PATSY RATINGS 2013 - COLGATE

[Lehigh Football Nation]

http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2013/02/patsy-ratings-colgates-class-of-2017.html

Oh-so-close to being one for the ages. Great? No doubt. But not without a few questions.

[RichH2]

Damn. Knew they would do well but.... Well we all have a lot of work to do coaching up our recruits and get trolling for next yr. Scary that we recruited many of those kids and lost out.

[GateRaider63]

Not worried about the 2 LBs. Alex Campbell is a DE/LB, Charles Cairnie is a TE/LB, and I think Obinwa (**) fits the mold perfectly for our OLB/Rush End position.

[CFBfan]

Not worried about the 2 LBs. Alex Campbell is a DE/LB, Charles Cairnie is a TE/LB, and I think Obinwa (**) fits the mold perfectly for our OLB/Rush End position.

i poked around a little, the LB from nj had about 20 offers including: ODU, U Del, Navy, Army, Albany, Towson, Elon, Stony Brook, Wagner and more along with a few Ivies, and a couple other PL's. and he played in a "big time" program that played a "national" schedule and he started in the middle 2 years. seems like the real deal.
will try to find more on the other kid as well

[Fordham]

Great great class

[GateRaider63]

i poked around a little, the LB from nj had about 20 offers including: ODU, U Del, Navy, Army, Albany, Towson, Elon, Stony Brook, Wagner and more along with a few Ivies, and a couple other PL's. and he played in a "big time" program that played a "national" schedule and he started in the middle 2 years. seems like the real deal.
will try to find more on the other kid as well

Yeah, I think Grasso is going to be a good one. Starting 2 years for that program is something.

How much do I have to whine to get this to a 75? Or should I just sue? (context if you need it... http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-lehigh-university-student-sues-over-grade-20130211,0,937005.story&sa=U&ei=kDYaUaywM8OmigLAooGACA&ved=0CBoQqQIwAA&usg=AFQjCNEuYmRyAsN-DsgyFmFCU-qeUUS4jQ)

[CFBfan]

Great great class

I'm thinking FU is gonna be in that range too? and with 60 shollies on the field and what i consider a very good head coach FU will be a very good team this year.....

[RichH2]

63
LMAO. Seems today some grad students think it better to sue rather than do their work properly for a better grade. Dont know truth of underlying allegations but to sue for over 1mil for a C+ seems a tad asinine.
There is very little to quibble about w Gate's class. Excellent top to bottom.

Gate and FU likely 2 best squads coming into this season. Not overwhelmingly so but distinct.
I

[carney2]

This is what we should be expecting from scholarship recruiting. As we've already seen, and suspect will see again over the next few days, some of these recruiting classes should have us asking, Why did we bother?

[RichH2]

This is what we should be expecting from scholarship recruiting. As we've already seen, and suspect will see again over the next few days, some of these recruiting classes should have us asking, Why did we bother?

+1

[Doc QB]

This is what we should be expecting from scholarship recruiting. As we've already seen, and suspect will see again over the next few days, some of these recruiting classes should have us asking, Why did we bother?

Fair question. But to truly decipher the code that will allow us to determine if we have in fact landed higher quality athletes at our beloved institutions, one must go beyond stats, resumes, measureables, etc. It comes down to recruiting. Seems redundant? No. I mean look at who recruited these guys and ask (more importantly find out): where did they take their five, alloted, NCAA allowed paid official visits and who actually offered them scholarships. One would not make visits unless they had an offer (or good chance of one) and the visit is likely not going to happen unless the school was highly intent on giving the cash. Then you have a different 'measurable' as to what level athlete we got...who else wanted them badly enough to pay for their official visit, and did they offer? Got to get the head to head data on the few schools that were in serious contention, all stats and accolades aside.

Then, and only then, will we know how we are stacking up in the recruiting game against the CAA, Ivies, etc.

