TrueGSU.com

Follow GSUFANS.com on
     
Page 18 of 30 FirstFirst ... 1617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 294

Thread: NSD #1

  1. #171

    Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by wonmoretime View Post
    K buddy.
    I'm not your buddy, guy.
    Dirk E. Sanchez, Overyonder, GA 2001

    Quote Originally Posted by half-n-half View Post
    you missed JDC's point.

  2. Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by JDC325 View Post
    I'm not your buddy, guy.
    K

  3. #173

    Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by wonmoretime View Post
    K
    Ah. You totally whiffed on that one

  4. #174

    Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by GSU08 View Post
    Ah. You totally whiffed on that one
    Like I knew he would lol, I knew you would get it. It could have been good, dang.
    Dirk E. Sanchez, Overyonder, GA 2001

    Quote Originally Posted by half-n-half View Post
    you missed JDC's point.

  5. #175

    Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by JDC325 View Post
    We did not even talk recruiting in the FCS the recruiting sites were in their infancy and paid no attention really to FCS teams. Also the top of the FCS is not that far from the bottom of the FBS where the Sun Belt is. Also the absolutely do care about the G5 they make a lot of money from teams with sites also a ton of G5 recruits have P5 offers we would not know it the last two years but if you check like Tulane's class there are a bunch. 24/7 must care about the FCS some as they have FCS teams ranked above G5 teams....sorta like how Yale is ranked above us...they dont even do playoffs. I guess stating that FACT is negative?
    The recruiting sites were in their infancy in 2011? Earlier you were calling Garrett Frye an outlier and now that I pointed out seven other "outliers" in that class you're using the excuse that the recruiting sites were new then (they weren't really). Even today, though, NDSU's recruiting class rankings are laughably low considering they've only lost 1 FBS game out of something like 8.

    Want to know what really makes me question the G5 recruiting rankings more than anything? The fact that the MAC's recruiting classes across the board are so much better than the Sun Belt's even though we've beat that league like a drum the past few years.
    Don't choose to be annoyed. Choose to be amused.

    If you think TK is the reason we don't have better non-conference football schedules, see this post.

  6. #176

    Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by BillyBob View Post
    The recruiting sites were in their infancy in 2011? Earlier you were calling Garrett Frye an outlier and now that I pointed out seven other "outliers" in that class you're using the excuse that the recruiting sites were new then (they weren't really). Even today, though, NDSU's recruiting class rankings are laughably low considering they've only lost 1 FBS game out of something like 8.

    Want to know what really makes me question the G5 recruiting rankings more than anything? The fact that the MAC's recruiting classes across the board are so much better than the Sun Belt's even though we've beat that league like a drum the past few years.
    For most of our time in the FCS they were. Really outliers? The did well against the competition the played against. Awesome we did well against FCS teams with better talent than other FCS teams and the lowest ranked G5 conference, also cant remember how many got drafted in the top three rounds again? Also the MAC's are not better significantly than the Sun Belts..it is better but not earth shattering. ArkSt takes in a lot of transfers as well. Fleck had WMU on the rise and well how did that second game go? You might want to check conference rankings and all their OOC games before putting them as low as the Sun Belt....here I will help http://www.colleyrankings.com/curconf.html#MAC. Also didnt our shared conference champ get beat by a bad UMASS team this year? When you expand your focus instead of a few games things play out like they should...so weird. NDSU, again the FCS goes 9-89 against the FBS but good lord ONE team out of 130 wins better than expected and 9-89 means nothing...I mean really this is comical. So you have to convince me the 89 losses had nothing to do with talent and its alllll just coaching and development.

    You are trying to base your arguments on anecdotal evidence weak evidence at that considering 7 guys out of an entire roster is supposed to mean something, 7 out performed their rankings slightly but the other 85-100+ did not.....Also you trying to make it if rankings are not 100% accurate they are worthless..That is just not true, if 1 out 4 five star kids become all americans but only 1 in 127 two stars do that is called CORRELATION and a strong one. The one out of 127 would be called an outlier since one out of 127 is .8%. If teams with rosters ranked in the bottom 25 only has one shared conference title and overall losing record and few bowls and or bowl wins that is a called a decent sample size and correlation not cherry picking one team out of 130+/- and our a handful of players off a roster who played well Elon and ULM but can barely get drafted. For every one McKinnion there are literally thousands of Gurley's that have went through the NFL that prove the rule not debunk it.
    Dirk E. Sanchez, Overyonder, GA 2001

    Quote Originally Posted by half-n-half View Post
    you missed JDC's point.

  7. #177

    Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by JDC325 View Post
    Obvious stuff, but saying a two star will succeed at the same rate a five star will fail is not even close to being true. There is no more solid proof than NFL teams evaluating players, they dont care what team name is on the jersey or what star rank you were out of high school yet over and over the higher ranked kids make the NFL and it is not even close. Doing well in the FCS or Sun Belt is great and all but NFL scouts are pretty good at separating the contenders vs the pretenders.


    READ
    http://www.sportsonearth.com/article...ospects-talent

    I mean honestly people have done research papers on this but...I mean google, read some article and research papers by folks who are well educated and get articles published in real magazines not ESPN. Let go of the handful of guys that dominated Elon and USA.....

    http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/...27002503253478

    Two-star players becoming Pro Bowlers do make for great stories, but stories are only anecdotal.
    Whoa hang tight. I never said that 2 stars would succeed at the same rates as 5 stars. I simply said that itís not guaranteed that a low star is a dud, and itís not guaranteed that a high star is successful. I followed that up by saying that as a general rule a higher star likely but not always needs less development, and that itís ďsaferĒ to pick a higher star player, but not a guarantee of success.

  8. #178

    Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by JDC325 View Post
    Like I knew he would lol, I knew you would get it. It could have been good, dang.
    I'm not your guy, friend.

  9. #179

    Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by wonmoretime View Post
    K
    I believe the correct answer was, “I’m not your guy, pal”

  10. #180

    Default Re: NSD #1

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleNationRising View Post
    Whoa hang tight. I never said that 2 stars would succeed at the same rates as 5 stars. I simply said that it’s not guaranteed that a low star is a dud, and it’s not guaranteed that a high star is successful. I followed that up by saying that as a general rule a higher star likely but not always needs less development, and that it’s “safer” to pick a higher star player, but not a guarantee of success.
    I know, I said the assertion that a two star will out perform their ranking at the same rate a five star will not prove their ranking is false, not even close to being true. 25% of five stars earn all american status while .8% of two stars do...I mean I am if you cant get that I dont know what to do at this point. Do you want a roster closer to 25% your players being all americans or .8%....how is this hard. Nothing is a guarantee and not one person has ever asserted that, that is something like wonmorewrong will try and say folks are saying to shift the argument but nobody seems to ever find a quote where anyone has said the rankings are lead pipe locks.

    The only lead pipe lock in a recruit rankings discussion is if one team or one player that is low ranked does well somebody will hold them up to "debunk" the rankings while ignoring the vast majority of thousands of players where the rankings were reliable and the vast majority of the other 130+/- FBS teams that finish where their talent would indicate. Like the bottom 25 rosters in 2016...but App managed to share a title with a team they did not play so the other 24 teams that did not "win" a conference title dont matter.

    Its ground hog day, honestly endless research papers and articles and all that matters is Swope did well against Elon...
    Dirk E. Sanchez, Overyonder, GA 2001

    Quote Originally Posted by half-n-half View Post
    you missed JDC's point.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •