A recent podcast featured a question and answer segment where it was asked if Notre Dame gets too caught up trying to fix a glaring weakness from the previous season only to let another area in the program become a new weakness in response. On the surface, this seems silly as most well run programs can fix issues without blindly letting another area slip because they have tunnel vision fixing that original weakness.
Coming into the 2020 recruiting cycle Notre Dame seemed acutely aware of a couple weaknesses that had lingered for a number of years and needed to be addressed following the loss to Clemson in the College Football Semi-final:
1) Seek out and sign elite top-end talent, including 5 stars and top 50 recruits.
2) Make a big impression on offense, especially with the skill position players.
In this effort Notre Dame dominated 2020 and has reason to be proud of their effort. Receiver Jordan Johnson, running back Chris Tyree, and tight end Michael Mayer are unquestioned top players at their positions, plus quarterback Drew Pyne performed really well at The Opening recently. All three of Tyree, Pyne, and Mayer should at minimum receive decent bumps in the rankings soon coming off their performances in the Dallas Nike event. Johnson did not participate while nursing an injury.
As the Irish currently sit at 5th nationally in the team rankings can we say the program has definitely improved recruiting this cycle from the recent past?
As mentioned, elite offensive skilled talent was a major need for 2020 and that box was checked with authority. Back in April and May–when Johnson and later Tyree gave their verbal to Notre Dame–it seemed unquestioned that recruiting would cruise to its best finish for the Irish in a number of years and that the momentum from success on the field was a very real thing.
Today, things are a little murkier.
This is supposed to a smallish class (likely 20 commits, maybe 21 at most) and back in the spring when nearly all of the top-rated commits were already on board the average player ranking put Notre Dame right up there with the best in the country. As summer continues to roll on the Irish have a lost a lot of momentum in recruiting as 6 out of the last 7 commits have not been blue-chip 4-star or 5-star prospects.
With a smaller class the national team ranking for Notre Dame has probably peaked already and very likely will be falling back from their current position in the coming weeks. With the early December signing period moving up the calendar for most programs (it’s basically November now using the old February signing date) the picture is a lot clearer than it usually would be during the summer yet several programs are ready to make a move.
The Irish will certainly be jumped by Georgia (6th nationally, 14 commits), Florida lurks in 9th with the same commits as Notre Dame, while Texas A&M (11th, 15 commits), Oklahoma (12th, 14 commits), Florida State (13th, 15 commits), Auburn (14th, 13 commits), Oregon (15th, 15 commits), and Texas (43rd, 7 commits) are all strong recruiting programs who will be adding more prospects than the Irish by the end of the cycle.
Recruiting rankings and offer lists make for fun and interesting conversations. Finding the right people makes for sustained success! Coach Kelly and our staff are building the roster with guys that FIT Notre Dame – and we are excited about the future! #IrishBoundXX #GoldRush21 pic.twitter.com/ctBLKIE1ei
— Brian Polian (@BrianPolian) July 5, 2019
Securing a top 10 class won’t be easy now. Resting with 20 or 21 commits does make it difficult to maintain a top 5 class as only one program (2018 USC, 4th overall, 18 commits) has finished in the top 5 of the team rankings over the last 3 cycles with fewer than 21 commits overall.
Perhaps the larger issue for Notre Dame is that the remaining 3-4 spots don’t look like they will be filled by elite recruits. That’s a little concerning when 6 out of the last 7 commits have been 3-star prospects. Potentially ending a cycle with 3 stars in 9 out of your last 10 commits would be quite frustrating and a tough pill to swallow.
Now, the recruiting player average has fallen to .906 which is tied for 3rd best in the Kelly era and still quite strong. We’re just not sure how much lower that average will drop by February for a class that could be the smallest at Notre Dame since 2012.
The blue-chip ratio has also now fallen to 52.9% for the 2020 cycle, that’s 6th best during the Kelly era. Where will that number end up when the class officially closes?
| YEAR | COMMITS | BC RATIO | PLAYER AVG |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 17 | 52.9% | .906 |
| 2019 | 22 | 72.7% | .906 |
| 2018 | 27 | 51.8% | .900 |
| 2017 | 21 | 47.6% | .893 |
| 2016 | 23 | 43.4% | .890 |
| 2015 | 23 | 60.8% | .904 |
| 2014 | 22 | 72.7% | .893 |
| 2013 | 23 | 82.6% | .923 |
| 2012 | 17 | 64.7% | .912 |
| 2011 | 23 | 47.8% | .899 |
| 2010 | 23 | 30.4% | .884 |
As always in recruiting, things could change. The post-Opening bumps for the Notre Dame recruits could be quite large and give a major boost to the player average. Safety Lathan Ransom could surprise and commit to the Irish, receiver Jalen McMillan has a flip-like vibe to him and could reconsider his pledge to Washington in the fall, and there could be a late bloomer or two who comes aboard later in the process to increase Notre Dame’s class rank.
It’s also not a bad time to have such a high variance of recruits for 2020 and think you’re signing some much needed difference-makers on offense when the previous cycle featured a really solid base of blue-chips.
Still, given the tremendous offensive haul the Irish are currently left with only a pair of blue-chip defenders, no blue-chip defenders in the back 7, and a decision to skip on linebackers for 2020. This could lead to priorities for 2021 (off to a hot start but only 1 defender from 5 commits and no one in the back 7) that prevent Notre Dame from taking a major step in the recruiting world.
Notre Dame moved forward with their 2020 offensive playmaker haul which cannot be lost. However, it doesn’t appear the Irish are going to extend that prosperity to the class as a whole and combine the likes of Tyree, Johnson, and Mayer with a deep and talented list of blue-chips coming off an impressive 22-4 run and playoff appearance on the field. At this moment 2020 feels like a small step in the right direction but a breakthrough cycle vaulting Notre Dame into the top echelon of the recruiting world may not happen yet.
This is a much clearer and more articulate synopsis than the comment I made in the last recruiting update but seems to be where I’m at. The offensive skill and line is exciting but it still feels like ND left some out there. They made the decision to pass on Simon but not hitting on any blue chips in the back 7 is frustrating and McMillan/mcgregor would have taken this class to another level. Think it’s just disappointing coming off the success in the last 2 years and the coaching stability to not go higher
Is #41 a big fan of Insane Clown Posse?
Well, since Juggalo War Paint has been shown to defeat many types of facial recognition software, i’m sure Hinish has discovered ways to use it to fool OL!
I’d like to see them pop a higher number and really concentrate more on the blue chip ratio, but one thing I noticed from your chart was this should be the first stretch of 3 consecutive years of being .900+ average. So, that’s not nothing to point towards that at least the average player coming in is consistently better as of late.
Like, if they could have somehow pulled off Clark Phillips and then taken two project/upside CBs that would be a lot preferable to the current haul of three 3* projects. No denying that. So it’s not really perfect but based on what we all knew was going to be a smaller class size, I’m not too disappointed where this class will end up.
Also glad you pointed out they wanted more elite skill and went out and nabbed the top APB, WR and TE. We’d all like a more depth but that they’re able to get some top-end skill has to count for something too as a positive development.
Isn’t this similar to how Clemson ran their recruiting a couple of years ago? A couple of blue chippers to go with some mid -level three stars? It seemed to have worked out pretty well for them.
Clemson had two MONSTER classes that formed the foundation for this most recent national champion. It’s hard to imagine that we are catching up in any meaningful way with another class average ranking of ~90 going up against Clemson that had back-to-back class averages of 92 and 93.5.
I think it’s disappointing that we had a chance for a monster class by doing the thing that we can never do (top-50 RB, DE, WR) but then not following it up with the depth of solid four-star guys that we are generally able to do in our sleep. Feels like a missed opportunity.
I’m referring more to the classes before their first natty. You have to start somewhere.
That’s fair to say, but kind of backs up the point that we’re still quite a ways away from being close to where Clemson is now.
I also think they profile so much better for WR/DT/DE in a way that will be difficult for Notre Dame to match, plus they basically hit the jackpot with Tajh Boyd, Deshaun Watson, and Trevor Lawrence at quarterback for 80% of their games since 2010.
Definitely far away from where Clemson is now.
As is everyone – they have 18 commits to Alabama’s 20 and are still 10+ points ahead of them in the rankings. For perspective, if we were to get to 20 by adding the #1, #2, and #3 overall players to our class (one of whom is, of course, currently committed to Clemson), we’d *still* need another five-star to match their class 247 Composite score. What they’re doing right now is beyond absurd.
Nailed it Eric. IMO it’s not class ranking that is most important, but getting the 1 or 2 individual difference makers that dominate games. Think Reggie Bell, Tua, Trevor Lawrence, Manti, Rocket, Lamar Jackson etc.
Manti I think is the last such player we’ve gotten who turned out to be the real deal on the playing field. And defense doesn’t seem to make as big a deal as offensive skill players at QB, RB, and receiver.
Not sure we can get a Trevor Lawrence type. We get guys that are pretty highly rated but turn out to be average to above average but not the superstars Clemson tOSU and Bama are getting.
Jaylon Smith would like to have a word with you.
Jaylon was great, but definitely not the overwhelming difference maker Manti was.
I beg to differ. He was the only thing holding BVG’s defense together. As soon as he left it went from not good to historically bad.
“Manti I think is the last such player we’ve gotten who turned out to be the real deal on the playing field.”
Not about to get into a petty argument about Manti vs. Jaylon.
All I’m saying is that by the metric of your statement, Jaylon qualifies as “turned out to be the real deal”.
There’s a reason folks around here call him the Godbacker.
Manti’s teams were better, and I think there’s a good argument to be made that Manti’s leadership was particularly valuable in the college game, but Jaylon is and was unquestionably a better football player than Manti. When they left for the NFL, basically nobody thought Manti was a first-round pick, whereas before getting injured Jaylon was in consideration for #1 overall as a linebacker, which is insane.
Te’o staying for his senior year versus Jaylon (with injury) not coming back colors things too. I would imagine 9/10 people would say Jaylon had a better career through each of their junior years.
Ugh. Only one of the two had to play for Van Gorder. Do you recall which one it was?
This is a great post. After a few years on the pay boards, I’ve determined this is the recent ND recruiting cycle:
#1) ND gets some guys who commit very early, even before the previous year’s class closes. They almost inevitably fall down the rankings through their junior seasons (even Pyne, who will be up for a ratings bump, will probably end up lower than the day he committed).
#2) Previous class closes at 10-15, with an average around .90 per player. Tom Loy and others say “ND’s next class is gonna be LOADED!!!!”
#3) The year goes by. ND’s class is not loaded.
#4) Class closes at 10-15, with an average around .90 per player.
We had a rather animated conversation about this behind the scenes the other day. Couple of counterpoints I’d make… The 0.9060 average rating includes long snapper Alex Peitsch and his 0.7936 247 Composite score. If you leave him out the class average is 0.9136, square between Kelly’s best (2013, 0.9230) and second-best (2012, 0.9121). That changes this analysis quite a bit. There are probably three spots left in this class; if we average a 0.9000 recruit for those spots, we’ll finish just a hair behind that 2012 average at 0.9115. The 2013 average doesn’t include Eddie Vanderdoes and the 2012 average does include Tee Shepard, FWIW; if you add Vanderdoes the 2013 class jumps to 0.9260, if you take out Shepard the 2012 class drops to .9080. The last three commits in this class would have to average 0.8770 or worse to fall below the adjusted 2012 average. So in terms of true relative quality, this class is extremely likely to be the second best class Kelly has landed. Context also matters. We could’ve had Cody Simon (#153 overall) and other blue-chip LBs if we wanted them, but we didn’t want them. We could’ve had more OL if we wanted, but this is a weak OL class and we’re set up big time in 2021 (with likely 5* Blake Fisher and top-200 Greg Crippen already in the class, and in true contention for 2-3 more 5* OL). Of note: – Jordan Johnson is our highest-ranked WR commit since Michael Floyd in 2008. – Chris