Sign in to follow this  
Rockerbraves

2011 College Football Recruiting Rankings

Recommended Posts

Not sure if anyone else gets into football recruiting, but National Signing Date is this Wednesday.

 

Here is Scout.com's top 25 recruiting rankings. Sort of surprised to see USC so high this year.

 

http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p...=14&yr=2011

 

1. Florida State 25 ACC 4397 10 4 10 11 13 12 0 23 2 3.72

2. Texas 22 Big 12 4355 8 4 11 7 12 10 0 22 0 3.86

3. Auburn 23 SEC 4281 3 2 13 8 11 12 0 23 0 3.74

4. Ohio State 22 Big Ten 3978 7 2 12 7 9 12 1 22 0 3.68

5. Notre Dame 23 Indep 3808 4 4 5 14 9 13 1 23 0 3.57

6. USC 25 Pac-12 3736 5 3 9 8 10 12 3 21 4 3.40

7. Georgia 23 SEC 3723 4 1 11 9 10 12 1 23 0 3.48

8. Alabama 21 SEC 3626 7 2 11 8 10 11 0 18 3 3.71

9. LSU 22 SEC 3550 5 3 7 11 12 9 1 21 1 3.55

10. Oregon 23 Pac-12 3295 4 0 11 11 12 11 0 21 2 3.43

11. Washington 26 Pac-12 3261 2 2 4 18 13 13 0 25 1 3.23

12. South Carolina 31 SEC 3158 1 1 4 21 16 15 0 30 1 3.03

13. Oklahoma 17 Big 12 3043 4 4 4 9 9 8 0 17 0 3.71

14. Arkansas 29 SEC 3037 1 1 5 19 16 13 0 26 3 3.10

15. California 20 Pac-12 3006 3 1 8 10 9 11 0 18 2 3.45

16. Oklahoma State 25 Big 12 2905 3 1 5 17 9 15 1 22 3 3.20

17. Tennessee 23 SEC 2861 3 0 5 18 12 11 0 21 2 3.22

18. Clemson 25 ACC 2858 3 1 6 14 14 10 1 25 0 3.16

19. North Carolina 22 ACC 2808 4 1 5 14 10 11 1 21 1 3.23

20. Stanford 19 Pac-12 2791 1 0 7 12 10 9 0 19 0 3.37

21. Mississippi 27 SEC 2628 3 0 4 19 13 14 0 19 8 3.00

22. Florida 16 SEC 2584 2 1 7 8 7 8 1 16 0 3.56

23. Nebraska 19 Big Ten 2557 5 1 7 8 11 7 1 17 2 3.26

24. Texas Tech 23 Big 12 2511 1 0 6 14 14 9 0 20 3 3.13

25. TCU 25 MWC 2497 0 0 3 16 13 11 1 24 1 2.84

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SEC=UGA    46

The TE Jay Rome kid that UGA got out of Valdosta... Wow, saw him play against my alma mater in the state playoffs, kid is a beast. The 2 corners (From Valdosta and Grady HS) they got have some talent as well. And, of course, if it pans out, Ray Drew at DE may start this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The TE Jay Rome kid that UGA got out of Valdosta... Wow, saw him play against my alma mater in the state playoffs, kid is a beast. The 2 corners (From Valdosta and Grady HS) they got have some talent as well. And, of course, if it pans out, Ray Drew at DE may start this year.

What do you think about this quarterback Zach Mettenberger LSU signed?

 

Mettenberger originally signed with Georgia in February 2009 as the No. 11 pro-style, drop-back quarterback in the nation out of Oconee County High in Watkinsville, Ga. He redshirted as a freshman and competed for the 2010 starting job during 2010 spring drills. But he was kicked off the team last spring in light of his arrest in March on misdemeanor charges of allegedly grabbing the breasts and buttocks of a woman at a bar in Remerton, Ga.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lovin this ....

