Random Internet Dude Knows More Than the Coaches
by HydroTech on Feb 10, 2010 2:00 PM PST
in California Golden Bears Recruiting
Email
PrintThis post created some controversy when published. For more information about this controversy, please see this fanpost.
A few days ago a friend directed me to an online article to read about Cal recruiting. After reading it I felt as if the author has a gross misunderstanding of recruiting expectations and realities - not to mention that the article contained many flawed arguments. I felt so strongly about my views that I am compelled to write something in response to illustrate where the author's understandings and logic falter.
The article at issue here is hosted at CalSportsDigest.com. The article starts out applauding Tedford & Co. for regaining some of its lost recruiting momentum. This praise is apparently pretext for appearing balanced and fair in his writing because the heart of the article contains pointed criticisms at Tedford & Co. for their 2010 recruiting class failures. Specifically, the author criticizes Tedford & Co. for offering scholarships to a few two-star recruits, having a few recruits de-commit from Cal, and not giving scholarships to recruits that the author has self-proclaimed to be better prospects than the ones that Tedford & Co. had recruited.
After reading his article, it became pretty apparent to me that the author was subtly boasting that he knew better than the coaching staff. Perhaps he did. I do not know his credentials. I've heard he was a former Daily Cal writer. Perhaps he was also football scout extraordinaire too - I don't know, but I doubt it. I have a feeling he really does not know much more about evaluating football talent than you or I. So I found it incredulous that he would make such bold statements that Tedford & Co. had made mistakes by recruiting X player over Y player. I do have to give him credit for giving his opinion though. Everyone is entitled to their opinion no matter how unqualified they may be. However, although a person is allowed to give their opinion, their statements should at least be grounded in logical and sound reasoning, and have an adequate understanding of how football recruiting -- and life -- works. I do not feel that the author had any of this understanding in his article. My response will attempt to show this.
My first disagreement with the author's statements occurs when he criticizes Cal's offensive line recruiting. Here's what he had to say:
The rather large hole on the left side of the offensive line, vacated by departing senior Mike Tepper, doesn’t look any different than it did three days ago.
Senior Donovan Edwards, who was the second option at both tackle spots last season, looks to be the likely candidate to protect presumed starter Kevin Riley’s backside next year.
But then what?
Chris Adcock is too small (Tedford said at his press conference Wednesday that he could see the Mesquite, TX native playing center) and Alex Crosthwaite and Geoff Gibson don’t have the footwork that made Tepper a decent left tackle.
In a year where Tedford and Co. made more strides in national recruiting than ever, they lost a Central Cali JUCO in Roszell Gayden, who appears to be a perfect fit on the blindside, to a team that’s over half way across the country. Not to mention, his twin brother, Rashad, signed to play his college ball at San Jose State.
The author's biggest gripe appears to be that Cal didn't sign a decent left tackle prospect to take over the left tackle position once Donovan Edwards graduates after next season. Alex Crosthwaite and Geoff Gibson apparently don't have the footwork to be "decent." Without giving the two recruits any benefit of the doubt, the author suggests their Cal careers won't be anything more than "decent" and perhaps nothing more than futile. Do these recruits deserve some benefit of the doubt? Certainly. They haven't been exposed to college coaching yet. They haven't been exposed to a stricter diet and training techniques. After exposure to the higher level coaching and training, these two recruits could certainly develop into good offensive linemen. I think this is quite obvious to anyone. However, the author doesn't seem to think they have a chance to develop at all. The two recruits haven't even stepped onto campus and the author has written them off. I'm not even sure the author has seen them play in person. He might have made his conclusions from merely watching a few minutes of grainy tape, or is just regurgitating another person's opinion of the two players. Either way, doesn't it make more sense to at least wait until the kids step onto campus, are exposed to a year of college coaching and training, before making a decision on whether they're worth their scholarships? I sure think so. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one. Based on what the author wrote, it doesn't sound like he would agree. In fact, it sounds like Tedford & Co. really should have consulted the author before offering scholarships to Crosthwaite and Gibson! Why didn't they?!
via bearinsider.com
Consensus four-star recruit (Scout, Rivals, ESPN) Alex Croswaithe will apparently never have a "decent" career as a left tackle.
Next, the author rips Tedford & Co. a new one for missing out on Roszell Gayden. Before we get to why the author rips Tedford & Co. for missing out on Gayden, it should be noted that Gayden has the author's stamp of approval for apparently being a "perfect fit on the blindside." Tedford & Co. should be pleased that they gave Gayden a scholarship as since the the author considers Gayden worthy of a Cal scholarship too! Glory be to God!
Now why does the author rip Tedford & Co. for missing out on Gayden? Because he signed with a team "that's over half way across the country" (Auburn). Well, I'll be damned. Schools should always lock down local recruits? Certainly that's ideal but some recruits just want to get away from home and there's nothing the home school can do to change a recruit's mind. Doesn't matter to the author though! Cal should just put shackles on all local kids. Nobody is getting out of state!
Why doesn't the author show Tedford & Co. some love for getting four star linebacker recruit David Wilkerson from Danville? Danville is only about 20 miles away from Berkeley. That must count for something? Apparently not. The author is picking and choosing his battles. He'll tell you about the local kids that Cal lost, and not tell you about the local kids that Cal nabbed. He doesn't care or is ignorant of the fact that kids sometimes want to get away from home.
via media.scout.co
Dude, it's completely unreasonable for you to want to go to college out of state! What are you thinking?!?!
Now the author also rips Tedford & Co. for not getting Roszell Gayden when Roszell Gayden's brother, Rashad Gayden, signed with local doormat San Jose State. The exact quote is:
In a year where Tedford and Co. made more strides in national recruiting than ever, they lost a Central Cali JUCO in Roszell Gayden, who appears to be a perfect fit on the blindside, to a team that’s over half way across the country. Not to mention, his twin brother, Rashad, signed to play his college ball at San Jose State.
Immediately, the faulty logic should be apparent. The author is using the fact that Rashad Gayden signed with a local school as proof that Roszell Gayden should have signed with Cal. Thus, because Roszell didn't sign with Cal that JT & Co. really screwed the pooch on that one. I'm sure the amazingly flawed reasoning is obvious for everyone, but since it wasn't that obvious to at least one person on this Earth I guess I should elaborate. Rashad and Roszell are two different people. The choice that the brother made cannot be used as proof that Roszell should have signed with Cal. Maybe Rashad wanted to stay in California. Maybe Roszell didn't. But the fact that Rashad signed with San Jose State doesn't mean Cal should have nabbed Roszell too.
I've said this before in other threads, but recruiting is not grocery shopping where you can waltz down the aisles and pluck whatever your little heart desires right off the shelves. Recruiting requires mutual interest. The school has to be interested in the prospect, and the prospect has to be interested in the school. Cal was obviously interested in Rashad Gayden. Gayden wasn't that interested in Cal. That's life. That's recruiting. The author fails to understand this.
Recruiting is not like grocery shopping.
Next, the author proceeds to criticize JT & Co. for its WR recruiting:
What seemed like a promising group of wideouts to start (I don’t have to remind anyone that that’s been a weak spot for Cal over the last couple of years), turned downright ugly with the departure of prospects Josh Harper and Davon Dunn, both of whom left for "greener pastures" in the heart of some of the world’s most fertile grounds.
Yes, the Bears’ got a big lift with the late addition of Allen, but—with all due respect to Pat Hill and the Bulldogs—Cal should never (NEVER) lose recruits to Fresno State.
The same faulty reasoning that the author used in the Roszell Gayden situation is being applied again here - the recruit's specific college interests don't matter and regardless of those interests Cal should be able to get whoever it wants. (Sigh) This isn't grocery shopping, Mr. Random Internet Dude Author.
