Signing day is here, Wyo Football has your info

[J-Rod]

Pretending that the recruiting class rankings don't matter is so foolish.

Everyone who tries to prove how meaningless these classes are always brings up the exception to the rule. Andrew Wingard this Brett Smith that. Whatever. Look at the rest of our classes the last 5 seasons, and look at our results the last 5 years.
Look at Bama and Florida States classes and their results.

Brett Smith was ranked in the Top 70 at his position, easily one of the highest rated recruits in recent times.

[WestWYOPoke]

Holy poop guys....some of you will complain just to complain. Some of our best players have been some of our worst ranked players. Andrew Wingard wasn't recruited by anyone except us and North Dakota. Just because a player doesn't have a bunch of stars next to their names you think they automatically suck. Drama queens.

Go Pokes!!

Please, rankings do matter, show me a team that ranks at the bottom of the recruiting wars that wins. .... You can't.

Wisconsin...Class rankings in Big Ten - 2011: 8th, 2012: 10th, 2013: 13th.

How did they fare 2 years after each class - 2013: 3rd (22 nationally), 2014: 2nd (13 nationally), 2015: tied for 4th (21st nationally).

Similar results could be found for Duke, Texas A&M, Missouri, Arizona state, Baylor and Ole Miss (to a lesser extent).

Yes, rankings are important. But Wisconsin is a great example of a program that brings in guys and develops them into NFL caliber players. Sure you can win with the best recruits, but it doesn't mean you absolutely can't win with "underrated" recruits.

According to 247 sports composite recruiting average from 2012-2015.

Texas A&M-9
Ole Miss-20
Baylor-26
ASU-30
Missouri -34
Wisconsin -44
Duke-58

Wyoming recruiting average is 115, last in the MWC. Boise St for comparison is sitting at 57.
If you can't see the correlation I can't help you.

Oh believe me, I'm very aware of the correlation. However you smugly challenged the board to find a team that finishes at the bottom of recruiting yet still wins and I provided several.

[Cuttslam]

Pretending that the recruiting class rankings don't matter is so foolish.

Everyone who tries to prove how meaningless these classes are always brings up the exception to the rule. Andrew Wingard this Brett Smith that. Whatever. Look at the rest of our classes the last 5 seasons, and look at our results the last 5 years.
Look at Bama and Florida States classes and their results.

Brett Smith was ranked in the Top 70 at his position, easily one of the highest rated recruits in recent times.

Top 70 gets you these types of offers.

The 6-foot-2, 200-pound Smith has received scholarship offers from San Jose State, Wyoming, New Mexico State, Portland State and Eastern Washington. Not exactly world beaters.

[Cuttslam]

Holy poop guys....some of you will complain just to complain. Some of our best players have been some of our worst ranked players. Andrew Wingard wasn't recruited by anyone except us and North Dakota. Just because a player doesn't have a bunch of stars next to their names you think they automatically suck. Drama queens.

Go Pokes!!

Please, rankings do matter, show me a team that ranks at the bottom of the recruiting wars that wins. .... You can't.

Wisconsin...Class rankings in Big Ten - 2011: 8th, 2012: 10th, 2013: 13th.

How did they fare 2 years after each class - 2013: 3rd (22 nationally), 2014: 2nd (13 nationally), 2015: tied for 4th (21st nationally).

Similar results could be found for Duke, Texas A&M, Missouri, Arizona state, Baylor and Ole Miss (to a lesser extent).

Yes, rankings are important. But Wisconsin is a great example of a program that brings in guys and develops them into NFL caliber players. Sure you can win with the best recruits, but it doesn't mean you absolutely can't win with "underrated" recruits.

According to 247 sports composite recruiting average from 2012-2015.

Texas A&M-9
Ole Miss-20
Baylor-26
ASU-30
Missouri -34
Wisconsin -44
Duke-58

Wyoming recruiting average is 115, last in the MWC. Boise St for comparison is sitting at 57.
If you can't see the correlation I can't help you.

Oh believe me, I'm very aware of the correlation. However you smugly challenged the board to find a team that finishes at the bottom of recruiting yet still wins and I provided several.

You provided ZERO.

[SDPokeFan]

Well unless the coaching staff found about 18 "diamonds in the rough" this class isn't looking so hot. And I guess they are going to pull people out of the stands to play on the defensive line.

[LawPoke]

According to a contact close to the team, the staff is very happy with the class. This said, Bohl and crew are on the clock...they have to show marked improvement next year and then even more the next year.

[BeaverPoke]

Just watched the press conference and call me crazy, but I think Bohl can do it. I bet there's more than a few players in this class.

You're crazy.

[BeaverPoke]

According to a contact close to the team, the staff is very happy with the class. This said, Bohl and crew are on the clock...they have to show marked improvement next year and then even more the next year.

On the clock? For what? There's a process going on here and we are clearly going to be competing for the playoffs before too long. Let's ride this out. Patience! It isn't until year 7 we should expect to see real results.

[SlowPoke]

It takes about 3+ years to develop a strong base for a recruiting class. This was year 2 under Bohl's program. Recruiting starts in the sophomore/junior year of high school, thus the first true fully developed recruiting class will be next year's crop at the earliest. Year 4 class will be the true base product of the current coaching staff.

[calpoke25]

Holy poop guys....some of you will complain just to complain. Some of our best players have been some of our worst ranked players. Andrew Wingard wasn't recruited by anyone except us and North Dakota. Just because a player doesn't have a bunch of stars next to their names you think they automatically suck. Drama queens.

Go Pokes!!

Please, rankings do matter, show me a team that ranks at the bottom of the recruiting wars that wins. .... You can't.

There are a lot of question about the legitamacy of the ranking sites. Evidence they are modifying rankings by the first schools offering. Alabama offers first, the 3 star goes to 4. Fcs school offers, the 3 star goes to 2. If that's the case, then rankings are more a reflection of the schools offering, than a reflection of the recruits. The ranking sites then look like geniuses - their highest ranks align with the best schools.

But doesn't that also kind of make sense? If Alabama offers a kid that obviously indicates that Alabama feels the kid is worth a scholarship. If Alabama feels a kid is worth a scholarship, wouldn't it stand to reason that that kid should probably be a pretty damn good player? It's no guarantee obviously but still, it makes perfect sense to me. What better way to judge a kid than by the schools who are after him?

Well then what do you say about the likes of Carson Wentz? The dude had 0 stars, went to North Dakota State, and is going to be a top 5 pick in the draft? The thing is, there is more talent out there now than ever and not every big school is going to find them, leaving this way to rank recruits as flawed. There is a reason they play the game instead of doing it as a ranking of stars. I mean if you need more evidence, go look at this. http://www.sbnation.com/college-footbal ... ng-ratings

To follow this point up, I would argue that the top 5-10 players on Wyoming are probably just as good as Boises top 5-10 players. Every team has their stars. The difference is as you start going down from there the talent gap keeps getting wider and wider, and that is where the game is won. You are Trying to ensure that your 50th best player is better than the other teams 50th best player, that your 25th best player is better than their 25th best player and so on. Where we are right now though is in a situation where it feels like Boises 80th best player is probably better than our 40th best player, and that's why we are getting murdered. Hopefully this class is the first step towards rectifying that.

[LanderPoke]

It takes about 3+ years to develop a strong base for a recruiting class. This was year 2 under Bohl's program. Recruiting starts in the sophomore/junior year of high school, thus the first true fully developed recruiting class will be next year's crop at the earliest. Year 4 class will be the true base product of the current coaching staff.

No matter what Beaver says we have GOT to give Bohl time. Got to. Bohl (or any coach that was thrown into this situation) needs at least 5 years to turn it around.

[LanderPoke]

Just watched the press conference and call me crazy, but I think Bohl can do it. I bet there's more than a few players in this class.

You're crazy.

Why? I am willing to bet there's at least 5-6 in this class that are truly worthy MWC level players. The question is are there 9-10. Can Bohl do this year after year or start winning recruiting battles? It remains to be seen.