 

11. Washington 26 Pac-12 3261 2 2 4 18 13 13 0 25 1 3.23

 

Although these rankings don't always show up on the field I'm excited that our program is on the right track to return to where we once were :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

these rankings are a bit skewed. An example is OU, they have the most, tied with a few other 5 star players, but had such a big class last yr, they wont be signing nearly as many players as most teams this yr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SEC=UGA    46
What do you think about this quarterback Zach Mettenberger LSU signed?

 

Mettenberger originally signed with Georgia in February 2009 as the No. 11 pro-style, drop-back quarterback in the nation out of Oconee County High in Watkinsville, Ga. He redshirted as a freshman and competed for the 2010 starting job during 2010 spring drills. But he was kicked off the team last spring in light of his arrest in March on misdemeanor charges of allegedly grabbing the breasts and buttocks of a woman at a bar in Remerton, Ga.

 

Zach is a great, prototypical, pro-style QB (think a smaller Ryan Mallett with better accuracy). He looked great in the few practices he was able to run, but was a bit immature and has a god complex. Hopefully he has learned his lesson. He could be a great signal caller for the Bayou Bengals, kinda sucks that he got away. But, Murray is doing a pretty good job for the Dawgs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lovin this ....

 

11. Washington 26 Pac-12 3261 2 2 4 18 13 13 0 25 1 3.23

 

Although these rankings don't always show up on the field I'm excited that our program is on the right track to return to where we once were :wacko:

These rankings don't always agree. For example I believe Rivals has your Washington team ranked 22nd while ESPN doesn't even have them ranked in their top 25.

 

Here's an interesting ESPN article about how the top recruits from four years (2007) ago have accomplished so far in their college careers. Sort of a where are they now type thing. LSU backup QB Jarrett Lee was just two spots below Cam Newton at #60 that year. :tup:

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/...tory?id=5652297

 

58. Cameron Newton, QB (Atlanta, Ga./Westlake) -After earning a backup QB role in 2007 behind Tim Tebow and redshirting due to an ankle injury in 2008 at Florida, Newton transferred to Blinn College in 2009 and led it to a NJCAA National Football Championship. He enrolled with Auburn in 2010 and led the Tigers to a No. 1 ranking, while winning the Heisman Trophy, Davey O'Brien Award, Maxwell Award and Walter Camp Award. He is expected to be drafted in the first round of the 2011 draft.

 

60. Jarrett Lee, QB (Brenham, Texas/Brenham) -Lee redshirted in 2007 and started eight games in 2008 before being sidelined for the rest of the season with an ankle injury. He served as the backup in 2009 and played in seven games. In 2010, he threw for 573 yards and two touchdowns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you take the average of all the recruiting services this seems to be the top 10 team recruiting classes for 2011.

 

1. Florida State

2. Auburn

3. USC

4. Alabama

5. Texas

6. Georgia

7. Ohio State

8. Notre Dame

9. LSU

10.Clemson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Square    37
If you take the average of all the recruiting services this seems to be the top 10 team recruiting classes for 2011.

 

1. Florida State

2. Auburn

3. USC

4. Alabama

5. Texas

6. Georgia

7. Ohio State

8. Notre Dame

9. LSU

10.Clemson

::wacko:

 

Overall I don't really care. These services are guestimates at best. Notre Dame has had plenty of top 10 classes over the years and they still churn out mediocre teams. Nebraska had higher ranked classes under Bill Calahan, but the players have progressed and played much better under Bo. Besides it being impossible to really project a 17/18 year old kid, they also seem to just rank these as" # of stars" classes. I think there is a lot more to recruiting positions of need and overall size/strength of class and how it fits into the current momentum of a program.

 

USC is being pretty smart about signing as many kids as they can get mid-year so they can fit under the "old rules" before the restrictions hit them next year though. We'll see how that pans out..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SEC=UGA    46

I'm pretty happy with the recruiting class. Could have used another DT and possibly a couple more LB.