[Franks Tanks]

Here is the flaw is the ratings. Guys who are listed by a recruiting service and those that recieve stars are heavily weighted. That would be fine if every recruit were evaluated by the recruiting services, but most are not. There are many players who could be 2 star guys if they recieved a proper evaluation, but simply do not because they don't go to camps or play on a High School team with other prospects. Many of the rated Colgate guys layed at high profile HS programs and are more likley to be rated. I guarantee that if a rivals scout did a thorough evaluation of all of the PL recruits, and FCS in general, many more would be rated. By the way I do think Gate brought in some excellent recruits.

[CFBfan]

Here is the flaw is the ratings. Guys who are listed by a recruiting service and those that recieve stars are heavily weighted. That would be fine if every recruit were evaluated by the recruiting services, but most are not. There are many players who could be 2 star guys if they recieved a proper evaluation, but simply do not because they don't go to camps or play on a High School team with other prospects. Many of the rated Colgate guys layed at high profile HS programs and are more likley to be rated. I guarantee that if a rivals scout did a thorough evaluation of all of the PL recruits, and FCS in general, many more would be rated. By the way I do think Gate brought in some excellent recruits.

100% agree frank. AND some services inflate kids numbers to make themselves look good.....i saw this 1st hand!! disgracful but it happens.

[carney2]

Here is the flaw is the ratings. Guys who are listed by a recruiting service and those that recieve stars are heavily weighted. That would be fine if every recruit were evaluated by the recruiting services, but most are not. There are many players who could be 2 star guys if they recieved a proper evaluation, but simply do not because they don't go to camps or play on a High School team with other prospects. Many of the rated Colgate guys layed at high profile HS programs and are more likley to be rated. I guarantee that if a rivals scout did a thorough evaluation of all of the PL recruits, and FCS in general, many more would be rated. By the way I do think Gate brought in some excellent recruits.

All true. My response is

1. If you want perfect, talk to God

2. If you've got something better, let's hear it.

[Franks Tanks]

All true. My response is

1. If you want perfect, talk to God

2. If you've got something better, let's hear it.


I have nothing better, and want no part of this. I do feel you are putting too much stock in the ratings, which we all know are for entertainment purposes only. :)

[RichH2]

Doc has valid points but very iffy to actually implement w/o info from all recruits detailing that info. Published reports not exactly reliable.*s not great predictors. I recall last yr a recruit w 0* who miraculously went to 3 simply by being recruited by a.B10 team. A number of recruits do have reliable info on offers and visits but it is hit or miss. Most do not. Do we reward.those w such info thereby downgrading those w/o it? Some are missing the essence of Patsy. Would be great to have but we dont so we do the best we can. And w/in that framework we can have fun comparing all classes by the same measures, even if flawed.

[van]

At least the flaws, which we all acknowledge, should be fairly uniform across the board (Hoyas excepted DFW). Still allows for relative comparisons. Carney said it best, not perfect. Makes for good conversation in an otherwise dull time.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

63
LMAO. Seems today some grad students think it better to sue rather than do their work properly for a better grade. Dont know truth of underlying allegations but to sue for over 1mil for a C+ seems a tad asinine.
There is very little to quibble about w Gate's class. Excellent top to bottom.

Gate and FU likely 2 best squads coming into this season. Not overwhelmingly so but distinct.
I

Fordham still had some head scratching losses last year so they still need to work on certain things imo. I do believe that they will have a lot to say this year based on their recent recruiting and solid turnaround from the 20111 debacle. I'll be interested to see how long their "window" will really be. I have a feeling the mediocre facilities and bumbling athletic department will hurt them over time.

Colgate's recruiting prowess is amazing given the overall support the program receives. Many of those kids will be playing in front of smaller crowds in college than they did in HS. Biddle is a magician.

[Fordham]

Fordham still had some head scratching losses last year so they still need to work on certain things imo. I do believe that they will have a lot to say this year based on their recent recruiting and solid turnaround from the 20111 debacle. I'll be interested to see how long their "window" will really be. I have a feeling the mediocre facilities and bumbling athletic department will hurt them over time.

Colgate's recruiting prowess is amazing given the overall support the program receives. Many of those kids will be playing in front of smaller crowds in college than they did in HS. Biddle is a magician. Bucknell is a head scratcher. You used plural, though. What were the other ones?

