Recruiting

Discussing Army Black Knights football, basketball and more. United States Military Academy sports forum. West Point athletics discussion board.
Dong Fong '09
Warrior
Posts: 892
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2019 11:58 am
x 8
x 104
Contact:

Recruiting

Post by Dong Fong '09 »

Does anybody follow recruiting really closely that can provide a good update on how we are doing on this front?

From some of the things I've seen online, it seems like we are having a good year. Saw a couple of commits flipped from other academies to us, and it seems like we are bringing in a some talented, athletes (several were state players of the year, or recruited by power five programs).

Is it actually the case we are having a strong recruiting year?
0 x
User avatar
LoneStarPhan
Warrior
Posts: 1590
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:58 am
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
x 7
Contact:

Re: Recruiting

Post by LoneStarPhan »

There are numerous websites that report/rank recruiting classes.

CBS 24/7 Sports has the following rankings for the Academies:
96. Air Force 42 commits: 14-3 star; 4-2 star.
111. Army 32 commits: 9-3 star; 0-2 star.
123. Navy 15 commits: 6-3 star; 0-2 star.

It is really difficult to know what to make of all this. The prep school component of each incoming class also is a major factor to the programs for all three Academies, that I don't think is reflected in these rankings. These numbers do show Air Force with more commits and double the ranked prospects in the recruit class. Navy looks to be lagging behind both Air Force and Army.

Rivals list of the top 99 schools recruit classes lists Air Force at number 89 with 36 commits, three of them 3 star recruits. Clearly, their system and the one used by CBS 24/7 sports is different.

At On3.com, the rankings are Air Force 109 (54 commits, 24 3-star); Army 112 (43 commits, 16 3-star) and Navy 115 (27 commits, 13-3 star).

Looks like Army is recruiting somewhere between Air Force and Navy, but the real success will depend on identifying and bring in players who are not ranked by the various recruiting services, but who go on to make positive contributions to the program.
Last edited by LoneStarPhan on Wed Feb 01, 2023 11:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
User avatar
thedoc85
Warrior
Posts: 779
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 2:09 pm
x 130
x 9

Re: Recruiting

Post by thedoc85 »

Actually------Rivals has Army at 83------above both of our rivals
0 x
wpgrad
Warrior
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 5:49 pm
x 117
Contact:

Re: Recruiting

Post by wpgrad »

The ranking are suspect at best for academies, and Monken has had years where he has brought in over 90 recruits in one year, split between the prep and usma. I have "heard" via the rumor mill that Army had a good number of AF/Navy commits reach out in the last few weeks, expressing an interest to be part of the new Army offense and not the Navy triple option...but of course who knows.
1 x
User avatar
LoneStarPhan
Warrior
Posts: 1590
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:58 am
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
x 7
Contact:

Re: Recruiting

Post by LoneStarPhan »

Thanks for the correction on the Rivals ratings. I just checked and it is now Army #85, Navy #87 and Air Force #90. They are updating the ratings as they get more information in today, the official national signing day. So essentially, they are ranking all three academies about the same for this recruiting class.
1 x
User avatar
PrideandDream
Warrior
Posts: 986
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:36 am
x 2
x 127
Contact:

Re: Recruiting

Post by PrideandDream »

Frankly recruiting rankings are a farce in general. All these services claim to rank prospects but have no real way of doing it. The 5 stars are clearly a cut above most 4 stars probably pan out. But for the bulk of the 3 stars? It's a crap shoot.

What I find funniest about the rankings is that there really is no official measurement of these kids and their skills. Outside of Height and Weight. I mean there are camps and services that do test and publish numbers but they are all different and lack the kind of rigor you'd like to see. Think about the NFL combine and how rigorous it is and they still make major misses on guys at that level.

Think about the dynamics of play in HS too. So looking at film is all over the board. Every state has different division and vastly different talent pools. A kid playin 6A in Texas or Florida might look above average on tape and really be a great player but doesn't show on film like a kid playing 2A ball in Nebraska. Probably not the best analogy but you get the point. There's little parity at the high school level.

The other thing is most of these coaches are only looking for a handful of things too like body type and a good measure of speed or strength. And there are ton more kids in high school that can play college ball than they can recruit.

Then there are the intangibles. Like work ethic, teamwork, leadership, etc that just can't really be found out through the internet. One huge thing for these college coaches is if you attend class and are self motivated. They don't need another headache to babysit on campus.

Lastly, how a kid performs is deeply linked to the development program a school has and the system he goes to. And these rankings really don't account for that by any means. I'd love to see a full evaluation of teams that actually develop guys. I bet that disparity at the FBS level is interesting. Do players really get faster and stronger? I'm sure at every school yes but to what extent? And obviously the system is huge in terms of how you fit in and if and when you play. A fullback probably isn't going to survive at most schools or see the field often. And as for QBs hell they wind up all over the place trying to fit in.

In short you just can't put a ton on these rankings. Sure maybe the top 20 or so but the truth is it's probably at best in thirds, top middle and bottom. And even within that you don't really know.

It's all an interesting debate. Roughly 1 Million kids play HS football. Less than 15,000 playin at the FBS level so just that tells you it's all over the board.

PD
1 x
WrekDivr
Warrior
Posts: 2209
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 9:04 pm
x 92
Contact:

Re: Recruiting

Post by WrekDivr »

On his latest podcast, Sal and Stephen Anderson discuss Army Football recruiting as of signing day as well as some discussion of our new offense.

https://www.youtube.com/live/er0IIONi7zY?feature=share
0 x
FSUBulldog0
Warrior
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:31 pm
Location: Denver
x 34
x 28
Contact:

Re: Recruiting

Post by FSUBulldog0 »

Added another 3-star yesterday. Was previously committed to Tennessee and had many other P5 offers.

http://blackknightnation.com/recruiting ... 2023-class
0 x
JKillerK
Warrior
Posts: 386
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 3:30 pm
x 10
Contact:

Re: Recruiting

Post by JKillerK »

It looks like we are returning to some of our old hunting grounds for recruits. We have a heavy contingent both in numbers and size from Penn for this year.
0 x
hrm
Warrior
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:40 pm
x 1
Contact:

Re: Recruiting

Post by hrm »

FSUBulldog0 wrote: Tue Feb 07, 2023 2:51 pm Added another 3-star yesterday. Was previously committed to Tennessee and had many other P5 offers.

http://blackknightnation.com/recruiting ... 2023-class
While I would normally be excited over an announcement like this, I note that this particular 3-star recruit "bounced around" a few high schools. During his senior year, and after the school year began, he departed powerhouse Bishop Gorman for a charter school in Calif. And he arrived three games into the season. Perhaps there's a benign explanation, but something about this makes me a bit nervous. To be sure, I hope this works out for all.
1 x
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AdsBot [Google], Google [Bot], Semrush [Bot], stash76, tre72ow75, wp1994 and 655 guests