Two more "wavering" recruits

Class of 61 · Post by **Class of 61** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:24 pm

According to Scout.com, two more of BG's verbals are now listed as "soft"... DB from Cincy, and DE/DT from Indiana. Not sure, but neither Scout NOR Rivals lists Nicely any more.... from 16 tentative yesses down to 10...and guess what, UT has offered a couple of these kids...surprise, surprise.

daspollak · Post by **daspollak** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:16 pm

Its going to happen. These players developed relationships with the former coaches who recruited them. If they move elsewhere and offer them, of course they will consider it. If Coach C wants these kids he will be in contact with them and do everything possible (within the rules) to keep them. Hey if Toledo can't beat us, I guess they just want to be like us with our coaches and recruits. Maybe not this year, but next year will be a good sign of how well Coach C can recruit. I do hope we keep that DT, he had some size to him which our defense could definitely use.

Class of 61 · Post by **Class of 61** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:49 pm

daspollak wrote:Its going to happen. These players developed relationships with the former coaches who recruited them. If they move elsewhere and offer them, of course they will consider it. If Coach C wants these kids he will be in contact with them and do everything possible (within the rules) to keep them. Hey if Toledo can't beat us, I guess they just want to be like us with our coaches and recruits. Maybe not this year, but next year will be a good sign of how well Coach C can recruit. I do hope we keep that DT, he had some size to him which our defense could definitely use.

He's scheduled for what I would assume would be an "official" visit, along with the LB from Perrysburg, on Jan. 19.

factman · Post by **factman** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 3:22 pm

This is not a big deal. For any recruit we might lose, the new staff will have another recruit in the same situation from another school. Of course it would be great to have the best of both worlds, but we would probably lose a couple, even without the coaching change. BG had closer to 22 verbals, and is still on a lot of the better players around Ohio. I am looking for a very strong recruiting year.

daspollak · Post by **daspollak** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:09 pm

Besides we are in a better boat than Miami. They have no head coach and any potential recruit is dangling in the wind right now.

BGSU33 · Post by **BGSU33** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 7:05 pm

daspollak wrote:Besides we are in a better boat than Miami. They have no head coach and any potential recruit is dangling in the wind right now.

Let's go snatch up a few of Miami's verbals then....we all know all too well that no matter who they bring in to Oxford down there that they can play- because we sure as hell can't beat them no matter how good or bad their team is anymore. If you can't beat them, take them away!

cph2133 · Post by **cph2133** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:37 pm

It's been said on here before, but I am happy they're decommitting and reevaluating the situation. I'd rather them be committing to play for Clawson and his BG program than be leftovers who get here and may not be thrilled with the program.

That being said, I'm glad they're decommitting, but I hope after they reevaluate they decide to become falcons again.

Class of 61 · Post by **Class of 61** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:07 am

cph2133 wrote:It's been said on here before, but I am happy they're decommitting and reevaluating the situation. I'd rather them be committing to play for Clawson and his BG program than be leftovers who get here and may not be thrilled with the program.

That being said, I'm glad they're decommitting, but I hope after they reevaluate they decide to become falcons again.

Maybe the THREE kids of "ours" who visited Toledo this past week will follow thru on your wishes, but the transfer of BG coaches to UT will definitely have a radical effect for at least this year. BTW, UT seems to have "lost" one of their three commits too; someone's point about Miami , and now Ball St. for that matter, could lead to a radical swing of recruits to "new" schools by Feb.

NWLB · Post by **NWLB** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:33 am

Kids need to play where they are happy. It isn't fair to beat on recruits for waviering, nor really to expect otherwise.

In any case, I'm willing to compare recruiting lists of what GB had and what somebody coaching at Tenn. has.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:52 am

Exactly...these are 17 and 18 year old kids. Give them some room to make the biggest decision of their lives and respect the fact that they may see things differently than we do.

I guess that "gentleman's agreement" to not go after the recruits of another conference member goes out the window when there's a coaching change?

rocketfootball · Post by **rocketfootball** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 12:00 pm

Flipper wrote: I guess that "gentleman's agreement" to not go after the recruits of another conference member goes out the window when there's a coaching change?

What's this gentlemen's agreement? BG continued to recruit Erique Dozier after he committed to Toledo, and he eventually ended up committing to BG instead. Toledo kept recruiting Phillip Manley last year despite him committing to Miami. Miami kept recruiting Kenny Veal despite him committing to Toledo. Toledo got both Manley and Veal to sign. Akron continues to recruit kids from other MAC schools all the time.

HoustonFalcon · Post by **HoustonFalcon** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 12:25 pm

Football is a different recruiting animal all in it's own. You have all of these recruits that are verballing and being asked to make decisions before the season is over, and all of these coaching changes happen. If your a coach, you know what kid is a soft verbal, and what kid is absolutely not going to change their mind. I don't have a problem with a coach recruiting a kid that might not be all that sure with his decision. These kids can't sign until February, plenty of time for things to happen. If a coach contacts a kid and simply asks if he is sure School A is right for him, and that recruit says "Well, I'm comfortable with it", then I have no problem with that coach asking what the question is. BUT, if the kid say "Absolutely", then you need to back off.

NWLB · Post by **NWLB** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 12:27 pm

rocketfootball wrote:
Flipper wrote: I guess that "gentleman's agreement" to not go after the recruits of another conference member goes out the window when there's a coaching change?
What's this gentlemen's agreement? BG continued to recruit Erique Dozier after he committed to Toledo, and he eventually ended up committing to BG instead. Toledo kept recruiting Phillip Manley last year despite him committing to Miami. Miami kept recruiting Kenny Veal despite him committing to Toledo. Toledo got both Manley and Veal to sign. Akron continues to recruit kids from other MAC schools all the time.

Yeah, and really, who said there were gentlemen in Toledo?

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 1:40 pm

rocketfootball wrote:
Flipper wrote: I guess that "gentleman's agreement" to not go after the recruits of another conference member goes out the window when there's a coaching change?
What's this gentlemen's agreement? BG continued to recruit Erique Dozier after he committed to Toledo, and he eventually ended up committing to BG instead. Toledo kept recruiting Phillip Manley last year despite him committing to Miami. Miami kept recruiting Kenny Veal despite him committing to Toledo. Toledo got both Manley and Veal to sign. Akron continues to recruit kids from other MAC schools all the time.

There was a time when such things didn't happen...then again there was time when Michael Jackson was black, so who really knows...

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 1:52 pm

As long as the colleges can pull their offer, players should be able to pull their commit.