How were Boise ST's recruiting classes?

[nemosgold]

I'm not a recruiting expert, how have their classes ranked over the last 5 seasons?

I'm not saying hire the Boise guy, Koetter and Hawkins didn't and haven't worked out well for ASU and Colorado respectively.

 

[Schnoodler]

50-70

There are always exceptions. You find them both ways. But the key is that the curve is pretty pronounced and results are correlated to recruiting. And Boise State is an over achiever no doubt.

Coincidentally we're right on the curve line, meaning we are doing pretty much just how we should be based on the talent we have. Which would indicate that brewster is neither good nor bad as compared to his peers. hmmm and yet he's suppose to be such a deficient coach?

But he recruits above his teams position. So if he continually recruits above his teams ability so that his talent level of his team his rising, and he can coach to that talent level. Well you can figure out what that trend line would imply.

 

[oak_street1981]

Well we already learned tonight that Brewster is a

I'm not a recruiting expert, how have their classes ranked over the last 5 seasons?

I'm not saying hire the Boise guy, Koetter and Hawkins didn't and haven't worked out well for ASU and Colorado respectively.

better coach than Peterson ( and also Leach).

So if Bankonit is correct, we should be in the Fiesta Bowl or Championship game, betweenour #39 recruiting class that is much better than BSU's classes, and the great Brew motivational and great football coaching skills.

 

[AhliBobwa]

according to Rivals.

Boise State 2006--70th--18 recruits--only three 3 star recruits (the rest less)
2007--68th--seven 3 stars
2008--89th--five 3 stars
2009--72nd--eleven 3 stars

 

[badgerman27]

Boise St is a developmental program, much like UW in that respect. Where your class is ranked really doesn't mean that much by the classes 3rd-4th year in your program.

Look at it like this - A highly ranked recruiting class(5th-10th) generally means you have many players who are further along in their development than a lower ranked class(25th-30th). While many of those kids in the top classes are ready to contribute right away, they are also closer to reaching their full potential. There isn't as much room for growth. The lower rated class usually redshirts many of their kids, giving them an additional year to develop. By the time that group is in their 3rd year, the wide gap in talent level that was there when the classes came in has narrowed greatly. By the 4th year, there isn't much difference at all. The lower rated class still has a large number of kids ready for a 5th year.

That's what the people who are hung up on recruiting rankings overlook. Schools that are dedicated to scouting players and figuring where/how they project in growth and what position they'll play, how they 'fit' their program, and developing them to reach their full potential will usually be competitive with teams that rely on pure talent. That's how a school that always finishes with recruiting classes in the 35-60 range remain competitive.

 

[goofinSF]

...and is exactly why Brewster deserves more time.

 

[GreasyGopher]

Another reason that boise state doesn't have high ranking classes is that they look passed measurables and look more for football IQ. This was specifically mentioned by the announcers of the fiesta bowl tonight. The perfect example of this is Kellen Moore. At 6' 180 he doesn't have the measureables of "the big time college quarterback" thus he was rated lower than his true potential. Boise state's roster is full of these type of guys. They are the perfect example of intangibles outweighing the measureables.

 

[BuckBravo]

How would Boise State and TCU fare with Big Ten schedules? Boise State did defeat Oregon to open the season at home, but never played another ranked team until TCU. TCU defeated Brigham Young and Utah, who were both ranked at the time. Remember Air Force? TCU only beat them by 3 points. Big Conference schedules not only have stronger competition, they wear a team down physically over the course of the season. Cincinnatti was undefeated, too, and look what happened to them against Florida.

Boise State's other wins besides Oregon: Miami (of Ohio!), Fresno St, Bowling Green, California-Davis (not the one in the PAC 10!), Tulsa, Hawaii, San Jose State, Louisiana Tech (not State!), Idaho, Utah State (not Utah!), Nevada (not UNLV!), New Mexico State.

To consider their schedule on par with Big Ten schools is a stretch. If Minnesota had had the same schedule, they probably only would have lost somewhere between 1 and 3 games on the season. I doubt Boise State would have done too well facing Penn State and Ohio State back-to-back weeks, and also facing Iowa, California, and Wisconsin over the course of the season.

Boise State should be commended for playing great fundamental football, but when they face inferior competition in the regular season it isn't fair to equate their accomplishments with an undefeated performance in the Big Ten.

 

[Iceland12]

Moving Up Conferences Isn't Easy

How would Boise State and TCU fare with Big Ten schedules? Boise State did defeat Oregon to open the season at home, but never played another ranked team until TCU. TCU defeated Brigham Young and Utah, who were both ranked at the time. Remember Air Force? TCU only beat them by 3 points. Big Conference schedules not only have stronger competition, they wear a team down physically over the course of the season. Cincinnatti was undefeated, too, and look what happened to them against Florida.

Boise State's other wins besides Oregon: Miami (of Ohio!), Fresno St, Bowling Green, California-Davis (not the one in the PAC 10!), Tulsa, Hawaii, San Jose State, Louisiana Tech (not State!), Idaho, Utah State (not Utah!), Nevada (not UNLV!), New Mexico State.

To consider their schedule on par with Big Ten schools is a stretch. If Minnesota had had the same schedule, they probably only would have lost somewhere between 1 and 3 games on the season. I doubt Boise State would have done too well facing Penn State and Ohio State back-to-back weeks, and also facing Iowa, California, and Wisconsin over the course of the season.

Boise State should be commended for playing great fundamental football, but when they face inferior competition in the regular season it isn't fair to equate their accomplishments with an undefeated performance in the Big Ten.

Bingo! Getting a team prepared for two or maybe three games a year is a lot easier then having to do it seven or eight times (yeah, I'm Mr. Obvious). Now if those two games are the first game and a Bowl Game it gets easier.

That said Boise State under Dan Hawkins and Peterson have been a very good team.

Has anybody else noticed the job that Hawkins has done at Colorado? Just a thought.

 

[Iceland12]

better coach than Peterson ( and also Leach).

So if Bankonit is correct, we should be in the Fiesta Bowl or Championship game, betweenour #39 recruiting class that is much better than BSU's classes, and the great Brew motivational and great football coaching skills.

Only if Maturi can get Boise State's schedule. (See Hawkins record at Colorado).

Yep, it's Maturi's fault again !

 

[monk10]

Bingo! Getting a team prepared for two or maybe three games a year is a lot easier then having to do it seven or eight times (yeah, I'm Mr. Obvious). Now if those two games are the first game and a Bowl Game it gets easier.

That said Boise State under Dan Hawkins and Peterson have been a very good team.

Has anybody else noticed the job that Hawkins has done at Colorado? Just a thought.

A member at my holiday party who is a Colorado fan, was using Boise State as an example of a coach we should be getting NOW! I asked him how he thought Colorado was doing, after a few minutes of him telling me how disappointed he was, I reminded him he has a Boise State coach.

 

[HopHead]

I agree with what others have said here. I totally respect what they have done up at Boise St. but the bottom line is that because of the conference they play in they essentially have 9 or 10 scrimmages and 2 or 3 real tough games a year.

One of the reasons they can go for the "football IQ" guys is because they don't have to take the physical punishment doled out week in and week out in a BCS conference. They said on the broadcast last night that Kellen Moore had been sacked 5 times all season. I doubt that would be true if they were playing in a BCS conference and suddenly Moore's 6', 180 lb frame might be a bigger issue.

Plus, I hate the Smurf Turf. Maybe it was cute when they were the little engine that could and it got their school some press they normally wouldn't have gotten. But now they should be known for their football talent and not the color of the field.

 

[dpodoll68]

Boise St is a developmental program, much like UW in that respect. Where your class is ranked really doesn't mean that much by the classes 3rd-4th year in your program.

Look at it like this - A highly ranked recruiting class(5th-10th) generally means you have many players who are further along in their development than a lower ranked class(25th-30th). While many of those kids in the top classes are ready to contribute right away, they are also closer to reaching their full potential. There isn't as much room for growth. The lower rated class usually redshirts many of their kids, giving them an additional year to develop. By the time that group is in their 3rd year, the wide gap in talent level that was there when the classes came in has narrowed greatly. By the 4th year, there isn't much difference at all. The lower rated class still has a large number of kids ready for a 5th year.

That's what the people who are hung up on recruiting rankings overlook. Schools that are dedicated to scouting players and figuring where/how they project in growth and what position they'll play, how they 'fit' their program, and developing them to reach their full potential will usually be competitive with teams that rely on pure talent. That's how a school that always finishes with recruiting classes in the 35-60 range remain competitive.

The fatal flaw in your logic is that, for some reason, you assume that players who are better coming in are closer to the top of some imaginary growth curve. Of course, this is true for some players, just as it is also true for some lesser-heralded players that they never develop into anything more than a warm body.

For many higher-ranked players, they also have a higher ceiling. The difference is that, when these types of players reach their ceiling, they win NFL MVPs. When lower-rated guys reach their ceiling, it usually means maybe getting drafted and playing in the league for a few years.

 

[NateDawgUM]

How is the smurf turf even fair? If you play in that sort of environment every day, and for every home game, you're going to have such an advantage over your opponent. I can't even watch it on tv, it gives me a headache.

There is no way Boise competes year in/year out in a real conference. They can have the sportswriters drooling all over them, but real fans know that if they were granted a game vs. Texas or Alabama, they would be more road kill than Cincy the other night.

 

[goldengophers]

A member at my holiday party who is a Colorado fan, was using Boise State as an example of a coach we should be getting NOW! I asked him how he thought Colorado was doing, after a few minutes of him telling me how disappointed he was, I reminded him he has a Boise State coach.

Hasn't it been established that Petersen was the brains of the operation when Hawkins was there as well? I could be wrong but I believe people have compared it to Monson and Few. I have a hard time believing that both Few and Petersen would not be successful elsewhere.

 

[GVBadger]

The fatal flaw in your logic is that, for some reason, you assume that players who are better coming in are closer to the top of some imaginary growth curve. Of course, this is true for some players, just as it is also true for some lesser-heralded players that they never develop into anything more than a warm body.

For many higher-ranked players, they also have a higher ceiling. The difference is that, when these types of players reach their ceiling, they win NFL MVPs. When lower-rated guys reach their ceiling, it usually means maybe getting drafted and playing in the league for a few years.

That is a good point. I don't think he is referring to unrated or two star kids. I think he is referring to your 5.5 or 5.6 guys on rivals that will not lead to a highly ranked class, say a class in the 40's. I don't believe that Rivals has enough skill to rank players at 5.5, 5.6 or 5.7 and have there be any correlation with their success in college football. There are far to many variables in play after the ranking is done and far to many variables in making the rankings for the difference to have any meaning.

So, if one class is 25 and one is 40 and the difference in the class is a bunch of 5.5 players vs a bunch of 5.7 players as well as one or two 4 star players, the difference in the class is so small the a ranking between 25 and 40 is very misleading.

Then let's say the one or two 4 star players don't qualify or blow out a knee in summer workouts and what do you have? You have a belief that the program with the 25th ranked class is much better then the 40th ranked class even though the classes are basically the same.

As a result, how the player is coached, developed, how hard they work, can they stay eligible, do they like the game, can they play under pressure, do they fit in the system, etc. is far more important then whether a player was ranked 5.5 or 5.7.

 

[gold04]

I remember reading an article not to long ago that no one wants to play Boise State and no one wants them in their conference. Everyone was afraid to play them according to Peterson. They should go in the same conference with TCU. That would make for a really good conference.

 

[WolfontheProwl]

Recruiting is only part of it.

The teams recruiting usually determines the teams success. You can find an exception to any rule out there. The thing is a team like Boise State isn't on the same playing field as teams in major BCS Conferences. As has been posted already their schedule isn't nearly as tough as your average BCS Conference team. You have to give credit to Boise State and what they have done but would they be deep enough to play in a BCS Conference? Would their top skill players be good enough week in and week out in the Big 10 or Big 12? These questions dont have a clear cut answer but I think its safe to say they wouldn't be unbeaten. Its to bad the BCS copped out and put TCU and Boise State against each other. I would like to have seen Boise State against an Iowa and a TCU against a Georgia Tech.

 

[Iceland12]

Schedules Count

Hasn't it been established that Petersen was the brains of the operation when Hawkins was there as well? I could be wrong but I believe people have compared it to Monson and Few. I have a hard time believing that both Few and Petersen would not be successful elsewhere.

As long as they stay at Gonzaga and Boise State we'll never know, but unlike Few (G4L), NOBODY was saying that about Peterson before Hawkins left Boise State.

People always want to overlook schedules. Florida hasn't played a Non-Conferences game outside of the South since the mid-90's. So what. The SEC only plays tough Non-Conference teams, the few they play, in September. Take a look at what happens to the SEC teams in Bowl Games in "cold" weather or on bad fields. Not a pretty picture.

Records can be slightly deceiving.

Next year Nebraska will be a good team with a great record. They better be, they play EIGHT Home games! Brian Kelly should get 9 wins at Notre Dame next year or be a considered failure. They only play three teams on their home field!

Joe Paterno has some schedule help next year. Yeah, he's got to go to Alabama (nice Joe), but that's only one of FOUR road games he has to play. They even bought Indiana into playing a "neutral" site game in MARYLAND!!!

Oh and Florida's first year without Tebow? It's a tougher schedule then 2009 but, they still play 8 games in Florida and the farthest they will travel will be to Nashville to play Vandy. I hope their body clocks can adjust!

 

[Iceland12]

I remember reading an article not to long ago that no one wants to play Boise State and no one wants them in their conference. Everyone was afraid to play them according to Peterson. They should go in the same conference with TCU. That would make for a really good conference.

That's true. Few BCS teams wanted to play them in a home and home series. Money was definitely a factor. Money was also the main factor in Boise State's complaint that even though they'd play "anybody, anywhere" they didn't get a taker. It turned out that what they were asking to be paid for that away game was a little high.

They wouldn't play for less then $1,000,000.

 

[nc2mn]

What's really going on at Boise St is that they have demonstrated the value of coaching continuity. They have replaced the coaches hired away by hiring from within - and thereby maintained the same offensive and defensive schemes for the last 10 or so years.

Compare that with the Gophers' 3 OC's in 4 years and a new DC almost every year for the last 10, and think about it.

 

[lakesgopher]

i think boise has a little better recruiting backyard than many believe. a 3 star kid in cali is much better than a 3 star in minny. if i remember correctly they said boise had 36 kids from cali, 20 from idaho, and filled in the rest with washington, texas, and oregon

 

[Bo Darville]

What's really going on at Boise St is that they have demonstrated the value of coaching continuity. They have replaced the coaches hired away by hiring from within - and thereby maintained the same offensive and defensive schemes for the last 10 or so years.

Compare that with the Gophers' 3 OC's in 4 years and a new DC almost every year for the last 10, and think about it.

That's pretty much right. After the Pokey Allen cancer situation, they hired Houston Nutt who was only there one year and left. Then they hired Dirk Koetter who had Dan Hawkins as his OC. When Koetter left after 2000 Hawkins hired Chris Peterson as his OC. I think Peterson was the WR coach at Oregon when Koetter was the OC there before going to Boise. Nutt won 4 games then Koetter won 6, 10 and 10. So, yeah, it appears the consistency isn't a bad thing.

 

[AhliBobwa]

I remember reading an article not to long ago that no one wants to play Boise State and no one wants them in their conference. Everyone was afraid to play them according to Peterson. They should go in the same conference with TCU. That would make for a really good conference.

There is an easy way to almost fix this the way you said.

Mizzou--to the Big Ten

TCU--to the Big 12

Boise State--to the Mountain West