Two sides of an argument going on today about our two commitments (counting Harris, likely coming as soon as today). One side says it's only April so no reason to worry about the class as a whole, while the other counters that we heard that last year and looked how it turned out.
My take, FWIW, is two-fold:
1) In terms of the 2017 class, I'm admittedly more bullish on the class overall and especially on particular players than some/many on here. And I could probably be fairly called a borderline sunshine pumper. That said, even from a ratings perspective that class turned out pretty well - Top 15 nationally and with guys like Barton Simmons saying the class is better than the ranking. I'd also add that our EEs had strong springs that give (very) early indications that they may be able to contribute earlier than expected AND outperform their rankings- remember that Trey was only a 4- star on Rivals and that both Johnson and Reid were lower rated 3s and they both look to play roles on Team 121.
2) As it relates to our current 3-star commits, this is where the April argument does hold water, IMO. Especially when it comes to Lane and Harris, look at their offer lists - those kind of lists are highly correlated to 4-star prospects, not 5.5 3s like they are now. So give it time - Rivals and others will re-rate plenty of times and I'm willing to bet both end at least 5.8 4-stars. As for Penix, funny thing is his offer list actually isn't as impressive as the other two at this point (which imo is worthy of discussion) but he's rated higher - a 5.7 3-star who shined in front of Woodrow and others at a recent camp and again imo is likely to also get bumped. But I do think a guy like Corbin, who @NYCVol pointed out had a poor offer list when we jumped in and now is a 4-star with a stud offer list, is informatove. Another thing on Penix is that he's a guy who the staff has seen more than a few times and also is a high character kid from a talent hotbed in SFl that we continue to mine.
So I'm of the mind to let the rankings issue play out. If we start taking players who are both lower rated AND have crappy offer lists then that will be troublesome, especially since we are leaders for upwards of 10+ instate highly rated studs so the remaining spots are relatively limited. But until them I'm really happy with our commitment list right now and how we've positioned ourselves for the rest of the class.
Fin
My take, FWIW, is two-fold:
1) In terms of the 2017 class, I'm admittedly more bullish on the class overall and especially on particular players than some/many on here. And I could probably be fairly called a borderline sunshine pumper. That said, even from a ratings perspective that class turned out pretty well - Top 15 nationally and with guys like Barton Simmons saying the class is better than the ranking. I'd also add that our EEs had strong springs that give (very) early indications that they may be able to contribute earlier than expected AND outperform their rankings- remember that Trey was only a 4- star on Rivals and that both Johnson and Reid were lower rated 3s and they both look to play roles on Team 121.
2) As it relates to our current 3-star commits, this is where the April argument does hold water, IMO. Especially when it comes to Lane and Harris, look at their offer lists - those kind of lists are highly correlated to 4-star prospects, not 5.5 3s like they are now. So give it time - Rivals and others will re-rate plenty of times and I'm willing to bet both end at least 5.8 4-stars. As for Penix, funny thing is his offer list actually isn't as impressive as the other two at this point (which imo is worthy of discussion) but he's rated higher - a 5.7 3-star who shined in front of Woodrow and others at a recent camp and again imo is likely to also get bumped. But I do think a guy like Corbin, who @NYCVol pointed out had a poor offer list when we jumped in and now is a 4-star with a stud offer list, is informatove. Another thing on Penix is that he's a guy who the staff has seen more than a few times and also is a high character kid from a talent hotbed in SFl that we continue to mine.
So I'm of the mind to let the rankings issue play out. If we start taking players who are both lower rated AND have crappy offer lists then that will be troublesome, especially since we are leaders for upwards of 10+ instate highly rated studs so the remaining spots are relatively limited. But until them I'm really happy with our commitment list right now and how we've positioned ourselves for the rest of the class.
Fin
