Its my impression that stars are mainly camp driven assessment. If a player excels at a big time camp and is given multiple BCS offers then he's rated 4/5 stars. What if he just had a great week? What we do know is Ohio runs its own camps and see things they like from the players participating every year. They have certain traits they are looking for in every unit and when they see it they add to their wish list. There is some general correlation between talent and stars but a program can be a Top 20 program taking the unheralded approach capable of knocking off ranked teams. Can you win a 4 team playoff without a roster full of 4/5 star guys, probably not.

As usual, I tend to agree with Robert Fox here.

I understand that the 'star' issue is fun to discuss in the off season.  But does it really mean a thing?  It's well-stated (by Uncle Wes, I believe) that a team is not going to be one of the top four teams in the nation without a lot of bigmultistar players.  The top four teams are distinctly better than the rest.  After those top four, though, any of the next 20 or so teams are of about equal talent.  I see no reason we can't be in that mix.

Sure, it helps to get the best players.  We're doing better on that.  You can see it on the field.  And, it certainly appears that our player development and coaching is very good.  Sure, we need to lick the injury bug.  

Generally, it seems to me that our progress is upward steady and a good way to go.

Maybe the bowl win to end last season was a lucky fluke.  Maybe it shouldn't serve to erase the disappointment of the prior 4 or so games.  But the sun seems to be shining on OHIO FOOTBALL..

Enjoy it.  Look where we were for so many years.  Look where we are.  Doesn't the future appear to be solid?



There must be a line from Silver Linings Playbook that I can quote here...Maybe 'I wanted to be romantic.'

as far as having most all-MAC players, it seems obvious to me that if you have the most, then you have the most depth of good players-not a lack of depth.
This whole thread was started stating the chance of an "outstanding" team in a few years based on recent recruiting which I questioned and you're saying that our chance of a MAC title in a while is unlikely because of the loss of 2 players. I'll rest my case.

In my opinion we simply don't have the high level athletes yet to compete at a consistent top 25 level.  Our coaching and team chemistry are good enough that we can win some games like Pitt and Penn State, but there are just not enough playmakers on the roster yet.  That seems to be how Solich likes to recruit.  He wants his type of players that fit a system, which is fine, but the tradeoff is that you aren't going to win many games on talent alone.  Fortunately we've had Tettleton carry us for the past 3 years to new heights, but I fear we could take a big step back if we don't have a stud QB really step up after Tettleton leaves. 

Unfortunately some of our most promising recruits the past few years haven't made it to Athens for one reason or another.  But that doesn't mean you stop trying to recruit these types of players and just go the safe route instead.  Our location and conference reputation/exposure does hurt in trying to attract the type of athlete who want to go to most bcs level schools (I hate using that phrase).  But Toledo has recruited very aggressively and taken some risks, and now they look like the clear frontrunner when it comes to current Mac recruiting.  I think we need to take some more chances and expand the boundaries of our recruiting if we ever want to get the type of size/speed ratio athletes to bring us to a new level.  You can only go so far with the hardworking farm raised hustle type players that Solich seems to love.  Give me a few more Glenville products that OSU passes over, or maybe some of that Florida speed like the new BGSU coach has tapped into recently.  We have an old-school coach which is awesome for coaching methodology and gameday planning, but I'm afraid we need a new-school recruiting coordinator in order to get us over the top.

I for one think BG can compete with anyone in this conference for football championships.  Year in and year out you have recruited well and always seem to have a solid QB in the pipeline.  Now with Clawson hitting up Florida hard I think you have the potential to pass us by over the next few years.  I would actually use BG as a football recruiting model for Ohio to look at going forward.  Basketball not so much.

I don't quite get all the talk about getting a certain kind of player that we can coach up-as if thats all we try. We offer lots of 3 star and up guys-we just don't get many of them.

Falconfan - indeed, the entire MAC has moved up considerably in the last few years.


What I took him to be referring to is an intangible.  Anyone can measure a kid with a stopwatch, but can you look into his head, and his heart? Will he fight to win, and never give up? Will he work hard to get better? Buddy believes, I think, as I do, that the coaches are looking for more than just speed, and good film. They are looking for someone with a never-give-up attitude, a team mentality, and a willingness to work long and hard to improve. Of course all teams are looking for that, too, but Ohio seems to be doing well at getting players with those intangibles. In turn those intangibles have enabled Ohio to play at a level beyond what just the "recruiting stars" would predict.

Part of "coaching up" is in the teaching, but a big part is in having the types of players that will listen, work hard, never give up, and keep improving. All things being equal, I'd take a 3-star with the right intangibles over a 2-star with them, but I'd probably take a 2-star with the right intangibles rather than a 3-star without them.

L.C., just how does OHIO get those recruiting classes up to the 60s?  Do what colobob says we arent doing now:

Sign more of the 3 star guys we go after.  That is what I have been saying for years.  Some people want to downplay 3 star guys and say we don't need them.  I totally disagree.  We need to sign a lot more of the 3 star guys that will stay at OHIO 4-5 years and produce.

