Next to Commit to the G

Midnite_Train

@SoFL_Dawg said:

DB, LB, OL.
Edit: WR could see attrition as well through transfer.

Going to take a guess:
Johnson
Hunter
Bishop
Landers
Hayes
Brini and/or Speed

JeffSentell

Here's the thing about sources with recruiting. ....

• Everyone has them.
• No sources are ever 100%
• When you miss, you learn why. Then move on. You learn something from it. Hard to call that a miss.
• The real skill is layering the sources. All sides. That's the best information.
• If you're getting the information from one perspective on this, then it is more likely to be flawed.
• This is just like writing a story. More sources on the angle of these decisions, the better.
• The best source is the most obvious one. Hard to get, but is always the most reliable.
• Best advice that those in the industry all know is true at the 11th hour: "If you don't know or have an idea, then he's probably going to sign somewhere else."
• One of the most interesting things to do is to compare conflicting information from alternate sources. Where it is different? Why it is different? When did things change? There is usually always a cause-and-effect trail there.

Casanova_Flatulence

@SoFL_Dawg said:

@Casanova_Flatulence said:

@texdawg said:
@SoFL_Dawg I think I'm just as curious to see how accurate your info turns out to be on NSD as I am to see who the Dawgs end up signing.

Not questioning your info - and fully expect and understand if you miss on a couple. Just curious.

And I hope you are mostly right. Not just for the great Dawg class but also for your willingness to gather all this info.

I've been on SEC college football message boards since '96 and was one of the first posters on the Original Free DawgVent. I've seen a lot of "insiders" come and go. You always have to take what they say with a grain of salt.

I agree with this. I can also tell that you’ve been burned by info as your posts illustrate that at times. One thing you should take away as it relates to me, I’ve never called myself an insider. I joined earlier this year and shared what I hear through a relationship I have. That info could dry up tomorrow, and I’d be OK with that. I’d still be here. Take what I say with a grain of salt but please also take away that I want nothing but the best for our Dawgs and everything I post is with the best intention, even if the news isn’t positive.

I'm glad you understand my overarching message. It doesn't appear you took any offense to my general observation. For the record I think you post thoughtfully and I appreciate the information you provide this board.

Casanova_Flatulence

@JeffSentell said:
Here's the thing about sources with recruiting. ....

• Everyone has them.
• No sources are ever 100%
• When you miss, you learn why. Then move on. You learn something from it. Hard to call that a miss.
• The real skill is layering the sources. All sides. That's the best information.
• If you're getting the information from one perspective on this, then it is more likely to be flawed.
• This is just like writing a story. More sources on the angle of these decisions, the better.
• The best source is the most obvious one. Hard to get, but is always the most reliable.
• Best advice that those in the industry all know is true at the 11th hour: "If you don't know or have an idea, then he's probably going to sign somewhere else."
• One of the most interesting things to do is to compare conflicting information from alternate sources. Where it is different? Why it is different? When did things change? There is usually always a cause-and-effect trail there.

Jeff, there was a recruiting study published by a woman (can't recall the university) earlier this year or late last year. You should try and look it up. My aging brain cannot remember the details around how many players she tracked, however what I do recall is that she followed them from the start of their first scholarship offer through to Signing Day. She reviewed all publicly written articles and interviews about the recruit. Her findings showed that the success rate of predictions (over 85% correct) was attributed to Twitter posts. She was able to determine where a recruit was leaning based on "tell" language in the players Tweets. She found a common thread with the majority of players and categorized the Twitter language to give her the best odds of predicting where they'd go.

Essentially, if you want to know where a 5* is going to college, follow their Twitter feed. If she was on this forum, she'd admit that guys like Clay Webb are virtually impossible to predict accurately, because they're so private about the process.

JeffSentell

@Casanova_Flatulence said:

@JeffSentell said:
Here's the thing about sources with recruiting. ....

