damn that hurts. I'm usually pretty positive when it comes to our recruiting classes....but beside De Laura and Hobert I'm pretty underwhelmed when it comes to this group of signings. Leach needs to upgrade some of his staff with better recruiters. Especially LA Valley.
I read posts like this and then think about the other side of that coin (upgrading staff based on recruiting).
The other side of the coin part involves all the comments about how much it has hurt us in recruiting that our staff has suffered through so much turnover in recent years. "Not enough time to establish rapport and solid connections" seems to be a common thread to those comments.
Is this a "can't have it both ways" type thing? I mean how can you develop that stability, that most feel is necessary in establishing recruiting connections, and avoid the complaints about constant turnover in staff hurting our recruiting, when you are going out and changing staff yourself?
Who really knows? It's always possible there will be staff turnover no matter what? There's always a chance of an assistant or two moving on by his own choice.
Plus we will have a new DC. He may want to bring in a guy or two of his own, anyway? If he did, it would be a huge help if those guys were ace recruiters with solid west coast/California connections.
In a perfect word ANY staff changes would involve superstar recruiters who are also top level coaches, and already have solid connections built up in the areas we want to recruit.
A guy can dream.........huh?
The point still stands though. If we are having turnover of staff, for whatever reason, it goes against that "stability" that many people have mentioned as a key factor in our recruiting success or shortcoming. That might be able to be overcome with the exact "right" guy or two? I dunno for sure?
I'm not advocating one side or the other. Just saying that there are usually a couple of sides to the coin to consider.