 

Defensive backfield, DE, and OL has been shored up quite nicely. That and we got a freaking monster of a RB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These rankings don't always agree. For example I believe Rivals has your Washington team ranked 22nd while ESPN doesn't even have them ranked in their top 25.

 

The Huskies fell in the rankings yesterday as they had three top players decommitt at the last second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
::wacko:

 

Overall I don't really care. These services are guestimates at best. Notre Dame has had plenty of top 10 classes over the years and they still churn out mediocre teams. Nebraska had higher ranked classes under Bill Calahan, but the players have progressed and played much better under Bo. Besides it being impossible to really project a 17/18 year old kid, they also seem to just rank these as" # of stars" classes. I think there is a lot more to recruiting positions of need and overall size/strength of class and how it fits into the current momentum of a program.

 

USC is being pretty smart about signing as many kids as they can get mid-year so they can fit under the "old rules" before the restrictions hit them next year though. We'll see how that pans out..

Interesting article that sort of supports your thoughts on recruiting. http://oregon.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1179868

 

Rivals.com began tabulating its Top 50 recruiting class team rankings with the Class of 2002. In nine years, 29 teams have made the rankings each season. In order to judge how recruiting success relates to on-field success, we ranked teams by recruiting (taking their average place over the nine years) and then compared that to their winning percentage over those nine years. The results may not be what you expected.

 

The school with the best recruiting classes over the period (USC), had the second-highest winning percentage. But the school's with the second- and third-highest recruiting ranking (Florida and Georgia), tied for 7th in winning percentage.

 

Virginia Tech had the highest achievement - in other words, it did the most with its classes. Virginia Tech tied for 21st in recruiting classes, but has the sixth-highest winning percentage in that time period (for a plus 15). Missouri (+13) is next. Ohio State (+11), Oregon and Pittsburgh (both +10) are the only other schools with double-digits gains.

 

The biggest underachievers? South Carolina and Texas A&M are the two biggest violators of good classes gone bad, with each coming in nine places lower on the field than in recruiting.

 

BY THE NUMBERS

There are 29 schools to have its recruiting classes ranked inside the Top 50 each year since 2002. Here's a breakdown by team of the differential between the average Rivals.com team rank and the winning percentage those teams have produced.

Team Avg. Class (rank) Win percent (rank) +/-

 

Virginia Tech 28.0 (t21) .752 (6) +15

Missouri 32.3 (27) .634 (14) +13

Ohio State 14.0 (12) .853 (1) +11

Oregon 26.5 (20) .684 (10) +10

Pittsburgh 34.8 (29) .607 (19) +10

Oklahoma State 29.3 (t25) .622 (17) +8

Maryland 29.3 (t25) .575 (20) +5

Texas 8.6 (6) .818 (3) +3

Alabama 15.6 (13) .675 (11) +2

Nebraska 25.2 (18) .623 (16) +2

Oklahoma 7.8 (5) .803 (4) +1

Auburn 12.3 (10) .741 (9) +1

Arkansas 28.7 (23) .548 (22) +1

Arizona State 29.1 (24) .544 (23) +1

USC 3.7 (1) .846 (2) -1

LSU 7.7 (4) .779 (5) -1

Arizona 34.0 (28) .394 (29) -1

Georgia 7.3 (3) .745 (t7) -4

Miami 10.3 (8) .667 (12) -4

Florida 7.0 (2) .745 (t7) -5

Florida State 8.8 (7) .644 (13) -6

Michigan 11.8 (9) .628 (15) -6

North Carolina 28.0 (t21) .427 (28) -7

Tennessee 12.7 (11) .608 (18) -7

Notre Dame 17.8 (14) .571 (21) -7

UCLA 21.8 (17) .513 (t25) -8

Mississippi 26.4 (19) .481 (27) -8

South Carolina 18.3 (15) .535 (24) -9

Texas A&M 19.7 (16) .513 (t25) -9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SEC=UGA    46
Interesting article that sort of supports your thoughts on recruiting. http://oregon.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1179868

 

Rivals.com began tabulating its Top 50 recruiting class team rankings with the Class of 2002. In nine years, 29 teams have made the rankings each season. In order to judge how recruiting success relates to on-field success, we ranked teams by recruiting (taking their average place over the nine years) and then compared that to their winning percentage over those nine years. The results may not be what you expected.