Its time to quit blaming the conference on our recruiting deficiencies. The problem in recruiting now is that only the Top 10 power programs in college football have any chance in grinding through the semifinals and finals against top flight SEC competition. The only Big Ten team that has a chance at a national championship is Ohio State. Back in the 70's and 80's programs like Pitt and BYU were able to sneak their way to National Championships with only Top 40-50 talent and an easy schedule. Then you could do it with the recruiting boost of a BCS conference as VT and Oregon made title games. All of the recruiting in the future is going to be monopolized by 10 or so power programs that have the most resources and true title talent. Everyone else will be in pretender status. Ohio is finally acting like a mid tier program regularly in the Top 40 and not a bottom feeder which is progress but this is program like all but a select few that maxes out with a BCS bowl. MAC, Big Ten or SEC it doesn't matter, the program caps out at the BCS.

You're already seeing it happening. Look at the progression. In 2005-2007, few if any of the players had any other offers. Ohio was dependent on finding guys with talent that others had overlooked. Most of the class was being filled in January with guys that had been missed, often because they had been hurt. Sometimes that worked out, as with Tettleton. Other times it did not, as with Sweeny, who never really recovered from his injury.

In 2005, Ohio did not really have the facilities or tradition to get where they needed to be. Slowly but surely over the last 8 years the facilities have improved. Attendance and game day excitement has improved. Team performance and national awareness of the program has improved. It happened gradually, but if you compare the last two years to the first two, the difference is dramatic. As they did in 2005-2007, Ohio still is sending out 150 or so offers in Jan-June, but back then, from that 150, they would get perhaps one acceptance. Now they are filling most of the class from those guys, and you no longer see them issuing 50 more offers in December/January, but perhaps only one or two.

Wes makes an important point, though. The stars aren't what matters. What matters is that they are getting the players they want. Eight years ago they were not. Almost none of the initial 150 offers were accepted, and they ended up taking second or third or fourth choices. Today it is much different. Today they are getting the players they want. This year the class is already half full, all from players on the list of players they really wanted.

Are they done? No, I don't think so. I think the program will continue to improve. As I said, I think that in 2015-2017 we are going to see even better teams, because they will be made up of first choices, not second. That in turn will further increase national awareness of the program, which in turn will bring better players to Ohio camps, which then will improve recruiting. This is a slow steady way to improve a program, but it's working, and I believe recruiting will continue to improve in the future.

I guess here is another way of looking at it. Over the course of a year, these kids are evaluated many times, by many different people. They are evaluated by recruiting services, like scout.com, 247sports, rivals, and espn. They are evaluated by coaches. No one offers what they this is a kid that can't play, or who they think is so so. Everyone wants 3-star players. By my definition, anyone that makes an offer is saying they think a player is 3-stars. One would think that the more people look at a player, and think he's 3-stars or better, the better the chance he really is. 

When Ohio was recruiting mostly players that had no other offer, that was an indication that Ohio was the only evaluator that though the kid was 3-stars. That didn't mean Ohio was wrong, just that they were the only evaluation with that opinion. Some of those players turned out well, others not so well. Today most 10 recruits have multiple offers, and some have 3 stars from services.  Does it mean that the players are better than 8 years ago? Not necessarily, but probably on average they are.

I would have thought that a fairly big name like Frank Solich would be able to attract top 3 level talent in the MAC on a yearly basis, but it just hasn't worked out that way so far based on the consensus rankings of the scouting services.  I know you guys don't want to buy into the star/number ranking systems these services use, but we have to base our recruit analysis on something.  I don't have the numbers all in front of me, but I would venture to say that during the Solich tenure we've generally ended up in the mid to bottom half of the MAC conference yearly based on the final scouting website rankings.  They can't all be wrong can they?  Isn't it possible that we've been able to overachieve and win in spite of mediocre recruiting.  If anybody (LC?) feels enterprising, I would love to see a year by year comparison, beginning with Solich's first class in 2005, of what place we finished in MAC recruiting based on all the major services (Scout, Rivals, ESPN.)  In all those 9 recruiting classes have we ever even finished in the top 3 of the conference?

I'm with Buddy on this one.  You all know my feelings on the "stars" players.  No matter what most of you say or think if we started with MORE BETTER players and coached 'em the way we do we would be light years ahead of the MAC.  Face it, we've been good in the MAC East 'cause most MAC East teams have not had our consistency.   I don't doubt we are getting better.  I'd say we are a consistent Top 5-6 team in the MAC but we are not the Top Cat yet.  Even inb the East, just look at Miami a few years back (with a new coach), Buffalo the one year(with Gill), then Kent (just last year).  Then go to the West and look at NIU, Toledo and now BallsU.  It's just a tuff league 'cause nobody consistently gets a big majority of the top talent.

My comparison would be UC in the now past Big East days.  They went from recruiting like us to getting a whole lot more of the 3-star type guys.  They are now a pretty consistent Top 40-50 team.  I don't think we get to that level without at least 8-10 of the 3-star guys EVERY year.  That's really how UC did it.  And off topic but look at the money UC is throwing into Nippert.  UC is really trying to make a concerted effort to be one of those Top 60 BCS teams.  The jury is out as to whether they can make it or not.  I do think it is POSSIBLE they get a Big 12 or ACC invite next time around if they keep showing off their committment.