I dont get too wound up on recruiting anymore. Sort of a grain-of-salt approach. Ive seen it too many times in basketball and soccer where HS prep credentials meant almost nothing once the kids got on campus. Its like everybody is starting from ground zero again and each kid will respond differently -- regardless of inherent skill set. The ones that respond to coaching and self-motivation and added responsibility and competitive drive tend to pull away from the ones that hope it comes easy.
Not that Im against recruiting a soopa star, but I think after the Top-20 or so kids in the country, 21-500 is largely marginalized down to attitude and desire. I guess what Im saying is unless we're bringing in a Top-20 kid, I dont count the chickens. I dont undersell the possibilities however.
I think most coaches in most sports do a very poor job of recruiting competitive drive. They sign talent, but they dont sign the right headspace attached at the neck to leverage all that god given ability. I think UD is unique in that we have a number of coaches that seem to know how to identify players that are "undervalued" and probably better than players rated higher, because they see signs of competitive drive and attitude that lends well to growing as an athlete into something more than others predict.
I think Sheff does a good job of that. Certainly
Mike Tucker has written the book on scouring Dayton and Cincinnati for "unknowns" that turn into career starters. And Mike Kelly may have been the best of them all.
Too bad we did not get one of those big-time transfers but we were "in the game". Its about volume. You just keep knocking and I think by and large we are doing that. Its not easy to out-bid a BCS school for a kid's services. Most BCS campuses look like a Fortune 500 headquarters. Nothing we can do about the conference we're in. There are some obstacles beyond our control.