TheVolCub08

We'll miss you, Slainte! There's always an opening for you if you ever want back in!

On draft dates, I cannot do March 5-7, and am limited between March 15-19. I can make it work, but will have to be very intentional to schedule at a time that I can be around.

Let's hear what you want to discuss. We definitely need to start moving toward nailing down a draft date.

If USC gets in no trouble over this, or even minor trouble (2 scholarships over 2 seasons), what is the benefit to universities and boosters to play by the rules? I don't see the benefit if there is no trouble.

The USC fans on here are not going to like this... For the record, Brent Hubbs is a Rivals site owner.

Continuing the offseason of weirdness (or misleading recruits, depending on what you believe...), on the same day that Urban Meyer begins his leave of absence, UF's defensive coordinator leaves to take the Buffalo Bills DC job, after only one month in Gainesville.

To the best of my knowledge, the actual formula has never been made public. 12 of the 17 letters of intent are in by 8 AM this morning for Northwestern. I'll have nothing to do to kill time at work at this rate. From Rivals: (and as you can see, quantity has almost nothing to do with the rankings...) Please note you only take the top 20 prospects in this formula, ordered by # Stars descending. POINTS = ((N / (N + 50)) * H) + ((50 / (N + 50)) * L) where... H = 250 for each 5-star commit + 140 for each 4-star + 75 for each 3-star + 20 for each 2-star + 10 for each 1-star L = 18 for each 5-star + 12 for each 4-star + 8 for each 3-star + 3 for each 2-star + 1 for each 1-star N = a big honkin' calculation, described below CALCULATION OF N: 10 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (high school) ranked 1-10 9 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (high school) ranked 11-20 etc. down to... 1 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (high school) ranked 91-100 10 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (non-high school) ranked 1-10 9 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (non-high school) ranked 11-20 etc. down to... 6 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (non-high school) ranked 41-50 24 for each commit ranked #1 on his official position ranking 18 for each commit ranked #2-5 on his official position ranking 8 for each commit ranked 6-X on his official position ranking, where X is dependent on detail position, as listed below... --Dual-threat QB: 25 --Pro-style QB: 25 --Running Back: 35 --All-Purpose Back: 15 --Fullback: 15 --Wide Receiver: 50 --Tight End: 20 --Offensive Tackle: 40 --Offensive Guard: 30 --Offensive Center: 10 --Defensive Tackle: 50 --Weakside Defensive End: 20 --Strongside Defensive End: 30 --Inside Linebacker: 35 --Outside Linebacker: 35 --Cornerback: 40 --Safety: 30 --Athlete: 25 --Kicker: (no points awarded for rank lower than 5th) If the team's average stars are greater than 3, add (100 * (Avg stars -> 3)) to N.

To the best of my knowledge, the actual formula has never been made public. 12 of the 17 letters of intent are in by 8 AM this morning for Northwestern. I'll have nothing to do to kill time at work at this rate. I saw it with my own two eyes last week. I'll see if I can still find it and I'll bring it over. Seemed like a bit of a redundant formula, but I know that 2* players were not part of the equation, and that only about the top 20 players signed per school were part of it. There were some arbitrary pieces to it (such as receiving a bonus for the #1 player at a position), and some of it seemed superfluous.

Well, 24 commits to 20. To me, team rankings are incredibly useless. When you're trying to combine a bunch of kids who are ranked based on a faulty star system using an even worse team scoring system, you get a bunch of crappy numbers that don't mean anything. There's no decent way to compare recruiting classes so I don't even bother trying. It's hard enough trying to compare recruiting classes within the same program that you're quite familiar with. While I agree the star system and team scoring system are faulty, I still think it's worth considering. Taking either as gospel isn't the best idea, but using it as sort of a guide isn't bad. It comes down to a coaching staff's ability to evaluate talent and develop it, though. There are simply too many players to evaluate. You can take a look at the top 100 talent in the country and see how each team did recruiting those guys, but the biggest programs with the biggest subscribers tend to get the most focus when it comes to talent evaluation. Neither rivals nor scout has enough people to evaluate everyone, let alone re-evaluate them when new offers start coming in that catch people's attention. But it's not impossible to evaluate an individual player. You can look at highlight film, offer list, numbers, etc. The problem comes when those sites apply a secret formula to come up with a team ranking that relies almost as much on quantity as it does quality. It's impossible to compare a program that brings in nearly 30 kids every year to one that redshirts most of its freshman and signs less than 20. The difference between 25 and 30 is pretty significant, too. That's not how Rivals ranks their classes. They remove quantity from the equation. I saw the formula recently, and iirc, only about the top 20 or so prospects per class are part of the ranking.

Received: Black Labs Janzen's Black and Milds Czar Nikita Gurus of Swat The Big City Sliders Cubbiebummin' Bronx DSB Minnesota Masterbatters Sultans Roady Awaiting: Ozzie Guillen's Accent Kingsport Copperheads

Got it today.

Don't be surprise if Ambles doesn't commit to any team on NSD. He's seems to be the type of character who would draw out his recruitment to satisfy his go. Yeah, he's already strongly hinted he'll likely wait til after NSD to make a decision. Says he has a couple more visits to take (one to USC, I believe). He's fantastically talented, but has been a bit of a diva. Ambles was at USC last week. He was Kiffin's first secondary violation (Ambles is the recruit that USC picked up in a limo...) Ambles also said tonight that whatever he feels when he wakes up Wednesday is what he's going to do.