[carney2]

Colgate's recruiting prowess is amazing given the overall support the program receives. Many of those kids will be playing in front of smaller crowds in college than they did in HS. Biddle is a magician.

Having peeked at some of the yet to be reported classes and massaging a few numbers I am quickly reaching the conclusion that Patriot League recruiting with scholarships may be a singular disappointment. Colgate may be the poster child. We are lauding them for gathering a "great" recruiting class when in fact, using pretty much the same methodology as previous non-scholarship years, they are not even in the top 5 or 6 all time for Patsy Point totals. Even Georgetown has had two classes that exceeded this total. In my opinion, this group should be about average or slightly above for recruiting with scholarships. Instead, they are probably going to end up at the top of the pile, envied by all. How can that be?

[Fordham]

It couldn't be because there's a flaw in using the same methodology for pre and post scholly, could it? xpeacex

Seriously, if memory serves you had a huge disclaimer last year when announcing Fordham's score and I thought you went out of your way to point out that the methodology didn't work as well for scholarships. I'm wondering what changed from that point until now.

Fwiw, I would take any of our last two classes as well as Colgate's over anything I've seen from any non-scholarship recruiting class the last few years. Colgate really has put together a heck of a class IMO.

[RichH2]

Not so pessimistic. Too soon to tell any difference whatsoever. One true fact we won more head to heads w CAA and Ivies. Not enuf yet but better. We have more to do to get recruiting close to CAA or Ivies.

[GateRaider63]

Having peeked at some of the yet to be reported classes and massaging a few numbers I am quickly reaching the conclusion that Patriot League recruiting with scholarships may be a singular disappointment. Colgate may be the poster child. We are lauding them for gathering a "great" recruiting class when in fact, using pretty much the same methodology as previous non-scholarship years, they are not even in the top 5 or 6 all time for Patsy Point totals. Even Georgetown has had two classes that exceeded this total. In my opinion, this group should be about average or slightly above for recruiting with scholarships. Instead, they are probably going to end up at the top of the pile, envied by all. How can that be?

I don't think you can snap your fingers and start nailing great classes. I think we are going to see a gradual change over the next few years of the quality of classes. I'm curious to see what Fordham has done this year since they have more 'experience' with this process than the other schools.

[carney2]

It couldn't be because there's a flaw in using the same methodology for pre and post scholly, could it? xpeacex

Seriously, if memory serves you had a huge disclaimer last year when announcing Fordham's score and I thought you went out of your way to point out that the methodology didn't work as well for scholarships. I'm wondering what changed from that point until now.

No significant changes from last year to this. One of LFN's goals is to preserve year to year comparability.

As for my 2012 comments that I don't think the old methodology works as well for scholarships, I stand by it. In fact, that's why I got out of the game. As I thought about it, I concluded that the data needed to upgrade for scholarships would be somewhere between difficult and impossible to round up.

[heath]

How does Colgates' class compare to past CAA or Socon classes? If the Patriot League wants to be noticed and win playoff games, they need to DO better than this. I think they will in the future,but to praise the Colgate class like it's the best ever is ludicrous. Wait until a PL school gets 4-5 players that are 2*, and mix in a 3* occasionally that wants a great education,. then that's a great class. It WILL happen. BTW, don't think Gates class will help them win the title this year.

[carney2]

don't think Gates class will help them win the title this year.

My money's on Fordham this year, but they don't count. Beyond them it's anyone's game:

Bucknell - Would need a lot of luck, but...
Colgate - A repeat? Why not?
Georgetown - Not the doormat Hoyas of old.
Holy Cross - A big rebound is not impossible.
Lafayette - Survive the OOC and get to people your own size.
Lehigh - Rebuilding, but not from the ground up.

Could be an exciting season with virtually every game up for grabs.

[RichH2]

Definitely a horserace . Gate has best returning QB, a decisive factor even w their porousD. Rams were better last yr and will be even better this yr.The rest could be anyone.
Frish will help some next season but 2 yrs of schollies will start to make a measurable difference.

