Juju Smith to officially visit for ND game

Submitted by Chi-Blue on May 7th, 2013 at 1:58 PM

The 5 star California Safety prospect will officially visit for the Notre Dame game per 247. Smith is a 5 star to 247 and Scout, and is a 4 star to ESPN and Rivals. He is the 84th ranin the ESPNU 150. Scout also rates him as the top Safety prospect in the country.

No brain buster here, but IMO this is what really sets Alabama apart from other programs . . . their ability to bring in top notch talent at every position every year. Any school can put together a good/great class, but doing it year in and year out is what really sets those special schools apart from the rest. Hoke is doing a great job of this. It's easy to bring in a great recruit and tell them they have instant playing time because there is nobody ahead of them. The real test is can you bring the same caliber of athlete year after year, and tell him it might be a while before you get your shot. This is what Hoke is managing to do right now with even getting kids like this to visit. The program is in great hands!



May 7th, 2013 at 2:05 PM ^

This kid could play safety or wide receiver and be good at either one.  He also has a handy nickname, since John Smith is just kind of boring and makes me think of Pocahontas.


May 7th, 2013 at 2:10 PM ^

The last thing I heard, the coaches were talking about him mainly as a safety prospect.  I don't know why the Artavis Scott recruitment would be wearing off.  Michigan has been pursuing both players all along and Smith said awhile ago that he would probably visit, so this isn't really a new development (other than the specific date).


May 7th, 2013 at 2:21 PM ^

Apparently the Michigan staff agrees with your sentiments; domer sites are reporting that Juju has stated that Michigan is willing to give him a look on both sides of the ball, while the rest of his top 5 (tOSU, ND, USC, UCLA) are primarily at safety.


May 7th, 2013 at 2:11 PM ^

Can we all agree to start using the 24/7 composite rankings for the definitive value?  It seems that they more fully encompass the overall value of a recruit, rather than one of the services being an outlier.  Sorry to nitpick, just something I'd like to establish as a rule going forward...



May 7th, 2013 at 3:38 PM ^

I was more referring to the fact that he was listed as 84th on the ESPN 150 in the OP, without listing where he was on the other services.  It's not like I felt personally offended or am aiming to start a crusade to rid the world of non-aggregate rankings, it just seemed kind of arbitrary.  I think more effort has been put into the thread of conversation than is needed though...


May 7th, 2013 at 5:38 PM ^

But isn't multiple (reliable) data points better than just one? I think what the poster meant was, if you're only going to list one, list the composite. I agree with you that getting all four individually is always best, but most posters don't put that much work into it. So instead of listing just ESPN or just Rivals, list the composite, and anything above that is gravy.

Michael Scarn

May 7th, 2013 at 2:32 PM ^

Based on the 247 article with quotes from him, he's looking for a visit where everything is genuine and they don't put on a show for him - sounds perfect for this staff's style of recruiting.


May 7th, 2013 at 2:40 PM ^

Not every school can put together a good/great class.

A group of teams including Bama can do it consistently though.

The quality of the recruits is not what separates Bama. Any difference is star rating is minimal with the top schools.

It is the fact they sign 5 years worth of those guys versus about 4 for the other top programs.


May 7th, 2013 at 4:38 PM ^

Signed as in signed an LOI, per Rivals. Also, despite getting hit with sanctions, OSU isn't that far behind either at 116. That's a difference of 2 kids per year over the past 5 years, not the 6 kids per year that "5 years worth of kids in 4 years" would be.

Anyway, I'm not claiming shady tactics aren't happening. What I was getting at is that it's not the number of guys Alabama signs, as they aren't signing significantly more than a school like Michigan or OSU - it's that while we lose guys to transfers, they lose guys by giving them "medical scholarships". Also, in that 5 year period, they had 13 kids go to the NFL early, nearly half of a recruiting class. It doesn't excuse anything related to the medical scholarships they hand out like candy, but it has an effect.


May 7th, 2013 at 3:27 PM ^

I guess I should specify. No, UTEP isnt going to have a (great) top ten class but many schools pull off something I would call above their average class every so often. Look at Ole Miss last year with getting four, yes four 5-star kids to sign, and eight 4-star kids to sign . . . that would be a great class. Do you really think thats going to happen for the next several years? Probably not. My point is most schools can do something special in a year, but to year after year get that pull is what is the difference maker in creating long term success.

disclaimer - no, star ratings dont always equal on the field success or stardom, but most of this board, myself included would be telling a lie if they said we didnt like the star ratings bump that we have enjoyed over the last 2.5 recruiting cycles. More often than not stars mixed with good coaching equals alot of wins.

His Dudeness

May 7th, 2013 at 4:51 PM ^

Those 'special years' you mention are the ones that get teams like that in trouble.

Ole Miss is absolutely paying recruits to sign. Auburn did it. USC did it. OSU did it. Clemson did it. SMU did it.

Teams that don't traditionally bring in talet then suddenly everyone wants to go to are very fishy.

To see how a team slowly builds a program and does it the right way, look no further than Northwestern. That's a program that does it the right way.