The author doesn't really explain why Cal shouldn't lose recruits to Fresno State, but I'm assuming his line of reasoning is something like Cal is > than Fresno State in everything blah blah blah. Maybe that's true if you just consider academics, stadium size, fan attendance, or whatever. But what about some of those other non-measurable aspects that go into choosing a college such as college and team atmosphere, personal preference in co-ed hottness, weather preferences, and playing time? That doesn't matter to the author! Apparently, that's all nonsense!
Clearly, the author has no understanding how many factors go into kids' decisions on where to attend college. Some of those factors are measurable objective factors such as stadium size, academic rankings, etc. Other factors are immeasurable subjective factors that none of us may agree with or understand. They might even be very irrational factors, such as how hot the coeds are. But the author doesn't want to believe any of those real life explanations. Fresno State sucks, and Tedford & Co. sucks even more because a few kids wanted to go to Fresno State for college.
Anybody want to know why Davon Dunn and Josh Harper de-committed from Cal? Here's what Dunn had to say:
"I think I might go with Fresno [State] because I feel like that is the best fit for me," Dunn said. "I am more comfortable with their staff, I am more comfortable with their players and atmosphere and it is a little bit closer to home, as well." (link to article)
Well, what do you know? The kid is more comfortable with the staff. Nothing wrong with that so long as Tedford didn't punch the kid's mom in the face. After all, some kids just click better with other people. The kid likes the players and the team atmosphere better at Fresno State. Nothing wrong with that. Every program has its own culture and atmosphere. And he wants to stay a little closer to home. Again, nothing wrong with that. The kid just has interests which don't quite match up that well with Cal. No biggie. But the author doesn't give a rat's ass about what this kid wants. Screw his interests! The author just wants Cal to get Dunn. Cal should have gotten Dunn because RECRUITING IS LIKE GROCERY SHOPPING!
Now why did Harper de-commit from Cal? Rivals.com interviewed Harper after his de-commitment and he had this to say:
"[I have] more of a chance to compete for playing time ... It was nothing bad towards [Cal]. Fresno State lost five receivers, and they're bringing in five, so even though there's going to be a lot of receivers there, there's going to be a lot more opportunity to compete for a spot." (link to source)
The kid wants playing time! Who can blame him? The author can, and will. God have mercy on poor Josh Harper's soul for preferring to go to a school where he felt he had a better opportunity to get playing time! Mr. Random Internet Dude, you are one unforgiving human being! Remind me to never piss you off!
So Cal lost Josh Harper and Davon Dunn. I don't really bat an eye because ... you know, I understand how life works. The author on the other hand... well, nevermind.
via media.scout.com
Harper: "I just want to play ball!"
Mr. Random Internet Dude Author: "Nobody in their right mind would EVER want to go to Fresno State."
Next, the author kicks Tedford & Co. to the curb for signing two two-star wide receiver recruits after losing Harper and Dunn:
Not only was the Harper/Dunn saga embarrassing, but it put the Bears behind a pair of eight-balls as they attempted to scrounge up a couple of pass catchers.
And scrounge is what they did.
Here’s a quote from Tedford’s presser, when he was asked as to how accurate he felt recruiting sites were in ranking players like Kaelin Clay and Terrance Montgomery (two receivers that Scout has as two-star prospects):
"Some of these receivers, like Kaelin Clay and Terrance Montgomery, I don’t know if anybody ever watched them on tape," Tedford said. "Because if you watch them on tape I don’t see how in the world you could say that they were a two-star at some point."
Two things immediately come to mind when reading this excerpt.
First off, tape is different than seeing an athlete in person.
Clay is from Long Beach Poly, a big-name school in the realm of high school football. He’s been in the spotlight, people have SEEN him play, yet he had just a few other offers (from the likes of Portland State, Northern Arizona and Utah State).
Secondly, if the tapes were so grandiose, how did no one else see them, not just the recruiting guys?
Did Paul Wulff, Mike Riley, Steve Sarkisian (insert EVERY other Pac-10 coach’s name here) completely neglect such wide receiving talent? Or is this simply a case of the Bears reaching for a couple of guys that nobody else believed to be Pac-10 talents?
The author critiques the coaches for pursuing Montgomery, whom was rated two stars by Scout. But the thing about Scout is that they give two stars to every player regardless of whether that player has actually been scouted and subsequently rated, or has never been scouted. In other words, it's not really known whether Scout actually reviewed Montgomery's film and gave him two stars, or his film was never reviewed and hence he got the usual two star rating. So to really rely on that two-star rating is tenuous, at best. On the other hand, Rivals.com lists Montgomery as a three-star recruit with a 5.5 rating on their scale of 4.9 to 6.1.
The author also critiques the coaches for pursuing Clay. Clay was listed as a four-star WR early on in the recruiting process by Rivals.com. He was later downgraded to three-stars, perhaps because he never received a lot of attention from big schools, but has been given a 5.7 rating on their scale of 4.9 to 6.1. While he never got a scholarship offer from an FBS school, Rivals.com reports that he was also getting interest from Arizona State, UCLA, Washington, Michigan, Florida State, San Diego State and Utah. Those schools wouldn't be showing interest unless they thought he was even worth some consideration for a scholarship, right? And even if he didn't get a scholarship from one of those schools all that really means is that they gave their scholarships to other players that they thought were better; that doesn't necessarily mean that Clay is bad - perhaps just not as good.
via media.scout.com
If Cal is your only big scholarship offer, you must suck. Clearly.
Maybe the coaches are reaching a little bit with these players. Maybe not. Many other programs offer scholarships to players who are unheralded and relatively unknown. That doesn't necessarily mean that these players are bad, but just that they're unknown.
Does the name James Rodgers ring a bell? Oregon State was the only FBS school to offer the two-star recruit (Scout profile). Rivals.com reports that he also had offers from Utah State and Texas State. Rivals gave him a 5.3 rating (on a scale of 4.9 to 6.1). He sure turned out pretty good. Why did a lot of teams probably not offer James Rodgers? Because he was 5'6" at the time. Clay and Montgomery are 5'9" and 5'11", respectively. They are both considered short for WR standards. The fact of recruiting is that a lot of teams will shy away from short recruits despite being talented. Cal hasn't really been one of those schools. To wit, a few of Cal's undersized players: Will Kapp at 5'10", Robert Mullins at 5'11", Jared Price at 5'11", Jeremy Ross at 5'11", Isi Sofele at 5'7", and Shane Vereen at 5'10". A few of those kids, despite being on the shorter side (and yet still having grown since high school), are pretty good players. I wouldn't discount the coaches for offering a two-star player. Coaches are professionals. They know football and most can recognize talent and potential. Frankly, and I'm sure I'm not alone on this, I'd rather trust the opinion of Tedford & Co. on Clay and Montgomery rather than take the word of Scout. But that's just me. I think the author feels differently though.
If Oregon State is your only big scholarship offer, you must suck. Clearly.
Finally, the author treats us to a little QB analysis:
At Berkeley’s regional Elite 11 quarterback camp, I fell in love with two athletes; neither was Austin Hinder and, interestingly enough, neither would ever have Cal offers.
That is pretty interesting. I think the author would like us to believe that the Cal coaches aren't seeing what he's seeing and that he's right, but I'm pretty sure all this really means is that he and the Cal coaches aren't seeing the same thing.
Moving on, the author treats us to more bulletproof commentary:
The Bears passed on Stockton product Marcus McDade, a late-bloomer whose arm strength is unparalleled amongst 18-year-olds in America, and Brett Nottingham, a UCLA decommit and Stanford signee who had more of a total package than any other QB in the West, BYU’s Jake Heaps and USC’s Jesse Scroggins included.