No one saying Gate class best of all time, just best in this 1st schollie class.

[Fordham]

No significant changes from last year to this. One of LFN's goals is to preserve year to year comparability.

As for my 2012 comments that I don't think the old methodology works as well for scholarships, I stand by it. In fact, that's why I got out of the game. As I thought about it, I concluded that the data needed to upgrade for scholarships would be somewhere between difficult and impossible to round up.

I agree with that completely but it's also why I question why you'd use past Patsy ratings as evidence that this year's Colgate class may not be all that different. Apples and oranges imo. If it's safe to say that while I love the annual Patsy reviews, I've always taken them with a grain of salt it's even safer to say that I take comparisons of Patsy rankings from non-scholarship years to scholarship ones with a sliver of that grain.

I found last year's thread: the wheels are coming off at Fordham (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?105179-Patriot-League-Recruiting-FORDHAM&highlight=). Very interesting to read imo, particularly given many comments in this year's threads about how competitive we should be when last year everything was (understandably) in the crapper. It leads me to some random thoughts regarding scholarship recruiting in general:

*I think the Class Size aspect is overrated and provides part of the skew in non-scholly Patsy ratings v. scholly. Tavani piles up 31 bodies and gets his 6 point bump last year (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?105141-Patriot-League-Recruiting-LAFAYETTE&highlight=). I personally value the 15 scholarship kids more than the 30 or so we would need to bring in otherwise. Keep in mind in that same Fordham 2012 thread there is a good comment from Tribe4SF that 15ish is the norm for scholarship classes but after signing day there are many additions that typically push the class up to 20+. In our case we had 15 recruits as of Patsy eval day but by game 1 we had added 3 FBS transfers (2 of them BCS) as well as 5 walk ons for a total group of 23. I expect this year will be similar.

*Imo OL take a little longer to develop before they should be expected to make an impact. Speed is speed and a RB or WR is more likely imo to step in as a frosh and get playing time and make an impact. Big OL/DL typically were able to overpower competition wherever they were and didn't need to learn technique THAT well. Couple that with being an 18 y/o more-like-a-boy out of HS going against 20- 21 y/old more-like-a-man who has had several years of college program technique instruction and off-season weightlifting and I think you can expect the impact more in year 2 - 3 for linemen. My point is that this is one of the reasons I LOVE Colgate's class. It sets up the next few years imo where they'll be able to recruit some more heavily weighted skill position players. I really do like the class alot.

*Coaching, coaching, coaching - it's the only way to explain how at Fordham the same exact kids (mostly) went 1-10 in 2011 and 6-5 with 3 of those being PL losses by a total of 8 points. The one question I would have if I'm you guys or HC is whether or not an established coach who for so many years figured out how to recruit strong need-based aid-only classes can alter their (and their staff's) approach to recruit in such a different way. I would obviously include Biddle but this class says to me that he's got it figured out. We needed the coaching change for both overall coaching but also recruiting purposes, in order to take full advantage of scholarships. I wonder who else needs a coaching change to do it as well?

*With regard to competing with the CAA for recruits. There is absolutely no question that we are competing with CAA, Ivies and lower tier FBS schools much much more than we ever had without scholarships and we are winning a decent amount of those battles. Here's the catch, though, and it's what I've been saying from the beginning - we still lose more than we win and it's due to facilities, the AI and overall conference perception imo. Thus, I really think that this Colgate class is exactly what PL fans should be hoping for. A bump up overall in talent while still not on par with the CAA. You put 3 - 4 similar classes together under Biddle and imo you'd have a good shot at getting a win or two in the playoffs instead of the valiant effort losses we've come to expect. We're not going to dominate FCS but we should be much more competitive imo and hopefully every once in a while one of our teams can really make a run ala 'Gate '03.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

*Coaching, coaching, coaching - it's the only way to explain how at Fordham the same exact kids (mostly) went 1-10 in 2011 and 6-5 with 3 of those being PL losses by a total of 8 points. The one question I would have if I'm you guys or HC is whether or not an established coach who for so many years figured out how to recruit strong need-based aid-only classes can alter their (and their staff's) approach to recruit in such a different way. I would obviously include Biddle but this class says to me that he's got it figured out. We needed the coaching change for both overall coaching but also recruiting purposes, in order to take full advantage of scholarships. I wonder who else needs a coaching change to do it as well?

A more glass-half-empty sort of person might argue: With three years of "full scholarships", shouldn't Fordham be coasting through the Patriot League portion of the schedule by now, with 70-80 Patsy Point classes? Especially with a couple-year headstart in this "method" of recruiting?

I'm working my way through Fordham later today, and I'll be comparing it closely to both Colgate's and Fordham 2012. I'll be very interested to see how it turns out.

[RichH2]

I tend.to give Rams a pass on their 1st yrs w schollies. Coaching was non existent. Morehead and staff seem to be a vast plus factor. Heck, FU D used to remind me of a Chinese fire drill. Lots of motion w/o direction.

[Fordham]

A more glass-half-empty sort of person might argue: With three years of "full scholarships", shouldn't Fordham be coasting through the Patriot League portion of the schedule by now, with 70-80 Patsy Point classes? Especially with a couple-year headstart in this "method" of recruiting?

I'm working my way through Fordham later today, and I'll be comparing it closely to both Colgate's and Fordham 2012. I'll be very interested to see how it turns out.
I'm saying that scholarships are not a panacea. They offer improvement but they won't mask poor preparation, poor game day coaching or poor recruiting. I'm not sure how that's glass half full.

The Patsy point thing as your reference point is lost on me but that could be because I view them simply for fun, entertainment and good 'conversation' during a slow off season rather than anything resembling a spot-on analysis of the classes that would make this year's 70 points somehow relate to past year's 70 points.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I'm saying that scholarships are not a panacea. They offer improvement but they won't mask poor preparation, poor game day coaching or poor recruiting. I'm not sure how that's glass half full.

The Patsy point thing as your reference point is lost on me but that could be because I view them simply for fun, entertainment and good 'conversation' during a slow off season rather than anything resembling a spot-on analysis of the classes that would make this year's 70 points somehow relate to past year's 70 points.

The Patsy Points system was not devised by me. I'm simply sort-of taking the baton from carney, the guy who came up with everything. He has always said they are for "entertainment purposes only", and that is undoubtedly true. They've been constantly exposed for being unscientific, over-reliant on unreliable rating services, unfair in this way or that way, etc. All true.

And yet, they're all we've got. They're imperfect, but they're the only measurement we have. They're for "entertainment purposes only", yet people lobby the Committee to add points. The Committee constantly tells people to not use them for really rating classes, that what makes a class is so much more than the Patsy Ratings. And yet, it will happen. People will compare the 2012 and 2013 Fordham classes and see the differences. Again, it's all we've got.

With the "scholarship decision", the Patsies, imperfect as they are, are the only yardstick there is in terms of comparing the pre- and post- scholarship eras. This is the revelation I had on the Patsies. It has flaws, and warts. But if the methodology changes significantly between years, i.e. removing the "class size" aspect of the points, there will be no way to see the impact in the Patriot League with and without scholarships.

For Fordham, too, this is important. Is Fordham getting "better" at the scholarship game? The Patsies are the only thing out there that offers some sort of measuring tool to find out if this is true.

As you can see, the Patsies are pure entertainment. And yet, deadly serious.

[Fordham]

The Patsy Points system was not devised by me. I'm simply sort-of taking the baton from carney, the guy who came up with everything. He has always said they are for "entertainment purposes only", and that is undoubtedly true. They've been constantly exposed for being unscientific, over-reliant on unreliable rating services, unfair in this way or that way, etc. All true. You're taking the baton from carney but not necessarily listening to his commentary that scholarships impact the ratings in a way that we still can't put our finger on. Yet it's enough to have him hang it up in recognition that the Patsy system he developed was geared towards non-scholarships with scholarships being a bit of a head scratcher. All that's fine since it's still just for fun but I've only jumped in when I start seeing some posts that question what scholarships have really brought us if even an acclaimed class like 'Gate's doesn't have more Patsy points than some previous year's non-scholarship squad. If you follow recruiting reasonably well and can't take a look at that class and see how it's better with scholarships, I'm not sure what to tell you.