 

The school with the best recruiting classes over the period (USC), had the second-highest winning percentage. But the school's with the second- and third-highest recruiting ranking (Florida and Georgia), tied for 7th in winning percentage.

 

Virginia Tech had the highest achievement - in other words, it did the most with its classes. Virginia Tech tied for 21st in recruiting classes, but has the sixth-highest winning percentage in that time period (for a plus 15). Missouri (+13) is next. Ohio State (+11), Oregon and Pittsburgh (both +10) are the only other schools with double-digits gains.

 

The biggest underachievers? South Carolina and Texas A&M are the two biggest violators of good classes gone bad, with each coming in nine places lower on the field than in recruiting.

 

BY THE NUMBERS

There are 29 schools to have its recruiting classes ranked inside the Top 50 each year since 2002. Here's a breakdown by team of the differential between the average Rivals.com team rank and the winning percentage those teams have produced.

Team Avg. Class (rank) Win percent (rank) +/-

 

Virginia Tech 28.0 (t21) .752 (6) +15

Missouri 32.3 (27) .634 (14) +13

Ohio State 14.0 (12) .853 (1) +11

Oregon 26.5 (20) .684 (10) +10

Pittsburgh 34.8 (29) .607 (19) +10

Oklahoma State 29.3 (t25) .622 (17) +8

Maryland 29.3 (t25) .575 (20) +5

Texas 8.6 (6) .818 (3) +3

Alabama 15.6 (13) .675 (11) +2

Nebraska 25.2 (18) .623 (16) +2

Oklahoma 7.8 (5) .803 (4) +1

Auburn 12.3 (10) .741 (9) +1

Arkansas 28.7 (23) .548 (22) +1

Arizona State 29.1 (24) .544 (23) +1

USC 3.7 (1) .846 (2) -1

LSU 7.7 (4) .779 (5) -1

Arizona 34.0 (28) .394 (29) -1

Georgia 7.3 (3) .745 (t7) -4

Miami 10.3 (8) .667 (12) -4

Florida 7.0 (2) .745 (t7) -5

Florida State 8.8 (7) .644 (13) -6

Michigan 11.8 (9) .628 (15) -6

North Carolina 28.0 (t21) .427 (28) -7

Tennessee 12.7 (11) .608 (18) -7

Notre Dame 17.8 (14) .571 (21) -7

UCLA 21.8 (17) .513 (t25) -8

Mississippi 26.4 (19) .481 (27) -8

South Carolina 18.3 (15) .535 (24) -9

Texas A&M 19.7 (16) .513 (t25) -9

 

Another thing you need to look at is how many of these recruits were drafted to the NFL rather than just looking at he winning %. I think this will also show the acumen of the coaching staff at certain schools (like how bad of a coach Mark Richt truly is.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another thing you need to look at is how many of these recruits were drafted to the NFL rather than just looking at he winning %. I think this will also show the acumen of the coaching staff at certain schools (like how bad of a coach Mark Richt truly is.)
Do most Georgia fans feel the same as you in regard to Coach Richt? Couple of years ago he was on a local sports radio show down here in the heart of "Tiger Country" . I recall after the interview thinking what a great guy and a great rep for the University of Georgia. I really do wish him success next season as long as it doesn't affect LSU.

 

Here's a pretty good article that talks about the pressure Coach Richt has placed on himself by calling this year's recruiting class his "Dream Team"

 

http://blogs.ajc.com/jeff-schultz-blog/201...tars-into-wins/

Edited by Rockerbraves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SEC=UGA    46
Do most Georgia fans feel the same as you in regard to Coach Richt? Couple of years ago he was on a local sports radio show down here in the heart of "Tiger Country" . I recall after the interview thinking what a great guy and a great rep for the University of Georgia. I really do wish him success next season as long as it doesn't affect LSU.

