Welcome to the Party!
(I would have posted sooner today, but I was busy getting frisked by Andrew Cuomo)
The Columbia Football roster now includes not only the names of the "officially recruited" incoming freshmen, but also we have eight new names bringing the total number of new-comer players to 39! And our current roster is now at 101! If the Lions can keep the roster at or near 100 players this season, the rewards will be enormous. Depth has been the #1 problem for Columbia football over the years, and the lack of depth has affected every aspect of the program. The last two years, Columbia has basically gone through the season with about 75 guys on the roster. 25 more players contributing in games, practices, and the weight room will have an immediate positive impact.
Another nice feature is that there is some additional biographical material on many, (but not all), of the new guys on the CU site. Make sure you check it out; the guys in the football office and in Columbia athletic communications deserve to have their work acknowledged.
Some of the new names are young men we knew were coming to Columbia, but were not on that official recruiting list.
By the way, if there's anyone who can explain to me what the difference is between the officially recruited players and everyone else, please let me know.
The new names are:
1) Evan Alvarez NG, 6-1, 220 Bronx, NY, Riverdale Country Day School
2) Ben Britzius OL 6-3, 280 Marietta, GA, Wheeler H.S.
3) Jordan Callaway DE 6-4, 210 Simi Valley, CA Royal H.S.
4) Brandon Cole DB 5-9 165 Glendale, MD Sidwell Friends H.S.
5) Ben Gaston C 6-3 285 Richland, WA, Hanford H.S.
6) Derek Lipscomb LB 6-0 190 Cincinnati, OH, North College Hill H.S.
7) Colin McNamara OLB 5-9 190 Alva, FL, Bishop Verot H.S.
8) Tim Skalak OL 6-2 275 Massillion, OH Central Catholic H.S.
If you take the time to read the bios of these guys, you'll see their academic achievements are more than a little impressive. Does that mean, a) they're top-notch players and scholars who could have been admitted with or without football on the transcript? b) they're mostly marginal players joining the team to help boost Columbia's A.I. academic index? or c) a little mix of both those possibilities.
My feeling is that the right answer is "c." Some of these guys may be there for academics a little more than athletics, but others, like Ben Gaston, look like serious players. Since you can never really tell who the real impact players are going to be until training camp at least, I think we should all assume that every player on this roster has a shot to be All-Ivy.
posted by Jake @ 8:24:00 PM
14 comments
14 Comments:
My experience is a bit dated now, but in the past when the coaches submitted their recruiting lists, they would provide the names of players they had started to recruit and who had applied, but who they decided not to keep on the final list of offical recruits because they were not a high enough priority. That way the admissions office would know that certain kids in the pool who looked like recruits and who had been contacted by football were not in fact recruits deserving of whatever consideration was due official football recruits. Generally the statement would be, here are kids we talked to who if admitted may choose to walk on and whom we would welcome if they did so but we are no longer recruiting them and you should apply to them the same standards you apply to any non-recruited student. Those kids when admitted can be assumed to have good academic credentials but not to be the key athletes. It's not easy to be admitted from that category, although of course any male who combines very high academics with strong athletic achievement is desirable because it is unfortunately not as common among boys as among girls.
As far as I know, the difference between someone who has been officially recruited and someone who hasn't is the amount of contact the coaches have had with the young man and also whether or not they were given the football stamp on their application to help them through the process of getting into school.
Thanks guys, that actually does help.
Two of those names are huge impact type guys; amazing that we ould keep this under wraps. Asia Sunset and foehi, eat your black hearts out!
I doubt players who are not official recruits can be used in the AI calculations, so Jake your choice b I don't think applies.
Look at Ben Gaston, who is reported to be salutatorian of a small town high school in southeastern Washington State and who has excelled in two sports at the state level. The admissions office would like him anyway because he is a high achieving male from a smaller town in a part of the country that is underrepresented in the class. He has the profile of someone who could get admitted even though he may not have been one of the official recruits.
By the way, isn't the recruit cap a four year cap and not a year by year cap? How do we know how many of these kids are or are not offical recruits?
If somebody can be admitted without a "push" and thus doesn't take up a slot under the banding system, why not admit him as a noon--recruited player? The academics of some of these players are staggering-salutatorians and valedictorians. At least two of the names are those of players who have great football pedigrees as well.
This Columbia alum would like to congratulate the Sports Information Department for the excellent job it did in releasing pertinent information so quickly on the incoming freshman. I hope this is a harbinger of great things to come.
Who are the two possible impact players referred to above?
-Dr.V
I'd say Gaston and Skalank. Gaston solely because of his size and Skalank because he's coming out of a top-notch football program.
Ben Britzius has similiar impact potential to the other two linemen since he is 6'3" 280 and comes from the great state of Georgia where big kids learn to play football as soon as they can walk.
I'll buy that! It'll be interesting to see how many players we have when training camp ends. Very often the players who leave are the ones who see that a new dynamo at their position has entered the mix. Not always, but sometimes that's the case.
Hopefully, very few players will leave the team at any point this year. I think you reported that Coach Wilson intends to emphasize retention this year, which is a very smart move indeed. By the way, is there any discussion of reviving the junior varsity program now that the roster is over 100? Thanks for all the information, Jake.
Last I heard, CU was planning on trying to play at least 4 JV games this fall, assuming the roster size stays close to where it is right now.
Yes, more JV games would be huge. I think the development of the linemen alone would really benefit from a 4-game tilt. I think we also are going to have a bevvy of RB's who will need the extra games to keep their legs moving.
Post a Comment
<< Home