Now that the FRENCH business is out of the way---THIS IS THE GUY IMO----We lost lynch to acdemic fear---but THIS KID WOULD FILL THAT SPOT TERRIFICALLY----5 Star now on scout!--Rated no 7 DE--Lynch rated # 6

 

Stephan Tuitt & Ishaq Williams----have to like that

 

he is on campus having his official visit--by friday some tidbits may start to come out---

 

If there is such a thing as a MUST GET for a class--ISHAQ IS THE DEFINITION OF THAT!

 

i thought our odds were very sketchy with french but with ISHAQ i thing we are the TEAM TO BEAT!---they have the RED CARPET out for him---amir carlisle will be coming FRIDAY so he and Ishaq have one day together----the coaches NEED TO MAKE THE BIG PITCH HERE

 

GET US ISHAQ AND WE WILL ALL BE HAPPY---

 

Ishaq & Amir---these are two of our LIKLIEST COMMITS IMHO---

Make this weekend great for them and they can make it great for us soon!

 

i think Ishaq may have been seen on campus today but nothing else coming out yet--the fact that these two guys are HERE-- and have made these VISITS--is VERY VERY POSITIVE----

 

FINGERS CROSSED EVERYONE!

 

aloha's

Edited December 9, 201014 yr by hawaiiirish

On Rivals radio today--Mike Farrel gave his opinion on Ishaq and Huggins----From his sources --ND LEADS FOR ISHAQ _( this is not surprsiong to me,as i said we are the team to beat, i am really counting on this commit)-----What was surprising and may be very good news

 

Farrel says we are now TIED with RUTGERS for HUGGINS---we have been the one moving up---i think this translates into a GREAT SHOT AT BOTH

 

Ishaq & Savon--could we live with that!

 

aloha's

thanks for posting hawaii. Great news.

I agree. Getting both would be huge. If ND landed both, I could see both getting significantly playing time as true frosh. Frankly, if we land Huggins, I feel he'll immediately be Notre Dame's best/most talented back. He is the real deal.

Seems like Huggins is a case of football (ND) vs. friends/family/close to home (Rutgers). Can't really argue with him either way he chooses.

On Rivals radio today--Mike Farrel gave his opinion on Ishaq and Huggins----From his sources --ND LEADS FOR ISHAQ _( this is not surprsiong to me,as i said we are the team to beat, i am really counting on this commit)-----What was surprising and may be very good news

 

Farrel says we are now TIED with RUTGERS for HUGGINS---we have been the one moving up---i think this translates into a GREAT SHOT AT BOTH

 

Ishaq & Savon--could we live with that!

 

aloha's

2 five star kids committing to ND after the new year?

 

That'll be the day.

2 five star kids committing to ND after the new year?

 

That'll be the day.

 

 

5 stars on Scout / 4 stars on Rivals.

Edited December 10, 201014 yr by STL Irish

5 stars on Scout / 4 stars on Rivals.

I always go with Scout.........they usually rate us higher.

I always go with Scout.........they usually rate us higher.

 

Ratings are over rated. They miss more often than not.

Ratings are over rated. They miss more often than not.

 

Then how do you explain the last 9 national titles being won by the teams who are highest in the rankings?

Then how do you explain the last 9 national titles being won by the teams who are highest in the rankings?

 

 

Bingo! You can't ignore the facts. The perennial powers are also dominant in recruiting. No, the ratings aren't perfect, but they have been proven to be an increasingly accurate predictor of success.

Bingo! You can't ignore the facts. The perennial powers are also dominant in recruiting. No, the ratings aren't perfect, but they have been proven to be an increasingly accurate predictor of success.

 

right, saying that they are more often inaccurate is obviously an overstatement. However, I think the biggest inconsistency in these recruiting services is their tendency to rate players based on future NFL potential and/or how they fit to a particular position. Not saying he's a guaranteed stud, but when a guy like Everette Golson is offered by programs like Michigan, Ohio State, Stanford, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, etc he's probably not a 3 star QB just because he's less likely to be drafted in the 1st round 4 years from now b/c the NFL tends away from 6' QB's.

Ratings are over rated.

 

Wow, that statement is kind of ironical. I wonder if the ratings rate themselves, in which case would it be possible for them to complain about their own over- (or under-) rating? At any rate, back to the topic that seems to come up week after week after week. Or better yet, back to Ishaq.

:llama:

What's over-rated is a 5 star vs a 4 star. Just focus on getting good players that fill your class.

I like the stars, but the number system ESPN uses would be more useful as long as the scouts put the effort into a good analysis.

 

How about a 100 point system with prospects being evaluated in 10 categories that vary depending on the position....*Think video game stats*

 

Ex:) Corner: 5 physical 5 Football Related

Size:

Strength:

Speed:

Agility:

Jumping:

 

Tackling:

Man Coverage:

Zone Coverage:

Ball Skills:

Jamming/Press Coverage:

 

5-star-(85-100)

4-star-(70-85)

3-star-(55-70)

2-star-(40-55)

1-star-(0-40) plus Not Rated

 

We break down prospects in these areas anyway, why not use it for a clearer analysis picture?

right, saying that they are more often inaccurate is obviously an overstatement. However, I think the biggest inconsistency in these recruiting services is their tendency to rate players based on future NFL potential and/or how they fit to a particular position. Not saying he's a guaranteed stud, but when a guy like Everette Golson is offered by programs like Michigan, Ohio State, Stanford, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, etc he's probably not a 3 star QB just because he's less likely to be drafted in the 1st round 4 years from now b/c the NFL tends away from 6' QB's.

 

This is why in baseball recruiting they rank you twice; as a MLB player and then as a college player.

 

You potentially could be a 4 star college guy but a 3 star MLB guy. Or if you are more of a long term project, a 3 star college guy and a 4 star MLB guy.

right, saying that they are more often inaccurate is obviously an overstatement. However, I think the biggest inconsistency in these recruiting services is their tendency to rate players based on future NFL potential and/or how they fit to a particular position. Not saying he's a guaranteed stud, but when a guy like Everette Golson is offered by programs like Michigan, Ohio State, Stanford, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, etc he's probably not a 3 star QB just because he's less likely to be drafted in the 1st round 4 years from now b/c the NFL tends away from 6' QB's.

 

 

I agree with this. Also, it irks me when I see Rivals rating defensive players based on how they project into a 4-3 system, as opposed to a 3-4. Ben Councell is a perfect example of a guy that should be a clear-cut 4-star prospect for a 3-4 defense. Rivals has him rated as a DE. WTF?

What's over-rated is a 5 star vs a 4 star. Just focus on getting good players that fill your class.

 

It's all about probabilities. It's more probable that a 5 star player will develop into a stud than a 4 star. So, with a limited number of scholarships, who would you rather bet on? I'm going with the best odds.

This is an Ishaq thread!!!!!:focus:

 

Thanks!:thumb:

This is an Ishaq thread!!!!!:focus:

 

Thanks!:thumb:

 

Ishaq? I thought we where talking stars.

Thanks Irish Chris.

Soo any more news on how his visit is going?