 

Here's a pretty good article that talks about the pressure Coach Richt has placed on himself by calling this year's recruiting class his "Dream Team"

 

http://blogs.ajc.com/jeff-schultz-blog/201...tars-into-wins/

 

Unfortunately, no, most people like him. I have just seen too many mistakes over the years, even in winning seasons and SEC title seasons.

 

My biggest issue revolves around his coaching, not who he is or what he has done. He has had some of the best talent in the nation on one team at the same time, just look at the number of his players in the NFL.

 

He makes poor calls, has horrible clock management skills, his teams are not prepared, he has one of the most penalized teams in NCAA over the past 9 years, he is loyal to a fault to his coordinators, he makes decisions with his heart, not his head, etc...

 

I don't know how many times he has exhausted all of his timeouts in the first and third quarters because the "wrong" play was called in. Look at the TN (I think) game this year, we kick off to start the game, our defense runs out there (some of them) we had to burn a timeout 7 seconds into the game to get a D on the field. 12 seconds lef tin the game, UGA at the 2, they come in from a TO, no TO left now, dive play... loss. 16 penalties against SC in 2009 ( I believe). Crap like this always happens.. and then this year we have one of the most talented and tenured O-lines and they were pathetic. All these things relate to coaching issues. UGA does well in spite of HCMR, the talent level is what has made him a "good" coach and won him so many games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
detlef    125
Long and interesting post that I, no the less, have issue with.

It doesn't hurt that Va Tech has been feasting on a crappy ACC schedule. The other issue I have with this ranking scheme is that it's all based on how well teams did with players that this particular ranking site thought were great players. Maybe both the school and Rivals.com missed the mark on some of these kids.

 

Take Pryor from OSU. The hype around this kid coming out of HS was "can't miss". Well, based on how the OSU fans around here reacted after the scandal (and much of the vitriol was directed at his actual performance on the field), he sort of fell a tad short of basically being thought of as the top overall recruit. Sure, the kid is a career starter and has hardly tanked, but I bet if you went back and ranked him against his incoming class, he'd be closer to #50, if that. So, is it an indictment of OSU that, despite getting "the best player in the country" that year, they didn't do more with him? Or did they simply not actually get the best player in the country?

 

And I purposefully avoided more glaring examples of guys not living up to expectations. Again, Pryor is anything but a poster child for missing the mark recruiting-wise. Yet, even still, the argument is relevant.

 

That's like grading FF drafts and making a big deal about some team doing well that season despite having the "worst" draft. By who's measure? Assuming he didn't win the league because he ditched his crappy players and worked the WW, maybe the draft wasn't so bad. Maybe "reaching" for Arian Foster in the 3rd round was such a stupid pick after all. Happens every year to someone. I recall getting laughed out of the room because of the bozos I've got at QB going into the season, then one of them ends up top 5 or something.

 

ETA: I do realize that it's everyone's favorite hobby to point to the times when scouts get it wrong and that, in general, 5-star kids are better than 4-star kids and so on. Well, at least 4 and 5 star kids are generally better than 1 and 2 star kids. It just gets a little dicey when you're deciding who the 20th best kid overall is and who the 25th best is. The situations where 2-star kids go off just stand out. However, that's not exactly what we're talking about because all of the teams with top 20 classes are all getting a nice chunk of both 4 and 5 star kids, so you truly are splitting hairs saying that UT had the 7th best class and FSU had the 8th. Really? And why is that? Because they were even until UT landed the 58th guy on your board and FSU landed the 70th? Great, we'll take that right to the bank.

Edited by detlef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ETA: I do realize that it's everyone's favorite hobby to point to the times when scouts get it wrong and that, in general, 5-star kids are better than 4-star kids and so on. Well, at least 4 and 5 star kids are generally better than 1 and 2 star kids.

