menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Recruiting Topic
Topic: Toledo and bowling green are killing it.
Page: 1 of 1
allen
General User
A
Member Since: 1/24/2006
Post Count: 4,638
person
mail
allen
mail
Posted: 7/6/2019 12:23 PM
settings_applications edit_note
https://www.toledoblade.com/sports/ut/2019/07/05/toledo-r...
Last Edited: 7/6/2019 12:23:44 PM by allen
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 7/6/2019 1:33 PM
settings_applications edit_note
WMU as well:
https://247sports.com/Season/2020-Football/CompositeTeamR...

Ohio's per player average is good, but so far the class is much smaller.
ExCat21
General User
EC21
Member Since: 9/29/2014
Post Count: 1,243
person
mail
ExCat21
mail
Posted: 7/7/2019 10:56 AM
settings_applications edit_note
But BG doesnt have a QB with a snap. And they dont know about their BC transfer. Toledo still has to replace Diontae, Cody and Jonvea. That's not going to be easy.
Buck.Cat
General User
BC
Member Since: 12/22/2017
Post Count: 365
person
mail
Buck.Cat
mail
Posted: 7/7/2019 2:39 PM
settings_applications edit_note
ExCat21 wrote:expand_more
But BG doesnt have a QB with a snap. And they dont know about their BC transfer. Toledo still has to replace Diontae, Cody and Jonvea. That's not going to be easy.
Couldn't the same argument be made about OU in terms of replacing running backs and wide receivers?
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 7/7/2019 7:56 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Buck.Cat wrote:expand_more
But BG doesnt have a QB with a snap. And they dont know about their BC transfer. Toledo still has to replace Diontae, Cody and Jonvea. That's not going to be easy.
Couldn't the same argument be made about OU in terms of replacing running backs and wide receivers?

Certainly Ohio's RBs and 2 of 3 WRs don't have much experience. Here are their career stats:

Ross 67 carries, 264 yards, 3 TD, 3 Receptions 19 yards
Neatherton 19 carries, 81 yards, 0 TD, no receptions
Allison 7 carries, 24 yards, 0 TD, no receptions
Tuggle, Wilbon no stats

Odom 50 receptions 726 yards, 5 TD
Cox 11 receptions, 309 yards, 3 TD
Buckner 3 receptions, 104 yards, 1 TD
Knock 6 receptions, 38 yards, 1 TD, 6 Carries, 11 yards
Long 1 reception, 23 yards
Minter 1 reception, 15 yards, 0 TD
Hooks, Tupa, Keszei, Walton, Harris no stats
Rufusbobcat94
General User
R94
Member Since: 6/13/2018
Post Count: 393
person
mail
Rufusbobcat94
mail
Posted: 7/7/2019 10:11 PM
settings_applications edit_note
allen wrote:expand_more
That is Toledo's highest-rated class so far in several years and looks like the found some gems there. Over the past 6 years, they have finished in the 60s-80s range nationally according to 247 sports.

Ohio has meanwhile finished between 92 and 120 nationally for the last 6 years per 247 sports but Ohio beat Toledo a combined 69-36 the last two times they played so I have no idea how this works.

Toledo is 37-15 over the past 4 years while Ohio is 34-19 with a comparable schedule so Toledo has a slight edge in overall record. Both made a MAC Championship appearance since 2016 with Toledo having a win against a weaker opponent than Ohio played (even though it was a debacle Ohio lost to Akron in 2017). Ohio beat its last two bowl opponents 68-6 while Toledo has lost its last two bowl games 32-69.

If the the recruiting numbers are accurate there must not be a big gap between those range of recruits or Ohio likely has other advantages, like MAC coaching staffs...?
Last Edited: 7/7/2019 10:38:26 PM by Rufusbobcat94
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 7/7/2019 10:34 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Rufusbobcat94 wrote:expand_more
That is Toledo's highest-rated class so far in several years and looks like the found some gems there. Over the past 6 years, they have finished in the 60s-80s range nationally according to 247 sports.

Ohio has meanwhile finished between 92 and 120 nationally for the last 6 years per 247 sports but beat Toledo a combined 69-36 the two times they played so I have no idea how the this works.

Different people will reach different conclusions. Some possible explanations:
1. Ohio's coaches are better at evaluating talent than the services, so their classes actually should be ranked higher than 92-120.
2. Ohio's coaches do a better job of coaching players up, so while they come in at 92-120th in the country, by they time they leave, they are better than that.
3. Toledo's coaches, while excellent recruiters, are worse than average at coaching players up, so while they class comes in at 60-80, by they time they leave, they are lower than that.
4. Ohio has gotten lucky when they played Toledo.

Is it one of these? Some combination of parts of each? Something entirely different? You'll have to decide. In the end, I consider recruiting rankings for amusement only. I like seeing Ohio with a high rank, but it really doesn't matter. They still have to win on the field.
Last Edited: 7/8/2019 10:35:47 AM by L.C.
ExCat21
General User
EC21
Member Since: 9/29/2014
Post Count: 1,243
person
mail
ExCat21
mail
Posted: 7/8/2019 1:23 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Buck.Cat wrote:expand_more
But BG doesnt have a QB with a snap. And they dont know about their BC transfer. Toledo still has to replace Diontae, Cody and Jonvea. That's not going to be easy.
Couldn't the same argument be made about OU in terms of replacing running backs and wide receivers?
Easier to replace WRs and RBs than it is QBs. That's why DBs get converted to WRs and so do Agile running backs. But not everyone can throw and manage a huddle. So BG is in a bad spot if you ask me.
Rufusbobcat94
General User
R94
Member Since: 6/13/2018
Post Count: 393
person
mail
Rufusbobcat94
mail
Posted: 7/8/2019 1:28 PM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
That is Toledo's highest-rated class so far in several years and looks like the found some gems there. Over the past 6 years, they have finished in the 60s-80s range nationally according to 247 sports.

Ohio has meanwhile finished between 92 and 120 nationally for the last 6 years per 247 sports but beat Toledo a combined 69-36 the two times they played so I have no idea how the this works.

Different people will reach different conclusions. Some possible explanations:
1. Ohio's coaches are better at evaluating talent than the services, so their classes actually should be ranked higher than 92-120.
2. Ohio's coaches do a better job of coaching players up, so while they come in at 92-120th in the country, by they time they leave, they are better than that.
3. Toledo's coaches, while excellent recruiters, are worse than average at coaching players up, so while they class comes in at 60-80, by they time they leave, they are lower than that.
4. Ohio has gotten lucky when they played Toledo.

Is it one of these? Some combination of parts of each? Something entirely different? You'll have to decide. In the end, I consider recruiting rankings for amusement only. I like seeing Ohio with a high rank, but it really doesn't matter. They still have to win on the field.
All good points and its probably some combination there. The 'for amusement only' sums it up well, especially in the middle range of ratings.
ExCat21
General User
EC21
Member Since: 9/29/2014
Post Count: 1,243
person
mail
ExCat21
mail
Posted: 7/8/2019 1:35 PM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
That is Toledo's highest-rated class so far in several years and looks like the found some gems there. Over the past 6 years, they have finished in the 60s-80s range nationally according to 247 sports.

Ohio has meanwhile finished between 92 and 120 nationally for the last 6 years per 247 sports but beat Toledo a combined 69-36 the two times they played so I have no idea how the this works.

Different people will reach different conclusions. Some possible explanations:
1. Ohio's coaches are better at evaluating talent than the services, so their classes actually should be ranked higher than 92-120.
2. Ohio's coaches do a better job of coaching players up, so while they come in at 92-120th in the country, by they time they leave, they are better than that.
3. Toledo's coaches, while excellent recruiters, are worse than average at coaching players up, so while they class comes in at 60-80, by they time they leave, they are lower than that.
4. Ohio has gotten lucky when they played Toledo.

Is it one of these? Some combination of parts of each? Something entirely different? You'll have to decide. In the end, I consider recruiting rankings for amusement only. I like seeing Ohio with a high rank, but it really doesn't matter. They still have to win on the field.
Dont quote me verbatim but I think our coach will take a 2-star 6'7" 310 lineman over a 3-star 6'2" 285LB lineman almost everytime. Our coach likes guys that have the physical make-up and trusts our program to max out their potential.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 7/8/2019 7:56 PM
settings_applications edit_note
ExCat21 wrote:expand_more
But BG doesnt have a QB with a snap. And they dont know about their BC transfer. Toledo still has to replace Diontae, Cody and Jonvea. That's not going to be easy.
Couldn't the same argument be made about OU in terms of replacing running backs and wide receivers?
Easier to replace WRs and RBs than it is QBs. That's why DBs get converted to WRs and so do Agile running backs. But not everyone can throw and manage a huddle. So BG is in a bad spot if you ask me.

Would it really matter if BG had a QB with experience? They have an all new coaching staff, and no doubt an all-new offense. Everson had plenty of experience before Solich arrived, but he played much better his second year in the same system (2006) than he did in 2005.
Bcat2
General User
B2
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295
person
mail
Bcat2
mail
Posted: 7/8/2019 8:41 PM
settings_applications edit_note
ExCat21 wrote:expand_more
That is Toledo's highest-rated class so far in several years and looks like the found some gems there. Over the past 6 years, they have finished in the 60s-80s range nationally according to 247 sports.

Ohio has meanwhile finished between 92 and 120 nationally for the last 6 years per 247 sports but beat Toledo a combined 69-36 the two times they played so I have no idea how the this works.

Different people will reach different conclusions. Some possible explanations:
1. Ohio's coaches are better at evaluating talent than the services, so their classes actually should be ranked higher than 92-120.
2. Ohio's coaches do a better job of coaching players up, so while they come in at 92-120th in the country, by they time they leave, they are better than that.
3. Toledo's coaches, while excellent recruiters, are worse than average at coaching players up, so while they class comes in at 60-80, by they time they leave, they are lower than that.
4. Ohio has gotten lucky when they played Toledo.

Is it one of these? Some combination of parts of each? Something entirely different? You'll have to decide. In the end, I consider recruiting rankings for amusement only. I like seeing Ohio with a high rank, but it really doesn't matter. They still have to win on the field.
Dont quote me verbatim but I think our coach will take a 2-star 6'7" 310 lineman over a 3-star 6'2" 285LB lineman almost everytime. Our coach likes guys that have the physical make-up and trusts our program to max out their potential.
Get your meaning. 2 star recruits like Tarell Basham, Casey Sayles, Will Evans and Amos Ogun-Semore.
ExCat21
General User
EC21
Member Since: 9/29/2014
Post Count: 1,243
person
mail
ExCat21
mail
Posted: 7/9/2019 2:06 PM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
But BG doesnt have a QB with a snap. And they dont know about their BC transfer. Toledo still has to replace Diontae, Cody and Jonvea. That's not going to be easy.
Couldn't the same argument be made about OU in terms of replacing running backs and wide receivers?
Easier to replace WRs and RBs than it is QBs. That's why DBs get converted to WRs and so do Agile running backs. But not everyone can throw and manage a huddle. So BG is in a bad spot if you ask me.

Would it really matter if BG had a QB with experience? They have an all new coaching staff, and no doubt an all-new offense. Everson had plenty of experience before Solich arrived, but he played much better his second year in the same system (2006) than he did in 2005.


Experience always plays a role. In my tenure we had 3 OCs. GREG GREGORY (Wing-Tee Triple Option) then PHIL EARLY (West Coast Offense) and then TIM ALBIN (Balanced Run Offense). So anytime you have a QB with snaps you have more confidence. With BG not having a QB, the receivers and TEs don't have the same chemistry. So I expect BGs offense to have some passing problems and them leaning towards the run this year....which is Un-BG-like. With Doege BG would have been top 6 in the conference. Now they may not make a bowl game again as Kent State and Akron will have better offenses than the previous years. Miami with no GUS will be in the same boat. Don't they have a transfer QB eith snaps though?
Showing Messages: 1 - 13 of 13
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)