Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How many can we take in this class?
OL and DBs getting replenished
True.
Hope they add more LBs soon. Will only have Dawson and Bailey as upperclassman next year.
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.
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.
https://www.hammerandrails.com/2017/6/21/15845786/purdue-football-2018-recruiting-classSecond 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.Not giving it the clicks
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.
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.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.
I don't disagree, but the stat you mentioned was skewed. That was my point
It would have been great to get him, but Moore has given his verbal to Texas today.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.
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.Will be interesting to see if early signing period (Dec 20th) will help Purdue to retain their recruits.
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.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.
You didn't read my entire statement. It says if the early commits don't sign early, we 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.
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.You didn't read my entire statement. It says if the early commits don't sign early, we move on.
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.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.
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".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.