Patriot League Recruiting (Patsy Ratings - FORDHAM

[carney2]

Moved (and amended) from championshipsubdivision.com.

FORDHAM = 28

The Committee readily admits that it does not understand scholarship recruiting, buried as it has been in the need-based aid Patriot League for all these years, and it freely admits that the Patsy Ratings system was not established to deal with play for pay recruiting. Also, it probably needs to be stated up front that the Patsy Ratings do not include transfers. Having said all of that, we need to state that all of this is quite puzzling.

QUALITY = 13: A few kids who can play, including one who is a 2-star – rated as a QB, but recruited as a LB. Details and a comparison with prior years:
2010: 4 Rated (36%); 1 two-star
2009: 4 Rated (17%); 0 two-stars
2008: 11 Rated (42%); 3 two-stars
2007: 7 Rated (27%); 2 two-stars

In case you’re wondering what difference the transfers might have made, The Committee advises you to consider that there were only three transfers included in the Fordham press release.

CLASS SIZE = 0: 11 recruits. (Patsy Rules require a minimum of 18 for points to be assigned.)

DISTRIBUTION = 6: No RB, WR or K.

SPEED = 2: We shall repeat it every time, but the information in this area is sketchy.

TRIGGER = 1: Excluding the 2-star QB who was recruited as a LB and listed as a LB in the press release, we have one QB remaining, a 1-star.

JUMBO = 2: 3 OL, 1 at 270+; 1 DL and he is over 250.

NEEDS = 4

DL = 2 (of 5): 2 DL, one rated, but undersized (235) and the other an unrated jumbo.
QB = 2 (of 4): 1 QB recruit, a 1-star. Decent size and All-State/All-League.
DB = 0 (of 3): 1 recruit; not rated.

THE COMMITTEE’S ADJUSTMENTS = 0

The Committee assumes that it is missing something and that coach Tom Masella has a plan. Just dealing with what’s in front of us however, we need to go on record by stating that this is not what we expected from scholarship recruiting. With only one or two possible exceptions the high school recruits do not appear to be much, if any, better than those that could have been – and, in fact, have been – signed without scholarships.

THE RATINGS RACE With 5 To Go:

60 Lafayette
28 Fordham

[Tribe4SF]

Nice adjustment, Carney! Hopefully in a year or two, you'll progress from puzzled to completely bamboozled, as the Patriot makes the full move to scholarships.xthumbsupx

[Bogus Megapardus]

My sense is that Fordham is being ranked the same way that other other PL colleges are being ranked, and not as a merit scholarship college. I guess you either have to look at Fordham the same way or exclude Fordham entirely. I don't think it would improve the Patsy Ratings to change the ranking system only when looking at Fordham, while applying the "traditional" system to everyone else.

I guess the other thing to keep in mind is that some of these guys might actually play in the fall. Yes, the Patsy League is unlike most others in a lot of ways, including the fact that the league rules do not allow redshirting freshmen. I assume (without knowing) that Fordham will continue to follow this rule even though it is now a full-ride school.

[RichH2]

If I understood what Masella was saying post season, he was not expecting a large class with schollies being held this year for transfers. But as LFN noted FU graduated 21. Would have thought he would have brought in at least that many.

[Tribe4SF]

If I understood what Masella was saying post season, he was not expecting a large class with schollies being held this year for transfers. But as LFN noted FU graduated 21. Would have thought he would have brought in at least that many.

The transition to scholarships disrupts that kind of easy math. On signing day, scholarship programs report only those who sign a LOI to accept an athletic scholarship. Players who plan to enroll with other kinds of aid, or as walk-ons, are not included in a signing day release. At W&M we usually don't find out for sure how many of those other players are coming until the school releases its media guide.

[RichH2]

Makes sense. If that is FU's situation would think more nameswill appear. Thepoint of schollies for them was to be a counter schoolfor FBS games. Given these numbers it would appear they are further away from that than they were last yr

[Tribe4SF]

Makes sense. If that is FU's situation would think more nameswill appear. Thepoint of schollies for them was to be a counter schoolfor FBS games. Given these numbers it would appear they are further away from that than they were last yr

Of course what we don't know is how many returning players may now be on scholarship.

[Bogus Megapardus]

Of course what we don't know is how many returning players may now be on scholarship.

Some exiting need-based aid recipients might be converted to scholarships, but I'm not sure I understand fully the incentive for Fordham to make those conversions. Since those players already are in place, I would think that Fordham will save its new merit scholarships for future classes. One incentive, I suppose, would be so that a future FBS opponent can call Fordham a "counter" game.

[Fordham83]

FORDHAM RECRUITS
Name, Pos., Ht., Wt., Hometown/High School

George Apostolopoulos, DL, 6'2, 235, Scarsdale, N.Y./Iona Prep
Brett Biestek, LB, 6'4, 235, Wallingford, Conn./Mark. T. Sheehan
Kai Brusch, OL, 6'4, 250, Salisbury School/Hamburg, Germany
Carlton Koonce, RB, 5'8, 180, Lumberton, N.J./Rancocas Valley (Hofstra)
Tom Fisher, TE/OL, 6'7, 265, Syracuse, N.Y./Westhills
Kassim Forbes, DB, 6'1, 185, Staten Island, N.Y./Curtis
Griffin Murphy, QB, 6-2, 215, Southborough, Mass./St. John's
Derrion Pittman, LB, 6'1, 215, Miramar, Fla./Miramar
Jake Rodriques, LB, 6'2, 245, Southington, Conn./Southington
Nick Talbert, WR, 6'3, 230, Hartford, Conn./Weaver (Hofstra)
Steven Tapia, OL, 6'5, 290, El Paso, Tex,/Montwood
Blake Wayne, QB, 6'0, 180, Concord, Calif./De LaSalle
Ian Williams, DB, 5'11, 175, West Palm Beach, Fla./The King's Academy
Justin Yancey, DL, 6'0, 295, Dallas, Tex,/Richardson Berkner

Fordham has minimum 3-4 more recruits to this list as well.. i saw video of a wr, k, lb, rb at meet recruit nite with head coach Masella .. think the rest didnt get a true scholly so perhaps thats why not included in this release. dont quote me but seemed Masella - offered scholly to best player available . not necessarily a need (on team) .. find the best players .. get them in the program..


u can find more info on these players and Fordham program here..

http://www.fordhamsports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/020410aab.html

[carney2]

FORDHAM RECRUITS
Name, Pos., Ht., Wt., Hometown/High School

George Apostolopoulos, DL, 6'2, 235, Scarsdale, N.Y./Iona Prep
Brett Biestek, LB, 6'4, 235, Wallingford, Conn./Mark. T. Sheehan
Kai Brusch, OL, 6'4, 250, Salisbury School/Hamburg, Germany
Carlton Koonce, RB, 5'8, 180, Lumberton, N.J./Rancocas Valley (Hofstra)
Tom Fisher, TE/OL, 6'7, 265, Syracuse, N.Y./Westhills
Kassim Forbes, DB, 6'1, 185, Staten Island, N.Y./Curtis
Griffin Murphy, QB, 6-2, 215, Southborough, Mass./St. John's
Derrion Pittman, LB, 6'1, 215, Miramar, Fla./Miramar
Jake Rodriques, LB, 6'2, 245, Southington, Conn./Southington
Nick Talbert, WR, 6'3, 230, Hartford, Conn./Weaver (Hofstra)
Steven Tapia, OL, 6'5, 290, El Paso, Tex,/Montwood
Blake Wayne, QB, 6'0, 180, Concord, Calif./De LaSalle
Ian Williams, DB, 5'11, 175, West Palm Beach, Fla./The King's Academy
Justin Yancey, DL, 6'0, 295, Dallas, Tex,/Richardson Berkner

Fordham has minimum 3-4 more recruits to this list as well.. i saw video of a wr, k, lb, rb at meet recruit nite with head coach Masella .. think the rest didnt get a true scholly so perhaps thats why not included in this release. dont quote me but seemed Masella - offered scholly to best player available . not necessarily a need (on team) .. find the best players .. get them in the program..


u can find more info on these players and Fordham program here..

http://www.fordhamsports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/020410aab.html

Thanks. I'm not sure what we have here that The Committee did not already have and consider. We take your 14 (from the original press release - and this post is the original press release) and eliminate the transfers (Koonce, Talbert and Wayne) because the Patsy Ratings do not consider transfers, and we have the 11 considered in these ratings.

The Committee - as are many others, actually - is still waiting for someone to drop some bread crumbs so that we can find our way down this yellow brick road. On the surface, this group does not appear to appreciably advance the cause of Fordham football. Where is our old friend Fordham when you need him?

[Fordham83]

I posted this for general info.. On the surface, this group does not appear to appreciably advance the cause of Fordham football.

Ill disagree. :) I saw film on all these recruits and 4 others not listed. Ill say this, does it immediately propel Fordham to the PL title (or best record) maybe not. but definitely an impressive group and a step in the right direction. Off the tape, HC Masella thought OL Tapia 6'5 290, LB Rodigues 6'2 245, Koonce RB, WR Talbert and DB Ian William will be in the mix for playing time as freshman.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I wanted to mention that my list of announced commits (http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2010/01/2010-edition-patriot-league-commit.html) includes one kid, LB Anthony Pesanello, who is not listed in the incoming scholarship class but I believe still qualifies with need-based aid. He may play either/both baseball and football.

Koonce and Talbert might get PT right away - but then again they redshirted at Hofstra, making them different types of players than the true freshmen. Similarly, QB Blake Wayne, a JuCo transfer from California, will also probably have every opportunity to win the starting QB job.

I also have to believe that there will be at least a dozen (non-scholarship?) bodies added to the roster just to fill it out for next year. Do they count towards the Patsy ratings, even though they're unannounced? Does the JuCo guy? Questions abound.

[carney2]

I wanted to mention that my list of announced commits (http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2010/01/2010-edition-patriot-league-commit.html) includes one kid, LB Anthony Pesanello, who is not listed in the incoming scholarship class but I believe still qualifies with need-based aid. He may play either/both baseball and football.

Koonce and Talbert might get PT right away - but then again they redshirted at Hofstra, making them different types of players than the true freshmen. Similarly, QB Blake Wayne, a JuCo transfer from California, will also probably have every opportunity to win the starting QB job.

I also have to believe that there will be at least a dozen (non-scholarship?) bodies added to the roster just to fill it out for next year. Do they count towards the Patsy ratings, even though they're unannounced? Does the JuCo guy? Questions abound.

Got into these twists and turns a few years ago and had to make some internal rules to maintain sanity and a sense of fair play:

Transfers do not count in the Patsy Ratings including transfers from junior colleges. That pretty much restricts us to kids coming directly from secondary/prep school. That also says that when/if the Patriot League goes scholarship, the Patsy Ratings are history. The logic for this seems fairly clear to The Committee, but...

Since The Committee has access to rumors, off-book "signings," and additions to the rosters from only two schools, it would be unfair to include these while ignoring players who come through the back door at other Patriot League institutions. Another internal rule therefore is that the announcement must come from the school before it will be included in any Patsy update.

[Fordham]

I understand the sentiment that it's an underwhelming class, particularly for those hoping that scholarships would vault PL programs right into the national championship discussion.

From my posts prior to the AGS-melt-down, though, I think I went into this pretty realistically by arguing that scholarships were no panacea to cover up the restriction of the AI or our poor facilities. They would allow us to recruit closer to home and also produce a nice bump up in talent than we would be able to get otherwise. I'm convinced that this class is doing that for us.

Some random thoughts:

*While it understandably doesn't help us in the Patsy rankings, there's no way to truly evaluate the class without taking the transfers into account. As LFN pointed out, one of the transfers will have every opportunity to win the starting QB job. Another (Koonce) is expected to be an immediate impact player for us and while I'm not sure how the WR will play out, we haven't had a 6'3 230lb receiver with his level of athleticism here as long as I could remember. These 3 are as talented as any kids I've seen us bring in and have a great chance to have a quick impact (particularly since they'll be here for spring ball as well).

*Of the incoming recruits, Rodriguez looks like the biggest steal. He's huge, looked very, very physical and nasty on film and appeared very athletic. Biestek did as well but Rodriguez looked on a different level. Again, I've never seen us bring in LB's with this type of size & athleticism before. It was a stark contrast to what I've seen in previous years. Is it possible that I was seeing what I wanted to see? Certainly. It's just that in previous years our LB's were always guys who were 200 - 215lbs and often very quick/athletic. These kids are 235lb+ and very quick/athletic. Don't know how to describe it other than these kids just looked different. Tapia, Yancey & Williams all looked as good, if not better, than what I remember seeing in previous years of going to this event. Some of the others appear to be projects/reaches.

