Illinois Football Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1      

Dan

Dan
Admin
Dan
Welcome to the Illinois Football Recruiting Thread :illinois:

2025 Illini Football Commits

1) OL Michael McDonough (January 19th, 2024)
2) QB Carson Boyd (January 27th, 2024)
3) OL Griffin Rousseau (January 29th, 2024)
4) DB Andre Lovett (March 11th, 2024)
5) DB Xanai Scott (March 12th, 2024)
6) WR Brayden Trimble (May 20th, 2024)
7) DL Cameron Brooks (June 9th, 2024)
8) DL Isaiah White (June 10th, 2024)
9) DB Desmond Straughton (June 23rd, 2024)
10) DE Erik Gayle (June 26th, 2024)
11) RB Cedric Wyche (June 29th, 2024)
12) DB Robert Jones (June 29th, 2024)
13) ATH Jershaun Newton (July 4th, 2024)
 
#3      
phats22
200 (1).gif
 
#11      
lstewart53x3
Simeon Rice said:
For those counting, there are over 100 4-5* recruits committed to B1G teams, and UI has the same number committed to them as I do
Click to expand...
Football recruiting ratings get more useless every year.

From a recent article by Robert on Illiniboard:

“The national websites apparently no longer rate every recruit and just slot them based on the school they choose (with a sprinkle of inflation every year!). From my research in that article:

Individual player ratings from 247 for players in our 2014 class: 70, 76, 77, 78, 78, 79, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 85, 88, 91, 96.

Individual player ratings from 247 for our 2024 class: 82, 85, 85, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 87, 87, 88, 88, 88, 88, 88”

In 2014, our recruiting ratings ranged from 70 to 96. In 2024, our ratings range from 82-88.

In another article from Robert in the past few days, he also makes the point that a kid’s sophomore film will have 3,000+ views, whereas his senior film will have 20 views, even though senior film is infinitely more valuable in football.

www.illiniboard.com

The 90 Illini #79: Brandon Hansen

Ah yes, I can finally do one of my "when a player commits to Illinois super early, there's no chance he will be rated and evaluated properly" rants. Hansen committed during the fall of his junior year. And no one (besides Illinois fans) pays attention to Illini recruits beyond that
www.illiniboard.com www.illiniboard.com
 
#14      
therealmiket86
#15      
Mr. Tibbs
yea , this needs to be explained .

as I heard it , the 105 is a hard roster limit with no room for extra walk ons over that.

this undoubtedly will lead to more players transferring sideways or down a division in search of playing time . I can’t see how a policy that encourages transferring is good for the player or the sport .

I just don’t get the direction college sports are going in .
 
#16      
OskieWowWow
Mr. Tibbs said:
yea , this needs to be explained .

as I heard it , the 105 is a hard roster limit with no room for extra walk ons over that.

this undoubtedly will lead to more players transferring sideways or down a division in search of playing time . I can’t see how a policy that encourages transferring is good for the player or the sport .

I just don’t get the direction college sports are going in .
Click to expand...
They want to copy the NFL model because it's proven to rake in as much money as possible
- Fewer teams in larger divisions
- Rule changes (no stopping clock on first downs, helmet communication, 2 min warning, etc)
- Schools directly playing players
- Reducing seating for more "premium" areas
- Expanded playoffs that's only possible for ~5-10 teams to actually win
- International games

It's going to kill the sport because college football is not the NFL and eventually, it's already turning away fans outside the top 15-20 teams
 
Last edited:
#17      
therealmiket86
Scholarship limits were fine at 85. If anything expand it to 90 which wouldn’t be much more. Absolutely no need for it to be 105. This offseason will be wild as now every school will have an extra 20 scholarships they can use.
 
#18      
therealmiket86
Mr. Tibbs said:
yea , this needs to be explained .

as I heard it , the 105 is a hard roster limit with no room for extra walk ons over that.

this undoubtedly will lead to more players transferring sideways or down a division in search of playing time . I can’t see how a policy that encourages transferring is good for the player or the sport .

I just don’t get the direction college sports are going in .
Click to expand...

This kills walkon programs. Also if your a Mac program do you even recruit hs players now or do you just go after P4 recruits that are transferring down a level. This will be the Wild West.
 