Maybe Cal passed on McDade because, um, you know, arm strength isn't everything? McDade is also rated two stars by Scout. Earlier, the author says Tedford & Co. were "scrounging" by signing two-star WR recruits Kaelin Clay and Terrance Montgomery. Now the author is implying that Tedford & Co. should have given a scholarship to McDade - a fellow two-star recruit? Can we get a little consistency here?
I'll be fair and note that Rivals.com lists McDade as a three star player with a 5.7 rating, but as since the author has been using Scout ratings against Tedford & Co. then its the Scout ratings which are relevant to this analysis and not the Rivals.com ratings.
via marinmedia.cache.photocore.us
Scout rates you as a two-star prospect and the 125th best QB prospect in the nation. Normally, if a college were to give two-star prospects a scholarship they would be "scrounging," but the Random Internet Dude has deemed you an exception.
And as for Brett Nottingham, perhaps the coaching staff passed on him because Nottingham didn't have much interest in Cal. Remember: mutual interest. Not: grocery shopping.
Even if Nottingham was more of a total package than Jake Heaps and Jesse Scroggins then why wasn't he getting more attention from more bigger name schools? Height isn't a factor. Nottingham is 6'4".
Perhaps the scouts and coaches think that Heaps and Scroggins are better prospects than Nottingham? Certainly that's very possible. Some of the biggest programs in college football came calling for Scroggins along with many others: USC, Florida, LSU, Nebraska, Tennessee, Washington, Arizona, Arizona State, Cal, North Carolina, Oregon State, Pittsburgh, and Washington State (Scroggins Rivals.com profile) (Scroggins Scout.com profile).
The same goes for Jake Heaps: Notre Dame, Cal, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Florida State, Brigham Young, and Washington (Heaps Rivals.com profile) (Heaps Scout.com profile).
As for Nottingham: UCLA, Stanfurd, Boise State, Colorado, Nevada, Wyoming, and San Diego State (Nottingham Rivals.com profile) (Nottingham Scout.com profile). That's not quite the same impressive list of schools that Heaps and Scroggins are sporting.
Random Internet Dude says you're a better "total package" than Jake Heaps. If Jake Heaps was rated as the #1 QB in America by both Rivals.com and Scout. com, I guess that makes you the next Tim Tebow.
Maybe Nottingham did get attention from some of those top programs and Scout and Rivals just aren't showing it. Either way, the author thinks Nottingham is better than Scroggins and Heaps. The recruiting services don't really agree with the author, and neither do the coaches for many top football programs across the country.
I think by now it's quite obvious what's going on. The author thinks he is a better talent evaluator than Tedford & Co.
If that wasn't true, then why would be he be lambasting Tedford & Co. for signing Clay and Montgomery? Why would he be criticizing Tedford & Co. for passing up two-star QB Marcus McDade? Why would be criticizing Tedford & Co. for passing up Brett Nottingham whom the author thinks is a better "total package" than Jake Heaps and Jesse Scroggins? Why would he be criticizing Tedford & Co. for offering scholarships to offensive linemen Crosthwaite and Gibson who have footwork problems and presumably are never going to be "decent"?
The author thinks he knows more than the coaches. In fact, he might be right. There's perhaps a good 5% chance he's right. But for the rest of us, for those of us who know that we don't know crap about talent evaluation, we'll just trust the coaches. After all, they are the professionals. It is their job to do that kind of stuff. They wouldn't have gotten to where they are today without some level of competency in the areas of talent evaluation. And even if they aren't gold medal winners in their talent evaluation, I'm pretty darn sure they're going to be better at it than the author.
I myself went through a phase where I thought I knew more than the coaches. I even wrote a few posts a long time ago breaking down some recruit film. Back then I was naive and arrogant. In hindsight, I regret writing those posts. Although my time on the practices fields with the team and coaches has taught me a small amount of what makes up a good player, I eventually realized I didn't know squat in the grand scheme of things. Perhaps, at the most, I knew a sliver more than your typical lay fan. Because of that realization I am not quick to judge Tedford & Co. for their recruiting decisions. And even if I do judge them, I make sure to at least maintain some level of reasonableness, some basic understanding of how recruiting works, and how life works before I lambast the coaches for not giving a scholarship to X recruit, or for giving a scholarship to an unknown or low rated two-star recruit, or for losing a recruit to another school.
When you're on the outside looking in, and when you're not privy to inside information or professional knowledge, then showing some restraint to your criticisms is probably the fairest course of action. To do otherwise makes one's self look like a know-it-all. And if a person still feels the need to declare themselves superior in knowledge than the coaches, then that person should at least have some damn good arguments to support themselves. Even more importantly, that person should at least have a basic understanding of how recruiting, and especially how life works.
100 comments
|
11 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
A few days ago a friend directed me to an online article to read […]. After reading it I felt as if the author has a gross misunderstanding of […]expectations and realities – not to mention that the article contained many flawed arguments. I felt so strongly about my views that I am compelled to write something in response to illustrate where the author’s understandings and logic falter.
You’ve been to BN again, haven’t you?
Whose Axe?
OUR AXE!
Jon Doss for Head Coach
He knows more than all because he put words on a paper. ALL HAIL THE DOSS.
Rec’d for the epic destruction.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Feb 10, 2010 2:14 PM PST reply actions
I read that article...
…and the first thing that came to mind was that he doesn’t have any more insight than the average CGB reader.
I think he also mentioned that he doesn’t get paid…so I guess that makes sense.
DUH
All Cal fans know more than the coaching staff…just listen to the commentary around Memorial Stadium on game day!
by harmonpreservationsociety on Feb 10, 2010 2:29 PM PST reply actions
Ok, so to provide some actual discussion rather than being smug with that reply. It seems Doss would do well to acknowledge that recruiting is complicated at best and hedge all of his ‘facts’ with this. I’m sure there is a reasonable discussion to have about Hinder vs McDade vs Nottingham and their abilities/potential. Same for all of the WRs that were in play at some point this recruiting year.
But hey, it’s more fun to go for the grumpy Cal fan market and go the ‘Tedford sucks!’ ‘These players are terrible!’ market.
Also, he discusses the ‘desperation move’ to get Allen to play WR. From everything I’ve read, WR is where he wants to be. If someone with his talent comes along, he gets to play where he’s most motivated. Tedford also stated he’ll get a shot at nickel package DB as well, so really Cal’s getting the best of both worlds for the moment.
Tru dat!
If anyone has seen some of his workouts as a wide receiver, you would be immediately convinced of his ability to make an impact immediately.
Marv Jones and Allen would a fearsome WR tandem. If he wants to play WR, so be it. We have needs in both WR and S.
by DavidsonBear on Feb 10, 2010 2:51 PM PST up reply actions
I know!
I remember watching the Army under armor game (or whatever it’s called). This was before they all committed…and Chris Martin made a huge hit on the RB and you see allen run in from the backfield to slap him on the head to congrat him.
Then you see Allen, Gabe King and Martin all sitting on the sideline together…
WHO KNEW WE WOULD GET ALL 3???? Seriously…
by DavidsonBear on Feb 10, 2010 2:55 PM PST up reply actions
People make fun of Bear Insider all the time
But if you truly want to see the crazies, head over to the Scout forums. All the BI rejects have congregated there so they can all talk about how much Cal sports makes them miserable. It’s like the land of the lepers.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Feb 10, 2010 2:53 PM PST up reply actions
Sounds like McCoveyChronicles, only the Cal Football version….
by Missing Barry on Feb 10, 2010 5:52 PM PST up reply actions
Thanks for linking up the original scout article – I skimmed it and that’s 2.5 minutes of my life I will never get back.
Typical, ill-researched scout article that was put out there to meet a deadline.
Stunning how poorly it was written, researched and reasoned. These recruiting services are decent at selecting who is the very best recruits at the time, but their reach is extremely limited and their staff is often unqualified to even make these evaluations. There is a reason so many 1, 2 and 3 star recruits “surprise” and become all-americans and professionals, it is because the evaluators are not professionals themselves.
