-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter methomps
- Start date
I don't see this as empty promises coming back on him...I see this as an overload of talent. PC plays up to these kids' egos by promising them a chance to play right away and telling them they are very important recruits. Neither of these are lies...but he does not mention the four 5-star guys ahead of this recruit that are already in the program. USC, with its Cali lifestyle, Hollywood persona, and a young, hip coaching staff, basically shows these recruits a dream life where they are the star. However, like anything else, dreams don't always come true.Bucknut319 said:
Just my opinion, but I think PC is a very smart man using all of the tools allocated to him.
Upvote
0
I don't disagree with that, but I think it's possible to sell your school to a recruit, heck even tell them they can make a big impact, without making them feel like #1 guys. If you are leading guys on to think that way, especially since I bet they highlight how they have played underclassmen early, then you're toeing a fine line. Any player can make an impact in due time if the staff likes them enough, but it is misleading to get them excited about playing early when that is probably unlikely.
Upvote
0
But what if they are #1 guys at that position? Heck most of these cats are #1 in their position in most recruiting services so I don't see that as an issue. Recruiting is all about making guys feel #1...lavishing attention, making them feel important, stroking egos.jwinslow said:
tOSU does the same things...postcards from Italy? Wouldn't that be designed to make a kid feel special to the staff?
Upvote
0
Jwin, you're expressing a romantic view of football recruiting that just isn't reality. In my opinion, anyway. There are lines, of course, that you don not cross in recruiting - those lines are written out by the NCAA. I've never seen one thing that indicated PC has crossed those lines. There is nothing wrong with toeing that line either. As long as you stay on the right side. Risky? Sure. so what?
Upvote
0
I'm sure I am romanticising recruiting to a degree, and I'm sure we make our recruits feel incredibly loved too. I guess I'm operating as a homer who appreciates the "we only offer you if we think we have room for you" approach of JT, and also as a rival who enjoys accepting the "Petey has 20 #1 guys per year" stereotype.
Upvote
0
Jwin, check out the number of DB's on OSU's roster, including incoming freshman. Then say again that bit about only offering where we have room.
Likewise, we "over-offer" positions constantly. If you need 3 Olinemen, youdon't just offer 3. And I'm quite sure we tell them things like "We wouldn't have offered if we didn't think you had the tools to start" and things like that.
A lot of Woody's recruits talk about how Woody recruited the parents more than the kids, and hardly ever talked about football. Thats great, and it worked for him. He got that kind of kid and he put together great teams. I think Tress is in that mold too. It works for him and he's putting together great teams.
It's not the only way to go about doing it, is all. ANd some people don't respond to that kind of approach. It's just as risky (in terms of gathering players) as PC's approach - or what we seem to assume it is.
Appreciating one approach over another is fine, but I'd shy away from things that look like value judgments in your remarks.
Likewise, we "over-offer" positions constantly. If you need 3 Olinemen, youdon't just offer 3. And I'm quite sure we tell them things like "We wouldn't have offered if we didn't think you had the tools to start" and things like that.
A lot of Woody's recruits talk about how Woody recruited the parents more than the kids, and hardly ever talked about football. Thats great, and it worked for him. He got that kind of kid and he put together great teams. I think Tress is in that mold too. It works for him and he's putting together great teams.
It's not the only way to go about doing it, is all. ANd some people don't respond to that kind of approach. It's just as risky (in terms of gathering players) as PC's approach - or what we seem to assume it is.
Appreciating one approach over another is fine, but I'd shy away from things that look like value judgments in your remarks.
Upvote
0
Buckin' A
Veritas Aequitas
You guys are all making good points. I just can't help but wonder why tOSU doesn't have near the amount of transfers that USC does. Those guys going to USC know that team is loaded with talent, yet seem to get disgruntled after being there a short period. That is what leads me to believe that there could be some false promises made. But hey, I been wrong before...
Upvote
0
Value judgments should probably be replaced by opinions on my part.
I still see a difference between offering DBs and telling them they could start for us (not necessarily when they arrive), and playing up the playing underclassmen thing. But as I've said many times, this is all based on perception, which we know in Tressel's case is often based on rumors more than fact.
I still see a difference between offering DBs and telling them they could start for us (not necessarily when they arrive), and playing up the playing underclassmen thing. But as I've said many times, this is all based on perception, which we know in Tressel's case is often based on rumors more than fact.
Upvote
0
In my view, this is a function of philosophy. USC is getting guys who were sold - apparently - on the idea of playing time, not on the idea of education or "the school" itself.Bucknut319 said:
When they see that they can't beat out the two or three guys in front of them, they look to move to a school where they can. That's not to say that 3rd stringers at OSU don't have the same desire to play, but they are more of the mindset that football isn't everything. If the book I'm reading is telling accurate storys, and I think it is, Woody was more intersted in education than how you did on the football field. He took players that had that same interest, or at least responde to that kind of philosophy. Thus, when they're not playing, they see the benefit in staying. At USC - again, assuming what we've been talking about IS the philosophy - if a kid isn't playing, and he's not been sold on, or predisposed to, the idea of education is more important, he's gonna look for PT elsewhere.
Just my thoughts.
Upvote
0
The bandwagon is getting shakier by the day at USC. Now they've lost their projectedstarting DE Schweiger for 8 weeks.
Carroll has a much bigger test ahead of him than most media groupies will admit. He still has the luxury of an insanely talented offense, but he will be tested by Fresno, Oregon, ASU & Cal, no doubt about it.
USC can be beaten. They nearly lost to Stanford in 2004, with Chow, with the extensive experience at D that they no longer have.
I suppose our rivalry with USC (based on history, recruiting and their current success) could warrant a thread about their woes... sorry for being offtopic.
Carroll has a much bigger test ahead of him than most media groupies will admit. He still has the luxury of an insanely talented offense, but he will be tested by Fresno, Oregon, ASU & Cal, no doubt about it.
USC can be beaten. They nearly lost to Stanford in 2004, with Chow, with the extensive experience at D that they no longer have.
I suppose our rivalry with USC (based on history, recruiting and their current success) could warrant a thread about their woes... sorry for being offtopic.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Well, I for one, think the mods have no idea what their doing, so I'm glad you have advised that splitting this thread is an option. 
Upvote
0
We are a clueless bunch so I for one appreciate Jwin's constant adviceBuckeyeskickbuttocks said:Well, I for one, think the mods have no idea what their doing, so I'm glad you have advised that splitting this thread is an option.
Last edited:
Upvote
0