-
Justin Hopkins
- 5 stars Rating: 95
7832 votes total - Justin Hopkins
- (14771)
- 33 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
ducklefty ●
- 5 stars Rating: 85
2325 votes total - (3658)
- 32 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
Back in Quack ●
- 4 stars Rating: 70
1594 votes total - (2067)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Back in Quack ●
- 4 stars Rating: 70
1594 votes total - (2067)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Duck Nasty ●
- 5 stars Rating: 94
2256 votes total - Shake and Bake
- (3055)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
Duckwad said...
No Angry Duck, the truth doesn't hurt. What hurts is thinking you live in a world of absolutes. The world is not black and white, there are various shades of gray. You can both believe in the ranking system as a barometer of talent, and still believe the system is not infallible. Even the talent evaluators would admit they make oversights or even errors evaluating talent. You are just a curmudgeon, who has led himself to believe there are not multiple ways at looking at the same prospect.
-
AngryDuck said...
The point being Back in Quack isn't really a star chaser, he's gung ho about all Oregon commits, see his comments the lowly ranked Walker as well. Which is fine. But one shouldn't go I'm a star chaser but love this guy.
First of all it questions the reliability of calling ones self a star chaser vs. the other option of just being pro duck. You are putting a distinction of being for this site above the general gung ho attitude. That one is superior because one follows the high star recruits and has discerning taste between how good different ones are.
The implication is that you are saying this new recruit is good or as good as many of the highly ranked players you follow closely because you follow them closely and know these things. But when you say all these xxx players are awesome without ranking them it somewhat invalidates your point.
I'm all for being for players who want to be ducks. But claiming your a star chaser and then going gung-ho that the lower ranked duck recruits are awesome is some flawed perspective.
Now it is possible to be this way and to be right, if all the duck players are homeruns in the long run, but the truth is some of the players we recruit will be misses. That would be true if we had a class of all 5 and 4 stars and one of all 3 and two stars. That is because there are only so much starting time that can be given to players.
I am for all players that want to be ducks, but I can't say that all players we get who commit will be awesome all Americian starters, or even starters on the team.
Say you love that guy great, I like this OL recruit because we've found strength in TE converted OL in our scheme. I'm not going to say I like this guy because I'm a star watcher, and despite his low ranking I think he is special.
Back in Quack ●
- 4 stars Rating: 70
1594 votes total - (2067)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Back in Quack ●
- 4 stars Rating: 70
1594 votes total - (2067)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Back in Quack ●
- 4 stars Rating: 70
1594 votes total - (2067)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Back in Quack ●
- 4 stars Rating: 70
1594 votes total - (2067)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Happyvduck ●
- 5 stars Rating: 95
1185 votes total - (1961)
- 17 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars



Pisarcik details his Oregon pledge