Online Now 336

Autzen Audibles

Loudest board in the nation, per capita

On this Board 200
Record: 5214 (1/16/2013)

Online now 333
Record: 5583 (1/22/2012)

Boards ▾

Autzen Audibles

Loudest board in the nation, per capita

Quacks Open Off-Topic Board

The Ticket Exchange

Buy and sell your Duck tickets here.

Reply

Too many whiffs?

  • Too listen to many of you on this board you would think the Ducks were flaming out, big time.

    Not so!

    To date Oregon has made 72 offers and have 11 commits (15.3%). Last year the Ducks extended 98 offers and had a signing class of 21 (21.4%, many not until January).

    By comparison the number of offers and commits extended by other programs:
    Offers Commits Ratio
    Notre Dame - 176 22 12.5%
    UCLA - 150 19 12.7%
    Bama - 132 19 14.4%
    LSU - 110 23 20.9%
    Washington - 127 20 15.7%
    USC - 99 16 16.2%
    Oklahoma - 166 15 9.0%
    Ohio State - 127 19 15.0%

    Oregon is taking a smaller class, thereby extending fewer offers, being much more selective and has approximately seven weeks until LOI signing day to secure their class.

    The commits to date are as talented or more so than any other class. The success rate in securing commitments from those offered to date is above most of those above, and at the end of the day will be above all those above with the exception of possibly LSU.

    So please get a grip and at least act like this isn't your first rodeo.

    This post was edited by Drewknowledge on 12/18/2012 at 8:54 AM

    Drewknowledge ●

  • Agreed! Thanks!

    This post was edited by Rexx Hardy on 12/18/2012 at 9:01 AM

    Rexx Hardy

  • This same meltdown has happened every year since I've started following recruiting. It's getting old.

    ducklefty

  • ducklefty said...

    This same meltdown has happened every year since I've started following recruiting. It's getting old.

    If its an every year occurrence, why complain about it? Hopes of it changing?

    Quack Mamba6

  • Agreed. Further, it is a good class so far. If you look at stars to deterimine ranking (which is a whole conversation in itself), in my mind you should look at average stars/player. We are 14th in the 24/7 rankings, 13th in Scout, and 10th in Rivals by this measure. About where we have been for our last few classes. I like this class so far, and am looking forward to fthe rest of the new Ducks! But what would recruiting season be without premature handwringing?

    chicagoduck1 ●

  • Drewknowledge said...

    Too listen to many of you on this board you would think the Ducks were flaming out, big time.

    Not so!

    To date Oregon has made 72 offers and have 11 commits (15.3%). Last year the Ducks extended 98 offers and had a signing class of 21 (21.4%, many not until January).

    By comparison the number of offers and commits extended by other programs: Offers Commits Ratio Notre Dame - 176 22 12.5% UCLA - 150 19 12.7% Bama - 132 19 14.4% LSU - 110 23 20.9% Washington - 127 20 15.7% USC - 99 16 16.2% Oklahoma - 166 15 9.0% Ohio State - 127 19 15.0%

    Oregon is taking a smaller class, thereby extending fewer offers, being much more selective and has approximately seven weeks until LOI signing day to secure their class.

    The commits to date are as talented or more so than any other class. The success rate in securing commitments from those offered to date is above most of those above, and at the end of the day will be above all those above with the exception of possibly LSU.

    So please get a grip and at least act like this isn't your first rodeo.

    One to one statistical comparisons like this generally don't tell you much because of how different one recruiting year can be compared to the next and that the recruiting process is becoming increasingly accelerated. One of the biggest factors of Oregon offering fewer recruits was something like 70% of of the top players were committed by the middle of August, a significant increase compared to prior years. I think this will be a good class , but just based on what's available it won't be up to the last three classes level.

    This post was edited by ppilot on 12/18/2012 at 10:50 AM

    ppilot

  • I'm betting Washington has far more offers than are accounted for IMO.

    Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/JHopkins247

    Justin Hopkins

  • ppilot said...

    One to one statistical comparisons like this generally don't tell you much because of how different one recruiting year can be compared to the next and that the recruiting process is becoming increasingly accelerated. One of the biggest factors of Oregon offering fewer recruits was something like 70% of of the top players were committed by the middle of August, a significant increase compared to prior years. I don't think that this going to bad class by any means, but just based on what's available it won't be up to the last three classes level.

    just because someone is committed elsewhere doesn't mean there aren't available. There hasn't been that many offers out because they have to be selective this year with limited scholorships. Remember there is about 62 freshman and sophomores after transfers. Personally i like the patient approach. Look at how many early commits that have waivered and gone elsewhere. Nothing is official until the LOI is faxed over.

    UWpoodlepuncher

  • UWpoodlepuncher said...

    just because someone is committed elsewhere doesn't mean there aren't available. There hasn't been that many offers out because they have to be selective this year with limited scholorships. Remember there is about 62 freshman and sophomores after transfers. Personally i like the patient approach. Look at how many early commits that have waivered and gone elsewhere. Nothing is official until the LOI is faxed over.

