3-star Speedy Smurf Recruiting Tactic

One more thing to consider, is that a lot of the smaller 3* types are under-ranked for the system they are coming into. They are being looked at as if they are going to play in a more traditional offense. Additionally, many of them would be 4/5*s if they were a few inches taller and added 20 pounds or so.

Is anyone actually complaining about the number of 3-star guys? It seems to me like the number of 3-star guys we have right now is about the same as an average Carr class, or even slightly less. One is a kicker. Seems fine to me.

this has been talked about and debated at least 2983467538947 times. and i can't tell if you are even being serious at this point. try not to lose sleep over this. as stated by Sommy, the number of 3* recruits really isn't any different from the Lloyd era, it's just that a lot of these guys are at the RB position. you just have to realize that the RB position is a bit more dynamic under richrod than it was with Lloyd. When we recruit RB's, that means that they are RB/slot WR/all around multi-purpose athletes. and as well as as McGuffie is playing (i personally love the guy already), he is far from locking up the position already with Shaw. under richrod there will be consistent competition at the RB position with respect to new guys coming in every year.

Despite the change in offensive philosophy, you've got to love this class so far. RR can really recruit. Do either of the websites (Rivals, Scout)rank the classes as the year goes on? If so where is Michigan?

This argument has been raging on Scout for awhile now. The Bigs there have shed some light on the rankings. Although it sounds a bit rationalistic, here it is:
The rankings are somewhat political. They say that the services keep in mind that there are tons of players in certain regions (like the south) with far more talent than other regions. The talent in those richer regions is in such quantities that you can't give them all higher rankings because the stars have to be spread out over the country. Yes, it seems they give consideration to subscribers in all parts of the country by making sure players from all regions are ranked, and this apparently comes at the expense of the south in general, and in particular places like Florida and Texas.
Another part of that philosophy is that a three star from Texas or Florida is equivalent to a four star from say Indiana or Michigan, and then some in many cases. They say that if a kid is a three star in the midwest, he is pretty much a three star and unless he has a "high celing" that isn't noticeable, you pretty much get what you see.
But for kids from the south, they argue that the "ceiling" is a lot higher, and you shouldn't put too much credence in their ranking.

"Roughly 100% likely"--sounds like a definite maybe.

Why do people say McGuffie and Shaw have locked up the starting job for the next 4 years when it's only been 3 games into the season. Do you really want to go all Mike Hart and have absolutely no one behind them to run the ball when they get hurt? Bring on the speed.

Granted Mike Hart never fumbled, but I would like to have atleast more than 2 options at RB for the next 4 years. Ya know... depth at positions would be nice.

that is all.

Carry on.