NSD 2019

The main discussion board for everything Tulane athletics related.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Wed Feb 06, 2019 6:53 am



Let's Roll !
User avatar
Show Me
Riptide
Posts: 3024
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:24 pm
Location: Saint Bernard
Status: Offline

Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:53 am

Hopefully the QB from Warren Easton Lance LeGendre signs with us.
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 18469
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:55 am

Show Me wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:53 am
Hopefully the QB from Warren Easton Lance LeGendre signs with us.
He went with Maryland
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
User avatar
Show Me
Riptide
Posts: 3024
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:24 pm
Location: Saint Bernard
Status: Offline

Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:57 am

tpstulane wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:55 am
Show Me wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:53 am
Hopefully the QB from Warren Easton Lance LeGendre signs with us.
He went with Maryland
I guess he read where we’re going to run a pro offense. :lol:
Dave breslin
Surge
Posts: 902
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:51 pm
Status: Offline

Wed Feb 06, 2019 6:14 pm

If we run a “pro “ offense maybe we can get Tom Brady to transfer! I don’t see us going the pro route. But not the high school offense of last year-please!
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Wed Feb 06, 2019 11:33 pm

Let's Roll !
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1805
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 7:54 am

This class was disappointing compared to the successes of the last recruiting cycle.
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 18469
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:31 am

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 7:54 am
This class was disappointing compared to the successes of the last recruiting cycle.
I believe the size last year (25) had more of an impact on our rankings. (The more signees usually the higher the ranking) This time we only signed 20 kids. WF said he’s going for better kids not numbers from here forward.
The 3 transfers will be more of an impact immediately than any of the recruits we signed.
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:34 am

tpstulane wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:31 am
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 7:54 am
This class was disappointing compared to the successes of the last recruiting cycle.
I believe the size last year (25) had more of an impact on our rankings. (The more signees usually the higher the ranking) This time we only signed 20 kids. WF said he’s going for better kids not numbers from here forward.
The 3 transfers will be more of an impact immediately than any of the recruits we signed.
Here's the rankings:

Per 247 -

94th overall
8th in AAC
4th in the state

Per Rivals -

88th overall
8th in AAC
3rd in the state


The total numbers matter but last years class was better than this one. It wasn't just pumped up by the # of signees. We need to win this year and show a modern offense to get things going recruiting wise.
Let's Roll !
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 7134
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:45 am

I came across a great article on SI.com It talks about the number of offers made to kids ranging from 8th grade to HS Seniors. It's a good read, especially, if (like me) you feel that kids changing their "commitments" has gotten out of control. If you read into the numbers, something like 12% of offers made by D1 colleges are actually commitments by the University making the offer.

https://amp.si.com/college-football/201 ... igning-day
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 18469
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 9:09 am

winwave wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:34 am
tpstulane wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:31 am
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 7:54 am
This class was disappointing compared to the successes of the last recruiting cycle.
I believe the size last year (25) had more of an impact on our rankings. (The more signees usually the higher the ranking) This time we only signed 20 kids. WF said he’s going for better kids not numbers from here forward.
The 3 transfers will be more of an impact immediately than any of the recruits we signed.
Here's the rankings:

Per 247 -

94th overall
8th in AAC
4th in the state

Per Rivals -

88th overall
8th in AAC
3rd in the state


The total numbers matter but last years class was better than this one. It wasn't just pumped up by the # of signees. We need to win this year and show a modern offense to get things going recruiting wise.
4th in the state is bad.
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:18 am

Hell even being third is bad. That said I am hopeful that things will change next year. Getting Hall really gives me optimism. Timing is everything and he's getting McCleskey who is going to be 1st team all AAC and if Hall is who we think he is he may make some All-American teams. McCleskey will make Mooney look even better and with the two of them players like Toles, Robertson and Vallien will look better too. Having a viable passing attack will help the running game. We should finally have a balanced attack that puts up points and is fun to watch for both fans and recruits.

Hall also benefits from having McMillan. McMillan is smart and has been through several systems so he should pick up the new offense quickly which means quicker results for us.

We still have issues on the O-Line. The new coaches will hopefully be better at scheming around their weaknesses. The staff is hoping Montano can start at center so Dublin can move back to guard. He's making a bigger jump than Fisher did . We need to that to work out and I think it can. I'm not sure if Knutson can really contribute on the O-Line. I would think at least one of the two remaining spots will go to yet another O-Lineman. Hope it's a good one.

BTW, it would really help recruiting and attendance if WF never says triple option again.
Last edited by winwave on Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Let's Roll !
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 18469
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:25 am

winwave wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:18 am
Hell even being third is bad. That said I am hopeful that things will change next year. Getting Hall really gives me optimism. Timing is everything and he's getting McCleskey who is going to be 1st team all AAC and if Hall is who we think he is he may make some All-American teams. McCleskey will make Mooney look even better and with the two of them players like Toles, Robertson and Vallien will look better too. Having a viable passing attack will help the running game. We should finally have a balanced attack that puts up points and is fun to watch for both fans and recruits.

We still have issues on the O-Line. The new coaches will hopefully be better at scheming around their weaknesses. The staff is hoping Montano can start at center so Dublin can move back to guard. He's making a bigger jump than Fisher did . We need to that to work out and I think it can. I'm not sure if Knutson can really contribute on the O-Line. I would think at least one of the two remaining spots will go to yet another O-Lineman. Hope it's a good one.

BTW, it would really help recruiting and attendance if WF never says triple option again.
Agree on all points!
Hopefully it all comes out as we predict!
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:27 am

tps- I added a paragraph about McMillan just after you posted. I think you'll agree with that too. :cheers:
Let's Roll !
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 18469
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:57 am

winwave wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:27 am
tps- I added a paragraph about McMillan just after you posted. I think you'll agree with that too. :cheers:
Yes sir!

:cheers:
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1805
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:04 am

winwave wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:18 am
Hell even being third is bad. That said I am hopeful that things will change next year. Getting Hall really gives me optimism. Timing is everything and he's getting McCleskey who is going to be 1st team all AAC and if Hall is who we think he is he may make some All-American teams. McCleskey will make Mooney look even better and with the two of them players like Toles, Robertson and Vallien will look better too. Having a viable passing attack will help the running game. We should finally have a balanced attack that puts up points and is fun to watch for both fans and recruits.

Hall also benefits from having McMillan. McMillan is smart and has been through several systems so he should pick up the new offense quickly which means quicker results for us.

We still have issues on the O-Line. The new coaches will hopefully be better at scheming around their weaknesses. The staff is hoping Montano can start at center so Dublin can move back to guard. He's making a bigger jump than Fisher did . We need to that to work out and I think it can. I'm not sure if Knutson can really contribute on the O-Line. I would think at least one of the two remaining spots will go to yet another O-Lineman. Hope it's a good one.

BTW, it would really help recruiting and attendance if WF never says triple option again.
The worst thing about poor recruiting classes is that they come back to bite programs in 3-4 years. Tulane could potentially win the AAC West, but the players from this class and the class from two years ago are looming on Tulane's roster for the 2020 and 2021 seasons.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:37 am

Right zombie. That’s why it’s s important to win this year and with a good offense so we get that HS recruiting rolling.
Let's Roll !
Wave755
Riptide
Posts: 3070
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:04 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:40 am

tpstulane wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 9:09 am
winwave wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:34 am
tpstulane wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:31 am
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 7:54 am
This class was disappointing compared to the successes of the last recruiting cycle.
I believe the size last year (25) had more of an impact on our rankings. (The more signees usually the higher the ranking) This time we only signed 20 kids. WF said he’s going for better kids not numbers from here forward.
The 3 transfers will be more of an impact immediately than any of the recruits we signed.
Here's the rankings:

Per 247 -

94th overall
8th in AAC
4th in the state

Per Rivals -

88th overall
8th in AAC
3rd in the state


The total numbers matter but last years class was better than this one. It wasn't just pumped up by the # of signees. We need to win this year and show a modern offense to get things going recruiting wise.
4th in the state is bad.
Rivals for average recruit rating shows the following:

LSU 3.64
La Tech 2.5
Tulane 2.3
ULALA 2.17


But, we really did get 3 very good transfers?
anEngineer
High Tide
Posts: 457
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:26 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 1:47 pm

Wave755 wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:40 am
tpstulane wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 9:09 am
winwave wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:34 am
tpstulane wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:31 am
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 7:54 am
This class was disappointing compared to the successes of the last recruiting cycle.
I believe the size last year (25) had more of an impact on our rankings. (The more signees usually the higher the ranking) This time we only signed 20 kids. WF said he’s going for better kids not numbers from here forward.
The 3 transfers will be more of an impact immediately than any of the recruits we signed.
Here's the rankings:

