I am pretty sure this is new, and if it has already been posted then I apologize. ESPN has DG ranked 117 and the 5th overall QB and Bolden 4th. Seantrel dropped to 4th http://insider.espn.go.com/ncf/recruiting/tracker/espnu150?&season=2010
ESPNU 150 -- Gardner #5 overall QB, Bolden #4.
Ahhhh shit. I guess it has been posted already. Well, disregard, I suppose. Sorry to anyone that feels compelled to type ... "Thanks for wasting my time, asshole."
Oh yeah, Thanks for wasting my time, asshole.
I talked to JC Shurburtt, from ESPN, about Devin Gardner's performance at the Elite 11.
This is what he had to say, "In a setting like the Elite 11, Devin Gardner is going to stand out less than if he were in pads and in a game. I personally felt he threw it well and that he's a great fit in a system like Michigan's that would take advantage of his overall ability. I also think he's a great kid with a wonderful attitude who was one of the better all-around quarterback prospects at the event if you were taking into account the entire picture."
Take from that what you will.
Thanks for the ESPN feedback. Still not sure how they can give such praise and not even consider him a top 100 recruit. I will still take any ESPN rating with a grain of salt.
My take on it, is that he thinks Devin Gardner is a playmaker, but it was hard to see in that setting. At an Elite 11, where they're going through passing drills, it's hard to see what he can really do.
He uses his feet, agility, and awareness to make plays. I think, if anything we'll see him rise up their boards once they get a chance to see his stats this season.
Then again, they have William Campbell ranked as a three star, and Jeremy Gallon as our second lowest ranking recruit, only in front of Adrian Witty, so who knows.
that everyone else that was there said he was amazing at the elite 11. so what gives with ESPN?
That's why I talked to him about it in the first place. Like he said, it sounds like they thought he would be better in actual game like scenarios.
I think people get a little carried away with these top numbers. I do not mean to defend rating services, but how many high school football players are there in the country? A quick search points at over 1 million in the US. Holy crap that is a large sample! Sure looking at only the standouts would lower that number, but even then to be rated in the top 1000 would mean you are truly outstanding.
On the other hand, for a service to create rankings instead of a broad rating with those kind of numbers is kind of ludicrous in itself.
Are you hearing anything about Marvin Robinson looking around?
From what I've heard, no he's not looking around. Where does this stem from?
He attended the Georgia camp recently, and one of Scout's guys who is in the know in Florida expressed some reservations about it, but nothing came of it. Marvin's just showing out by hitting the camp circuit a little bit.
If a recruit is ranked highly then M's recruiting class looks better. If he performs well, then "He was a stud recruit." If he performs poorly, then "He was a bust."
If a recruit is not ranked highly then M's recruiting class looks worse. If he performs well, then "The coaches really know how to develop hidden talent." If he perfoms poorly, then "He wasn't that good anyway."
Those are all just side arguments to what really matters: Does he help us win games?