It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.
Not only that – Scout is also biased in their player evaluations. That’s a known fact. I forgot the story behind this, but there’s some political crap tied into the state of Washington. Just check out the Final 2010 Rankings and compare where Cal and UW are on the lists.
AdmiralBear mentioned it in the Scout Thread
First, insofar as the article finds any basis in Scout’s recruiting rankings, let me just say that Scout rankings have zero credibility. Scout has become a flat out joke. The most egregious example: Scout ranked UW’s class #11 in the country — I repeat, #11 IN THE COUNTRY. Think that might have something to do with Allen Wallace’s ties to UW? No other recruiting service had UW even in the top half of the Pac 10. AW and Scout have UW in the top 12. Think about it. Scout isn’t even trying to conceal this bias. It is really rather pathetic.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Feb 10, 2010 3:40 PM PST up reply actions
I would like to know the backstory here with Scout and UW.
by atomsareenough on Feb 10, 2010 4:17 PM PST up reply actions
First: I am slow-clapping for the best takedown of the recruiting industry that I have ever read.
Second: I kinda agree that the two WRs going to Fresno seemed like a big deal when appeared to indicate that our class was falling apart (and kids were going anywhere to jump ship.) Now that we had a Top 10 (or Top 20) class, I could care less, and I don’t think that his point matters.
Third: This was my favorite part
“Some of these receivers, like Kaelin Clay and Terrance Montgomery, I don’t know if anybody ever watched them on tape,” Tedford said. “Because if you watch them on tape I don’t see how in the world you could say that they were a two-star at some point.”
Two things immediately come to mind when reading this excerpt.
First off, tape is different than seeing an athlete in person.
Tedford’s point was completely the opposite, right? That no other coaches had even watched tape to know if they were any good. And why would anyone really think that watching tape is much different than seeing someone in person? If this mattered, every college football program in the country would employ teams of advance scouts to go watch their future opponents in person rather than relying on tape, right? I have only watched LeBron James on tape, and I know that he is pretty good at basketball.
Ah crap, blockquote fail, this should be in blockquotes from Doss as well:
Two things immediately come to mind when reading this excerpt.
First off, tape is different than seeing an athlete in person.
by Tedfordisgod on Feb 10, 2010 3:13 PM PST up reply actions
This is actually why a lot of organizations throughout sports have gone to video and cut staff from their scouting departments. Scouting live is extremely expensive and there is little to be gained. Think about this in terms of hockey and basketball where the sports are truly global.
It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.
Yeah, exactly. I have always presumed that all visits to watch football recruits are just to be seen by the kid and talk to the kid (rules permitting), not to actually do any evaluation.
by Tedfordisgod on Feb 10, 2010 3:20 PM PST up reply actions
I often have conflict with the Daily Cal football writers’ opinions. Nguon for saying we should lose to SC and then being totally oblivious as to why there was such an uproar, Doss for writing some vitriol that expresssed no opinion outside of “we suck” and now Tran.
18 to Cheeseboard
by JrBear on Feb 10, 2010 3:55 PM PST via mobile reply actions
And there is a big difference between expressing an opinion that people think is wrong, and expressing opinions about things you clearly do not understand. The Nguon thing was basically a reasonable thing to write and people were also reasonable to not like it. Doss, however, is just writing strong detailed opinions that have no basis in the real world.
by Tedfordisgod on Feb 10, 2010 5:49 PM PST up reply actions
Doss sounds like he plays way too much NCAA football
Recruiting is easy, just be on the phone with recruit a lot without pissing them off and they’ll be guaranteed to sign an LOI for your school.
/snark
"it's like an alarm clock, WOOT WOOT!" -Bubb Rubb
by secret ASian man on Feb 10, 2010 4:06 PM PST via mobile reply actions
One of the most critical factors and that which separates the coaches from amateurs is projection, and this is where Doss’s scouting goggles fails him miserably. Rising high school seniors are not finished products and oftentimes, if they are too polished given their measurables there arises concerns that they may have reached their respective ceilings. The challenge is to project to a point three or four years into the future and determine which players will stand out. First-year contributions for quarterbacks as a metric is incomplete. (And disingenuous, given that Coach Tedford all but excludes true freshmen prep QBs from the rotation, it was completely unfair to measure Bridgford against that standard, aside from the fact that Bridgford has been injured since the third week of the season!- Doss you bastard!) Writing off Crosthwaite and Gibson before they even hit college is incredible! Apparently for offensive line expert Jon Doss, FOOTWORK IS A DEBILITATING WEAKNESS THAT CANNOT BE OVERCOME.
First off, tape is different than seeing an athlete in person.
This is where HydroTech was especially correct in his assessment of Doss subtly suggesting he is a better evaluator than Tedford. One of the camps Doss allegedly attended was the Elite 11 Berkeley camp, where he bore witness to the talents of Hinder, Nottingham, and McDade. The only problem is that the host of the camp was Jeff Tedford and the Cal Football program. At that point last May, Cal had only offered Jake Heaps and Austin Hinder. After that weekend, Tedford offered USC signee Jesse Scroggins—but neither Nottingham or McDade met the standard for an offer.
by ttgiang15 on Feb 10, 2010 4:15 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Am I the only one hoping Doss takes the bait and comes over here to respond?
It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.
BLOG FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT!
President Emperor Warlord Of The Sun!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
It's not that hard to find him
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Feb 10, 2010 4:32 PM PST up reply actions
One thing....
Nottingham HAD a lot of interest for Cal. I might be mistaken, but both of his parents were Cal alums and he was really hoping and waiting for a Cal offer. When he got his first offer from UCLA, he jumped on it right away and committed as it was his first major D1 offer. However, when Stanford came calling, he saw them as a better fit and also probably thought he could get some revenge on his once favorite team. But regardless, JT and staff didn’t feel like he was worth the offer…I am sure he participated in the Cal camps, but even then JT and staff had higher priorities.
Tedford offered Hinder and Heaps early. Hinder was ranked as high as 2 in the country at the time. Since we generally don’t take 2 QBs (unless the QB brings his superstar brother with him), we were done once Hinder committed. As Hinder fell in the rankings, maybe JT would have rather had Nottingham or another QB, but probably not. And pulling Hinder’s offer to go after someone else would have hurt credibility in the future.
GOLD OUT MOZAMBIQUE!
Hmmmmm
So Hydro is offering an OPINION of Doss’s OPINION here where Doss doesn’t post. Sort of weak. You could at least offer up a post at Scout and invite him over to this blog. Or better yet, why not offer Doss the opportunity to point/counter point you here where home blog advantage seems to suit your overblown style?
Also, it seems like Hydro’s entire setup for disagreeing with Doss is centered around the idea that Doss is wrong just because he’s Jon Doss writing for a Scout site, not a coach or some subjectively selected expert you personally have a higher value for. Or maybe the true motivation is that Doss chooses not to kiss the program’s ass with every sentence he writes?
Unconditional homerism blows.
Blog on Homers.
I do not particularly see any critiques of the argument Hydro put forth, Jiggets. I merely some overarching concerns about the fact that HydroTech posted a blog post at his own blog as if that is some sort of controversial thought in the first paragraph and some vague invective in the end portion.
In the middle, you provide very general critiques of HydroTech’s motivation for writing the post without any specifics as to your ultimate reasoning as to why HydroTech is incorrect. HydroTech sets up his analysis in depth in the post. If you have some concerns about his specific analysis, I am sure HydroTech and others would love for you to quote the areas you disagreed with and provide your counter arguments instead of the generalities you pose here. I know I would love to see some real specifics. Let’s get to the nitty gritty here instead of just trading meaningless bards.
Moreover, if Doss wishes to provide a rebuttal, nobody is going to stop him. He can post it here. He can email us at goldenblogs at gmail dot com. He can even post it at his own website, something called Scout, which may have quite a bit bigger reach than us shmucks. If you want to email this link to him, be my guest.
I look forward to your specific response to the arguments put forward by HydroTech.
President Emperor Warlord Of The Sun!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
“Hi, I’m Jiggets. Instead of trying to prove any of Doss’s points or refute any of Hydro’s, I’m just going to use typical political tactics and call the other side names and accuse them of silencing the opinion of the other side even though JON DOSS IS FREE TO REGISTER AND RESPOND TO THIS POST WHENEVER HE WANTS TO to win my arguments.”
My opinion of you: you are unbelievably retarded.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Feb 10, 2010 5:30 PM PST up reply actions
Worth pointing out that the vast majority of Jiggets’s presence on this blog is negative. He posts only to express disappointment, frustration with the de-commitments of Harper-Dunn and the recruitment of Clay.
If someone has a problem with Hydro’s response, maybe they could break it down and show why it is incorrect. No, it’s easier for someone with a negative disposition to claim “homerism” and go on crying himself to sleep.
It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.
It’s really annoying how most Cal football debates devolve into something you’d see on a cable news network. All noise, no substance.
On the other hand, it makes it easier to win the debate. I guess I can live with that tradeoff.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Feb 10, 2010 5:44 PM PST up reply actions
Hydro’s post have everything to do with Doss lacking logic. That isn’t an opinion, that’s a fact. Doss contradicts himself and makes comments that lack any basis whatsoever.
You can be disappointed all you want with this recruiting class, but every service other than Scout has it highly rated. That said, the other point of Hydro’s rant is that these services for the most part are the product of individuals like Doss who have absolutely no basis for most of their judgments.
It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.
Forget it BeastMode. We’re all homers because we can’t see the truth that Mr. Doss sets forth for us. JON DOSS FOR HEAD COACH!
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Feb 10, 2010 5:38 PM PST up reply actions
But he wrote for the Daily Cal! Don’t you see? His judgment cannot be questioned!
It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.
There is an open invitation for Doss to participate in this blog. He is not forbidden to create an account — if he already does not have one — and respond to what I wrote. Even if he wishes to not participate on this blog, he can still counter my points over on his website. There is no “home blog advantage” that you refer to. The playing field is equal.
If you carefully read what I wrote, Jiggets, you’d understand that I wasn’t defending Tedford & Co.‘s decisions, merely criticizing Doss’ criticisms. There is a subtle difference. It appears as if you do not understand this subtle difference. Furthermore, judging from the fact that you think the purpose of this post was to kiss the program’s ass then you really mis-read and misunderstood my post.
In summary, it is clear from your comment that you do not have any understanding of what I wrote. I can only hope you choose to read it again to fully understand what I’m saying.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Montgomery and Clar
With regards to Montgomery and Clay, I think a reasonable expectation for a responsible reporter would be to ask the right questions, research for the answers, and put on your critical analyst’s hat (I offer my own answers):
How did they go overlooked for so long in the recruiting process? Why weren’t they offered by more programs?
DOSS: Kaelin Clay went to Long Beach Poly, a respected program that undoubtedly draws interests from scouts. Justin Forsett was also an under-the-radar two star prospect, but even he managed to attract Notre Dame’s attention. So there must be something wrong with Clay (Northern Arizona, Portland State, Utah State) and Montgomery if they can’t even get Washington State to notice.
ME: Kaelin Clay entered the season as a 4-star prospect on Rivals. But Clay had the misfortune of being an under-utilized star on the worst Poly team in recent history. The first half of the season (six games), he played in five and averaged 68.4 all-purpose yards—hardly D-1 caliber play. At this point, the Jackrabbits were 2-4 and as we would later find out, none of the other players on roster would receive a D-1 offer. Colleges tuned out LB Poly. Meanwhile, Clay went on a tear from late October through the end of the season, the stimulus being a position switch from receiver to running back:
10/23- Milikan – 178 receiving yards, 229 all-purpose yards
10/30- Wilson – 108 receiving yards, 141 all-purpose yards
11/06- Cabrillo – 88 rushing yards, 81 receiving yards, 169 all-purpose yards
11/13- Compton – 132 rushing tards, 95 yard-return, 276 all-purpose yards
11/20- Los Alamitos – 168 rushing yards, 233 all-purpose yards
11/27- Servite – 111 rushing yards, 189 all-purpose yards
His all-purpose yard average from the second half of the season was 206.17, more than three times his average from the first half. His worst game of the second half was better than any game from the first half. And while the Jackrabbits finished the second half at 4-2, they didn’t qualify for CIFs. And because their final game was in late November, the regular season for college football was still in progress. Unlike previous years’ Poly teams, they were not featured in the CIF championships when many scouts converge.
Terrance Montgomery played at West Adams Prep, a smaller school that opened in Fall 2007. He plays in a relatively new league Los Angeles City Section- Southern Division. He was the first player at his school ever to earn a scholarship. For this recruiting season only he and fellow Cal commit Tevin Carter were offered scholarships to D-1 schools from that six-team league. Before he announced for Cal, only Tevin Carter appeared in either Scout or Rivals databases from that league! (Montgomery and his QB now appear in Rival’s database.) Montgomery didn’t go to any of the camps (the last one he went to was during his sophomore year). And to complicate matters, his HS head coach resigned in the middle of December—when senior season tapes are sent out last-minute—squashing any hopes to garner the attention he needed to get his first offer.
So how was Cal able to break through? I can tell you first-hand that Cal gets full-length HS game videos from an independent film source. And having stayed deep into the night at the football office to cut film, those on the video staff cut each tape play-by-play. The primary objective is to evaluate the target player you are recruiting. But one of the benefits is also to unlock hidden gems in the opposition. Tevin Carter played at Santee, a league opponent for West Adams. According to Biggins, Montgomery had been recruited off and on by the Cal staff since his junior year. In 2008, West Adams defeated Santee by a score of 42-37. Terrance Montgomery had a pair of touchdowns—a 45-yard reception and a 90-yard kickoff return—think the staff noticed?
Are these players worthy of a scholarship offer?
DOSS: NO. Because two unworthy players have been brought in, it will force the staff to move Keenan Allen from safety to receiver. (From the article, it is unclear whether or not he even watched any of Montgomery or Clay’s highlight videos.)
ME: I call it a push. As I have said elsewhere, after watching each of their highlights, Montgomery > Harper > Dunn > Clay. FWIW, this is also how Scouts Inc./ESPN sees things as well
One last aside, the dumbest thing in recruiting anyone ever does is question a prospect’s offer sheet. It is a lazy exercise that affords a rather incomplete picture in a player’s recruitment. Each college has an independent review process. Each program has their own standards for offering. Each program has their own set of priorities. Data points (film, workouts, camps) are not available equally for each recruit. It’s not a closed system. Many players fall by the wayside because of circumstances beyond their talents and abilities (see Montgomery). So expecting an offer sheet to be aligned according to a player’s grade is extremely short-sighted. To illustrate, here’s how the other west coast powers did in their WR recruiting:
USC - landed the #1, #2, and #3 receiver in the land—not in the market for under-the-radar prospects
UCLA - only room for one receiver in the class, Paul Richardson committed early, and re-committed on December 16
Stanford - only WR committed on June 26, but still hasn’t signed because there’s no more room in the class
Washington - only two WRs, last committed on December 7
Oregon - no receivers taken in this class! (though some are athletes and may be converted)
Oregon State – no receivers taken in this class!
Arizona - had three receivers commit in December, last one on Christmas Day
Washington State - had a couple of NorCal and central California receivers commit late, only one recruit total from SoCal
Arizona State – got a late January commit from a recruit in Long Beach with no offers (sound familiar?) but he is projected to cornerback, otherwise their last WR commit was from a JC player on December 17
Receivers were NOT a priority for Pac-10 schools this class. Most of the schools had finished their recruiting by December. Stanford, Oregon, and Oregon State did not even take a single natural receiver in their classes! There was no market in offers for late-bloomers in the Pac-10, so that should not be judged against Clay or Montgomery.
by ttgiang15 on Feb 10, 2010 5:11 PM PST reply actions 12 recs
I'd rec this twice if I could
Guys, if you want to learn about the recruiting process, just follow ttgiang15’s posts. He is spot on.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Feb 10, 2010 5:52 PM PST up reply actions
DOSS: NO. Because two unworthy players have been brought in, it will force the staff to move Keenan Allen from safety to receiver. (From the article, it is unclear whether or not he even watched any of Montgomery or Clay’s highlight videos.)
Doss is misinformed. Allen is not FORCED to move from FS to WR. In addition to ttgiang15’s fine analysis on the “worthiness” of Montgomery & Clay, what’s been revealed after National Signing Day is that Keenan Allen has always wanted to play WR. It is a major reason why Allen signed with Cal. Tedford & Co plans to let Allen play WR & FS in nickel situations to maximize his productivity on the field.
Doss was on the Cal radio station too. He played QB at De La Salle and falls back on the “Where did you play” argument whenever someone disagrees with him. He always sounded pretty pompous.
Well done Hydro
Well, what do you know? The kid is more comfortable with the staff. Nothing wrong with that so long as Tedford didn’t punch the kid’s mom in the face. After all, some kids just click better with other people. The kid likes the players and the team atmosphere better at Fresno State. Nothing wrong with that. Every program has its own culture and atmosphere. And he wants to stay a little closer to home
I thought this point was particularly important. The recruiting process is so prone to hyperbole. When two Cal WRs decommit and go to Fresno St., people freak out like it’s some sort of pattern and indictment of the program. In reality it’s two people who did what was best for them. Meanwhile the coaches went out and got other excellent recruits that did want to go to Cal. When you only recruit ~20 kids a year one or two recruits can seem so damned important that everybody freaks out one way or the other. But it’s still just a few people and doesn’t really mean anything in the larger context.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
Also, there is absolutely no way that losing two commits to Fresno State can be an indictment of our staff or our team. If they went to Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, or Washington I could understand the alarm, but not here. Presumably, if the problem were Cal, a recruit would leave because we fail to live up to our billing every year and seem to have hit a plateau while other schools are the hot new item. So, why do you go from the PAC-10 to the WAC to play for Fresno State, who also matches that description?
Let me just add
Roszell Gayden seriously considered Cal against Oklahoma and Auburn. Gayden was here for the big recruiting weekend w/ Chris Martin, Adrian Lee, and Michael Coley. Tedford & Co didn’t miss out on Gayden’s talent. He had a great visit and we made his decision extremely difficult. Doss’ presumption seems to be that Cal can and should get any recruit. As Hydrotech has pointed out sufficiently, that’s not how the recruiting game or life work.
Our recruits are constantly improving. If you watch Adcock’s Jr vs Sr HLs, you can see how much he has improved technique-wise lowering his pad level of play, gaining more leverage and sustaining his blocks in the process. Talent aside, it’s also very important imo to consider how coachable these recruits are. The willingness to learn and fit into a team is never reflected in the # of stars. I think highly of Brett Nottingham and don’t know much about Marcus McDade, but Austin Hinder is a kid who wants to learn, improve, and do the best for his team. Tedford & Co wouldn’t have committed to Hinder early if he didn’t have the talent or the “generalship” to lead a team.
BTW – does anyone else think that Doss has an unhealthy love for “size” the same way Jay Bilas loves “wingspan” on NBA draft day? :)
Also, he makes it sound like we lost a local recruit when Gayden is not really a local recruit at all! He played JC ball in California, but I think he is originally from Indiana or thereabouts. And didn’t he choose Auburn (not exactly a football slouch) because he could enroll right away instead of earning more credits before he could enroll at Cal?
GOLD OUT MOZAMBIQUE!
I have a scathing criticism of HydroTech's piece
>"While [Kaelin Clay] never got a scholarship offer from an FBS school…"
> “Oregon State was the only FBS school to offer the two-star recruit [James Rodgers] … Rivals.com reports that he also had offers from Utah State and Texas State.”
Both Clay and Rodgers had offers from Utah State, which has been an FBS school and playing in the WAC for some time now… heck last year they handily beat the school that Roszell Gayden’s brother apparently chose.
So HydroTech’s whole argument pretty much falls apart from there…
More seriously, I essentially agree with HydroTech’s criticisms of Doss’ article. The main mistake Doss makes in my opinion is to dismiss recruits when no one, not even the coaches, knows just how good or bad they will be. But I think it also makes sense for us to be careful and not assume that the coaches are right all the time either, or even 75% of the time – I think recruiting is an extremely uncertain art.
It is certainly possible, though less likely (but I would say more than 5%), for the coaches to be wrong about recruits and for less informed critics to be right, much in the same way that in my industry, a project may in some cases be rightly criticized by a less-informed outside decision-maker based on superficial observations. In many cases, the outside critic is dead wrong, but in the cases where they end up being right, it usually seems to be a forest for trees thing where the experts directly involved with the project were too engrossed in the details.
Frankly, my totally IN-expert view is that Clay looks like he might actually be a pretty high quality recruit judging by video and circumstance, with the RB switch. I’m not as sold on Montgomery – I just don’t know.
But rather than assume Montgomery is not good enough to play at Cal like Doss does, my question would be this: given our limited scholly slots this year, which reportedly affected our recruiting of guys like Jefferson and Werner, should we have offered Montgomery a grayshirt instead of an immediate ride, much as OSU did with Terron Ward? Montgomery apparently truly had no FBS offers, unlike Clay who at least had Utah State. Were we competing against ourselves here?
I’m guessing there must a legit reason – which very well may be that Tedford and co. stick to principles and are straight with kids, offering scholarships where they feel it’s warranted regardless of demand from other programs. And if true, that’s ok, though certainly divergent from the approach some other programs and their recruiters appear to take.
Just like any coaching staff, Tedford and crew have had plenty of misses to go with their (albeit more numerous) hits if you look through the 2002-2006 classes (too early to tell for the later ones). Will Clay and Montgomery be misses? It’s certainly possible given their lack of big-time offers, which is of course not all-important (James Rodgers), but an interesting data point – HydroTech later (rightly) uses the same offer-based argument to compare Nottingham unfavorably with Scroggins and Heaps.
And I think Doss is right to worry about the Bears’ left tackle position. It would have been really great to land Arie K. or Gayden. He shouldn’t just assume that guys like Ragland or Siddoway or Crosthwaite can’t step up, though there’s certainly no guarantee that they will.
To summarize, we won’t know about Clay and Montgomery, or Hinder, or Crosthwaite etc. either way for a couple years in all likelihood. And that’s where Doss should have left it.
Thank you for putting together a response.
You did catch an error of mine, thank you. I did incorrectly state that Clay and Rodgers did not receive offers from any other FBS schools other than Cal when in fact they did have offers from Utah State who is an FBS school. However, the fact that I made this error does not change the analysis of my argument. My argument concerning Clay was that although he never got any other FBS scholarship offers (other than Cal, and Utah State), does not necessarily mean he’s a bad prospect. Clay was getting interest from other FBS schools too. As for my argument concerning Rodgers, my point was that a lot of programs shy away from smaller recruits despite obviously being talented but Cal is not one of those programs. Nothing in my arguments are changed by the fact that Utah State is an FBS school.