And yet, they're all we've got. They're imperfect, but they're the only measurement we have. They're for "entertainment purposes only", yet people lobby the Committee to add points. The Committee constantly tells people to not use them for really rating classes, that what makes a class is so much more than the Patsy Ratings. And yet, it will happen. People will compare the 2012 and 2013 Fordham classes and see the differences. Again, it's all we've got. Comparing Fordham 2012 scholarship to Fordham 2013 scholarship is apples-to-apples and makes sense imo. I think the goofiness comes in when comparing non-scholarship to scholarship, particularly over different years. I'm not sure which classes were the ones that are higher ranked than this year's Colgate class but I'll bet you that if you compared them to many, if not most, CAA schools from that same time period you'd find that the PL non scholarship Patsy's are higher or comparable ... yet I don't think anyone feels that the classes were anywhere near that.


With the "scholarship decision", the Patsies, imperfect as they are, are the only yardstick there is in terms of comparing the pre- and post- scholarship eras. This is the revelation I had on the Patsies. It has flaws, and warts. But if the methodology changes significantly between years, i.e. removing the "class size" aspect of the points, there will be no way to see the impact in the Patriot League with and without scholarships.

My gut beliefs regarding the Patsies:
... as a tool to enable some of us nuts to have some off season fun and goofy banter, it's EXCELLENT.
... as a tool to compare scholarship classes from one school to scholarship classes at another school in the same year, it's GOOD
... as a tool to compare scholarship classes from one year to scholarship classes in another year, it's OK (still interesting).
... as a tool to compare scholarship classes from one year to non-scholarship classes in another year, it's close to WORTHLESS


As you can see, the Patsies are pure entertainment. And yet, deadly serious.

xsmileyclapx ok, that line drew a chuckle

[RichH2]

Well, Fordham a quite thorough analysis. Patsy has evolved repeatedly over the yrs. Little doubt it will be modified in the coming yrs.
As to comparability, Patsy was always good w/in each class. A bit less so on a yr to yr basis. Now with schollies, comparability to prior yrs is at best problematical but still a good off season topic. It will always have a much higher reliability w/in each yr. Class size was relevant in the past as the more bodies in camp the better chance for quality.. Agree much less impact now for class size except in reference to specified needs.
I hope your effort was enjoyable for you, I liked reading it. Proving that ,at least in part, Patsy has served its primary purpose for you and I.

[Fordham]

Well, Fordham a quite thorough analysis. Patsy has evolved repeatedly over the yrs. Little doubt it will be modified in the coming yrs.
As to comparability, Patsy was always good w/in each class. A bit less so on a yr to yr basis. Now with schollies, comparability to prior yrs is at best problematical but still a good off season topic. It will always have a much higher reliability w/in each yr. Class size was relevant in the past as the more bodies in camp the better chance for quality.. Agree much less impact now for class size except in reference to specified needs.
I hope your effort was enjoyable for you, I liked reading it. Proving that ,at least in part, Patsy has served its primary purpose for you and I.
Agreed - I love it. My point is strictly to those comments drawing conclusions from the previous, non-scholarship Patsy results to this one. Don't want that to take away from any appreciation for carney's previous work and LFN's current one (although I may have just earned a negative "Committee Adjustment" number for my Rams!)

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Agreed - I love it. My point is strictly to those comments drawing conclusions from the previous, non-scholarship Patsy results to this one. Don't want that to take away from any appreciation for carney's previous work and LFN's current one (although I may have just earned a negative "Committee Adjustment" number for my Rams!)

Is that "lobbying"? :P

More seriously, thanks. Trying to wrap my head around Fordham's class - and how best to represent it.

