You've fixated on the departures of Jennings and Lewis, I assume because of how they were rated as high school recruits. I think one thing many people fail to realize is how truly arbitrary those rankings are. There are countless stories of schools paying them to improve their recruits' rankings (*cough* USC *cough*), or bumping certain players because of their attendance at events they hosted (*cough* Rivals *cough*).
There were 21 other players in Maryland's 2021 recruiting class, many of whom contributed far more on the field than Jennings or Lewis. Colby McDonald was one of the lowest-rated players in the entire class, but was the team's second-leading rusher as a true freshman despite only playing in 7 games. Hell, Ty Johnson was a two-star recruit and he's the best running back Maryland's had in a decade.
I really don't think it's fair to say that just because two highly-rated players decided to transfer that it's impossible to stack quality recruiting classes and grow as a program. There are a lot of ways to judge recruiting classes, and these rankings are one of the worst ones.
We can't say 12 months ago how significant it is that MD is landing them, and then pretend that losing them 12 months later doesn't hurt. You can't buy into the consensus rankings about their abilities when they sign, and then dismiss the rankings when they've departed.
I mean, they can be highly talented and not right for the program (not bought in, not willing to work, or whatever).
Or they could be not as good as their rankings suggested (possible).
But you recruited them. You brought them in. So you and your staff bought into their abilities, and hopefully that decision to recruit and pursue them was tied to more than the 247 / ESPN / Rivals recruiting rankings, right?
(Also beyond on-field production, you are trying to sell your fanbase on what you are building. So rankings matter in that regard too.)
So, it didn't work out. That's fine, things happen, but MD isn't Ohio State right now obviously. If the Buckeyes lose a couple of highly regarded guys, who cares? It's irrelevant, because they are always going to sign other 4 and 5 stars to replace them - immediately.
If MD loses the couple of highest rated guys in their classes... they might find other good players, but they aren't eating into the talent deficit they face vs. Ohio State / Michigan / Penn State if they aren't stacking, and have to deal with the immediate attrition. Then you are just trying to replace what you had, which already wasn't good enough.
(And in this case, these signings probably helped encourage Campbell to move on.)
And yes, certainly players can be undervalued or overvalued by the rankings individually. And yes, undervalued talent can be coached up or developed. And good coaches can find a way to scheme / maximize whatever talent they have. But pretty much each week is do you have enough talent to line up and compete? And when you are in the ballpark talent wise, you have a chance, and if the answer is no - then you don't.
It's good that McDonald showed something, since Boone also left.
Locksley is going to add talent, and he was pretty straight forward with his comments. He pointed to most of these guys not contributing statistically to the record this year. He talked about guys not being bought in.
I completely agree he needs guys who want to be here. And I think he'll go find guys who do, and he'll land talent who can help now.
But if Locksley (anyone, any program) is no longer going to be able to keep the guys you recruit... then any talk about building rosters just seems largely irrelevant to me. Patience wise, maybe it can still be argued that you are building culture, and need incremental steps... but personally, I think you ask for quicker results if this is the world now. Go get what you need in the portal to make quicker significant improvements.