Next you mention that Utah State beat San Jose State (the team that Rashad Gayden signed with). I do not see the relevance of such a remark. The fact that Clay and Rodgers both had scholarship offers from Utah State, and Utah State beat San Jose State this last year has no impact upon my arguments and analysis.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Hey Hydro – I can’t tell if you’re kidding but this part of my post was intended as a (apparently not so funny) joke:
“Both Clay and Rodgers had offers from Utah State, which has been an FBS school and playing in the WAC for some time now… heck last year they handily beat the school that Roszell Gayden’s brother apparently chose.
So HydroTech’s whole argument pretty much falls apart from there…"
I totally agree with your points about Clay and Rodgers and the Utah State angle has no bearing. I was joking about my nitpick. But then maybe your response was joking… ah whatever.
My main points in the post were after that, starting with when I say “More seriously…”
I very much agree with this statement:
To summarize, we won’t know about Clay and Montgomery, or Hinder, or Crosthwaite etc. either way for a couple years in all likelihood. And that’s where Doss should have left it.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Exactly. I just don’t understand how Doss can make these assessments. based on what? The number of scholarship offers a player receives? How many 1, 2 and 3 star recruits have to make it to the NFL, under the radar, for people to realize this is an extremely inexact science and it is pointless to make these projections for 99% of these kids.
It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.
But rather than assume Montgomery is not good enough to play at Cal like Doss does, my question would be this: given our limited scholly slots this year, which reportedly affected our recruiting of guys like Jefferson and Werner, should we have offered Montgomery a grayshirt instead of an immediate ride, much as OSU did with Terron Ward? Montgomery apparently truly had no FBS offers, unlike Clay who at least had Utah State. Were we competing against ourselves here?
I’m guessing there must a legit reason – which very well may be that Tedford and co. stick to principles and are straight with kids, offering scholarships where they feel it’s warranted regardless of demand from other programs. And if true, that’s ok, though certainly divergent from the approach some other programs and their recruiters appear to take.
I think you answered your own question. I do believe that Tedofrd & Co. are pretty straight shooters and will give a kid a scholarship if they think he’s worth it regardless if there is no interest in that kid from other schools. Even though this may hurt Cal because Cal could get away with having a good player without having to use a scholarship on him, I’d rather the Cal coaching staff be honest with their players and not play games with them.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
From everything I’ve read and heard, this is exactly how Cal runs its ship. If you are worthy of a scholarship from Cal, you receive one. If not and Cal is unsure, you walkon. If you have some academic things you need to take care of, like Chris McCain, you may grayshirt. Also, Cal doesn’t sign way more guys than it has room for, unlike a number of other major programs (ALABAMA).
It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.
You guys may be right. But to BM’s point about grayshirts: are grayshirts under Tedford really only for recruits that “have some academic things” to take care of like McCain?
Did Lucas King and Tyler York who grayshirted in 2009 and count against the 2010 scholly total have academic things to take care of? Honest question – if so, I didn’t realize that they did. I thought that for them, the grayshirt was just something between an immediate ride and a preferred walk-on spot.
You are correct. Academics and no scholarships available are primary reasons for grayshirts. A different type of grayshirt situation is that of Tyson Alualu’s. He didn’t come to Cal straight out of high school instead opting to stay home in Hawaii for the semester/year due to his first kid being born.
Just like any coaching staff, Tedford and crew have had plenty of misses to go with their (albeit more numerous) hits if you look through the 2002-2006 classes (too early to tell for the later ones).
I just want to say I have a bit of a problem with talking about recruiting as “misses and hits” the way you do here. We’re projecting the future here, it’s a very uncertain process. You can recruit a kid who’s a 4 star recruit for all the right reasons, and evaluated as such by the coaching staff and brought on. If said 4 star recruit never pans out into anything, I don’t think it’s fair to call it a miss the way you do, which I’m inferring means there was something wrong with the evaluation, it just might be that he was one of the ones that didn’t pan out but the evaluation was completely correct. Anytime you’re projecting the future, all you can do is play the odds, and doing so recognizes that sometimes it works out for you and sometimes it doesn’t, the question is, over time, are you playing the odds right to have more success than you would if your evaluations were not as good? So I hope that makes sense why I don’t like this kind of mentality….
by Missing Barry on Feb 10, 2010 10:02 PM PST up reply actions
MissingBarry -
I think I’m using a different definition of “hits” and “misses” than you are. By my definition, a single “miss” does not necessarily imply that the recruiting approach was bad, just as a single “hit” does not necessarily imply that the recruiting approach was good (may have been dumb luck since there is so much uncertainty). I am just talking about end results. And over time, since the luck evens out – well we can hope, anyway – the unlucky misses should be not to far from the lucky hits, percentage-wise and at least partially cancel.
That’s why I’m taking a period from 2002-2006. Frankly, Tedford and co. have a lot of hits that were not very highly-rated. Mack, Decoud, Robert Jordan, Forsett etc. etc. – so this period actually reflects pretty well on their recruiting approach. But like anyone they have had misses as well, which may have all been just unlucky, or perhaps not.
I think what we both agree on is the uncertainty of the process for any single recruit – even if you have the level of knowledge that the coaches do. My conclusion from just that we should not completely dismiss dissenting opinions just because none of us have nowhere near the knowledge that Tedford and his staff do. But how much more ridiculous is it then for someone like Doss to dismiss Tedford’s QB evaluation, for example…
I just want to reiterate, Doss is not an expert. He is a kid with no scouting experience whatsoever. The problem here is that Scout is a recruiting service and whether he likes it or not (he does) readers tend to think the columnists there have some sort of basis for their evaluations. The only things, objectively, that Doss can evaluate is which schools offered said recruit, whether said recruit committed or de-committed and how many stars have been awarded by Scout and other sites.
Comments about scrounging for receivers, that Cal missed out on McCade, that there is something wrong when receivers like Dunn and Harper decommit to Fresno State, and that Allen is being played out of position, these all include a talent evaluation that Doss is not competent enough to perform. And, in his defense, neither are the vast majority of writers and bloggers covering recruiting.
It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.
At Berkeley’s regional Elite 11 quarterback camp, I fell in love with two athletes; neither was Austin Hinder and, interestingly enough, neither would ever have Cal offers.
The Bears passed on Stockton product Marcus McDade, a late-bloomer whose arm strength is unparalleled amongst 18-year-olds in America, and Brett Nottingham, a UCLA decommit and Stanford signee who had more of a total package than any other QB in the West, BYU’s Jake Heaps and USC’s Jesse Scroggins included.
Instead, Cal took Hinder, a 6-foot-5, 180-lb project, who has fallen from as high as the No. 2 rated passer in the class to Scout’s No. 34.
While he is the nicest kid I’ve come across in a while, it was overwhelming to me that, at one of the more prestigious camps for some of the most elite quarterbacks in the country, Hinder had to be taught a five-step drop.
He’d never done that before.
His mobility and accuracy are admirable, but I’m afraid that Hinder, who has run out of the shotgun mostly, may be a bit out of his comfort zone.
And even if he’s not, even if he’s on point, when is he going to play?
Wait,, make up your mind. Do we have too many quarterbacks? If we got one of Doss’ guys, when would HE have played?
Delicious Freedom....
Things to Remember: Girls usually don't like it when you yell out "Beast Mode!" when switching to doggy style. - TFLN
So...through all the drama...the only good to come out of it was...
a new nickname: Jon “The Author” Doss
Wow
I don’t visit the blog for a couple of days and a giant shit storm happens. Great post Hydro, this is exactly the type of negativity on the process of recruiting that drives me nuts.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
I'm going to go against the grain here
There’s a lot to read in all the various posts over the past couple days. I have read many of the comments, and I just read Doss’s initial article, and I have not yet read Hydro’s main rebuttal (above) in it’s entirety.