• Everyone has them.
• No sources are ever 100%
• When you miss, you learn why. Then move on. You learn something from it. Hard to call that a miss.
• The real skill is layering the sources. All sides. That's the best information.
• If you're getting the information from one perspective on this, then it is more likely to be flawed.
• This is just like writing a story. More sources on the angle of these decisions, the better.
• The best source is the most obvious one. Hard to get, but is always the most reliable.
• Best advice that those in the industry all know is true at the 11th hour: "If you don't know or have an idea, then he's probably going to sign somewhere else."
• One of the most interesting things to do is to compare conflicting information from alternate sources. Where it is different? Why it is different? When did things change? There is usually always a cause-and-effect trail there.

Jeff, there was a recruiting study published by a woman (can't recall the university) earlier this year or late last year. You should try and look it up. My aging brain cannot remember the details around how many players she tracked, however what I do recall is that she followed them from the start of their first scholarship offer through to Signing Day. She reviewed all publicly written articles and interviews about the recruit. Her findings showed that the success rate of predictions (over 85% correct) was attributed to Twitter posts. She was able to determine where a recruit was leaning based on "tell" language in the players Tweets. She found a common thread with the majority of players and categorized the Twitter language to give her the best odds of predicting where they'd go.

Essentially, if you want to know where a 5* is going to college, follow their Twitter feed. If she was on this forum, she'd admit that guys like Clay Webb are virtually impossible to predict accurately, because they're so private about the process.

Good stuff. But the secret sauce there beyond the Twitter thread are now IG and Snapchats. In all honesty, it is not worth trying to track all of it at all times.

There was a recruit in this cycle who unknowingly gave away his decision with an answer to a relatively innocent question. Had nothing to do with football.

Still have kept it 🤐.

DirtDawg

@Casanova_Flatulence said:

@JeffSentell said:
Here's the thing about sources with recruiting. ....

• Everyone has them.
• No sources are ever 100%
• When you miss, you learn why. Then move on. You learn something from it. Hard to call that a miss.
• The real skill is layering the sources. All sides. That's the best information.
• If you're getting the information from one perspective on this, then it is more likely to be flawed.
• This is just like writing a story. More sources on the angle of these decisions, the better.
• The best source is the most obvious one. Hard to get, but is always the most reliable.
• Best advice that those in the industry all know is true at the 11th hour: "If you don't know or have an idea, then he's probably going to sign somewhere else."
• One of the most interesting things to do is to compare conflicting information from alternate sources. Where it is different? Why it is different? When did things change? There is usually always a cause-and-effect trail there.

Jeff, there was a recruiting study published by a woman (can't recall the university) earlier this year or late last year. You should try and look it up. My aging brain cannot remember the details around how many players she tracked, however what I do recall is that she followed them from the start of their first scholarship offer through to Signing Day. She reviewed all publicly written articles and interviews about the recruit. Her findings showed that the success rate of predictions (over 85% correct) was attributed to Twitter posts. She was able to determine where a recruit was leaning based on "tell" language in the players Tweets. She found a common thread with the majority of players and categorized the Twitter language to give her the best odds of predicting where they'd go.

Essentially, if you want to know where a 5* is going to college, follow their Twitter feed. If she was on this forum, she'd admit that guys like Clay Webb are virtually impossible to predict accurately, because they're so private about the process.

Here's a link to a story about Kristina Gavin Bigsby, the person @Casanova_Flatulence mentioned...
https://www.hawkcentral.com/story/sports/college/iowa/football-recruiting/2018/01/27/university-iowa-researcher-can-predict-where-football-recruits-go/1071233001/

georgiaboy

@RandomFan said:

@BarkingDawg1987 said:

@brentwilson said:

@DGDinNYC said:
Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. I apologize.

it's all good. these are possible scenarios. I'm sure the staff has a "next best available" for each guy, however I'm feeling really good about Webb, Dean, Cain (if Holyfield leaves), and after @JeffSentell 's about Haselwood today I like our chances with him too.

Sanders - Strong Bama lean would be shocking if he went to UGA
Dean - Current Bama lean
Webb - Noone knows on this front, a lot of Bama folks believe he will stay in state. I personally believe UGA
Wright - UGA currently in 3rd with Wright, but could be in the driver seat depending on what happens 12/19.

I have no idea about Cain and Haselwood or Keegan. This may seem like a death scenario but is really not far fetched.

Most regular readers around here already know most of this:

Sanders - A lean right now to Bama, wouldn't be shocking at all to see UGA move to the drivers seat with a good visit this weekend. He's not 100% sold on Bama quite yet; and we have Dell McGee, are RBU, and are still running the ball at a high rate...unlike Bama for all 3 of those.

Dean - AmericusDawg says UGA. He's been very, very, very, dependable over the years. And if anyone doesn't know who Americus is, then ya don't know much about UGA recruiting

Webb - see above.

Wright - speculation has been UGA is in the lead for weeks due to his knowledge playing time is available. Both of our starting OT's are projected to enter the draft next year and both Wright and Neal have seen how much playing time Cade Mays got this year, how badly we need stud OT's, and that we have the best OL coach in the country. The feeling is we have told Keegan to back off since we are confident in at least Wright, and/or possibly Evan Neal. We had an in-home with Keegan today and not long after Wiltfong put in his CB for Keegan to Michigan. Meaning our staff feels great about landing one of Wright or Neal.

Cain - as most around here already know, he wants in as long as Holyfield is going to the draft, which seems likely. He was sold on that "Swift" role as the 3rd RB behind Chubb and Sony his freshman year; with Swift likely going pro for Cain's sophomore season which would open up more carries for him. That's also going to be the pitch for Sanders, and this weekend will tell the staff how receptive he is to that. The feeling is Cain is a Dawg, unless Sanders wants to be a Dawg and takes that 2nd RB spot.

Who are you on the Rant? I assume you’re over there since you’re dropping AD’s name.

RandomFan

@georgiaboy said:
Who are you on the Rant? I assume you’re over there since you’re dropping AD’s name.

I stay low-key over there. Well, pretty much here too, but if I've posted there it's not more than a handful of times. I lurk on a lot of different places.

DogsNotDawgs

Is 85 % a good prediction rate?

ftn49

@DogsNotDawgs said:
Is 85 % a good prediction rate?

If you read the article, 85% was the percentage the researcher could name the final two schools. The accuracy of the final school was about 70% which I'm sure is better than some, worse than others.

donm

@Casanova_Flatulence said:

@JeffSentell said:
Here's the thing about sources with recruiting. ....

• Everyone has them.
• No sources are ever 100%
• When you miss, you learn why. Then move on. You learn something from it. Hard to call that a miss.
• The real skill is layering the sources. All sides. That's the best information.
• If you're getting the information from one perspective on this, then it is more likely to be flawed.
• This is just like writing a story. More sources on the angle of these decisions, the better.
• The best source is the most obvious one. Hard to get, but is always the most reliable.
• Best advice that those in the industry all know is true at the 11th hour: "If you don't know or have an idea, then he's probably going to sign somewhere else."
• One of the most interesting things to do is to compare conflicting information from alternate sources. Where it is different? Why it is different? When did things change? There is usually always a cause-and-effect trail there.

Jeff, there was a recruiting study published by a woman (can't recall the university) earlier this year or late last year. You should try and look it up. My aging brain cannot remember the details around how many players she tracked, however what I do recall is that she followed them from the start of their first scholarship offer through to Signing Day. She reviewed all publicly written articles and interviews about the recruit. Her findings showed that the success rate of predictions (over 85% correct) was attributed to Twitter posts. She was able to determine where a recruit was leaning based on "tell" language in the players Tweets. She found a common thread with the majority of players and categorized the Twitter language to give her the best odds of predicting where they'd go.

Essentially, if you want to know where a 5* is going to college, follow their Twitter feed. If she was on this forum, she'd admit that guys like Clay Webb are virtually impossible to predict accurately, because they're so private about the process.

Yeah, there's always those 15% that are a real PITA to predict.

georgiaboy

@RandomFan said:

@georgiaboy said:
Who are you on the Rant? I assume you’re over there since you’re dropping AD’s name.

I stay low-key over there. Well, pretty much here too, but if I've posted there it's not more than a handful of times. I lurk on a lot of different places.

Not many folks here know about AD or his success rate.

RandomFan

@georgiaboy said:
Not many folks here know about AD or his success rate.

Yeah, I guess not.

CZCashvilleDawg

Anyone else feeling good about Monday ?

Kasey

@CZCashvilleDawg said:
Anyone else feeling good about Monday ?

I do