ADVERTISEMENT

Number 12 on board (in case you blinked)

It'll be interesting to see two things going forward.

  • How many of our 2 stars get upgraded to 3
  • How many of these players sign their LOI with Purdue once plan A and B don't work out for the bigger fish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PurduePeteBsie87
Would love to see our next KY verbal to be Traynor, Moore or Dingle.

If recruits want to be a part of the revival, they better verbal quickly to assure a spot. I think we can say for sure that the majority of this class will be wrapped up before the season starts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: boilerbusdriver
Would love to see our next KY verbal to be Traynor, Moore or Dingle.

If recruits want to be a part of the revival, they better verbal quickly to assure a spot. I think we can say for sure that the majority of this class will be wrapped up before the season starts.

I hope we can land all 3. Perhaps hopeful thinking, but I like our odds on at least two of them. One article by a Kentucky reporter said that he thought Moore may end up a Boilermaker in the end because he could fit in early in Brohm's offense. I hope so! As a former KY HS football coach, I love to see the state being heavily recruited by Brohm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ITSC-Ret
Hammer and Rails has an interesting analysis of this class so far compared to the last 10 years. We've never been so successful this early in recruiting and it is easily already the second best class in a decade.
 
Hammer and Rails has an interesting analysis of this class so far compared to the last 10 years. We've never been so successful this early in recruiting and it is easily already the second best class in a decade.

Second best overall? Or just thus far into the recruiting calender?

Overall, Hope had 3 classes that were better.
 
Um. Ok. Here's the gist. No class had as many commitments as this class at this point in time (and it's not close). Only one class - 2012 - finished higher than this class is currently ranked.

Rankings are skewed by volume. Look at average stars. Hopes last 3 and hazells first (which had a lot of hopes recruits) had a higher star average
 
Rankings are skewed by volume. Look at average stars. Hopes last 3 and hazells first (which had a lot of hopes recruits) had a higher star average
Let's see when this class is complete. Fact is we've never had more kids more anxious to sign on with our staff in the last decade. I think that's meaningful and a harbinger of good things to come.
 
Let's see when this class is complete. Fact is we've never had more kids more anxious to sign on with our staff in the last decade. I think that's meaningful and a harbinger of good things to come.

I don't disagree, but the stat you mentioned was skewed. That was my point
 
  • Like
Reactions: BoilerBulldog
Ridiculous to try to compare this class to others at this point. I don't even like to rate them on signing day. The truth is we won't know for a few years how good the class is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ITSC-Ret
I don't disagree, but the stat you mentioned was skewed. That was my point

I read the post the other day. It was about the time it took to get to 11 commits, but was based off of the post signing day recruit list. Definitely skewed, but it will be nice as something to look back to and compare in February once everything is locked up. That's more the value I see to that post.
 
I hope we can land all 3. Perhaps hopeful thinking, but I like our odds on at least two of them. One article by a Kentucky reporter said that he thought Moore may end up a Boilermaker in the end because he could fit in early in Brohm's offense. I hope so! As a former KY HS football coach, I love to see the state being heavily recruited by Brohm.
It would have been great to get him, but Moore has given his verbal to Texas today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: boilerbusdriver
The early signing period is exactly what PURDUE needs to lock up their commits. And if anyone who is committed doesn't sign, we should move on.
What happens if a large chunk of the verbals don't bite on the early signing period? What if that is the norm for cfb? I don't think anyone knows what the real impact of this change will be, and I could see a lot of recruits holding out for February if they feel they are in a low risk/high reward position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheBoris
I think there's two things you'll get out of the early signing period. 1) the coaches will know who's "committed" and those who might be fishing for other offers. 2) vice versa, commits will be able to see sooner rather than later if there's going to be a spot for them at schools they were holding out for which will help their decision process also
 
What happens if a large chunk of the verbals don't bite on the early signing period? What if that is the norm for cfb? I don't think anyone knows what the real impact of this change will be, and I could see a lot of recruits holding out for February if they feel they are in a low risk/high reward position.
You didn't read my entire statement. It says if the early commits don't sign early, we move on.
 
You didn't read my entire statement. It says if the early commits don't sign early, we move on.
No, I read it. Just looking for clarification/discussion, because I don't believe the staff (or most any staff) can simply "move on" from verbally committed recruits if there are a significant number who choose to wait til February to make it official. It will be interesting to see if a December LOI becomes the norm or the exception, but I don't think the number of recruits wishing to take their time (the same amount of time previous classes had to sign a LOI) will be so minuscule that coaches can afford to write them all off without being at a disadvantage. Maybe I am not drawing enough distinction between verbal commits and uncommitted recruits, but I don't believe there is much of a difference anymore. Until they sign the paper they are in play and assumed to be waiting on a better offer.
 
No, I read it. Just looking for clarification/discussion, because I don't believe the staff (or most any staff) can simply "move on" from verbally committed recruits if there are a significant number who choose to wait til February to make it official. It will be interesting to see if a December LOI becomes the norm or the exception, but I don't think the number of recruits wishing to take their time (the same amount of time previous classes had to sign a LOI) will be so minuscule that coaches can afford to write them all off without being at a disadvantage. Maybe I am not drawing enough distinction between verbal commits and uncommitted recruits, but I don't believe there is much of a difference anymore. Until they sign the paper they are in play and assumed to be waiting on a better offer.
If the staff isn't stressing that early commits are expected to sign early, then shame on them. We should rarely accept an early commit who won't sign early.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zaphod_B
What happens if a large chunk of the verbals don't bite on the early signing period? What if that is the norm for cfb? I don't think anyone knows what the real impact of this change will be, and I could see a lot of recruits holding out for February if they feel they are in a low risk/high reward position.
BINGO. This early signing period will be a sea change for football recruiting. Schools like Tennessee that usually get 35 commits and leave ten of them with their Johnsons in their hands on signing day won't be able to pull that crap anymore. This early signing day will actually be "Come To Jesus Day".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zaphod_B
ADVERTISEMENT