However, I have to say that Doss’ article doesn’t really rub me the wrong way and leaves me wondering what all the hubbub is about. He points out a few truths that pretty much everyone can agree upon:
1) That there are recruiting holes not filled in the recruiting process (O-line, for instance)
2) That the Maynard-Allen connection makes everyone scratch their head (did Maynard contact Cal first, and bring Allen, or was Allen looking to get his bro a scholarship?).
3) That Cal is perceived to be a better school than Fresno State and so the fact that 2 WR’s ditched Cal for there is odd.
4) That Clay and Montgomery were lower rated WR’s who suddenly appeared (at least to the blogging community) out of nowhere as if they were quick replacements by the Fresno duo.
I don’t think anyone can dispute these facts. I think where Doss gets into trouble is that he purports to be some authority figure on the subject of each of these 4 points. He says we “scrounged” in getting Clay and Montgomery. I say, it’s fine for you to throw that somewhat derogatory and wreckless term out there, but let’s see how they do on the field. I say the same thing about some basketball recruits – but who am I? A guy who thinks he knows hoops sitting in the stands. Doss doesn’t back up his assessment with any statement of qualifications as to why HIS opinion is anymore valuable than anyone else’s. I’d say the same about Hydro and everyone else on this board. Who the hell are you to suggest one recruit is a bust and another is a gem? Because you watched a 5 minute highlight reel on YouTube? Give me a break. Okay, that was regarding point #4, so I’ll work backwards.
3) This is true. Cal should never lose recruits to Fresno. However, we don’t know why those guys left Cal, do we? Was it that their grades sucked and Cal asked them to not bother, yet saved them embarrassment? Was it that they became scared of Cal academics? Was it that they didn’t want to play on Cal’s fake grass field? Did Jerry Tarkanian pay them 100k to switch? Are they afraid of living in the bay when the big one hits? We don’t know. So, it’s stupid to infer that Tedford did a shitty recruiting job. So, Doss losses a point here, but earns the point by stating that it’s suspect.
2) Maynard-Allen connection. Yes, it’s odd. How did we get those NC guys? But, again, we don’t know. Doss should just state that it’s fishy and not pontificate as to what happened. Unless he leaves the sentence as an open ended question for the reader, and hopefully time will reveal the answer.
1) O-line. Sure – who wouldn’t like to bring in 5 5-star linemen recruits every year. But coaches cannot get every player they covet. Big deal. Get over it.
I guess I’m taking a long time to say that Doss makes good points about this recruiting class. He appropriately praises the good parts of the class, and accurately points out the strange and weak parts in it. He should just stay away from stating things as fact, like reasons why stuff happened or who is a better player, when he does not provide qualifications to back up his opinion.
And the same can go for just about every poster on this board. Everyone is arguing over:
- issues that they don’t have an inside ear on,
- they didn’t do the same evaluation process that the recruiters did, and,
- frankly, time will bear out how good a player all those discussed end up being.
So, really, this is all much ado about nothing.
Where Doss really succeeds, however, is that he’s surely brought a lot more traffic to Cal Sports Digest – a site that apparently lets you read content, but which you have to ultimately pay for in order to post to. So, in this sense, he’s doing what all good writers do – bring in cash for their employer. “Bad publicity is better than no publicity?”
HydroTech, are you sure Doss didn’t slip you a Benjamin Franklin to start this whole fight?
Okay, okay, I’ll go read your arguments in their entirety, and then comment again. But really, folks. Unless you come in and state who you are, and why your player evaluation is better, or accounting of details are to believed, we are just drunks arguing about stupid shit at the bar. Much ado about nothing, I tell you. Fun, sport, however, as bars are a good business. HydroTech and Doss are the bartenders here who serve up the drinks. We pay with our time. And this K-Y ad on my screen pays a little something too. Good (weak?) show fellas… (okay, I’m making fun of the matter… I know you both got your feelings hurt and that the perceived threat to SN was real….) But, move along people, nothing to look at here…
Ha, good points, though I wouldn’t say Cal never should lose recruits to Fresno, some people just have very different preferences and would rather go to Fresno, oh well, it’s more like they should almost never lose recruits to Fresno.
by Missing Barry on Feb 12, 2010 12:54 PM PST up reply actions
USC....
lost their army all american punter recruit to fresno state state
First time comment on here...
Jon Doss apparently thought he was doing his readers a service by refusing to “sugarcoat” what he thought was the downside of our recruiting class. Unfortunately, most of his negative comments were simply an assumption of the worst without any factual basis. He even insulted a couple of our incoming scholarship athletes calling them “scrounges.” Through your blog (and the discussion that followed on the boards at Scout), it is clear that the only “scrounge” is Jon Doss. While he is still part of the Bear family, he should thank you for not “sugarcoating” the constructive criticism in your article. That he, or someone affiliated with Jon Doss, threatened a lawsuit, shows his total lack of appreciation for your thoughtful response. With that being said, I hope he can learn from what you and others wrote, gets into a great journalism school, and goes on to be a successful writer. GO BEARS!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
About Us
• About the Golden Bloggers
• Our previous site @ Blogsome
• Avinash @ Bears Necessity
• Best of the Golden Blogs
• Golden Blogs Interviews
• HydroTech's Cal Football Analyses
• Ron Fimrite's Anatomy Of A Miracle
• CGB Weekly Guides
• GoldenBlogs' Community Guidelines
• GoldenBlogs' FAQ
• CGB GIF Army
Learn More About The California Golden Blogs Clothing Store
Pac-12 On SBN
Pacific Takes (Pac-12) NORTH AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)
UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)
CougCenter: (Washington State)
BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)
Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)
SOUTH
BruinsNation: (UCLA)
ConquestChronicles: (USC)
HouseOfSparky: (ASU)
Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)
TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)
Block U: (Utah)
Golden Bears Football Schedule
| Fresno St. | Sat 09/03 | W 36 - 21 |
@
Colorado
|
Sat 09/10 | W 36 - 33 |
| Presbyterian | Sat 09/17 | W 63 - 12 |
|
@
Washington
|
Sat 09/24 | L 23 - 31 |
|
@
Oregon
|
Thu 10/06 | L 15 - 43 |
|
USC
|
Thu 10/13 | L 9 - 30 |
|
Utah
|
Sat 10/22 | W 34 - 10 |
|
@
UCLA
|
Sat 10/29 | L 14 - 31 |
|
Washington St.
|
Sat 11/05 | W 30 - 7 |
|
Oregon St.
|
Sat 11/12 | W 23 - 6 |
|
@
Stanford
|
Sat 11/19 | L 28 - 31 |
|
@
Arizona St.
|
Fri 11/25 | W 47 - 38 |
|
@
Texas
|
Wed 12/28 | L 10 - 21 |
Pacific-12 Conference Standings
(updated 1.2.2012 at 11:12 PM PST)
| North | Conf | Overall | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| W | L | W | L | |
|
Oregon Ducks
|
8 | 1 | 12 | 2 |
|
Stanford Cardinal
|
8 | 1 | 11 | 2 |
|
Washington Huskies
|
5 | 4 | 7 | 6 |
|
California Golden Bears
|
4 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
|
Oregon St. Beavers
|
3 | 6 | 3 | 9 |
|
Washington St. Cougars
|
2 | 7 | 4 | 8 |
| South | Conf | Overall | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| W | L | W | L | |
|
USC Trojans
|
7 | 2 | 10 | 2 |
|
UCLA Bruins
|
5 | 4 | 6 | 8 |
|
Utah Utes
|
4 | 5 | 8 | 5 |
|
Arizona St. Sun Devils
|
4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
|
Arizona Wildcats
|
2 | 7 | 4 | 8 |
|
Colorado Buffaloes
|
2 | 7 | 3 | 10 |
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