#19      
Mr. Tibbs
therealmiket86 said:
This kills walkon programs. Also if your a Mac program do you even recruit hs players now or do you just go after P4 recruits that are transferring down a level. This will be the Wild West.
Click to expand...
A Mac school, or any G5 school , or even any FCS school really has no reason to recruit hs players anymore for 2 reasons
1. they can get plenty of players with 3 years to play 2, who will look for playing time transferring from a P4 school

2. if a hs recruit they do sign is any good , that player will transfer out after 1 or 2 years and get some real NIL money at a B1G , SEC, or B12 school

why put in all the energy looking for overlooked 2* & 3* hs players , when there will be less of them around after 60-70 programs will be signing up to 20 more of them each .

it’s as if the G5 schools are really going to be nothing more than a farm league .
 
Last edited:
#20      
Battle89
Mr. Tibbs said:
A Mac school, or any G5 school , or even any FCS school really has no reason to recruit hs players anymore for 2 reasons
1. they can get plenty of players with 3 years to play 2, who will look for playing time transferring from a P4 school

2. if a hs recruit they do sign is any good , that player will transfer out after 1 or 2 years and get some real NIL money at a B1G , SEC, or B12 school

why put in all the energy looking for overlooked 2* & 3* hs players , when there will be less of them around after 60-70 programs will be signing up to 20 more of them each .

it’s as if the G5 schools are really going to be nothing more than a farm league .
Click to expand...
Not sure that doesn't extend upward either. Take say the top 8 SEC teams, add in the top 4 schools in the B1G, ACC, B12 and that's potentially 400 players that might choose to be second or third or fourth string at a playoff-hopeful school rather than play here. We are a lot closer to a good MAC team than we are to a playoff team.
 
#21      
Chukwuwumba
therealmiket86 said:
Not a fan of this at all. This kills walk on programs and the transfer portal will be even worse. Imagine trying to keep 105 scholarship players happy.
Click to expand...
Could be wrong, but I thought I heard somewhere that with recent rulings, or upcoming one, walk ons for football typically wouldn’t exist anymore. Because they have the same routine eg practice schedules, meetings, workouts, food, game day, etc as a typical scholarship player so therefore would be considered a student athlete and should be afforded the same benefits as typical scholarship athlete for same sport.
I wonder if the last 10-15 or so scholarships would go towards scout team/walk ons.
 
#23      
Orange_Blue
Mr. Tibbs said:
A Mac school, or any G5 school , or even any FCS school really has no reason to recruit hs players anymore for 2 reasons
1. they can get plenty of players with 3 years to play 2, who will look for playing time transferring from a P4 school

2. if a hs recruit they do sign is any good , that player will transfer out after 1 or 2 years and get some real NIL money at a B1G , SEC, or B12 school

why put in all the energy looking for overlooked 2* & 3* hs players , when there will be less of them around after 60-70 programs will be signing up to 20 more of them each .

it’s as if the G5 schools are really going to be nothing more than a farm league .
Click to expand...

Or, do FCS programs and MAC programs become the new junior college feeders to larger programs? As a fan of FCS Northern Iowa, I wonder if the coach could sell the idea of playing time to in the MoValley could translate to more money with a Big Ten/SEC program rather than just playing special teams then transferring.
 
#24      
Mr. Tibbs
Orange_Blue said:
Or, do FCS programs and MAC programs become the new junior college feeders to larger programs? As a fan of FCS Northern Iowa, I wonder if the coach could sell the idea of playing time to in the MoValley could translate to more money with a Big Ten/SEC program rather than just playing special teams then transferring.
Click to expand...
there is no doubt in my mind that FCS & G5 schools will become in essence “farm leagues” for exceptional players to compete for a year or two , and then transfer up to one of the P4 for TV time & NIL money .
 
#25      
Navy_illini
Mr. Tibbs said:
yea , this needs to be explained .

as I heard it , the 105 is a hard roster limit with no room for extra walk ons over that.

this undoubtedly will lead to more players transferring sideways or down a division in search of playing time . I can’t see how a policy that encourages transferring is good for the player or the sport .

I just don’t get the direction college sports are going in .
Click to expand...
I think this increase opportunities for borderline D1 talent because there are 20 extra spots per school. The walk on would then have opportunities if they want at lower levels

If you put the time in for a revenue sport you should be on scholarship

I don’t know if NIL amounts will be sustainable from donors but we will see
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back