Online Now 888

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

On this Board 602
Record: 4947 (7/23/2012)

Online now 896
Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)

Boards ▾

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell and swap tickets

Reply

Signing Day Central

  • This post is for members of Lions247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial
    signature image signature image

    Follow me on Twitter @Lions247 sfitz@247Sports.com

    Sean Fitz

  • Sean, do you know why they "only" signed 12 guys out of 15 available slots? We all know every scholarship is precious now, and we also know there is no way to catch up next year with 18 signings. Did they keep those 3 scholarships in their back pocket, as a carrot to dangle in front of all of those walk-ons?

    JoePa_4_Ever

  • JoePa_4_Ever said...

    Sean, do you know why they "only" signed 12 guys out of 15 available slots? We all know every scholarship is precious now, and we also know there is no way to catch up next year with 18 signings. Did they keep those 3 scholarships in their back pocket, as a carrot to dangle in front of all of those walk-ons?

    Early Enrollees = way to catch up. PSU can sign 18 next year (should the spots open). Either way, those 3 spots WILL be filled next season. Suppose PSU signs 12 next year, 3 will be EE's and 9 regular, meaning that PSU will have 21 available the following year (6 EE's and 15 regular).

    signature image

    #DicedPineapples

    shavisimo2

  • JoePa_4_Ever said...

    Sean, do you know why they "only" signed 12 guys out of 15 available slots? We all know every scholarship is precious now, and we also know there is no way to catch up next year with 18 signings. Did they keep those 3 scholarships in their back pocket, as a carrot to dangle in front of all of those walk-ons?

    each year, early enrollee's can be back dated to count against the prior class. Like our 5 early enrollee's this year that counted towards 2012 class, we can take 3 next year that can be counted towards the 2013 class....thus we can take a total of 18 next year. We're given 15 scholarships per recruiting year (EE's count towards the prior recruiting year).

    PSU12

  • JoePa_4_Ever said...

    Sean, do you know why they "only" signed 12 guys out of 15 available slots? We all know every scholarship is precious now, and we also know there is no way to catch up next year with 18 signings. Did they keep those 3 scholarships in their back pocket, as a carrot to dangle in front of all of those walk-ons?

    It allows them to have 3 EE's next year that would count towards this year. Then we could take 18 recruits who have the benefit of another sanction free year during their time here.

    Plus the staff can probably pull in some better talent across the board as they will have been recruiting these kids for 2 years, with evidence of the staff's talent on and off the field.

    Edit: Apparently I was too slow roflmao

    This post was edited by PSUTodd217 on 2/6/2013 at 8:12 PM

    PSUTodd217

  • PSU12 said...

    each year, early enrollee's can be back dated to count against the prior class. Like our 5 early enrollee's this year that counted towards 2012 class, we can take 3 next year that can be counted towards the 2013 class....thus we can take a total of 18 next year. We're given 15 scholarships per recruiting year (EE's count towards the prior recruiting year).

    Okay, I see what you guys mean. But I'm wondering why he didn't just fill those 3 slots this year, and question whether he'll be able to get 3 better recruits next year than he could have gotten this year, coming off of a pretty good year for the team, and all of the Coach of the Year awards. I'm still optimistic going forward, but I think this was the optimum time to try to lure guys to the program.

    JoePa_4_Ever

  • JoePa_4_Ever said...

    Okay, I see what you guys mean. But I'm wondering why he didn't just fill those 3 slots this year, and question whether he'll be able to get 3 better recruits next year than he could have gotten this year, coming off of a pretty good year for the team, and all of the Coach of the Year awards. I'm still optimistic going forward, but I think this was the optimum time to try to lure guys to the program.

    Next year we only have about 7 open spots if we use those scholarships. If we pocket them, like BOB did, we now have 10 spots. BOB obviously believes he could fill those 3 with guys better than those who were almost offered. I'd tend to agree. 7 is such a small number, that the players you'd leave off would probably be pretty highly regarded.

    Notice, the guys we got after the sanctions were, for the most part, the lower ranked recruits. It's easier to sell the school with each passing year (further from the event, less years on the bowl ban). It's likely the average recruits we have a shot with improves slightly each year.

    signature image

    #DicedPineapples

    shavisimo2

  • JoePa_4_Ever said...

    Okay, I see what you guys mean. But I'm wondering why he didn't just fill those 3 slots this year, and question whether he'll be able to get 3 better recruits next year than he could have gotten this year, coming off of a pretty good year for the team, and all of the Coach of the Year awards. I'm still optimistic going forward, but I think this was the optimum time to try to lure guys to the program.

    The sanctions killed any chance at top recruits this class since most top recruits were off the board by the time BOB showed what he could do. In future classes, they know he was COTY, etc. when they start looking at schools, and the impact of the sanctions on their careers will be less severe by the year

    PSUTodd217

  • shavisimo2 said...

    Next year we only have about 7 open spots if we use those scholarships. If we pocket them, like BOB did, we now have 10 spots. BOB obviously believes he could fill those 3 with guys better than those who were almost offered. I'd tend to agree. 7 is such a small number, that the players you'd leave off would probably be pretty highly regarded.

    Notice, the guys we got after the sanctions were, for the most part, the lower ranked recruits. It's easier to sell the school with each passing year (further from the event, less years on the bowl ban). It's likely the average recruits we have a shot with improves slightly each year.

    Good points. But waiting longer is also a risk. What if the young guys can't fill the large shoes of the great senior players - and just as important - leaders we just lost? What if our lack of depth is exposed due to injuries? What if the QB spot really struggles? What if we have more coaching losses (realizing many are glad that Roof is gone, but dreading losing LJ or Vandy or MacW)? Just playing devil's advocate and doing some risk analysis. ;-) Seems O'Brien is a gamblin' man...

    JoePa_4_Ever

  • JoePa_4_Ever said...

    Good points. But waiting longer is also a risk. What if the young guys can't fill the large shoes of the great senior players - and just as important - leaders we just lost? What if our lack of depth is exposed due to injuries? What if the QB spot really struggles? What if we have more coaching losses (realizing many are glad that Roof is gone, but dreading losing LJ or Vandy or MacW)? Just playing devil's advocate and doing some risk analysis. ;-) Seems O'Brien is a gamblin' man...

    I'd say its a bigger risk to take iffy recruits this year and gamble that they will turn out to be gems

    PSUTodd217

  • PSUTodd217 said...

    I'd say its a bigger risk to take iffy recruits this year and gamble that they will turn out to be gems

    This is true. Especially when the Big Ten honors 4 year schollies. Plus, you want some spacing throughout the sanctions. If we loaded up all 20-21 kids this class, there would be a sizable gap in 2017-2018 since we can only can 15 players.

    pennstate2012

  • JoePa_4_Ever said...

    Good points. But waiting longer is also a risk. What if the young guys can't fill the large shoes of the great senior players - and just as important - leaders we just lost? What if our lack of depth is exposed due to injuries? What if the QB spot really struggles? What if we have more coaching losses (realizing many are glad that Roof is gone, but dreading losing LJ or Vandy or MacW)? Just playing devil's advocate and doing some risk analysis. ;-) Seems O'Brien is a gamblin' man...

    There are going to be major depth issues regardless. 65 ships is just incredibly challenging. I'd rather save ships for better players when the depth issues will exist no matter what. It's actually not really a gamble. Getting the best pieces is much much more important than hitting the number every year IMO.

    Put it this way, if we use those three ships, they probably go to Clay (RB going to Kent State; very good in high school, but no major offers and very lightly recruited), a LB who is a good player, but not likely to do too much and maybe another DT who didn't have many offers.

    I would guess the chances that they land 3 better prospects in those slots next year is pretty high, and it appears BOB agrees. It's not too much of a gamble when you really look into it, unless BOB thinks he won't have much success in the next class.

    signature image

    #DicedPineapples

    shavisimo2

  • PSUTodd217 said...

    I'd say its a bigger risk to take iffy recruits this year and gamble that they will turn out to be gems

    I agree with the recruits we really had a chance at landing were probably a higher risk than those that will be out there next year.

    signature image

    'Respect All Fear None."

    mezzman99