Please Paypal payment ($17) to ericshoskins@aol.com or mail it to: Eric Hoskins 771 Abigale Lane Birmingham, AL 35210 Payment is due by February 1, please.

I reversed the trade, so I hope that fixes the issue. It's nobody's fault that the scoring changes took effect the way they did, so you shouldn't be punished. You have your points and you have your pick back. So, it's done.

The scoring changes were a CBS issue, and nothing that we did or did not do. We waited until we received notice that last season's points were archived before we performed any scoring changes at all. The problem is, CBS changed the points and it became retroactive for some reason. It affected every team, whether they were complete or not, and unfortunately, we all had to deal with it. Because the points were not actually archived, there is no way to know what everyone should have had. I have no way to check it or to change it, so it is what it is at this point. Sorry. Next year, if we make changes (which I don't anticipate because of how much input we gave everyone this past season), we'll wait until we've paid for the league before making any changes. And, after looking over everything, you did not drop a single player that you would have kept over your actual keepers, anyway, and if someone had offered you 55 points to trade down by only 7 picks in the 13th round, you surely would have done that in a heartbeat. So, you have a legal roster, and it cost you the 198th overall pick (and gave you back the 205th). I don't get where the beef is? This was likely a one time CBS glitch, and it cost you literally nothing. This is a non-issue, all things considered. IF you disagree, let me know what you want to see done, and we'll figure out how to handle it.

Hosak receives 535 points from OGA

dew (and Red Flash, I guess...) For the first time tonight, I heard Sal Sunseri's name associated with the DC position at UT.

Not over yet. He may stay. But don't count anything out in this odd coaching search. I heard he decided to stay. Hopefully he decides to come here. If not Steele, who are we looking at? If we're looking at Saban disciples, then I'd guess we'd take a run at Susnari or Smart (yeah right). Otherwise, do we have a chance/interest in Rodney Garner? Unless I am mistaken, there is no proof that Steele has said anything yet. There are reports, but nothing quoting Steele either way. May not mean anyting, but I'll wait until I hear Steele saying one way or another what he's going to do before I worry too much. There is a chance that Garner ends up at UT, but I don't think it's as the DC. The same high school coach who was telling me about Smart to UGA is telling me that he believes Garner to UT is all but done. TIFWIW. I think it's Lance Thompson's job to lose if Steele turns it down.

Not over yet. He may stay. But don't count anything out in this odd coaching search.

Cubbiebummin' receives Janzen's BnM's 4th rounder and 300 points.

Honestly, I don't know that I expect Plaschke to run with it, either. However, there is a movement that could be somewhat Tiger Woods-ish if some girls (and yes, there are multiple) decide to come forward. There are also some legal documents that could be provided. Will they? I don't know. Even if they are, will they matter? Again, I don't know. I do know that there are some embarrassing details that are out there to be shared, and there might be some incriminating ones, as well. Some people are willing to turn a blind eye to your indiscretions when you coach their team. When you screw that team over, though, those same people are the ones who want to get you the worst. Personally, I feel that it's just best to let sleeping dogs lie. All that would come about if everything were uncovered would be a little humiliation (and maybe a divorce, though I sincerely doubt it..). So, let Lane either keep his nose clean and do his job, or screw up and let the NCAA deal with it. But, I'm not the one with the documents, so it doesn't really matter what I would do or think should happen.

Well, another bout with brilliance, I see. I did not say he was a reporter for Volsbitch. I said he was a poster there. He's actually a radio reporter for the local ESPN Radio affiliate. But let's not let reality get in the way of being a douche.

If none of you have heard the sound byte from ESPN, a very young (and admittedly immature) radio host (and Volsbitch.com poster) asked Dooley the question: "Will you or your staff be calling USC recruits and asking them not to attend classes?" Other reporters broke out into laughter, but Dooley used it as an opportunity to show great class. Said he was not going to disparage any other programs, and that instead he wanted to focus on Tennessee and doing things the right way there. It certainly was a break from what UT fans have endured over the past 14 months. This same reporter is taking all of the behind the scenes, under wraps dirt he has on Kiffin (which is pretty significant) and emailing it all to Bill Plaschke. I don't expect anything to ever come of it, but it could be an absolute riot if Bill runs with any of it. (Pun intended, btw.)

Does he know what he's talking about with rumors? I haven't heard directly from Basilio (whose show does suck, but he's also pretty connected), but one of his cohosts. Both have heard from separate people that Lovie is possible, and AA says that Tony's sources are much better than his own. This is an aside, but this would fit Hamilton's MO to have everyone waiting for him to announce Cutcliffe while he's secretly courting Lovie. Happened that way with Pearl. Maybe I'm just hoping it's right, but I'm beginning to think there might be something to this. However, Hubbs apparently said Lovie's not interested. Are you aware of this and who is more likely to be accurate here (if there's any way to know that)? If I have learned anything in this process, it's that I have no stinking idea who to believe. I've heard that the Haslam plane is in Chicago RIGHT NOW picking up Lovie.

Does he know what he's talking about with rumors? I haven't heard directly from Basilio (whose show does suck, but he's also pretty connected), but one of his cohosts. Both have heard from separate people that Lovie is possible, and AA says that Tony's sources are much better than his own. This is an aside, but this would fit Hamilton's MO to have everyone waiting for him to announce Cutcliffe while he's secretly courting Lovie. Happened that way with Pearl.