    A buddy of mine did some analysis about the early commits and about 80-90% of them stay with their original team. Yes it is still a non-binding verbal agreement that can be terminated by either party at any time, but the odds of getting a kid once he's committed to another teams drops considerably.

    ppilot

  • Justin Hopkins said...

    I'm betting Washington has far more offers than are accounted for IMO.

    Like 7 to 1 kinda thing haha

    Is that one of those "dog year" ratios JHop?

    Like a 7 to 1 kinda dog thing... haha

    This post was edited by bobthebuilder on 12/18/2012 at 11:52 AM

    bobthebuilder ●

  • ducklefty said...

    This same meltdown has happened every year since I've started following recruiting. It's getting old.

    So you never think of the what ifs? If Dominique Easley had signed, Bjorne Werner had signed? I agree we need to cut the neg nancy but looking at just those two players who we were in on makes you always say what if. We have always pulled out players late like bralon and Ricky, but a little what if is to be expected

    Back in Quack

  • ppilot said...

    A buddy of mine did some analysis about the early commits and about 80-90% of them stay with their original team. Yes it is still a non-binding verbal agreement that can be terminated by either party at any time, but the odds of getting a kid once he's committed to another teams drops considerably.

    One to one statistical comparisons like this generally don't tell you much because of how different one recruiting year can be compared to the next and that the recruiting process is becoming increasingly accelerated.

    Ed O

  • Back in Quack said...

    So you never think of the what ifs? If Dominique Easley had signed, Bjorne Werner had signed? I agree we need to cut the neg nancy but looking at just those two players who we were in on makes you always say what if. We have always pulled out players late like bralon and Ricky, but a little what if is to be expected

    EVERY school has "what ifs". Knowing a lot (relatively speaking) about lots of different PSAs is part of the fun of being a fan like we are at this site, but I think that we might know too much to really appreciate what we have partly because we don't have a wide enough perspective to understand that every school has failures.

    Alabama, Ohio State, USC... they all have them each and every year.

    I would expect that each of them have a fair number of fans that follow recruiting closely that don't think that the school is getting as many top PSAs as they "should", too.

    Ed O

  • Ed O said...

    EVERY school has "what ifs". Knowing a lot (relatively speaking) about lots of different PSAs is part of the fun of being a fan like we are at this site, but I think that we might know too much to really appreciate what we have partly because we don't have a wide enough perspective to understand that every school has failures.

    Alabama, Ohio State, USC... they all have them each and every year.

    I would expect that each of them have a fair number of fans that follow recruiting closely that don't think that the school is getting as many top PSAs as they "should", too.

    I whole heartledly disagree with your last paragraph. Yes we all have whatifs. At the end of the cycle I doubt tosu USC or bama said damn we could have done much better. Yes they have been on top longer, but yet aren't saying gosh dangitt with 5 3*s and a grip of highly touted players. But yeah everyone misses on some I know, not my whole point tho.

    Back in Quack

  • Ed O said...

    One to one statistical comparisons like this generally don't tell you much because of how different one recruiting year can be compared to the next and that the recruiting process is becoming increasingly accelerated.

    ? 80-90% is probably an accurate assessment of early commits on a yearly basis. How many of our early commits decommitted? 1 out of 8 or so?......

    Back in Quack

  • Ed O said...

    One to one statistical comparisons like this generally don't tell you much because of how different one recruiting year can be compared to the next and that the recruiting process is becoming increasingly accelerated.

    Might help if you knew the sample population included before making a comment like this, but since you asked he included the 2008-2012 recruiting classes. That equates about to a 1-1 ratio right?

    This post was edited by ppilot on 12/18/2012 at 12:28 PM

    ppilot

  • Back in Quack said...

    ? 80-90% is probably an accurate assessment of early commits on a yearly basis. How many of our early commits decommitted? 1 out of 8 or so?......

    His earlier assertion was that the rules of the game had changed because PSAs committed earlier. Even assuming his buddy's assertion is correct, I don't know how he's able to figure it out for the new paradigm that he claims is a reason not to be able to look back at previous classes and/or classes from other schools.

    It's clear that verbals tend to stay on board, and even earlier commits tend to stay on board, but I find it ironic that he pooh-pooh earlier stats and then brought up one on his own that was more subject to his own criticism. :)

    This post was edited by Ed O on 12/18/2012 at 12:29 PM

    Ed O

  • Back in Quack said...

    So you never think of the what ifs? If Dominique Easley had signed, Bjorne Werner had signed? I agree we need to cut the neg nancy but looking at just those two players who we were in on makes you always say what if. We have always pulled out players late like bralon and Ricky, but a little what if is to be expected

    I don't have a problem talking/thinking about what ifs. Just think people need to not let this process stress them out so much sometimes, but to each his own.

    And yes big schools also play what-if (when they aren't winning titles). I recently read a thread from USC asking what if they had Burfict, Teo, and Jones as their linebackers as all 3 were commited or thought to be headed to USC at one time. That would have been scary.

    ducklefty

  • Ed O said...

    His earlier assertion was that the rules of the game had changed because PSAs committed earlier. Even assuming his buddy's assertion is correct, I don't know how he's able to figure it out for the new paradigm that he claims is a reason not to be able to look back at previous classes and/or classes from other schools.

    It's clear that verbals tend to stay on board, and even earlier commits tend to stay on board, but I find it ironic that he pooh-pooh earlier stats and then brought up one on his own that was more subject to his own criticism. :)

    I too thought it was a bit of a flip-flop!

    joeduck in mc72765

  • Ed O said...

    His earlier assertion was that the rules of the game had changed because PSAs committed earlier. Even assuming his buddy's assertion is correct, I don't know how he's able to figure it out for the new paradigm that he claims is a reason not to be able to look back at previous classes and/or classes from other schools.

    It's clear that verbals tend to stay on board, and even earlier commits tend to stay on board, but I find it ironic that he pooh-pooh earlier stats and then brought up one on his own that was more subject to his own criticism. :)

    Gotcha didn't see that

    Back in Quack

  • Too many highly ranked prospects committing early to other schools. Then we wiffed on the ones we were recruiting. We are in play but not likely for a small handful of one five and a few 4 star players. The rest seem to be 3 or less, and the ones we've recruited hardest like Sina/Etuale ect we seem to be missing on. We will get a class as full as we want it, but it seems like we will be for the most part not getting our top few targets at a position. McQuay being the only one left and him unlikely to be a duck.
    I trust the coaches, but when they are getting their 3rd or less target player at a position I have to worry.

    AngryDuck

  • Back in Quack said...

    I whole heartledly disagree with your last paragraph. Yes we all have whatifs. At the end of the cycle I doubt tosu USC or bama said damn we could have done much better. Yes they have been on top longer, but yet aren't saying gosh dangitt with 5 3*s and a grip of highly touted players. But yeah everyone misses on some I know, not my whole point tho.

    Here are some facts to chew on:

    The 2012 rosters of USC, UO & OSU were made up of players from five recruiting classes from 2008-2012. During that period(per Rivals db), USC landed 102 recruits, Oregon signed 115 and OSU 110, including:

    5*...USC(14)...UO(3)...OSU(1.DNQ)
    4*...USC(61)...UO(42)...OSU(7)
    3*...USC(21)...UO(55)...OSU(66)

    All others: USC(6)...UO(15)...OSU(36)

    2012 season records:

    Oregon(11-1)...BCS Fiesta Bowl($17 million per team)
    OSU(9-3).........Alamo Bowl($3.175 million)
    USC(7-5).........Sun Bowl;($2 million)

    Maybe, player selection, player development and quality coaching TRUMP star ratings and hype, and deserve more respect from fans. Are the UO coaches perfect? No, they are only 35-4 over the past three seasons, including 3-point losses to Auburn, USC & Stanford.

    hungryduck

  • I am not worried at all. Plus still have a while to change alot of minds to switch their commitments. I think our 2014 class is going to be stacked with talent.

    Woody7171

  • Drewknowledge said...

    Too listen to many of you on this board you would think the Ducks were flaming out, big time.

    Not so!

    To date Oregon has made 72 offers and have 11 commits (15.3%). Last year the Ducks extended 98 offers and had a signing class of 21 (21.4%, many not until January).

    By comparison the number of offers and commits extended by other programs: Offers Commits Ratio Notre Dame - 176 22 12.5% UCLA - 150 19 12.7% Bama - 132 19 14.4% LSU - 110 23 20.9% Washington - 127 20 15.7% USC - 99 16 16.2% Oklahoma - 166 15 9.0% Ohio State - 127 19 15.0%

    Oregon is taking a smaller class, thereby extending fewer offers, being much more selective and has approximately seven weeks until LOI signing day to secure their class.

    The commits to date are as talented or more so than any other class. The success rate in securing commitments from those offered to date is above most of those above, and at the end of the day will be above all those above with the exception of possibly LSU.

    So please get a grip and at least act like this isn't your first rodeo.

    What's the old saying...if it's anything we've learned from history, it's that we don't learn anything from history...seems to apply here

    alsmetal

  • hungryduck said...

    Here are some facts to chew on:

    The 2012 rosters of USC, UO & OSU were made up of players from five recruiting classes from 2008-2012. During that period(per Rivals db), USC landed 102 recruits, Oregon signed 115 and OSU 110, including:

    5*...USC(14)...UO(3)...OSU(1.DNQ)
    4*...USC(61)...UO(42)...OSU(7)
    3*...USC(21)...UO(55)...OSU(66)

    All others: USC(6)...UO(15)...OSU(36)

    2012 season records:

    Oregon(11-1)...BCS Fiesta Bowl($17 million per team)
    OSU(9-3).........Alamo Bowl($3.175 million)
    USC(7-5).........Sun Bowl;($2 million)

    Maybe, player selection, player development and quality coaching TRUMP star ratings and hype, and deserve more respect from fans. Are the UO coaches perfect? No, they are only 35-4 over the past three seasons, including 3-point losses to Auburn, USC & Stanford.

    Exfreakinactly! They are gonna see things in players that fit what they want to accomplish regardless of what somebody else rates the player

    Rexx Hardy

Oregon
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports