Charles Fischer Administrator No. 1 Share Posted February 1, 2021 Yes it could happen, but I hope MC surprises everyone including this pundit by finishing in the top five of Rivals rankings. Thoughts? NSD 2021: Mike Farrell's five predictions by Rivals.com Our Beloved Ducks surprising people has happened before... Mr. FishDuck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
30Duck No. 2 Share Posted February 1, 2021 Well, it is a compliment of a sort to have a bold prediction be that Oregon doesn't finish in the top 5 recruiting rankings, not really going to far out on a limb to say that Alabama will stay on top, followed by 4 other SEC teams. either. What I find interesting in this is, where's Clemson? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou Farnsworth No. 3 Share Posted February 1, 2021 Assuming that JTT goes elsewhere, and that we have a bit more than a "punchers chance" for Avantae D, as well as Henry T; I have a gut feeling that we will squeak out a Top Five class. Yeah, probably not a consensus Top Five. But even if we don't, this class, as it currently sits with signed recruits, puts us in rarified air that I can't remember us ever having breathed with an average player composite score of .9090. The 2021 Ducks will field a team that will be virtually all four and five star players! Bodes well my friends, bodes well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Fischer Author Administrator No. 4 Share Posted February 1, 2021 38 minutes ago, Lou Farnsworth said: as well as Henry T Transfers do not count in the rankings, just so you know. But you are right--it could still happen... Mr. FishDuck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Marsh No. 5 Share Posted February 1, 2021 Top 5 is nice but as it has been pointed out repeatedly ... there is much different between 3-7 this year. The top 2 of Bama and Ohio State are significantly ahead but what is really important to a program is being top 10. Top 10 indicates there is enough top tier talent to compete at the highest levels. What you do with that talent is the next question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirklandduck Moderator No. 6 Share Posted February 1, 2021 5 minutes ago, David Marsh said: Top 5 is nice but as it has been pointed out repeatedly ... there is much different between 3-7 this year. The top 2 of Bama and Ohio State are significantly ahead but what is really important to a program is being top 10. Top 10 indicates there is enough top tier talent to compete at the highest levels. What you do with that talent is the next question. Precisely. The difference between Rivals 3-7 is tiny based on total points and you can even say 3-8 as well. Even if Oregon finishes at 6, they're only behind by a very small amount. I'll take a top 10 recruiting class any day of the week! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDucksFan No. 7 Share Posted February 1, 2021 41 minutes ago, kirklandduck said: I'll take a top 10 recruiting class any day of the week! Me to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherOD No. 8 Share Posted February 2, 2021 (edited) I would agree that there probably isn't a ton of difference between maybe 3-8 in the final rankings. I tend to look at recruiting a bit less on absolute numbers and a bit more just on the general perception of what the staff's top targets appear to have been, and what percentage were landed. I don't really have a way to rate that, so depend upon a service like 247 or Rivals, to determine that for me. A secondary goal would be filling gaps, meeting needs, and managing the roster; but, to this point, the staff seems to be doing that pretty well (for example, it doesn't have 40 WR/DB types and no OL). Getting a high percentage of the top guys - who appears there was a good shot with - is IMO success. First one to throw out crazy, random grades? I probably don't follow it closely enough to do this, but just for fun: QB: A It appears TT was the top choice and the goal was one QB this cycle. RB: A Not a lot of RB offers this year by the Ducks. Offers are generally reported by kids - and its sometimes debatable which ones are immediately convertable and which ones conditional. I'd guess only about 6 offers were the former, and 3 were top national flyer offers (Shipley, Pryor, Edwards) that would have been automatic takes (regardless of the depth chart). After those, the Ducks got 2 of 3. It looks like RB wasn't a heavy priority, and will be next cycle (when the West region appears more loaded). WR: A- It was always likely going to be Franklin or Egbuka at the top. The Hudson-Ware decommit is notable (but its maybe interesting it doesn't appear the staff used that spot to go after another WR). Xavier Worthy sticking with Michigan probably goes as a notable "miss". TE: A Mataveo and Ferguson were top targets and 2-2. OL: A Foster at OG might go as a "miss". I'm not sure if Miller and Simmons were an "either/or", but landed one. Suamataiai, Walden, and Light appear to be 3 very top targets and the four together represent an elite group. DL/Edge: C Any season where you have 2 of the top 5 players nationally as west coast edge prospects considering Oregon, its hard to consider it a high grade if you go 0-2 (if JTT goes elsewhere, with him its a re-grade). Burkhalter decommitted, but there is an indication that was mutual. A spot were the staff probably had 30+ convertable offers out. One wonders a bit, with a new possible emphasis on a NT, if CA prospects like Toia or Vaka might have been more emphasized? Not sure where Armitage (Stanford) fell, Tilmon is an interesting athletic profile for sure, as well as Keanu Williams. LB: B The local kid Brown appears to be the big fish. It will be interesting to see where guys like Flowe, McNeill, and Buckner eventually fit in (all very highly rated kids by Oregon historical standards). I am not sure there were going to be more than about 3-4 LB taken, after the group last year. Guys like Davis, Calvert, and Simon were all offered early but there never seemed to be much momentum. DB: B- A bit thin at CB currently. I still see Dickerson as still petty big (and a re-grade with him). Personally, not quite as jazzed about filling up with nickel S types (an Avalos preference?). Amongst Davies, Barkins, and (hopefully) Dickerson, it will be pretty important a couple turn into quality Pac-12 corners (and soon). I've seen some different opinions on JC Perkins, but he sure seemed to blow up as a recruit, and probably goes as a "miss". There appear to have been 20+ legit CB offers out. CA kids Wright and Brown appear to have been top targets but never appeared close. Two S appeared the goal (and added two). Beavers was an early target and decommit, so that might qualify as a "miss". Edited February 2, 2021 by AnotherOD Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
