Oyenmwen Uzebu commits!

Donate To GopherHole

btowngopher said:
1. Why would you be happy to finish in the mid 40s? That's asking pretty little of someone who is supposed to be a great recruiter. It's setting the bar pretty low.

2. You are somewhat right about the 4 star thing. Finishing in the top 40 with zero four stars is very rare, and has only happened with classes of at least 27 players.
Click to expand...

It would be a nice improvement of roughly 15 spots over Fleck's 2017 class and the highest ranked recruiting class for him.

I'm not somewhat right, it is very rare.
 


mkAz said:
He was apparently just 15 at time his junior year hudl video came out, and he was dominating. He's going to be a monster. Great addition.

<iframe src='//www.hudl.com/embed/video/3/3916892/583b4ec8dfd8b72524bdbb29' width='640' height='360' frameborder='0' allowfullscreen></iframe>
Click to expand...

Wow. Knowing that he's 15 at the time of this video is incredibly impressive. This kid is one of the most impressive recruits in years (I'm going by amateur eye, I'm sure there are guys ranked higher).

I'm repeating what other people have said already, but it is really hard to find a kid that size that doesn't look fat. It's really hard to find a kid that size who shows some athleticism. It's even rarer when the kid is this young.

Way to go PJF.
 

Spoofin said:
Recruiting rankings vs AP rankings is a different debate (one I also disagree with you on). My question is why folks care if this particular recruit changes from a 3-star to 4-star. That is what I said was odd.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The thing is, we don't actually know how good these kids are yet. If they move from a 3* to a 4*, it likely means they improved since the last time they were evaluated, which means they are likely even better than we thought they were when they committed. That is a good thing, no?
 


Keyser Söze said:
The thing is, we don't actually know how good these kids are yet. If they move from a 3* to a 4*, it likely means they improved since the last time they were evaluated, which means they are likely even better than we thought they were when they committed. That is a good thing, no?
Click to expand...

Whether they are better, worse, or the same as we thought - it doesn't change how good they are when they play here. The above does not explain why I should care if OU stays a 3, moves to a 4, or even drops to a 2. In any event he will be the same player here. I'm delighted he is going to be a Gopher. I couldn't care less what his ranking is or ends up being. Still not sure why I should or why there were multiple posters hoping he and others move to a 4-star.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
Whether they are better, worse, or the same as we thought - it doesn't change how good they are when they play here. The above does not explain why I should care if OU stays a 3, moves to a 4, or even drops to a 2. In any event he will be the same player here. I'm delighted he is going to be a Gopher. I couldn't care less what his ranking is or ends up being. Still not sure why I should or why there were multiple posters hoping he and others move to a 4-star.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I get that changing their ranking doesn't magically change their ability, but that isn't the point. No one thinks that it does. Again, fans don't actually know how good these players are yet. There are different expectations for a 4 star recruit and a 3 star recruit, and if one of our guys moves to a 4 star, the assumption is "oh, this guy is even better than we thought he was". Higher rankings = higher expectations = more excitement. You can pretend this doesn't make sense or that you don't understand, but I don't believe you.
 

Keyser Söze said:
The thing is, we don't actually know how good these kids are yet. If they move from a 3* to a 4*, it likely means they improved since the last time they were evaluated, which means they are likely even better than we thought they were when they committed. That is a good thing, no?
Click to expand...

For people on a message board - maybe, yes. But I would think our coaches use their own evaluation and probably hope some of these guys stay under the radar. I would hope that professional recruiters would have very little knowledge what a bunch of entry level journalists rate the players that will determine their career and more likely be able to evaluate on their own. All that said, of course I hope all our recruits get 'bumped up.' It makes the offseason more entertaining...but nothing more.

While the star system does have some strong statistical correlation to success on the field it is completely arbitrary and only exists to make money off fans. They could have picked any number for their top recruits - they settled with 5. It would probably be more exact if they went with 7. By the way, do these human beings ever drop from a 3 star to a 2 star? I can't remember a Gopher recruit who dropped within their last year. It seems like they can only go up based on the schools interested. The entire practice is a sham...I still love it, though. I always go with the philosophy that stars are fun, but they cease to matter with the first snap in which a player participates.
 

Spoofin said:
Whether they are better, worse, or the same as we thought - it doesn't change how good they are when they play here. The above does not explain why I should care if OU stays a 3, moves to a 4, or even drops to a 2. In any event he will be the same player here. I'm delighted he is going to be a Gopher. I couldn't care less what his ranking is or ends up being. Still not sure why I should or why there were multiple posters hoping he and others move to a 4-star.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

They care about perception of the program. Which I guess can maybe help with other recruiting, but that wears off pretty fast and will eventually based almost solely on results on the field. Personally I agree with you.
 



Keyser Söze said:
I get that changing their ranking doesn't magically change their ability, but that isn't the point. No one thinks that it does. Again, fans don't actually know how good these players are yet. There are different expectations for a 4 star recruit and a 3 star recruit, and if one of our guys moves to a 4 star, the assumption is "oh, this guy is even better than we thought he was". Higher rankings = higher expectations = more excitement. You can pretend this doesn't make sense or that you don't understand, but I don't believe you.
Click to expand...

Oh, I understand some will be more excited about OU if he is a 4-star than a 3-star. It is the point that I find that silly that I am making. Feel free to disagree, but I find it odd. I will be equally excited even if he drops to a 2-star. He is an awesome get - why do we feel some need to have a <I>perception </I>that it is even more awesome?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
Oh, I understand some will be more excited about OU if he is a 4-star than a 3-star. It is the point that I find that silly that I am making. Feel free to disagree, but I find it odd. I will be equally excited even if he drops to a 2-star. He is an awesome get - why do we feel some need to have a perception that it is even more awesome?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Because many Gopher fans look for anything to pat themselves on the back. Recruiting rankings may give them a chance to escape their their feelings of inferiority, if only for a moment on a discussion board.

As for the purpose of this thread, I welcome any player who desires to wear the maize and maroon. [emoji41]
 


Some Day...Maybe said:
eab1db245dbabafe398e7e634dffc281.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I LOVE this photo!
 




GopherHomer said:
For people on a message board - maybe, yes. But I would think our coaches use their own evaluation and probably hope some of these guys stay under the radar. I would hope that professional recruiters would have very little knowledge what a bunch of entry level journalists rate the players that will determine their career and more likely be able to evaluate on their own. All that said, of course I hope all our recruits get 'bumped up.' It makes the offseason more entertaining...but nothing more.

While the star system does have some strong statistical correlation to success on the field it is completely arbitrary and only exists to make money off fans. They could have picked any number for their top recruits - they settled with 5. It would probably be more exact if they went with 7. By the way, do these human beings ever drop from a 3 star to a 2 star? I can't remember a Gopher recruit who dropped within their last year. It seems like they can only go up based on the schools interested. The entire practice is a sham...I still love it, though. I always go with the philosophy that stars are fun, but they cease to matter with the first snap in which a player participates.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was talking about fans and people on message boards, hence the reason I said "we". How can the star system have a strong statistical correlation to success on the field if they are completely arbitrary? That doesn't even make sense. The fact that there is a strong correlation should make it obvious that rankings are based on talent/potential. If they were truly arbitrary, there would be no correlation to on field success.
 

Keyser Söze said:
I get that changing their ranking doesn't magically change their ability, but that isn't the point. No one thinks that it does. Again, fans don't actually know how good these players are yet. There are different expectations for a 4 star recruit and a 3 star recruit, and if one of our guys moves to a 4 star, the assumption is "oh, this guy is even better than we thought he was". Higher rankings = higher expectations = more excitement. You can pretend this doesn't make sense or that you don't understand, but I don't believe you.
Click to expand...

+08
 

Spoofin said:
Oh, I understand some will be more excited about OU if he is a 4-star than a 3-star. It is the point that I find that silly that I am making. Feel free to disagree, but I find it odd. I will be equally excited even if he drops to a 2-star. He is an awesome get - why do we feel some need to have a <I>perception </I>that it is even more awesome?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's a fact that 2-stars are less likely to succeed than 4 stars, so I wouldn't. If he starts as a high 3-star and moves to a 2-star, that would be concerning. It would likely mean he either regressed or hasn't developed like people expected and they can no longer justify his previously good ranking.

This is probably a pointless debate, so I'll leave it alone now. I assume Uzebu is a talented player with a bright future and am very excited to have him on board.
 

dpodoll68 said:
There's nothing to "disagree" on. It is a fact that there is a strong positive correlation between recruiting rankings and on-field results.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine how big a deal it will be to see Andries, Uzebu, and Carroll should he decide to stay home on the same O-Line.
 

hungan1 said:
I can't imagine how big a deal it will be to see Andries, Uzebu, and Carroll should he decide to stay home on the same O-Line.
Click to expand...

It will be a big deal, because Carroll being here will mean a four star is finally rowing.
 

MennoSota said:
Because many Gopher fans look for anything to pat themselves on the back. Recruiting rankings may give them a chance to escape their their feelings of inferiority, if only for a moment on a discussion board.

As for the purpose of this thread, I welcome any player who desires to wear the maize and maroon. [emoji41]
Click to expand...

Why does everything you write piss me off?
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Yet Fleck has been after a number of 4*s and official visits haven't even started. Yet you feel the need to post this in every. single. recruiting. thread.
Click to expand...

Dog Whistle.

As for the ratings yes, Fleck will need 4-stars for top 40 class. I hope he does. It's called reality... you disagree he needs several to have a top 40 class?

Yes, it's early and that my point Einstein. Top 15 class right now because many of the big boys below Gophs right now have very few commits...and they too will have official visits just like the Gophs, it is how it works.
 

PMWinSTP said:
Dog Whistle.

As for the ratings yes, Fleck will need 4-stars for top 40 class. I hope he does. It's called reality... you disagree he needs several to have a top 40 class?

Yes, it's early and that my point Einstein. Top 15 class right now because many of the big boys below Gophs right now have very few commits...and they too will have official visits just like the Gophs, it is how it works.
Click to expand...

Yes, we get it you think he needs 4 stars to have a top 40 class in 10 months others don't agree. You don't need to post it every time they get a commit.
 


If Fleck lands a couple 5 stars and a half dozen 4 stars, I'll be pretty happy about this class. :)
 

Keyser Söze said:
Yes, I was talking about fans and people on message boards, hence the reason I said "we". How can the star system have a strong statistical correlation to success on the field if they are completely arbitrary? That doesn't even make sense. The fact that there is a strong correlation should make it obvious that rankings are based on talent/potential. If they were truly arbitrary, there would be no correlation to on field success.
Click to expand...

Well, "we" can mean a lot of different things, but okay I get where you were coming from. Thanks.

My point about it being arbitrary is that you limit yourself by only using 5 rating points. I'm going to take 5 star recruits and 2 star recruits out of comparison because I think history pretty much solidifies the difference between the two. Since they only have "5" different strata I think the difference between 3 and 4 stars is pretty arbitrary. I feel like guys get both 3 and 4 star ratings solely based on where they commit...there have been many Gopher commits that were unrated (mostly local guys in this scenario) that have UMN, NDSU, SDSU offers for example. When they commit to the Gophers they are given a 3 star rating. I'd be willing to bet if they chose one of the Dakotas, they would maintain being unrated or given a 2 star ranking. My main point is that they should use a 7 star system - much like a lot of statistical modeling. Unfortunately that would require a bunch of young journalists actually having to put some thought into their click-bait.

Has anybody ever done analysis on how rivals 5.7 recruits (3 star) do VS 5.8 recruits (4 star)? My guess is that it would be completely random or based on situation/surrounding talent. Hence - none of this matters and we should just wait and see how these guys perform.
 

PMWinSTP said:
Dog Whistle.

As for the ratings yes, Fleck will need 4-stars for top 40 class. I hope he does. It's called reality... you disagree he needs several to have a top 40 class?

Yes, it's early and that my point Einstein. Top 15 class right now because many of the big boys below Gophs right now have very few commits...and they too will have official visits just like the Gophs, it is how it works.
Click to expand...

Nah it's called an idiot whistle and I hear it every time you post.

Nit pick is all you do. Every time we get a commit you post something to try and downgrade the class. Then it turns into 4 pages of the recruiting ratings argument.

What happened to your post about how this class is the same as past year's because it's only a 2.66 average due to 1 unrated recruit. Then they rate that recruit a 3* and now all your posts are about how this class won't finish above the mid 40s without a 4*. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for what you will repeat in every single thread after they land a few 4*s.
 

GopherHomer said:
Well, "we" can mean a lot of different things, but okay I get where you were coming from. Thanks.

My point about it being arbitrary is that you limit yourself by only using 5 rating points. I'm going to take 5 star recruits and 2 star recruits out of comparison because I think history pretty much solidifies the difference between the two. Since they only have "5" different strata I think the difference between 3 and 4 stars is pretty arbitrary. I feel like guys get both 3 and 4 star ratings solely based on where they commit...there have been many Gopher commits that were unrated (mostly local guys in this scenario) that have UMN, NDSU, SDSU offers for example. When they commit to the Gophers they are given a 3 star rating. I'd be willing to bet if they chose one of the Dakotas, they would maintain being unrated or given a 2 star ranking. My main point is that they should use a 7 star system - much like a lot of statistical modeling. Unfortunately that would require a bunch of young journalists actually having to put some thought into their click-bait.

Has anybody ever done analysis on how rivals 5.7 recruits (3 star) do VS 5.8 recruits (4 star)? My guess is that it would be completely random or based on situation/surrounding talent. Hence - none of this matters and we should just wait and see how these guys perform.
Click to expand...

You clearly don't know what you're talking about, so why did you waste everyone's time typing this? How you "think" or "feel" about something has nothing to do with the reality of the situation.
 

Pretty typical gongshow of a commitment thread here. Let's do it again next commitment!
 

PMWinSTP said:
It would be a nice improvement of roughly 15 spots over Fleck's 2017 class and the highest ranked recruiting class for him.

I'm not somewhat right, it is very rare.
Click to expand...

15 spots when he was hired a month before signing day. Should be expected in my opinion. It isn't very rare to finish top 40 with 1 or 2 4 stars.
 

It's not an official commitment thread until someone says Claeys would have gotten this guy too...
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom