Athleticism 26
Speed 27
Rebounding 52
Defense 52
Shot Blocking 51
Low-post 67
Perimeter 16
Ball Handling 6
Passing 40
Work Ethic 33
Stamina 66
Durability 49
FT% 65.8

This is the #169 PF?! Would you even recruit this for a DII school? He'd need to be high potential in a lot of areas, but that doesn't impact positional rankings, correct?

Athleticism 36
Speed 55
Rebounding 1
Defense 43
Shot Blocking 1
Low-post 1
Perimeter 39
Ball Handling 64
Passing 45
Work Ethic 66
Stamina 81
Durability 41
FT % 81.3

#168 PG. I thought Seble announced that they hadn't started the new recruit generation yet. Sure seems to me that the recruits are getting worse and worse every year.

But we both know that there are unranked guys who are better than both. It's as much an issue with their internal player ranking system.

I truly don't think the recruits have gotten worse. And if they have gotten worse, it's across the board. It's definitely not a bad thing. I'd definitely view it as a positive, not a negative.

I think they have gotten SLIGHTLY worse over the last 5-8 seasons.

And I agree its a good thing.

I'm hating the big men recruits this year for D-II. All-around TERRIBLE.

Your big men or any frosh shouldnt be starting for you right away unless your taking over a ghost ship program or a real low end prestige job that's what the bench and redshirt is used for to develop.

I'm with dalter, recruits getting worse is definitely a good thing. It doesn't seem so when you are first going after players, but with players getting worse it allows the best players to stand out. I just find it so odd to see guys with 98ath/100sp/99per/99bh somehow shooting less than 45% from the field. With recruits getting worse if you are fortunate enough to have a player like that he will dominane.

Quote: Originally posted by piratesfan23 on 2/07/2010Your big men or any frosh shouldnt be starting for you right away unless your taking over a ghost ship program or a real low end prestige job that's what the bench and redshirt is used for to develop.

But the above recruits (especially the PF) might not ever be useful, let alone start (especially at a DI school). A 29 ATH? He better be high-high potential.

Quote: Originally posted by kmasonbx on 2/08/2010I'm with dalter, recruits getting worse is definitely a good thing. It doesn't seem so when you are first going after players, but with players getting worse it allows the best players to stand out. I just find it so odd to see guys with 98ath/100sp/99per/99bh somehow shooting less than 45% from the field. With recruits getting worse if you are fortunate enough to have a player like that he will dominane.

I agree that watering down the recruits is a good thing, but numbers like that might be going too far. I'm recruiting from a DII perspective, and those recruits leave a bad taste in my mouth. What are the DI schools, who these recruits are theoretically intended for, going to think?

All I know is that recruit battles over transfers will be heated.

Should be interesting.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally posted by homrbush on 2/07/2010Athleticism 26
Speed 27
Rebounding 52
Defense 52
Shot Blocking 51
Low-post 67
Perimeter 16
Ball Handling 6
Passing 40
Work Ethic 33
Stamina 66
Durability 49
FT% 65.8

This is the #169 PF?! Would you even recruit this for a DII school? He'd need to be high potential in a lot of areas, but that doesn't impact positional rankings, correct?

Athleticism 36
Speed 55
Rebounding 1
Defense 43
Shot Blocking 1
Low-post 1
Perimeter 39
Ball Handling 64
Passing 45
Work Ethic 66
Stamina 81
Durability 41
FT % 81.3

#168 PG. I thought Seble announced that they hadn't started the new recruit generation yet. Sure seems to me that the recruits are getting worse and worse every year.

Their are DIII recruits who I would have higher on my watch list.