Tyree is our highest-ranked RB commit since James Aldridge in 2006. – Tosh Baker was the fourth-highest OL commit in the Kelly era, until Fisher committed shortly after. – Michael Mayer and Kevin Bauman are far and away the best TE tandem in the country. After the Opening, Mayer is a virtual lock to be Kelly’s second-highest TE commit and has a shot at the #1 spot (currently #77 and due for a huge boost; Ben Koyack was #42 overall in the 2011 cycle). – Jordan Botelho and Rylie Mills are the highest-ranked pair of DL commits we’ve had since Aaron Lynch and Stephon Tuitt in 2011 (not apples to apples, but still, either one would’ve headlined any DL class since then). Finishing with about the same class ranking as we have over the last few cycles while taking anywhere from four to eight fewer kids than we did in each of those classes is a demonstrable improvement. Which is most decidedly *not* to say that I think we’ve reached the pinnacle! I think that at a macro level this type of class should be the baseline for what Notre Dame can do with a solid on-field product and a set of engaged recruiters on staff. In that respect, I’m happy to see us pull it off. At the micro level, the only concern I really have is that DB recruiting is, charitably, a mess right now. I think Todd Lyght needs to get some things… Read more »
I should add that WR recruiting could be a bit better too, even with Johnson and a couple of upside guys I really like in Watts and Brunelle. I’m not sure if things could’ve been different with Jalen McMillan (or if they still might), but we definitely could’ve been a bigger player for Gee Scott (#66 overall and probably getting a post-Opening bump). So while I wouldn’t say I’m disappointed in it, it definitely could be even better than it is.
2012 had a long-snapper too. We’re gonna finish behind 2012 either way, but probably not by a huge margin.
Right, the apples-to-apples comparison to other classes if you’re taking out the lowest-ranked recruit from the current class is to take out the lowest-ranked recruit from the previous classes.
That’s a lot of if’s, shoulda, coulda, woulda, maybe’s!!
Is it fair to remove a long snapper for 2020 but none of the other special teams players from previous cycles? Granted, Peitsch is awfully low for a long-snapper (due for a bump?) which definitely hurts 2020’s average.
We’re probably looking at going from 15th overall, tied for 12th best average last year to 12th overall, 9th best average in 2020. I think we all agree it’s improvement but not by much.
Don’t want to jinx anything but the 2020 class average is susceptible if someone like Chris Tyree goes somewhere else. I know, I know it’s not going to happen but a smaller not super deep class has that fear, too.
I won’t be surprised if the defense catches up as we get into the football season.
That’s a fair point on the specialists. I was considering the last couple of years, which had no specialists in 2018 and a decently-regarded Bramblett in 2019, but a fair analysis would do the same for all the classes.
Here are the 247 Composite player averages for each year of the BK era with specialists removed:
2010 – 0.8844 (no change)
2011 – 0.9027 (Kyle Brindza removed)
2012 – 0.9201 (Scott Daly removed) [0.9160 if you also take out Tee Shepard]
2013 – 0.9230 (no change) [0.9260 if you add in Vanderdoes]
2014 – 0.8974 (Tyler Newsome removed)
2015 – 0.9069 (Justin Yoon removed)
2016 – 0.8934 (John Shannon removed)
2017 – 0.8980 (Jon Doerer removed)
2018 – 0.9000 (no change)
2019 – 0.9094 (Jay Bramblett removed)
2020 – 0.9136 (Alex Peitsch removed) [An average of 0.8900 for the last three players gives a 0.9099 class average]
Doesn’t persuade me to change my point, honestly. If anything laying it out like this makes it clear that 2019-20 has been a big improvement over 2014-18. Which, as I’ve said before, doesn’t mean we should throw the staff a parade, but does clearly indicate a *potential* upward trend.
There aren’t a lot of ifs/couldas/wouldas in there, at least if you choose to put stock in what the pay site analysts said (not just Tom Loy, lol). We turned away Zinter and Atteberry for sure. We chose not to be players for Simon. The other points I made in support of the class were objective; how much weight you or I choose to put on them is subjective, but they’re not ifs/couldas/wouldas.
This class was always going to be small, we have an awesome offensive class including two five-star skill position players, we pulled an excellent DL class (Botelho is in the ISD Fab 50, btw). DB recruiting gets a C- right now, which is a huge letdown, and WR is much different from when we thought it could be JJ/McMillan/Henning, but otherwise the class is very good and will likely end as the best one we’ve signed in seven years. Not coincidentally, 2019-20 will clearly be the strongest two-year haul since 2012-13.
I just don’t get the “basically treading water” reaction to the class at all. I think you know that by now though. 😀
If you remove the long snapper from the 2012 class, the average goes up to .9196.
In what world is it reasonable for a team regularly in 10-15 range of recruiting, and finishing in the 5-15 range of AP rankings to turn away a top 150 prospect at a position where we aren’t taking any others for a year (which is also insane for a 3 player position group)????
We need talent.
Assuming Simon stays around 150, when he steps on campus he would be the 9th highest rated defender, 3rd highest rated LB, and only top 200 LB over a 2 year span.
Top 150 defenders since 2017
2017:
Ewell #149 (didn’t count him)
2018
Griffith #70, Simon #90 – LB, Lamb #99 – LB, Allen #106, Ademilola #128
2019
Hamilton #60
2020
Botelho #105, Mills #120
You make a place for him, and suggest one of the Kiser, Liufau, Bertrand, or Ekwonu transfer after next year. There’s no way all 4 of those lower ranked prospects are going to be better than him.
You know who probably has more and better LBs on their team than us? Ohio State.
Maybe they were afraid Simon would be the one to transfer with all the bodies in front of him? Just spitballin’ it does seem like there should have been some reason not to pursue a good player and with family ties.
Or….did his brother (who is on, what position #3 and wasn’t he specifically recruited for rover and now is a LB?) tell him “hey, maybe think about somewhere else, it’s all over the place here right now and there’s a ton of guys and I’ve already seen it’s tough to rise through it.” Not sure if that would be the case or not, and either way ND seemingly being pretty cool on the younger Simon is more the surprising part.
I know they have numbers now but it feels like for LB and CB (and maybe S) some years they’ll get like 3-4 commits, then the next year take 0, then they’ll panic and realize they need 2+ the following year. In stating the obvious you’d think a more smooth addition would be better than the feast/famine they tend to do with some of those defensive positions especially.
Yeah… Ekwonu is a much better ILB prospect than Simon and it’s not really close. Simon looks great in 7-on-7, but reportedly the staff has concerns with how he could handle 11-on-11 and how much additional size his frame could support. That means they likely consider him strictly an OLB/rover prospect, with JOK, Moala, Kiser, and Liufau ahead of him. JOK and Moala will have two years left in Simon’s freshman year, while Kiser and Liufau will probably have four.
The staff also, from what I’ve read, isn’t sold that Simon is good enough to push past the guys on campus. Ohio State, FWIW, took just one LB last year, Cade Stover (Tommy Eichenberg was listed by 247 at LB but profiles as a college WDE). So they’re in a bit of a different position than us.
For me it’s the combo of him being so highly ranked, and a position that in 2-3 years we will say is a desperate need because we didn’t take a single LB in 2020. There is no way Kiser, Bertrand, Liufau, and Ekwonu will all be great players. I’d be shocked if all 4 graduate from ND.
I basically never suggest things the staff should do/have done, for many reasons, but mostly 1. they are objectively better than me (and every person on the internet) at everything related to football, that is why they are professionals at ND, and 2. they know wayyyyyy more than even the most in-the-know non-coach.
But this is simple numbers. As Hooks mentions, 0 takes this year, means scrambling in two years. When we could take a very highly rated player (maybe he isn’t good, but statistically more likely to be than a lot of other guys on the roster), and then NOT be scrambling in 2 years. No matter what, he will have the possibility to have more eligibility than the guys ahead of him. And if he ends up with the same eligibility, it is because he is better and played earlier.
If we take a 3 star over him, fine, because that means the coaches judged that player to be better, but 0 bodies in a given year for your entire LB corps (especially when S’s aren’t falling out of trees) is a bad move, especially when a highly ranked guy wants to come. This appears to be a very short term approach, which I actually understand because their lively hood is more directly tired to this and next season, than when young Simon is a JR, but this seems like a pretty no-brainer macro level, long term decision, with pretty minimal downside.
The only way this makes sense to me is if we sign 3 top 200 LBs next year, which would still only make 4 over 3 classes, and has happened 0 times under Kelly.
I don’t think we’re going to be scrambling, which perhaps is the true difference between our perspectives. We have ten guys at LB who will have multiple years of eligibility left when the 2020 season kicks off: Drew White (who reportedly the staff views as the best Mike on the roster if they had to play today), Bo Bauer, JOK, and Moala with two years, Jack Lamb and Simon the Elder with three, Ekwonu, Kiser, Liufau, and Bertrand with three or four. Ten guys!! White, Bauer, and Moala have already contributed in live action to varying degrees, JOK will start this year, and Lamb is on the cusp of starter status, so we already can fairly assume that five of those ten guys will be no worse than contributors. 2021 signees would be sophomores by the time White/Bauer/JOK/Moala are out of eligibility.
Balance that against the secondary and drop end, where we’re much thinner, and I 100% understand why the staff is looking there for the final few spots in a small class. Numbers are obviously extremely fuzzy, but assuming we add three more in this cycle I think we can somewhere from 22-24 in 2021. I don’t think it’ll be a problem to take 2-3 good LBs in 2021.
I have heard repeatedly for months on TOS that the staff is extremely high on Kiser. Their not taking Simon has to make you think they think he is lacking.
Yeah, I’m not trying to die on the Simon is awesome hill. I trust if the coaches thought he was ELITE they would take him.
But I am willing to die on the hill of take a LB every year (we take a QB every year and only 1 plays at a time), and if a top 150 player wants to be that guy, take him.
I am thinking about 2022. The chances we have 3 starting SR/RS SR LBs who are all better than Simon, is pretty unlikely, for 2 reasons. 1. It is unlikely all of those guys are still on the team. 2. statistically recruiting rankings are actually pretty good at predicting success, so it is reasonably likely that Simon will be better than at least 2 of last years’ class. This means that in 2022, a JR Simon would very likely be a starter, rather than a SO who recruit next year and is unlikely to be ranked as highly as Simon.
Also, if Simon isn’t great, and is buried behind 4 better LBs only a year older than him, then he probably wouldn’t stay around too long anyway.
And related to this whole article, we aren’t recruiting at such a high level, we can ignore a player like that and count on multiple 2021 commits being better.
Yea I’m with you on this once Juice. I brought this up on the recruiting article when they first mentioned the possibility of not taking Simon. If they really think he is not going to a good player then fine, but as you say statistically the higher the rating the better the chance at turning into a good player.
And so it should be generally a rule – never turn down a top 150 player. We are never going to be Bama and Clemson where we have so much talent that we can be THAT picky with numbers (except maybe on OL/TE). If talent wants to come one year then we need to take it even if the numbers are a little thin elsewhere for a year or two.
I think you’re over thinking this. ND doesn’t think he’s going to be that good. If they thought he’d be a starter in 2-3 years they would take him. I surely trust the coaches more than the recruiting gurus. If there are only 10 busts in the top 150 and ND thinks this kid is one, then they shouldn’t take him.
1. There are surely more than 10 busts in the top 150 each year.
2. It is the height of recruitnik hubris to suggest that a hard rule should be instituted to make room for a prospect based on an arbitrary list (why is 150 more relevant or meaningful than 100? or 200?) thrown together based on evaluations made by an outside party.
I think this was kinda my point. ND doesn’t see him as a fit.
Co-sign. FWIW I wouldn’t go so far as to say they think he’s a bust, just that they don’t see him as an elite talent in this system.
I hear you. It does seem super strange to take Bertrand and Liufau late last year when numbers were unprecedentedly tight and then pass on Simon this cycle. Looking at it that way it does seem kind of absurd.
I get that there are a lot of bodies at linebacker now, although I’m not sure that’s a super great point because the staff stacked those bodies in the first place and odds are some guys will leave or get washed out. It’s also highly unlikely all those young linebackers are going to be good.
A lot of people think Cody is going to be very good, taking a verbal to OSU has to be a point in his favor. I know Jamie at ISD likes him a lot and thinks he has a higher ceiling than his brother who might start at Mike this year.
I get the sense we liked Simon a lot (I mean we offered so), and it’s possible he just wasn’t that into Notre Dame.
We genuinely aren’t pursuing linebackers that hard and it’s possible they don’t like Simon as much as some guys on campus. Watch us take a linebacker in October or something lol.
I’ve always at least partially assumed that Simon had less interest in us than was being reported, for all the reasons you mentioned. But everyone keeps saying we just passed (not that they haven’t said that about other prospects who have lost interest).
The weird thing for me about Simon is that they were pushing so hard last year to take *another* linebacker at the end of the class (who ultimately went to UW), and now they’re like “nope, no space.”
Which maybe suggests that they’re not as high on Simon as they were on Asa Turner. I mean, there isn’t a whole lot of mystery here. They clearly don’t see Simon as a good enough prospect to take him regardless of the roster situation. They’ve shown no reluctance in the post-BVG era to load up on a position if they like guys – for example 2019 LB recruiting, as you noted – so if they thought that highly of Simon, I don’t imagine they’d care about the potential logjam ahead of him.
They may well be wrong on how good Simon is, but *why* they didn’t take him seems to be pretty well described by the simplest explanation.
I think it makes sense that after spring they really liked their linebackers a lot more than they thought.
It doesn’t make sense that they’d watch Simon perform really well in the off-season events and then decide he might not be good enough at 11-on-11 or big/strong enough to play inside when he *hasn’t even played real football* in 9 months. That just has to be recruiting fluff to sell ND passing on him.
But I do get if they’re high on the current crop and think they should pass. Don’t agree, but I get it.
They never pushed hard for him, so it’s not like they wanted him, he drifted to OSU, and then suddenly Pravda reported he wasn’t good enough for them. The staff kept tabs on him but never really recruited him hard, and then post-spring they basically didn’t recruit him at all. The stuff I’ve seen runs more towards the staff never saw him as a potential inside guy, not that it’s a development since the last time he played “real” football. Their perspective might be wrong, but it’s not necessarily mutually exclusive to him doing well in camps.
One of the ISD guys, I think Jamie but maybe Matt, said a while back that the staff’s ambivalence towards Simon was more about who was on the roster already than how tight numbers were for the 2020 class, that the coaches weren’t sold he could break through the “logjam” on the roster. This isn’t a new development, which is why I’m much less fired up about it than many others are.
I don’t know how to quantify or judge how hard we pushed for him. We offered a long time ago, he visited campus in March, we visited him in NJ in May. Relative to the other linebackers at least he was at the top of interest and ND pushing for a linebacker.
Isn’t the “new” development coming since spring time that they didn’t think Simon could beat out guys at inside linebacker? No one was saying that about Simon back in the fall. If that’s what they think now fine, we’ll see what happens in 2021 with linebackers!
I believe the original comment from Jamie/Matt just mentioned linebackers, not specifically inside, and was from the May-ish timeframe (I looked through the forums but couldn’t find the original, but I’m pretty sure on that). On the “new” development point, I meant it’s not “new” since he started trending to Ohio State, it’s been out there for a while.
We offered at most nine LBs in the class (technically 15, but we are/were recruiting at least six of them at either WDE or RB or both), which is by far the smallest position group offer count for this cycle. The next smallest group is RB, at 18 offers. The latest LB offers were in February, and I’m not even sure both of them fell into the “true LB” bucket (Trenton Simpson and Mohammed Kaba). Other than Simon we haven’t seriously pursued any true LB that I can think of since at least before spring practice, and we haven’t seriously pursued Simon either after seeing him in May.
What I’m saying is, again, the reported decisions to pass on LB generally and Simon specifically are not developments of the last couple of weeks. The staff could well be wrong on their opinion of him, but I don’t at all think that the published opinion has anything to do with saving face after losing ground to Ohio State. I think that’s what the staff’s opinion has been for a while.
One thing about the Simon situation that makes me feel better is that the LB coach is Lee. So far, he’s impressed me with his ability to evaluate, recruit, and develops his guys. So I’m giving them a pass on this until they prove different