#11 commitment
- Cheerleader
- Coach Level
- Posts: 2447
- Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 11:22 am
- Location: Destin, FL
Re: #11 commitment
I think one of the biggest advantages of Navy and Army is that they are fully supported by the entire student body and faculty. They hear every day how important they are and their entire training is geared towards motivation and team effort. If we had that kind of attention and morale boosting, I think we would be better, too.
- TUPF
- Emerald Circle
- Posts: 21455
- Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
- Location: Maryland Eastern Shore & sometimes Philly
Re: #11 commitment
I think Navy is a perfect example of a program whose sum is greater than its individual parts. Army has similar restrictions on who they can recruit and has been nowhere near as successful recently.
I think Roller and I are the only ones here who have received appointments to Annapolis so I'll say this about NAPS, the Naval Academy Prep School. It would be simple to say that Navy uses NAPS to stockpile athletes, but it's not that simple. NAPS was established long ago as a gap year between high school and the Academy for applicants who are close, but not quite there academically. Generally it's for kids who have shown much promise to be future naval officers but for whatever reason, their academics are not quite up to snuff. They don't take basket cases. If you are a stud football player but can't read, you are not getting into NAPS. Many, but not all NAPS enrollees enter USNA the next year.
As for ml's argument he is also right. The Navy athletes for the most part are selected and coached up into a well oiled system that has shown great success for 15 years. If Fritz can establish the same buy in and track record at Tulane I'd love for him to do the same but at least for the first few years, the skills of the individual recruits must be better than the AAC median.
I think Roller and I are the only ones here who have received appointments to Annapolis so I'll say this about NAPS, the Naval Academy Prep School. It would be simple to say that Navy uses NAPS to stockpile athletes, but it's not that simple. NAPS was established long ago as a gap year between high school and the Academy for applicants who are close, but not quite there academically. Generally it's for kids who have shown much promise to be future naval officers but for whatever reason, their academics are not quite up to snuff. They don't take basket cases. If you are a stud football player but can't read, you are not getting into NAPS. Many, but not all NAPS enrollees enter USNA the next year.
As for ml's argument he is also right. The Navy athletes for the most part are selected and coached up into a well oiled system that has shown great success for 15 years. If Fritz can establish the same buy in and track record at Tulane I'd love for him to do the same but at least for the first few years, the skills of the individual recruits must be better than the AAC median.
Fan since 1974 living in Phelps seeing the upper bowl of Tulane Stadium
- long green
- Cornerstone
- Posts: 29134
- Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 10:34 am
- Location: New Orleans
Re: #11 commitment
In general we should aspire to recruit at a higher level than Navy. But if there is one position where we should find it encouraging to snag a guy with a Navy offer, it's QB (as long as we're running this sort of offense).
And may our enemies, if they exist, be unconscious of our purpose. - From The Lady Vanishes
Re: #11 commitment
Yes, that's exactly it. Did you even read what I wrote? They are literally last in the conference in recruiting every year. The reason they win is not because they have some magic ability to spot the diamond in the rough, it's because they sign 50-60 kids per year. If 15% of them turn out to be really good players, that's 8 or 9 players...if 15% of our class hits, that's 3 players. Multiply that over 4-5 years and they wind up with a lot more good players than we would if we recruited the same.windywave wrote:We can't win those types of recruits but Navy can go to a bowl 13 of 15 yeara? Did you even read what you wrote?ml wave wrote:At the risk of repeating myself, it's great that Navy has been successful. They have some advantages that allow them to sign and develop under-recruited kids that we do not have. That's not a complaint, they certainly have a lot of disadvantages which is why they're signing under-recruited kids in the first place. You obviously don't follow recruiting, so I'll put this another way for you...for each of the last three years, Navy has (by far) the worst recruiting rankings in the AAC. We cannot win with those types of recruits.
If you think our admissions office is restrictive they have nothing on Navy. I'd posit over 95% of AAC football players couldn't get in with or without the prep school.
I will reiterate that I will take a QB they want because they will fit in our system and probably excel. DL not so much but on a matter of principle I object to your position as not founded in fact i.e. Navy wins football games.
Re: #11 commitment
You're demonstrating a lack of understanding of how the prep school works and Navy athletics as a whole. Can you just trust me that the prep school is not a warehouse for athletesml wave wrote:Yes, that's exactly it. Did you even read what I wrote? They are literally last in the conference in recruiting every year. The reason they win is not because they have some magic ability to spot the diamond in the rough, it's because they sign 50-60 kids per year. If 15% of them turn out to be really good players, that's 8 or 9 players...if 15% of our class hits, that's 3 players. Multiply that over 4-5 years and they wind up with a lot more good players than we would if we recruited the same.windywave wrote:We can't win those types of recruits but Navy can go to a bowl 13 of 15 yeara? Did you even read what you wrote?ml wave wrote:At the risk of repeating myself, it's great that Navy has been successful. They have some advantages that allow them to sign and develop under-recruited kids that we do not have. That's not a complaint, they certainly have a lot of disadvantages which is why they're signing under-recruited kids in the first place. You obviously don't follow recruiting, so I'll put this another way for you...for each of the last three years, Navy has (by far) the worst recruiting rankings in the AAC. We cannot win with those types of recruits.
If you think our admissions office is restrictive they have nothing on Navy. I'd posit over 95% of AAC football players couldn't get in with or without the prep school.
I will reiterate that I will take a QB they want because they will fit in our system and probably excel. DL not so much but on a matter of principle I object to your position as not founded in fact i.e. Navy wins football games.
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
#cousins don't count
Re: #11 commitment
Please show me where I said that it was? Or, for the double bonus, please show me where I said anything about the prep school?windywave wrote:You're demonstrating a lack of understanding of how the prep school works and Navy athletics as a whole. Can you just trust me that the prep school is not a warehouse for athletesml wave wrote:Yes, that's exactly it. Did you even read what I wrote? They are literally last in the conference in recruiting every year. The reason they win is not because they have some magic ability to spot the diamond in the rough, it's because they sign 50-60 kids per year. If 15% of them turn out to be really good players, that's 8 or 9 players...if 15% of our class hits, that's 3 players. Multiply that over 4-5 years and they wind up with a lot more good players than we would if we recruited the same.windywave wrote:We can't win those types of recruits but Navy can go to a bowl 13 of 15 yeara? Did you even read what you wrote?ml wave wrote:At the risk of repeating myself, it's great that Navy has been successful. They have some advantages that allow them to sign and develop under-recruited kids that we do not have. That's not a complaint, they certainly have a lot of disadvantages which is why they're signing under-recruited kids in the first place. You obviously don't follow recruiting, so I'll put this another way for you...for each of the last three years, Navy has (by far) the worst recruiting rankings in the AAC. We cannot win with those types of recruits.
If you think our admissions office is restrictive they have nothing on Navy. I'd posit over 95% of AAC football players couldn't get in with or without the prep school.
I will reiterate that I will take a QB they want because they will fit in our system and probably excel. DL not so much but on a matter of principle I object to your position as not founded in fact i.e. Navy wins football games.