In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1148
Online now 1268 Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)
Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game
Buy, sell and swap tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
What are are top ten needs by position for next years class:
1, 10 Scholarships Available
2, No career ending injuries or transfers between now and close of 2014 Recruiting (since speculation is just that, and if we lose a player early in eligibility we will likely need to backfill with another recruit at position anyway given dwindling depth with 65 scholarships)
3. No more recruits in 2013; All sign except Walton
Remember, only 10 slots. Anything you add as a need is at the expense of another position noted:
3. CB (until one of the multiples recruited the last two years are proven ...)
5. OT (2d)
6. RB (Allen)
10. WR or DE (first 5* talent that commits)
Can't have any "misses."
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by NittanyTerp 15 months ago
We need more than one Center/Guard, we can't even field a two-deep in 2014 as it stands.
Hartman (maybe OT)
Alosi (maybe OT)
One will be fine. The need is for 2 OTs. Taller edge types. That is where the depth is scary. NOT on the interior.
WE ARE! And we will always be...
Also, I expect that number to increase to 12-13 hopefully... I can see a couple guys not coming back for their senior year. Hopefully... The 2014 class is stacked.
--You can much more easily take a kid who can play at OT and slide him down, therefore it is more crucial that we focus on OT types in this class. If we take two OL, they should probably both have at least some chance at ending up at OT (this would include a player like Quenton Nelson). If we take three, that's when more of your "pure" IOL comes into play. I think we need three either way, but if it sticks at 10 we may only get to take two judging by early forecasts.
--We will have "misses", that is inevitable. We have to hope other players and schemes will be able to cover that. Misses are recruiting.
--Five star talent likely isn't happening this year. I am optimistice we'll be thoroughly full of high three and four star guys, but it will be another year or so before we get to truly elite recruits, imo. That's great considering the hand we have been dealt.
As for needs, this is what I have (after SRs leave) with the numbers reflecting a 65 man roster:
RB: Even (w/Allen)
WR: Plus One
TE: Minus One
OL: Minus Three
DL: Plus Two (even at DT, plus two at DE)
LB: Minus Three
DB: Minus Four
That can/will change with 5th year guys and the NFL. It also changes with the quality of player we are talking about. And how bulk is at the positions. For example we got a lot of RS FR DTs. Numbers-wise we look ok there, but we have pretty much no experience there right now. Its also a spot that can flame out, and a spot where our best recruiter is. So it could really float depending on how this season goes, what LJ wants, and what recruits are really interested.
Psu aint Alabama so there will be misses.
Psu to stay competitive needs to land 2 stud DLS and continue ti land elite OL. Psu needs talent and size up front. But with only 10 schollies this can get ugly. Psu also needs a stud cover corner and safety.
I'm pretty sure we get 15 guys, not 10.
But we only have room for 10 because of the 65 man limit that will start in 2014.
But aren't we down to 75 this year, so that would allow 15 recruits next year with attrition? If not, my mistake.
We have 55 guys set to be on scholarship in 2014.
We can only have 65 on the roster in 2014.
Total Ships Allowed - Obligated Scholarships = Open Scholarships
10 Open Scholarships
1 Has been taken (Mark Allen)
Hahaha, I understand the math, I just had the wrong numbers for the equation. I thought we were going to be under by 15 ships for some reason. Thanks for the clarification though.
It's times like these where I'm hoping we can get an injunction on the sanctions and hope they can be removed through a court ruling.
I hope Emmert has blue balls for the rest of his life.
I was talking to a buddy of mine that knows a guy in antitrust who knows the judges in the area. Word is that the fed judges that could be assigned all pretty much have had someone in their ear telling them of the seriousness of this and not to pussy foot around... So the timeline that he said is that NCAA has to respond around March, the judge would rule on the (NCAA's) motion for summary judgment in early summer (maybe even late May) and then (if we get the result we want and the judge says we have standing) negotiations would be swift, because as he, the antitrust attorney and countless articles where LAWYERS chime in say that if the judge rules that we have standing, discovery could be ugly for the NCAA. So we may just have a decision with plenty of time before signing day... I know that you prepare for the worst (10 schollys), but that was encouraging and made my day.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by rmj147 15 months ago
What does this even mean? Alabama doesn't have busts?
“We need to keep this (expletive) together,” Mauti and Zordich to Hill
It means he's new-era and you should tune him out... He is a troll
Hypothetically it gets past the NCAA's request for dismissal, the NCAA negotiates, what is the position of PA?
I'm an all in type, so I would say hold out to get all the sanctions reversed and get a few million for inconvenience of 2012 season. But what does PA negotiate to? One year is done, all other sanctions vanish and forget the 60 million? To me anything less is a win for the NCAA and if PA doesn't go the full monty then it gives legs to the NCAA acting on criminal matters in the future. I believe the case has as much to do with precedence as it does the sanctions. Both are extremely important, imo.
Can we please not turn this into a dream thread of vanishing sanctions? We all hope and wish they'd be gone to some extent, but we need to let them play out. Especially in another thread.
Keep this one for discussing the ten (for now) spots we have open for RY14.
Very true... It's tough. I dunno. That's a tough call. They will need to decide that, and the firm that Corbett hired is legit. But regardless, we will be in a lot better position even if we get 75 schollys... I would imagine the lawyers that Corbett has on his side would play hard ball and get a great deal. Another thing my buddy told me to consider and remember is the former Senator that is over-seeing what we are doing. He has consistently said that we are "doing excellent with regard to compliance, a phenomenal job." If the judge rules against MSJ, the NCAA can save face and avoid court by trying to "negotiate" outside of court and say: "According to Senator whatever his name is, PSU has been outstanding, we are revisiting the sanctions and reducing them." Then the ball is in Corbett's court. He's technically the client. Does he take the reduction as a win and move on, or does he proceed with the case, and go for the "jugular" as it were after the NCAA takes a weak stance. Just different scenerios to think about... Purely hypothetical, but gets you thinking. Everything hinges on the fed judge assigned, but word from his antitrust guy (who is a baller in his own right) things look very, very good for us no matter what. We appear to have standing. I don't want to get my hopes up too high, but I am cautiously optimistic. But, in the mean time, we discuss limited schollys and how best to approach this numbers game. Just wanted to throw some things to get your mind racing after talking antitrust with my boy. Certainly going to be something to watch going into the early summer.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports