Ohio Football Recruiting Topic
Topic: 2014 WR Herman Brunis (Fairfield, OH) - Ohio Signee
Page: 2 of 5
mail
person
OUs LONG Driver
1/24/2014 3:11 PM
Casper71 wrote:expand_more
Uh, we don't get 4-star recruits at OHIO. Few ever land at a MAC school (note I said "FEW"" not NONE) Probably 1-2 a year including all MAC schools.

MAC Rankings
Rank School Commits Conf Points Top
100

Off Def SpT HS JC Avg 45. Western Michigan 26 MAC 1466 0 0 0 14 12 13 1 24 2 2.54 70. Ball State 16 MAC 824 0 0 0 9 9 7 0 16 0 2.56 72. Toledo 18 MAC 674 0 0 0 4 7 11 0 17 1 2.22 76. Ohio 14 MAC 619 0 0 0 6 8 5 1 13 1 2.43 79. Bowling Green 15 MAC 556 0 0 0 4 6 9 0 14 1 2.27 84. Central Michigan 15 MAC 508 0 0 0 4 4 10 1 15 0 2.27 91. Buffalo 15 MAC 439 0 0 0 3 9 5 1 15 0 2.00 93. Kent State 12 MAC 424 0 0 0 3 6 5 1 12 0 2.00 98. Northern Illinois 9 MAC 335 0 0 0 3 6 2 1 9 0 2.33 99. Miami (Oh) 12 MAC 326 0 0 0 1 6 6 0 12 0 2.08 109. Akron 9 MAC 201 0 0 0 0 4 5 0 8 1 2.00 115. Massachusetts 7 MAC 140 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 7 0 2.00 116. Eastern Michigan 6 MAC 95 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 6 0 1.00
My point still stands. A 5 star guy who commits to any school and washes out for whatever reason is more detrimental than a 3 star guy who only plays sparingly. On signing day it sure looks great though. The star thing is a great starting point for conversation. It has little value beyond that. I agree the more high star guys we get the more likely we have an outstanding class, arguing otherwise is ridiculous. My point is nothing is proven on paper.
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
1/24/2014 3:17 PM
LongDriver--You deserve an answer.  

 bcat2  1) took a broadside (a swipe without specifics)  2) at me.  And, as usual, that swipe did not meet my point (apparent disconnect in his/her assertion that our recruits are MAC title quality and our on-field achievement). 

Is it reasonable to expect one who raises a point to meet the response to that point?...Is throwing broadsides a reasonable response if you don't like or agree with the point that a responding poster makes?

I've tried to back off lately..think that I've done so.

Why no one tells bcat2 the same thing when, hiding behind a pseudynom (appears connected to the staff or team), he/she beats the same it's-sunny-24-hrs-per-day drum over and over again despite reality to the contrary, never responding to reasonable argument to the contrary?

Was my post suggesting the apparent talent/achievement disconnect a reasonable thought or unduly disturbing and, so, worthy of a broadside slam at me?



[this is far from the first time that i've objected to broadsides and being slammed with off-point argument when i respond directly to a point]
mail
person
OUs LONG Driver
1/24/2014 3:43 PM
Monroe, appreciate the thought out reply.

I'm a positive, glass half full guy, but I don't deny last year was a disappointment (and to a certain degree all years that don't end in a MAC title at this point as a disappointment). I don't really see anyone saying they're happy with last year as a whole. I think you mistake the positive comments people make for complacency or satisfaction and then label those people with positive outlook as an apologist who doesn't have their feet on the ground in reality. I think that's unfair to most. People tire of hearing about the negative not only in our little BA.com world but the real world too. All the negative press even stops for the feel good story every once in a while. I believe it's just as important to acknowledge success as it is defeat. Learn from both and improve for next time.

To your point, Bcat2 is not without some guilt in the squabble.

Everyone here wants the Bobcats to better next year. Will they be? I don't know, but I'll be watching.
mail
person
L.C.
1/24/2014 3:44 PM
OUs LONG Driver wrote:expand_more
.... A 4 star guy who gets the boot in his first year is much worse than a 4 year unrated scholarship player who only contributes on special teams.

I have to disagree with this. A 4-star guy who gets the boot in his first year is replaced the next year with someone else to use the scholarship and costs only 1 scholarship-year. By contrast the guy that hangs on for 4 years playing special teams costs 4 scholarship-years.
mail
person
OUs LONG Driver
1/24/2014 3:48 PM
I see what you're saying. Not a great example although a negative mark on the APR should also be considered. Point I was trying to make is no one should care how they start, it's how they finish that matters.
mail
person
T79Smith
1/24/2014 5:19 PM
mail
person
Casper71
1/24/2014 6:18 PM
I repeat once again: if you start with BETTER players (3 star recruits) and coach them up, you will be light years ahead of looking for a bunch of diamonds in the ruff (2-star guys).  I'll talk all the stars we can get!

If you look t the lists there are very few 5-star guys even at the Top levels.  And,there are just a few more 4-star guys.  ALL the top programs are LOADED with 3-star guys.  That tells me if we can get as many 3-star guys as WMU got this year AND if our coaching is the best in the MAC we will win a MACC some day very soon.  If the majority of our classes are 2-star guys we are like the rest of the MAC and that MACC will take longer to achieve...

The concept does not seem that difficult to understand to me so I am not sure why people keep saying we don't need 3-star players or we do need that many of them.
mail
person
L.C.
1/24/2014 7:07 PM
Casper71 wrote:expand_more
...The concept does not seem that difficult to understand to me so I am not sure why people keep saying we don't need 3-star players or we do need that many of them.

No one disagrees in theory, the problem comes in practice. Say that 5 people review a player, and 2 say he is 3 stars, and 3 say he is 2 stars, is he 2 stars, or 3? Say a player is rated in his Junior season as a wide receiver as 2 stars, and moves to Safety, and excels, but isn't re-rated, is he 2 stars, or 3?

While we are sitting around waiting for the 2014 class to come in, I'm sure that the staff is already starting to think some about the 2015 class. They watch film, and they evaluate players, many or most of which have not been evaluated yet by the ratings services. Over the next three months they will issue offers for players for the 2015 class, and I'm sure that when they issue the offers, the offers will all go to players that the staff thinks are 3-star (or better) players. Will the ratings services agree, when they come along later and rate these players? In some cases yes, in other cases no.

If you go through the list of players to whom Ohio made offers last winter you will find a few 5-star players, some 4-star players, some 3-star players, and some 2-star players. But, note something about this group of 2-star players. They  aren't randomly selected 2-star players, they are players that the Ohio coaching staff thinks are 3-star players, yet the service thinks is 2-stars. Which is right? It turns out that the staff is often right, which is why we find that in real life, many of the 2-star players Ohio recruits are quite good.

As an example of a case where they didn't agree, consider the case of Durrell Bristol/Wood last year. He got lowly 2-star ratings from all the services, and for that matter didn't even pick up any All-Conference honors, much less All-District  or All-State honors. Clearly, he can play. To start on the offensive line as a true Freshman is something that is very rarely done.  I would argue that clearly he should have been rated 3 stars, or better. Why were the services wrong in his case? Were the services confused because of his name change from Bristol to Wood? Did they overlook him because he was a lineman for a very bad team? It's hard to know, but miss him they did.

One advantage that Ohio suddenly has had the last 2 years is that they have been getting a lot of early acceptances, especially from the State of Ohio.  As long as that continues, they can slowly raise their standards each year, trying for an every higher quality group of recruits. For 2015 I would argue that they have the opportunity to go after an especially high quality of recruit. The 2015 class replaces the outgoing 2010 class, so it will be very small, perhaps 15 players. Therefore the staff should be more selective in terms of who they offer.
Last Edited: 1/24/2014 7:10:23 PM by L.C.
mail
person
Bcat2
1/24/2014 7:24 PM
Casper71 wrote:expand_more
I repeat once again: if you start with BETTER players (3 star recruits) and coach them up, you will be light years ahead of looking for a bunch of diamonds in the ruff (2-star guys). I'll talk all the stars we can get!

If you look t the lists there are very few 5-star guys even at the Top levels. And,there are just a few more 4-star guys. ALL the top programs are LOADED with 3-star guys. That tells me if we can get as many 3-star guys as WMU got this year AND if our coaching is the best in the MAC we will win a MACC some day very soon. If the majority of our classes are 2-star guys we are like the rest of the MAC and that MACC will take longer to achieve...

The concept does not seem that difficult to understand to me so I am not sure why people keep saying we don't need 3-star players or we do need that many of them.
Casper71. I doubt if the coaches even discuss stars. Somehow I think coach Solich would discount a player evaluation that relied on stars. If I was an assistant briefing him about a player the last thing I would present would be recruiting service stars. Stars are awarded without consideration of many tangibles (ACT, age, senior year growth, grades) and intangibles (character, upside potential). So given the staff does their own evaluation which includes many factors the services do not I can easily see the coaches deciding this 2 star has more upside and college potential than this other already maxed out 3 star high school hero. Guess I am saying the staff gets to award extra stars as they evaluate players and they don't have to tell anyone about it.
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
1/24/2014 9:02 PM
Star ratings are mildly amusing at best...academic, hot-stove stuff for the off-season.  For what it is, it's okay.

It's on field performance that counts.  Getting a distant whiff of the NFL isn't success.

The reality-deficit poster who thinks that recruiting and coaching are terrific...despite such as  BG 3 td's in the first quarter before we got a first down and 2nd half Beefs totally plows us...is really a sad statement on academics around Athens.  No ability to reason at all.

We all hope next year is better.  But the last half of the last two seasons gives pause.



 
mail
person
Bcat2
1/24/2014 10:37 PM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
Star ratings are mildly amusing at best...academic, hot-stove stuff for the off-season. For what it is, it's okay.

It's on field performance that counts. Getting a distant whiff of the NFL isn't success.

The reality-deficit poster who thinks that recruiting and coaching are terrific...despite such as BG 3 td's in the first quarter before we got a first down and 2nd half Beefs totally plows us...is really a sad statement on academics around Athens. No ability to reason at all.

We all hope next year is better. But the last half of the last two seasons gives pause.
Deleted by Bcat2
Last Edited: 1/25/2014 9:30:36 AM by Bcat2
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
1/24/2014 11:04 PM
Yes.
mail
person
Jerry86
1/24/2014 11:22 PM
Bcat2,

Per Monroe's recent post:

Quote:expand_more
bcat2, you probably don't understand my post since you have no grasp of the obvious:  People like you who accept the very mediocre status quo are what hurt the University.  People like me, who love the University and want to make it better, advocate reasonable change.


I am guessing that either (1) Dennis Rodman hacked his account given the drivel above (about women and people of color voting) or (2) he went off the deep end. Sad that Bobcat Attack doesn't have an IGNORE feature as most places do.

Monroe talks about mediocrity .. hmmm, IMO we were mediocre from 1975 - 2005 .. 30 years. Since Frank arrived we also have arrived. I guess Monroe expects us to be a top 20 team .. won't  happen Monroe. Be happy with a SUCCESSFUL program! Monroe back in the 70's ...... hahhahaha.
Last Edited: 1/25/2014 8:52:39 AM by Ryan Carey
mail
person
Bcat2
1/25/2014 7:40 AM
Jerry86 wrote:expand_more
Bcat2,

Per Monroe's recent post:

bcat2, you probably don't understand my post since you have no grasp of the obvious:  People like you who accept the very mediocre status quo are what hurt the University. People like me, who love the University and want to make it better, advocate reasonable change. 


I am guessing that either (1) Dennis Rodman hacked his account given the drivel above (about women and people of color voting) or (2) he went off the deep end. Sad that Bobcat Attack doesn't have an IGNORE feature as most places do.

Monroe talks about mediocrity .. hmmm, IMO we were mediocre from 1975 - 2005 .. 30 years. Since Frank arrived we also have arrived. I guess Monroe expects us to be a top 20 team .. won't happen Monroe. Be happy with a SUCCESSFUL program! Monroe back in the 70's ...... hahhahaha.


It is sad there is not an ignore feature. I would pay for the option. What I keep waiting for is the teacher to come along and send him to the principal's office.
Last Edited: 1/25/2014 8:53:39 AM by Ryan Carey
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
1/25/2014 11:49 PM
If you praise the last season and a half of generally lousy ball, then you enable it, you prevent change.  Akin to those who didn't want women to have the franchise because, hey, everything was just fine.