Per 247 -

94th overall
8th in AAC
4th in the state

Per Rivals -

88th overall
8th in AAC
3rd in the state


The total numbers matter but last years class was better than this one. It wasn't just pumped up by the # of signees. We need to win this year and show a modern offense to get things going recruiting wise.
4th in the state is bad.
Rivals for average recruit rating shows the following:

LSU 3.64
La Tech 2.5
Tulane 2.3
ULALA 2.17


But, we really did get 3 very good transfers?
This is all ridiculous. This recruiting scoring eventually gets to EXTREMELY insignificant digits. The difference between a half star is pretty meaningless. These are humans, not machines. LSU is obviously the highest and these other 3 are about the same. The important thing is did you get the players you need to make your team better. If you need a linebacker and the highest available is a quarter star lower rating than an available wide receiver, you take the linebacker.

This micro-analysis of the star system has proven time and time again to be grossly overblown. Yet, every year, it becomes the be-all and end-all of recruiting talk. Get over it and trust the coaches and the system until they prove otherwise ON THE FIELD. This is just looking for things to complain about. When you throw in the graduate additions, I'm satisfied that the team is getting better and more competitive with the top quarter of the conference. What else is there?
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:38 pm

Like it or not the rankings usually prove accurate overall. When we did better last year everyone was citing the rankings. Same here. It wasn't a good class. Does look like some of the transfers will help.

Discussing this stuff is why these fan forums exist. Quit whining . I've told you before you need to get much thicker skin. You clearly want this to be the yoggie two board where all is well all the time. It's not. Hasn't been forever. Yet were here because we want it to get better.
Let's Roll !
Bicoastalwave
High Tide
Posts: 406
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:24 am
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:53 pm

I am disappointed we missed out on one more signee (Tyler Scott would have changed our narrative), but at the end of the day we are in GREAT SHAPE for next year and beyond. The average star ranking is a much better metric then the system just rewarding you based on # of recruits. Also we have the #19 transfer in all of college football in Mccklesky. We added multiple grad offensive linemen which was our largest question mark. The sky is not falling, it was just a a slightly disappointing end to the signing period when we had hoped we would see an uptick from last year based on our record and bowl win.

Looking at this from a positive viewpoint we have more room for grad transfers or can put those scholarships forward to next year which was going to be a small class (18 openings before attrition).
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6980
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:20 pm

I think people are forgetting these numbers carry less weight than they did even five years ago because of all the transfers. The # of recruits is a factor in the total score, and if you're filling 3-4 spots every year with transfers and grad transfers instead of HS seniors, you're only signing 21 compared to other schools' 24-25. That 10-15% fewer players. Would you turn down McCleskey and Knutson for a low 3 star HS WR and OL, just so our ranking was higher? I wouldn't.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:40 pm

320- Don't others get transfers to? It seems we are always talking about how much more transferring is going on nowadays. I'm glad we got McCleskey . Not sure Knutson will ever make a real contribution on the OL. Montano might. Anderson at LB looks like he could end be a contributor too. We could have also got others with the other scholarships. It's not either/or.
Let's Roll !
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 5343
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:52 am

RobertM320 wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:20 pm
I think people are forgetting these numbers carry less weight than they did even five years ago because of all the transfers. The # of recruits is a factor in the total score, and if you're filling 3-4 spots every year with transfers and grad transfers instead of HS seniors, you're only signing 21 compared to other schools' 24-25. That 10-15% fewer players. Would you turn down McCleskey and Knutson for a low 3 star HS WR and OL, just so our ranking was higher? I wouldn't.
Yup. Some quality transfers, especially at need positions, r eating up schollies and not included in the rankings.

Still have no clue how Tech continues to recruit at this level or any level. What athlete would choose spending 3-4 years in CUSA Ruston over Nola on TV every week in a much better conference. I really don’t get it. Very confused.
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6980
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Fri Feb 08, 2019 7:26 am

winwave wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:40 pm
320- Don't others get transfers to? It seems we are always talking about how much more transferring is going on nowadays. I'm glad we got McCleskey . Not sure Knutson will ever make a real contribution on the OL. Montano might. Anderson at LB looks like he could end be a contributor too. We could have also got others with the other scholarships. It's not either/or.
Some do, some don't. Most of the P5s don't, or just get one at a position like QB or something. Those schools usually are signing a full class of HS players. Its also why I said 21 as compared to 24. I was allowing for a transfer in a P5 recruit class. I'm just pointing out that it does affect the rankings, and we've been signing more transfers the last couple of years than we did previously, due to rules changes.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
Post Reply