[hoyapigskin]

There should be enough info on the Georgetown class to perform a ranking. I believe 19 of the 22 commits are listed at: http://www.hoyasaxa.com/sports/football.htm

I believe GU did well given no schollies to offer.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

There should be enough info on the Georgetown class to perform a ranking. I believe 19 of the 22 commits are listed at: http://www.hoyasaxa.com/sports/football.htm

I believe GU did well given no schollies to offer.

I would love to do so, but in years past it was not done until the class is officially announced by the school, since the potential exists that new kids will commit or other kids will decommit.

[hoyapigskin]

Either way but all of these kids have signed NLI's with GU and historically it is an extraordinary event that a kid ends up not showing up in August.

[DFW HOYA]

I believe GU did well given no schollies to offer.

I'm sure they're all good kids, but this GU class looks, at a distance, as thin as any in the last 20 years, even up against some of the later MAAC years.

When you don't get commits in skill positions and end up with visible imbalaces in positions that you already have depth (e.g., Georgetown now has seven QB's on its 2013 roster and four PK's), it speaks to losing out on prospects and filling the list with low-aid or no-aid recruits.

Of course, there may still be the possibility for decommits so that's a concern as well. I do not believe that Georgetown participates in the NLI for football because the NLI is for grant aid only.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Either way but all of these kids have signed NLI's with GU and historically it is an extraordinary event that a kid ends up not showing up in August.

I don't disagree. Having said that, I have seen it happen.

[CFBfan]

I'm sure they're all good kids, but this GU class looks, at a distance, as thin as any in the last 20 years, even up against some of the later MAAC years.

When you don't get commits in skill positions and end up with visible imbalaces in positions that you already have depth (e.g., Georgetown now has seven QB's on its 2013 roster and four PK's), it speaks to losing out on prospects and filling the list with low-aid or no-aid recruits.

Of course, there may still be the possibility for decommits so that's a concern as well. I do not believe that Georgetown participates in the NLI for football because the NLI is for grant aid only.

correct DDW, they do not.

[GateRaider63]

FYI, it looks like Colgate got another commit. I have to assume this is a PWO, but who knows.

Daniel Mosko via twitter:
Committed to Colgate university for football. Yee buddy!!
https://twitter.com/Bearjew9/status/302239314866208768

http://www.hudl.com/athlete/546299/highlights/36510453

[DFW HOYA]

FYI, it looks like Colgate got another commit. I have to assume this is a PWO, but who knows.

http://www.maxpreps.com/athletes/QuFdp0sB1kaeczulhmrbTQ/football-fall-12/stats-daniel-mosko.htm

[hoyapigskin]

I say do the rankings for GU now...and re-calculate in May if there is a significant change. I also disagree with DFW Hoya as the athletes that GU have committed our solid and Mandy Williams is coming in as an athlete not necessarily to compete for the QB job. Good O]Line pickups as well. Ledford a 2 star on 247 sports.

[CFBfan]

I say do the rankings for GU now...and re-calculate in May if there is a significant change. I also disagree with DFW Hoya as the athletes that GU have committed our solid and Mandy Williams is coming in as an athlete not necessarily to compete for the QB job. Good O]Line pickups as well. Ledford a 2 star on 247 sports.

how do know that? he's listed as a qb. he's listed at 6' 175 very thin and numbers are typicaly inflated a little.

[hoyapigskin]

how do know that? he's listed as a qb. he's listed at 6' 175 very thin and numbers are typicaly inflated a little.

I have spoken to source close to the recruit and he was being recruited as a corner or possibly WR. Kid is a phenomenal athlete.

[hoyapigskin]

I don't disagree. Having said that, I have seen it happen.

Come on let's see the Hoya Patsy Ratings...no need to wait. We want to get into the fray!xblehx

[DFW HOYA]

Time will tell.

Unfortunately, outside of its recruiting in Atlanta and Dallas, Georgetown's results appear to be more than a step behind the other six.

[hoyapigskin]

I agree the two kids from Atlanta are very good players, also Huntley the CB from Dallas played for Lovett in Atlanta before moving to TX. But we did spread the wealth from a geographic standpoint with commits from NJ, CA, TX, GA, VA, NY, PA, CT, IL. Most kids are all-conference/county and a few All-state selections.xnodx