I think someone posted that we haven't beaten a MAC team with over a .500 mark (for the season or when we played them ??) in about a year and a half.

Please post the scores of the games over the last year and a half vs. MAC teams that were over .500 and against decent out of conference foes (so throw out such as Peay).

Establish the facts.  State a reasonable basis of reality.  Then state opinion...then let's judge the quality of those opinions given the facts.



certain poster will need help with the definition of "fact."  i suggest dictionary.com


 
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
1/25/2014 11:50 PM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
Star ratings are mildly amusing at best...academic, hot-stove stuff for the off-season. For what it is, it's okay.

It's on field performance that counts. Getting a distant whiff of the NFL isn't success.

The reality-deficit poster who thinks that recruiting and coaching are terrific...despite such as BG 3 td's in the first quarter before we got a first down and 2nd half Beefs totally plows us...is really a sad statement on academics around Athens. No ability to reason at all.

We all hope next year is better. But the last half of the last two seasons gives pause.


Deleted by Bcat2

Your deleted posts and those that the mods modify are some of your most cogent.

 
mail
OhioCatFan
1/26/2014 12:15 AM
Getting back to the topic of this thread . . . after a few pages of commercials . . . my impressions when I watched the video were not unique but I came way thinking that this totally unrated guy might truly be a "diamond in the rough."  He has very good hands, isn't afraid of contact and usually makes good yards after catch.  He also blocks, which many WRs don't, but which Frank stresses.  He has lots of heart, desire and grit. In that regard he reminds me just a little of Chad Brinker.  I think he may end up being a very good player for OHIO.  
mail
person
L.C.
1/26/2014 9:59 AM
I agree, OCF, he does a lot of things right. Of one thing I'm certain - Coach Dixon knows receivers, and knows what he wants. If Dixon thinks this is a guy he wants, he's going to be fine.
mail
person
ohio9704
1/26/2014 10:19 AM
Verbal per scoutingohio.com/Mark Porter.
mail
person
L.C.
1/26/2014 6:54 PM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
Your deleted posts and those that the mods modify are some of your most cogent.

You do realize that the changes that Ryan made to Bcat2's post, and the post from Jerry86 was to delete some things that they had quoted from you, and that the original post from you was also edited by Ryan to delete the same material. There will always be things we disagree about. Can't we all try to keep the discussion civil, at least?
mail
person
Doc Bobcat
1/26/2014 7:29 PM
Poor Herman......as Golden Earring would say....this thread has officially entered The Twilight Zone.
mail
person
L.C.
1/26/2014 7:31 PM
Welcome to Ohio, Herman, and good luck to you.
mail
person
Casper71
1/26/2014 8:34 PM
Named All City by the guy who follows HS F-ball in Cincy.  A diamond in the ruff?  Maybe he SHOULD be a 3-star recruit
mail
TWT
1/27/2014 12:33 AM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
Wonderfully intelligent remark, bcat2. Just what we expect from you: Hiding behind a pseudonym, you generally trash me while not responding to an obviously legit point (if we keep recruiting best in MAC, why no best in MAC performance).  Why do you even post if you're going to absolutely fail to engage in any reasonable debate or show any ability to consider for even a second that the coaches and team are not perfect.


Monroe. You generally trash the football program. Your point about recruiting talent has been asked and answered over and over. True things have not fallen just right for you to have your precious MACC, but, to deny Ohio has/is recruiting well and that Ohio players are talented is something with which many here can not go along. Monroe, consider players in the NFL. From the MAC Toledo is first and Ohio is second. I propose this is a stronger argument for Ohio's talent than your MACC point against Ohio's talent. Again, we have been here before.

Taking those numbers as absolutes as to the amount of guys in the NFL, the fact that Solich has only graduated 6 classes of his own recruits says that we'll be #1 eventually in this metric.

 
mail
person
Jeff McKinney
1/27/2014 12:55 AM
Monroe, I have to take exception to your drawing an analogy between praising an underachieving football program and opposing a social justice issue like the franchise for women. You may not have meant this, but it sounds like you are insinuating that there is a moral dimension to one's opinion about Ohio football. And that to disagree with your opinion is a moral lapse akin to opposing a basic natural right.
Showing Messages: 26 - 50 of 119
MAC News Links



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