[JimmyDimes]

Pretending that the recruiting class rankings don't matter is so foolish.

Everyone who tries to prove how meaningless these classes are always brings up the exception to the rule. Andrew Wingard this Brett Smith that. Whatever. Look at the rest of our classes the last 5 seasons, and look at our results the last 5 years.
Look at Bama and Florida States classes and their results.

Going back 5 years is completely irrelevant. Why? Because there is a reason DC was fired. That, and the fact that Bohl changed both offense and defensive schemes. Bohl is working his way out of the mess he inherited. He's had a total of 2 1/2 classes.....making his first year recruits true sophomores if they played. That list includes the likes of Brian Hill (not highly recruited), Ryan Cummings (not highly recruited), Van Maanen (not highly recruited), Priester (not highly recruited), etc. And let's not forget about all the freshman who played in the secondary last year and all the linebackers who played out of position.

Both Alabama and Florida State are bad examples because they have had good coaching continuity.

I'm excited about this season because we get key players back from injury (Allen and Gentry) and we return all but 5 starters.

[LawPoke]

According to a contact close to the team, the staff is very happy with the class. This said, Bohl and crew are on the clock...they have to show marked improvement next year and then even more the next year.

On the clock? For what? There's a process going on here and we are clearly going to be competing for the playoffs before too long. Let's ride this out. Patience! It isn't until year 7 we should expect to see real results.

To win. Bohl himself told me that he needed four years to get to a solid program and win. I am happy to be patient, and was only referring to Bohl's own clock.

[wiley wapiti]

It takes about 3+ years to develop a strong base for a recruiting class. This was year 2 under Bohl's program. Recruiting starts in the sophomore/junior year of high school, thus the first true fully developed recruiting class will be next year's crop at the earliest. Year 4 class will be the true base product of the current coaching staff.

No matter what Beaver says we have GOT to give Bohl time. Got to. Bohl (or any coach that was thrown into this situation) needs at least 5 years to turn it around.

Beaver is definitely one of them, but there are others....absolutely NO IDEA how to build a tradition of winning. They only see stars and scoreboards, it will take 5-6 years and funding for assistant coaches for ANY coach to build a winning tradition here at Wyoming. If you think differently, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, plain and simple. These people are ignorant on the highest level, and need to move on to schools in the SEC. Those are the programs you people need to be fans of because UW will NEVER be on that level. Stop comparing us to Those schools with unlimited funds and associated with p5 conferenses.

Instead of looking at stars with this class, maybe we should be looking at who we are recruiting against for the players we got. Take a look back a few years and compare. Trust me, we are getting more recruits that bigger schools are going after than 2 years ago. 2 years ago, we were recruiting against Black Hills State for gad sakes. Its getting better, just give it time......

Give Bohl the resources and time, he will build a winner at UW, fire him after this year and we will be starting that 5-6 year building period all over again, no matter who we hire.

[SDPokeFan]

It takes about 3+ years to develop a strong base for a recruiting class. This was year 2 under Bohl's program. Recruiting starts in the sophomore/junior year of high school, thus the first true fully developed recruiting class will be next year's crop at the earliest. Year 4 class will be the true base product of the current coaching staff.

No matter what Beaver says we have GOT to give Bohl time. Got to. Bohl (or any coach that was thrown into this situation) needs at least 5 years to turn it around.

Beaver is definitely one of them, but there are others....absolutely NO IDEA how to build a tradition of winning. They only see stars and scoreboards, it will take 5-6 years and funding for assistant coaches for ANY coach to build a winning tradition here at Wyoming. If you think differently, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, plain and simple. These people are ignorant on the highest level, and need to move on to schools in the SEC. Those are the programs you people need to be fans of because UW will NEVER be on that level. Stop comparing us to Those schools with unlimited funds and associated with p5 conferenses.

Instead of looking at stars with this class, maybe we should be looking at who we are recruiting against for the players we got. Take a look back a few years and compare. Trust me, we are getting more recruits that bigger schools are going after than 2 years ago. 2 years ago, we were recruiting against Black Hills State for gad sakes. Its getting better, just give it time......

Give Bohl the resources and time, he will build a winner at UW, fire him after this year and we will be starting that 5-6 year building period all over again, no matter who we hire.

Coach Bohl, it's cool you use this message board, but you can do better than Wiley Wapiti as a user name!

[NebraskaCowboy]

Just watched the press conference and call me crazy, but I think Bohl can do it. I bet there's more than a few players in this class.

You're crazy.

Why? I am willing to bet there's at least 5-6 in this class that are truly worthy MWC level players. The question is are there 9-10. Can Bohl do this year after year or start winning recruiting battles? It remains to be seen.

Personally, I agree 110% with LanderPoke. This class has some pretty good top end guys that aren't getting the respect they deserve. I saw where Chandler Garrett had Memphis and Rutgers wanting him, Dustin Weeks had Wisconsin wanting him, and Jace Webb had Oklahoma State after him and those are the only ones that got mentioned. I would almost bet on it that the talent in this class is deeper than a lot of you expect and that you are just looking for something to whine about. I remember two signing days ago I was going through high school recruits hudl films and thought "Brian Hill is going to be a stud" before he played a day as a Cowboy. The other thing that stood out is Bohl made the comment about how redshirting guys avoids their least productive year as a freshman and gives them their most as a 5th year senior. So a lot of you should stop checking recruiting rankings, go watch the film yourself, and relax. And if that is too much work, take your whining somewhere else.

[LanderPoke]

The safety Josh Boyd had some strong interest late. Bohl mentioned that a PAC school would ambulance chase them around and offer all the kids that we offered. I really think Bohl and Co. have an unusual eye for talent (at least that's what I tell myself so I can sleep at night).

[JimmyDimes]

The safety Josh Boyd had some strong interest late. Bohl mentioned that a PAC school would ambulance chase them around and offer all the kids that we offered. I really think Bohl and Co. have an unusual eye for talent (at least that's what I tell myself so I can sleep at night).

Probably Oregon State.

[WestWYOPoke]

Holy poop guys....some of you will complain just to complain. Some of our best players have been some of our worst ranked players. Andrew Wingard wasn't recruited by anyone except us and North Dakota. Just because a player doesn't have a bunch of stars next to their names you think they automatically suck. Drama queens.

Go Pokes!!

Please, rankings do matter, show me a team that ranks at the bottom of the recruiting wars that wins. .... You can't.

Wisconsin...Class rankings in Big Ten - 2011: 8th, 2012: 10th, 2013: 13th.

How did they fare 2 years after each class - 2013: 3rd (22 nationally), 2014: 2nd (13 nationally), 2015: tied for 4th (21st nationally).

Similar results could be found for Duke, Texas A&M, Missouri, Arizona state, Baylor and Ole Miss (to a lesser extent).

Yes, rankings are important. But Wisconsin is a great example of a program that brings in guys and develops them into NFL caliber players. Sure you can win with the best recruits, but it doesn't mean you absolutely can't win with "underrated" recruits.

According to 247 sports composite recruiting average from 2012-2015.

Texas A&M-9
Ole Miss-20
Baylor-26
ASU-30
Missouri -34
Wisconsin -44
Duke-58

Wyoming recruiting average is 115, last in the MWC. Boise St for comparison is sitting at 57.
If you can't see the correlation I can't help you.

Oh believe me, I'm very aware of the correlation. However you smugly challenged the board to find a team that finishes at the bottom of recruiting yet still wins and I provided several.

You provided ZERO.

I provided you several. Wisconsin is a great example. Duke and Missouri are also examples of what I'm talking about. No they don't recruit in the 100's nationally, but they consistently recruit in the bottom half of their conference and finish in the top half.

"show me a team that ranks at the bottom of the recruiting wars that wins."

There ya go...at least 3 teams that are at the bottom of the wars in their conference, yet are contenders in their conference.