Assume Sonny & Co sign a class this year composed entirely of 3 star players with 4.0 gpas.. Also assume that the position distribution of the players is exactly however you think it should be ideally. Would you be happy/thrilled/disappointed with that class?

If we are going to spin blue and gold fairy tales can we assume we win the Natty as well?

IrishCalBears;842326749 said:

---

Assume Sonny & Co sign a class this year composed entirely of 3 star players with 4.0 gpas.. Also assume that the position distribution of the players is exactly however you think it should be ideally. Would you be happy/thrilled/disappointed with that class?

---

Considering most of our recruits will be 3 or 2* with gpa's much lower than that (w a couple exceptions), your scenario is a step up any way you slice it. Last year we pulled in 2 4* and only one actually made it so....

socaliganbear;842326751 said:

---

Considering most of our recruits will be 3 or 2* with gpa's much lower than that (w a couple exceptions), your scenario is a step up any way you slice it. Last year we pulled in 2 4* and only one actually made it so....

---

Well considering a 4.0 ain't what it used to mean, yes I would still be happy. But this assumes no 2*s or 3.9s. Also assumes no pipe dreams.

I just want us to win a few PAC 12 games. Is that too much to ask for ?

IrishCalBears;842326749 said:

---

Assume Sonny & Co sign a class this year composed entirely of 3 star players with 4.0 gpas.. Also assume that the position distribution of the players is exactly however you think it should be ideally. Would you be happy/thrilled/disappointed with that class?

---

very happy if they were all guys with tape like Lonny Powell's and John Porchivina's.

IrishCalBears;842326749 said:

---

Assume Sonny & Co sign a class this year composed entirely of 3 star players with 4.0 gpas.. Also assume that the position distribution of the players is exactly however you think it should be ideally. Would you be happy/thrilled/disappointed with that class?

---

Yes. A smart player can make up for some deficiencies. And surely he would be a heck of a lot better than a 3* with a 2.0 GPA.

GivemTheAxe;842326777 said:

---

Yes. A smart player can make up for some deficiencies. And surely he would be a heck of a lot better than a 3* with a 2.0 GPA.

---

If we were all 3* and 4.0 we probably would compete for the title. Easily outsmarting the opposition. That kind of team would probably be ble to utilize the entire tedford play card.

Tedhead94;842326764 said:

---

Well considering a 4.0 ain't what it used to mean, yes I would still be happy. But this assumes no 2*s or 3.9s. Also assumes no pipe dreams.

---

Yeah, I heard 5.0's are en vogue these days.

"We don't keep score, but trophies for everyone."

AP points are such a joke. White suburbia's answer to affirmative action.

Who rigged that system?

Question: Would you be happy with 3* 4.0s?
Answer: Beyond pleased. Very happy+.

Much like snotfurd, I think Cal's recruiting niche should be smart, athletic guys. 3*s and 4.0's fit the bill.

There are enough of them out there, you just need to create a culture that values them, then go out and find them.

the actual gpa number means very little-even in a good year, the actual number of players who have been admitted to Cal without their athletic abilities is what, maybe 2? Not like every 4.0 applicant is admitted to Cal...
In reality, a good academic recruiting year is about guys who are willing to compete hard in the classroom, and take advantage of the academic support available to them...

tydog;842326766 said:

---

i just want us to win a few pac 12 games. Is that too much to ask for ?

---

+1000

93gobears;842326799 said:

---

Much like snotfurd, I think Cal's recruiting niche should be smart, athletic guys. 3*s and 4.0's fit the bill.

There are enough of them out there, you just need to create a culture that values them, then go out and find them.

---

Furd gets a lot of 4 and svn 5 star big guys recently, especially online and TEs, and QB. But your right in saying the rebuilt on the backs of 3 star guys.

93gobears;842326799 said:

---

Much like snotfurd, I think Cal's recruiting niche should be smart, athletic guys. 3*s and 4.0's fit the bill.

There are enough of them out there, you just need to create a culture that values them, then go out and find them.

---

You also need to have the grad rates and such to back up the talk.

93gobears;842326799 said:

---

Much like snotfurd, I think Cal's recruiting niche should be smart, athletic guys. 3*s and 4.0's fit the bill.

There are enough of them out there, you just need to create a culture that values them, then go out and find them.

---

completely agree. the aspects of identifying talent, and then developing them are key. i hope we have that, bc for the most part, i think we've hauled in some good "smart, athletic ~3*" types.

And a team can win a lot of games, with 3* talent and good coaches.

If we had a team we could be proud of, full of 3*, 4.0s, and won 7-8 games every year, I'd be deliriously happy. Leave the National Championships to the cheaters.

JSC 76;842327152 said:

---

And a team can win a lot of games, with 3* talent and good coaches.

If we had a team we could be proud of, full of 3*, 4.0s, and won 7-8 games every year, I'd be deliriously happy. Leave the National Championships to the cheaters.

---

you lost me here. even Furd got close to a title game. why not us? don't lower your expectations for what Cal can be under the right leadership!

beeasyed;842327153 said:

---

you lost me here. even Furd got close to a title game. why not us? don't lower your expectations for what Cal can be under the right leadership!

---

Are you saying Furd doesn't cheat?

the core of our recruiting classes should be these type of players. id say 75% of the class, but id actually put it more realistically. 3 stars with above a 3.5 gpa. after that though, a couple 4 or 5 star recruits with above a 3.0 gpa doesnt bother me.

of course theres still the occasional 4/5 star recruit like bryce that gets good grades. cant shy away from those guys

IrishCalBears;842326749 said:

---

Assume Sonny & Co sign a class this year composed entirely of 3 star players with 4.0 gpas.. Also assume that the position distribution of the players is exactly however you think it should be ideally. Would you be happy/thrilled/disappointed with that class?

---

Yes. That would be my preference. However, if we are going to make the exception the general rule, at least show results on the field. What I can't stand is poor performance in the classroom that is accompanies by poor results on the field by student-athletes who probably did not have the educational foundation necessary to succeed in the classroom at Cal. We have had the worst possible scenario the last couple of years.

calbear93;842327408 said:

---

Yes. That would be my preference. However, if we are going to make the exception the general rule, at least show results on the field. What I can't stand is poor performance in the classroom that is accompanies by poor results on the field by student-athletes who probably did not have the educational foundation necessary to succeed in the classroom at Cal. We have had the worst possible scenario the last couple of years.

---

2 tutors for 90-100 players will do that though. it wasnt just the players we were getting.

gobears725;842327414 said:

---

2 tutors for 90-100 players will do that though. it wasnt just the players we were getting.

---

Good point. Thanks for pointing that out. Definitely not just blaming the kids. The program failed the kids either by taking in students who most likely would not make it at Cal or by not providing sufficient resources for them to succeed. I am very forgiving when it comes to disappointments on the field. However, failing these kids in providing them with the education that we promise them seems less forgivable.

Let's see... more stars and higher GPAs or fewer stars and lower GPAs...? hmmm.... let me think....

JSC 76;842327152 said:

---

And a team can win a lot of games, with 3* talent and good coaches.

If we had a team we could be proud of, full of 3*, 4.0s, and won 7-8 games every year, I'd be deliriously happy. Leave the National Championships to the cheaters.

---

what kinda loser a** mentality is that? you happy with wifing a fat, horse faced girl because she has a nice personality?

BEAST2324MODE;842327724 said:

---

what kinda loser a** mentality is that? you happy with wifing a fat, horse faced girl because she has a nice personality?

---

haha, put so eloquently. i think the mentality that Cal fans should approach it is if Stanford can put together the run of success that they have, then Cal should be able to accomplish it as well. By no means should Cal have to take a backseat to anyone, particularly our rivals

BEAST2324MODE;842327724 said:

---

what kinda loser a** mentality is that? you happy with wifing a fat, horse faced girl because she has a nice personality?

---

Because (a) it's a million % better than where we are now; and (b) I'm not sure that it's possible to win 12 games a year without cheating, and I'm not willing to sell my soul for that deal.

JSC 76;842327730 said:

---

Because (a) it's a million % better than where we are now; and (b) I'm not sure that it's possible to win 12 games a year without cheating, and I'm not willing to sell my soul for that deal.

---

to me i think it requires uniform competency. from the chancellor, AD, athletic department, all the way down to the coaching staff and the type of players that we recruit. management has to have a vision for it and the coaching staff and players have to be able to put the vision into action, but you have to have very smart people at the top and have them hire very smart people. we have too many inefficiencies to accomplish it at this point, but i have no doubts the potential is there for us. our peer institutions have been able to accomplish periods of success. we should be able to do the same or something similar. they no doubt have challenges and barriers to success that are similar to ours, so i think its possible. we werent at all too far from accomplishing it ourselves during the tedford era.

i think a good model from the professional ranks is the Golden st Warriors. similar in that they always had good, loyal fans. leadership changed at the top and they hired smart, reputable people to run the management portion of it. management made good decisions and now they have a product to show for it.

we have an AD that has admitted that she doesnt understand the x's and o's of football. just starts right there with how can she make key decisions on who to hire when she doesnt even have a good understanding of the game

gobears725;842327742 said:

---

to me i think it requires uniform competency. from the chancellor, AD, athletic department, all the way down to the coaching staff and the type of players that we recruit. management has to have a vision for it and the coaching staff and players have to be able to put the vision into action, but you have to have very smart people at the top and have them hire very smart people. we have too many inefficiencies to accomplish it at this point, but i have no doubts the potential is there for us. our peer institutions have been able to accomplish periods of success. we should be able to do the same or something similar. they no doubt have challenges and barriers to success that are similar to ours, so i think its possible. we werent at all too far from accomplishing it ourselves during the tedford era.

i think a good model from the professional ranks is the Golden st Warriors. similar in that they always had good, loyal fans. leadership changed at the top and they hired smart, reputable people to run the management portion of it. management made good decisions and now they have a product to show for it.

we have an AD that has admitted that she doesnt understand the x's and o's of football. just starts right there with how can she make key decisions on who to hire when she doesnt even have a good understanding of the game

---

I would point out to thos that think we have to settle for less on the field that our highest grad rates pretty much ever coincided with our best on the field results in about 60 years, including two 10 win seasons.

OaktownBear;842327758 said:

---

I would point out to thos that think we have to settle for less on the field that our highest grad rates pretty much ever coincided with our best on the field results in about 60 years, including two 10 win seasons.

---

i think conclusion that i would draw from that is that is that we need to recruit high character, hard working, tough kids. if they're 3 star, great. if theyre 5 star even better. but id say that they need to have at least those 3 attributes to their personalities. we cant look solely at football ability and highlight reels.

IrishCalBears;842326749 said:

---

Assume Sonny & Co sign a class this year composed entirely of 3 star players with 4.0 gpas.. Also assume that the position distribution of the players is exactly however you think it should be ideally. Would you be happy/thrilled/disappointed with that class?

---

Has anyone ever told you that "assumption" is the mother of all F*ck ups?

Go Bears!

PS: answering the question, I would be satisfied.