You're correct that generally 4 and 5 star kids are better than 1 & 2 star kids, however it kills me when I see a WR like Jordy Nelson of the Packers. In more cases than not whenever you see a white WR actually playing in the NFL it seems they either didn't play for a Div 1 school or if they did they were most likely asked to walk on in college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
detlef    125
You're correct that generally 4 and 5 star kids are better than 1 & 2 star kids, however it kills me when I see a WR like Jordy Nelson of the Packers. In more cases than not whenever you see a white WR actually playing in the NFL it seems they either didn't play for a Div 1 school or if they did they were most likely asked to walk on in college.

There are plenty of black dudes playing and staring in the NFL that came from small schools at any number of positions, including WR. If your point is that most highly touted WRs are black, it's likely because that's a speed position and most of the fastest people tend to be black. Look at the olympic sprints. The stopwatch doesn't lie. At age 18, it is likely too hard to judge the intangibles, so it comes down to height, weight, and speed. Dudes like Wayne Crebet prove sometime between age 18 and 22 that they've got what it takes to make it in the pros, even if they don't look or run like Calvin Johnson. but when he's 18, he may be Rudy for all anyone knows. Sort of like Brian Westbrook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are plenty of black dudes playing and staring in the NFL that came from small schools at any number of positions, including WR. If your point is that most highly touted WRs are black, it's likely because that's a speed position and most of the fastest people tend to be black. Look at the olympic sprints. The stopwatch doesn't lie. At age 18, it is likely too hard to judge the intangibles, so it comes down to height, weight, and speed. Dudes like Wayne Crebet prove sometime between age 18 and 22 that they've got what it takes to make it in the pros, even if they don't look or run like Calvin Johnson. but when he's 18, he may be Rudy for all anyone knows. Sort of like Brian Westbrook.

Yes my point is that the people who run the recruiting services are racists like you because they also sincerely believe that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. In most cases white high school WR's won't even get rated by Rivals or Scout.com services, so yes as far as many know they may be Rudy.

 

Someone told me about this one white high school WR was on rivals with above average measurables and stats, however rivals accidently placed a black kids picture under his name. The phones rang off the hook for the kid until the service finally recognized their mistake and put his real pic up and the phones quit ringing. :wacko:

Edited by Rockerbraves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Square    37
There are plenty of black dudes playing and staring in the NFL that came from small schools at any number of positions, including WR. If your point is that most highly touted WRs are black, it's likely because that's a speed position and most of the fastest people tend to be black. Look at the olympic sprints. The stopwatch doesn't lie. At age 18, it is likely too hard to judge the intangibles, so it comes down to height, weight, and speed. Dudes like Wayne Crebet prove sometime between age 18 and 22 that they've got what it takes to make it in the pros, even if they don't look or run like Calvin Johnson. but when he's 18, he may be Rudy for all anyone knows. Sort of like Brian Westbrook.

Maybe that is why the SEC has so much speed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SEC=UGA    46

And then you have guys like vai sikahema and everyone is all :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
detlef    125
Yes my point is that the people who run the recruiting services are racists like you because they also sincerely believe that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. In most cases white high school WR's won't even get rated by Rivals or Scout.com services, so yes as far as many know they may be Rudy.

 

Someone told me about this one white high school WR was on rivals with above average measurables and stats, however rivals accidently placed a black kids picture under his name. The phones rang off the hook for the kid until the service finally recognized their mistake and put his real pic up and the phones quit ringing. :wacko:

Dude, have you ever watched the Olympic 100m dash? Not many white guys in there, now are there. Do you think that's because all the really fast white guys aren't allowed to run? Even if there was some sort of bias at play in the US and colleges assume white guys are slow and thus they don't get the needed training (mind you, a coach would have to be insane because, again, the stopwatch doesn't lie. If some white kid in HS is running low 10s in the 100, someone is going to be all over that.). At any rate, what about the rest of the world? What about countries that don't have many black people in them? Why aren't there a bunch of Russian or Finnish dudes on the podium in the sprints? It's not just an American thing, because the Brits and Jamaicans have been showing well. Black Brits, mind you.

