Introduction for latest DB Commit Donald Warnell

[Alec Simpson]

https://ucla.rivals.com/news/introducing-donald-warnell

Here is my interview with latest defensive back commitment Donald Warnell out of Dickinson, Texas.

 

[dre8clap]

https://ucla.rivals.com/news/introducing-donald-warnell

Here is my interview with latest defensive back commitment Donald Warnell out of Dickinson, Texas.

I keep reading that he’s athletic and versatile and a steal. But why is he only rated a 2 star? Sounds to me like a lot of excitement over a 2 star. I guess that’s where ucla football currently stands.

 

[Alec Simpson]

I keep reading that he’s athletic and versatile and a steal. But why is he only rated a 2 star? Sounds to me like a lot of excitement over a 2 star. I guess that’s where ucla football currently stands.

There's a lot more to an athlete than his star rating. He has been highly productive at a top 200 program in the country. His body is college ready which is intriguing. Donald Warnell hold some very lofty power 5 offers which is a list I encourage all UCLA fans to look at.

 

[bruin1934]

Texas produces lots of Db’s and I do like his offer list.

 

[pick6kb]

There's a lot more to an athlete than his star rating. He has been highly productive at a top 200 program in the country. His body is college ready which is intriguing. Donald Warnell hold some very lofty power 5 offers which is a list I encourage all UCLA fans to look at.

Yup. He’s got a lotta real interest. Plus is rated 3 stars on 247’s composite rankings.

2 time ACC POY Travis Etienne who shredded my undergrad alma mater Virginia this past weekend was also rated 3, as was LB Isaiah Simmons, and CB Bryce Hall for the Cavs, all of whom are projected 1st/2nd round picks in the upcoming NFL draft.

We had plenty of 4 & 5 stars recruited under JMJ who were worthless & never saw the field as well.

Ratings are as much marketing tools as reality.

 

[dre8clap]

There's a lot more to an athlete than his star rating. He has been highly productive at a top 200 program in the country. His body is college ready which is intriguing. Donald Warnell hold some very lofty power 5 offers which is a list I encourage all UCLA fans to look at.

So if you think he’s so good, why isn’t he higher rated? Just trying to understand how a rivals staff thinks he’s so good when he’s only rated 2 stars.

 

[Rick Kimbrel]

So if you think he’s so good, why isn’t he higher rated? Just trying to understand how a rivals staff thinks he’s so good when he’s only rated 2 stars.

Some players are what you call late bloomers. Alterraun Verner was also a two-star until his senior season and he saw his rank rise to a three-star. Rankings are not a perfect science but to be used as a compass, a guide through the process.

 

[pick6kb]

So if you think he’s so good, why isn’t he higher rated? Just trying to understand how a rivals staff thinks he’s so good when he’s only rated 2 stars.

It's not about whether I think he is good or not. There are plenty of other top notch D-1 coaches who think he is pretty good. I cannot explain to you exactly why Rivals has him ranked at 2 and some others at 4, but there are plenty of reasons this happens as detailed below.

There is, and always has been, plenty of gaming of the rankings system. Players misreporting game stats which are not fact checked. Over reliance on camps which produce underwear all stars not football players (JMJ recruited plenty of those). Artificial bumps when commits start garnering interest from or commit to the Alabama's and Ohio State's of the world, thereby inflating their rankings and the team rankings commensurately.

I have said it before and will say it again. Just like the polls themselves, recruiting rankings are as much a beauty contest as reality. The are also a tool utilized by media, schools and fans to generate interest in programs and sell season tickets. Last year Juan Thornhill got drafted by the Chiefs in the 2nd round ... He was recruited by Mendenhall as a 2-star out of Altavista, VA.

I saw the same shit show at Virginia with Mike London who consistently brought in top talent but finished with bad records year in and year out, as we saw with JMJ at UCLA the last several years. Either they and/or Rivals missed on their evaluations, they do not know how to develop talent, strategy and in-game adjustments were not a strength, or all of the above.

But, recruiting rankings are no guarantee of success. The same folks on here who were whining about how Chad Morris at Arkansas was doing so much better because he had brought in better classes are nowhere to be found now with him getting fired 1.5 years in. Same with Willie Taggart at FSU. Manny Diaz had a wealth of talent to work with at Miami and a roster loaded with seniors, and they finished with just a couple wins better than CK.

Unless we know that the kid is not good, have watched his film, done an evaluation, I just don't understand how anyone can pass judgement on it one way or the other. There is enough evidence every season that there are plenty of misses both ways, up and down.

 

[pick6kb]

Some players are what you call late bloomers. Alterraun Verner was also a two-star until his senior season and he saw his rank rise to a three-star. Rankings are not a perfect science but to be used as a compass, a guide through the process.

Agreed. And the high school rankings are also significantly biased to size, strength and speed, which for most except a select few elite level athletes, get neutralized through strength & conditioning, development, technique and scheme at the next level.

And some kids simply decide not to do the camp circuit, results of which much of the rankings are based on, if they have offers they like and decide they don't need to pick up 15 more, or the one from that particular program they really feel they want.

 

[DMG63]

Agreed. And the high school rankings are also significantly biased to size, strength and speed, which for most except a select few elite level athletes, get neutralized through strength & conditioning, development, technique and scheme at the next level.

And some kids simply decide not to do the camp circuit, results of which much of the rankings are based on, if they have offers they like and decide they don't need to pick up 15 more, or the one from that particular program they really feel they want.

Arizona State has

Agreed. And the high school rankings are also significantly biased to size, strength and speed, which for most except a select few elite level athletes, get neutralized through strength & conditioning, development, technique and scheme at the next level.

And some kids simply decide not to do the camp circuit, results of which much of the rankings are based on, if they have offers they like and decide they don't need to pick up 15 more, or the one from that particular program they really feel they want.

SO FAR 2020
LSU 15 4 stars
Alabama 16 4 stars
Oregon 10 4 stars
Arizona State 6 4 stars
Stanford 6 4 stars
UCLA 1 4 star
Our recruiting results grade Fail
I want us to turn 4 stars into 5 stars not 2 stars into 3 stars

 

[pick6kb]

Arizona State has

SO FAR 2020
LSU 15 4 stars
Alabama 16 4 stars
Oregon 10 4 stars
Arizona State 6 4 stars
Stanford 6 4 stars
UCLA 1 4 star
Our recruiting results grade Fail
I want us to turn 4 stars into 5 stars not 2 stars into 3 stars

Okay.

 

[ervwald]

So if you think he’s so good, why isn’t he higher rated? Just trying to understand how a rivals staff thinks he’s so good when he’s only rated 2 stars.

Look at the offer list. They don’t care how many stars he has.

 

[1bruin1954]

It's not about whether I think he is good or not. There are plenty of other top notch D-1 coaches who think he is pretty good. I cannot explain to you exactly why Rivals has him ranked at 2 and some others at 4, but there are plenty of reasons this happens as detailed below.

There is, and always has been, plenty of gaming of the rankings system. Players misreporting game stats which are not fact checked. Over reliance on camps which produce underwear all stars not football players (JMJ recruited plenty of those). Artificial bumps when commits start garnering interest from or commit to the Alabama's and Ohio State's of the world, thereby inflating their rankings and the team rankings commensurately.

I have said it before and will say it again. Just like the polls themselves, recruiting rankings are as much a beauty contest as reality. The are also a tool utilized by media, schools and fans to generate interest in programs and sell season tickets. Last year Juan Thornhill got drafted by the Chiefs in the 2nd round ... He was recruited by Mendenhall as a 2-star out of Altavista, VA.

I saw the same shit show at Virginia with Mike London who consistently brought in top talent but finished with bad records year in and year out, as we saw with JMJ at UCLA the last several years. Either they and/or Rivals missed on their evaluations, they do not know how to develop talent, strategy and in-game adjustments were not a strength, or all of the above.

But, recruiting rankings are no guarantee of success. The same folks on here who were whining about how Chad Morris at Arkansas was doing so much better because he had brought in better classes are nowhere to be found now with him getting fired 1.5 years in. Same with Willie Taggart at FSU. Manny Diaz had a wealth of talent to work with at Miami and a roster loaded with seniors, and they finished with just a couple wins better than CK.

Unless we know that the kid is not good, have watched his film, done an evaluation, I just don't understand how anyone can pass judgement on it one way or the other. There is enough evidence every season that there are plenty of misses both ways, up and down.

Well said. Also there is our own admissions which remove quite a few of these kids from being able to enroll at UCLA. Here they have to be a student athlete where at suc, and other schools, they only need to be an athletic student and can major in DVD rewinding, paper shredding or ballroom adjusting.

 

[Rick Kimbrel]

Well said. Also there is our own admissions which remove quite a few of these kids from being able to enroll at UCLA. Here they have to be a student athlete where at suc, and other schools, they only need to be an athletic student and can major in DVD rewinding, paper shredding or ballroom adjusting.

At SC paper shredding would be a lot of work...

 

[1bruin1954]

At SC paper shredding would be a lot of work...

With all the corruption at sc paper shredding is a must.