*Can't explain the low overall #'s. The topic of replacing that many seniors, who else might join the class/how we're going to fill it in, etc. didn't come up but wish it did.

*I shudder to think of us recruiting with the league wide AI and no scholarships. I know it's a hypothetical, so tough to agree on or quantify; but I really think that honestly viewed through that lens, this class is much, much better than we would have had without scholarships ... however, that might not be enough for those that were hoping scholarships would produce a bigger jump for the PL.

*I do think Masella just went after talent and best available player wherever he could find it, fwiw. Other than the fact that he was looking for good competition at the wide open QB spot so I assume the transfer from CA was very targeted.

*It was weird to see us listed with such big time schools during this recruiting season. There was a 2 star QB out of CT that was considering us before committing to Temple ... who then was swooped up by Florida! There was also a DT who had committed to us in December but was scooped up by a late offer from Texas Tech. Not sure if this is just part and parcel of recruiting with scholarships or if there's a skill that we'll need to acquire here or both. Either way, it was somewhat fun to see us in the mix with those schools for once.

Finally, I would argue here that scholarships are doing exactly what they should be doing. They're making us considerably better than a Fordham without scholarships but not so much so that it will destroy league competitiveness or even automatically vault us to the top the league standings. If adopted league-wide, I thnk it will stop the slow, year-to-year slide we've been seeing in the PL and make us more competitive in a way similar to how we were in the late 90's, early 2000's. Basically having a shot to win any OOC match-ups and maybe win a post-season game or two but by no means necessarily dominant or favorites v. scholarship schools who don't have an AI to deal with.

Just my .02.

[1standgoal]

I understand the sentiment that it's an underwhelming class, particularly for those hoping that scholarships would vault PL programs right into the national championship discussion.

From my posts prior to the AGS-melt-down, though, I think I went into this pretty realistically by arguing that scholarships were no panacea to cover up the restriction of the AI or our poor facilities. They would allow us to recruit closer to home and also produce a nice bump up in talent than we would be able to get otherwise. I'm convinced that this class is doing that for us.

Some random thoughts:

*While it understandably doesn't help us in the Patsy rankings, there's no way to truly evaluate the class without taking the transfers into account. As LFN pointed out, one of the transfers will have every opportunity to win the starting QB job. Another (Koonce) is expected to be an immediate impact player for us and while I'm not sure how the WR will play out, we haven't had a 6'3 230lb receiver with his level of athleticism here as long as I could remember. These 3 are as talented as any kids I've seen us bring in and have a great chance to have a quick impact (particularly since they'll be here for spring ball as well).

*Of the incoming recruits, Rodriguez looks like the biggest steal. He's huge, looked very, very physical and nasty on film and appeared very athletic. Biestek did as well but Rodriguez looked on a different level. Again, I've never seen us bring in LB's with this type of size & athleticism before. It was a stark contrast to what I've seen in previous years. Is it possible that I was seeing what I wanted to see? Certainly. It's just that in previous years our LB's were always guys who were 200 - 215lbs and often very quick/athletic. These kids are 235lb+ and very quick/athletic. Don't know how to describe it other than these kids just looked different. Tapia, Yancey & Williams all looked as good, if not better, than what I remember seeing in previous years of going to this event. Some of the others appear to be projects/reaches.

*Can't explain the low overall #'s. The topic of replacing that many seniors, who else might join the class/how we're going to fill it in, etc. didn't come up but wish it did.

*I shudder to think of us recruiting with the league wide AI and no scholarships. I know it's a hypothetical, so tough to agree on or quantify; but I really think that honestly viewed through that lens, this class is much, much better than we would have had without scholarships ... however, that might not be enough for those that were hoping scholarships would produce a bigger jump for the PL.

*I do think Masella just went after talent and best available player wherever he could find it, fwiw. Other than the fact that he was looking for good competition at the wide open QB spot so I assume the transfer from CA was very targeted.

*It was weird to see us listed with such big time schools during this recruiting season. There was a 2 star QB out of CT that was considering us before committing to Temple ... who then was swooped up by Florida! There was also a DT who had committed to us in December but was scooped up by a late offer from Texas Tech. Not sure if this is just part and parcel of recruiting with scholarships or if there's a skill that we'll need to acquire here or both. Either way, it was somewhat fun to see us in the mix with those schools for once.

Finally, I would argue here that scholarships are doing exactly what they should be doing. They're making us considerably better than a Fordham without scholarships but not so much so that it will destroy league competitiveness or even automatically vault us to the top the league standings. If adopted league-wide, I thnk it will stop the slow, year-to-year slide we've been seeing in the PL and make us more competitive in a way similar to how we were in the late 90's, early 2000's. Basically having a shot to win any OOC match-ups and maybe win a post-season game or two but by no means necessarily dominant or favorites v. scholarship schools who don't have an AI to deal with.

Just my .02.

Very interesting insight and feedback.

[Go...gate]

I understand the sentiment that it's an underwhelming class, particularly for those hoping that scholarships would vault PL programs right into the national championship discussion.

From my posts prior to the AGS-melt-down, though, I think I went into this pretty realistically by arguing that scholarships were no panacea to cover up the restriction of the AI or our poor facilities. They would allow us to recruit closer to home and also produce a nice bump up in talent than we would be able to get otherwise. I'm convinced that this class is doing that for us.

Some random thoughts:

*While it understandably doesn't help us in the Patsy rankings, there's no way to truly evaluate the class without taking the transfers into account. As LFN pointed out, one of the transfers will have every opportunity to win the starting QB job. Another (Koonce) is expected to be an immediate impact player for us and while I'm not sure how the WR will play out, we haven't had a 6'3 230lb receiver with his level of athleticism here as long as I could remember. These 3 are as talented as any kids I've seen us bring in and have a great chance to have a quick impact (particularly since they'll be here for spring ball as well).

*Of the incoming recruits, Rodriguez looks like the biggest steal. He's huge, looked very, very physical and nasty on film and appeared very athletic. Biestek did as well but Rodriguez looked on a different level. Again, I've never seen us bring in LB's with this type of size & athleticism before. It was a stark contrast to what I've seen in previous years. Is it possible that I was seeing what I wanted to see? Certainly. It's just that in previous years our LB's were always guys who were 200 - 215lbs and often very quick/athletic. These kids are 235lb+ and very quick/athletic. Don't know how to describe it other than these kids just looked different. Tapia, Yancey & Williams all looked as good, if not better, than what I remember seeing in previous years of going to this event. Some of the others appear to be projects/reaches.

*Can't explain the low overall #'s. The topic of replacing that many seniors, who else might join the class/how we're going to fill it in, etc. didn't come up but wish it did.

*I shudder to think of us recruiting with the league wide AI and no scholarships. I know it's a hypothetical, so tough to agree on or quantify; but I really think that honestly viewed through that lens, this class is much, much better than we would have had without scholarships ... however, that might not be enough for those that were hoping scholarships would produce a bigger jump for the PL.

*I do think Masella just went after talent and best available player wherever he could find it, fwiw. Other than the fact that he was looking for good competition at the wide open QB spot so I assume the transfer from CA was very targeted.

*It was weird to see us listed with such big time schools during this recruiting season. There was a 2 star QB out of CT that was considering us before committing to Temple ... who then was swooped up by Florida! There was also a DT who had committed to us in December but was scooped up by a late offer from Texas Tech. Not sure if this is just part and parcel of recruiting with scholarships or if there's a skill that we'll need to acquire here or both. Either way, it was somewhat fun to see us in the mix with those schools for once.

Finally, I would argue here that scholarships are doing exactly what they should be doing. They're making us considerably better than a Fordham without scholarships but not so much so that it will destroy league competitiveness or even automatically vault us to the top the league standings. If adopted league-wide, I thnk it will stop the slow, year-to-year slide we've been seeing in the PL and make us more competitive in a way similar to how we were in the late 90's, early 2000's. Basically having a shot to win any OOC match-ups and maybe win a post-season game or two but by no means necessarily dominant or favorites v. scholarship schools who don't have an AI to deal with.

Just my .02.

Yep. Agree wholeheartedly. xnodx

[RichH2]

Let uspray that PL meeting in June adopts the same common sense analysis.

[DFW HOYA]

Basically having a shot to win any OOC match-ups and maybe win a post-season game or two but by no means necessarily dominant or favorites v. scholarship schools who don't have an AI to deal with.

In other words, "a little better, but not really good enough to worry anyone." Not a very compelling argument.

Rhetorically speaking, why shouldn't the goal of PL schools be to compete for the national championship? Does Villanova sit back and think they want to "maybe win a post-season game or two but by no means [be] necessarily dominant"? Or is there something wrong in competing for a title?

[Fordham]

In other words, "a little better, but not really good enough to worry anyone." Not a very compelling argument.

Rhetorically speaking, why shouldn't the goal of PL schools be to compete for the national championship? Does Villanova sit back and think they want to "maybe win a post-season game or two but by no means [be] necessarily dominant"? Or is there something wrong in competing for a title?

In other words, Georgetown was against scholarships because it will destroy league competitiveness but when presented with info that it might not destroy league competitiveness, you're now against them because they don't increase league competitiveness enough? xconfusedx

It's all very compelling for me, if not for you. Get more competitive than we have been and stop the slide. Of course I'd like to compete for a title and that's Masella's stated goal. Scholarships help move us much more in that direction that standing still does, though, even if it's not enough for Georgetown.

[RichH2]

It begs the question of merit aid to quibble about what the impact of it will be. I have ranted ,perhaps too much, for years about the gradual slide of PL vis a vis the rest of FCS. While my viewpoint certainly skewed by mediocrity of LU program over the last 4 years and partly belied by finishing the past season with 3 teams in the top 25, the issue is there and has to be addressed at some point. Sooner better than later. The objective to my mind is to first be able to compete successfully on a national level and secondly and just as important to solidify a PL identity apart from that of the IL

[DFW HOYA]

In other words, Georgetown was against scholarships because it will destroy league competitiveness but when presented with info that it might not destroy league competitiveness, you're now against them because they don't increase league competitiveness enough?

I've never seen anything publicly that Georgetown was for or against scholarships, perhaps in part because scholarships doesn't figure to change where GU is right now. If (purely for illustration) 10 equivalencies in a 55 equivalency conference become 10 scholarships in a 55 scholarship conference, how does it really change things?

I don't hold a public position on scholarships either, but I am opposed to the AI, which I contend is a sop to the Ivy League. The PL schools can make their own decisions intelligently on admissions without an arbitrary firewall based on SAT scores.

[LBPop]

If (purely for illustration) 10 equivalencies in a 55 equivalency conference become 10 scholarships in a 55 scholarship conference, how does it really change things?


Yep...when you're nearly broke, you're nearly broke. I went to a state school, but even I understand that. xrolleyesx

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I've never seen anything publicly that Georgetown was for or against scholarships, perhaps in part because scholarships doesn't figure to change where GU is right now. If (purely for illustration) 10 equivalencies in a 55 equivalency conference become 10 scholarships in a 55 scholarship conference, how does it really change things?

I don't hold a public position on scholarships either, but I am opposed to the AI, which I contend is a sop to the Ivy League. The PL schools can make their own decisions intelligently on admissions without an arbitrary firewall based on SAT scores.

Offering scholarships will increase the pool of potential players that are good enough to be offered scholarships elsewhere but don't qualify for aid based on a need-based formula. There are a significant number of kids from families that, say, make $90,000 combined family income a year that get full offers from, say, PSAC schools that PL schools can't offer. That's why PL basketball teams have actually gotten players with better academics after offering scholarships - it allows them to target more middle class players that could excel at a PL school.

I like the idea of the AI - that certain academic standards need to be met to be an athlete at a PL school, and that those admits are subject to peer review. I do believe that it's awfully tricky to get right, and it's not at all clear whether it's totally "right" now or not. But I am in favor of what it represents.

[RichH2]

In a perfect world the AI would not exist. Forms of AI have been in place for a while to limit shools from dipping to far down for players. For years LU was accused of taking more borderline kids. LC was caught at it. I would prefer that it was not necessary but it is. Not as a sop to IL really an interior competitive issue, more resulting from the fear of overreaching rather than the reality of it.