 

I didn't say that if you're black you must be faster, but rather that there seems to be rather overwhelming data that supports that most of the fastest recruits tend to be black. Again, where are all these fast white guys in the 100m finals? I'd love to see how many white recruits that can flat out fly (and/or jump) are actually not heavily recruited.

 

Oh, and by the way, maybe the reason why Jordy Nelson was a walk-on was because he didn't actually play WR in HS, he played QB. So, ironically, he may have been undervalued for the same reason many black QBs in college are in the NFL draft. Maybe he wanted to play QB but nobody would give him a scholarship to do that. Maybe he walked-on at KSU so he could try to be a QB and then, finally, he saw the writing on the wall and moved to WR. Either that or Kansas hates white people. One of the two.

 

Also, he was taken very high in the draft despite a good, but not amazing 40 time. I don't know where it would have ranked him the year he came out, but it would have put him 25th in last year's combine. Now, again, by the time the pros are looking at these guys, they have a lot more to look at than speed, so a guy like him who may have amazing hands or runs great routes or whatever it was that the Packers saw that made them draft him as, what I'm assuming was, around top 5 WR in the draft. Perhaps when you're looking at 18 year old kids, you don't have as much football IQ and such to go with, you just roll the dice with kids who can fly down the field or some such. It's really not a hard concept to grasp unless you have some pathetic agenda like yours.

 

"Someone told you" about the white recruit? Was it another self-pitying idiot like yourself? Was it the dude's cousin and "good measurables were really 6'1" with a 4.85 or something like that? Because the facts don't add up. First off, coaches want to win, so they're not going to turn their back on some big kid who can run fast. Secondly, there are a ton of white football fans who would love nothing more than to root for a 6'4" white kid who can flat-out fly. He'd be a freaking hero. Dudes like you in particular would want to change sex and have his baby. But Bobby Bowden doesn't want any part of that, because Bobby Bowden hates white people.

 

 

Now go eff yourself you pathetic little man. Go play your weak-ass race card elsewhere you sad SOB. I've often enjoyed sparring with you despite the fact that I typically think you're a backwoods moron. But I'm not going to let some Limbaugh-spum guzzling idiot call me a racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameltosis    1
Now go eff yourself you pathetic little man. Go play your weak-ass race card elsewhere you sad SOB. I've often enjoyed sparring with you despite the fact that I typically think you're a backwoods moron. But I'm not going to let some Limbaugh-spum guzzling idiot call me a racist.

 

oh no he did'ant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude, have you ever watched the Olympic 100m dash? Not many white guys in there, now are there. Do you think that's because all the really fast

Now go eff yourself you pathetic little man. Go play your weak-ass race card elsewhere you sad SOB. I've often enjoyed sparring with you despite the fact that I typically think you're a backwoods moron. But I'm not going to let some Limbaugh-spum guzzling idiot call me a racist.

By definition you are a racist if you honestly believe because a select group of black men do well in the Olympics sprint that means black WR's must be faster than white WR's. :wacko:

 

Oh and by the way when was the last time an olympic sprinter made a splash in NFL? My guess is not many since Bob Hayes. Besides I am not talking about the NFL. I'm talking about college football.

 

Don't you think it is just a little strange that the majority of white WR that happen to play in the NFL were not good enough to earn a scholarship at a BCS school out of high school? It's not just Jordy Nelson who had to walk on. How about NFL WR's like Kevin Curtis who had to walk on at Utah State. And how about Mike Furrey who walked on at Ohio State, Or Greg Camarillo who had to walk on to Stanford. Or Kevin Walter who had to play on at a Div 2 school at Eastern Michigan. That's just a few. Do you really think none of these guys were good enough to earn a scholarship right our of high school? Please...you racist SOB :tup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.