A Sea Of Red

to Louisville

you got a link to that cowboy?

Louisville just landed their second quarterback commitment in the 2010 recruiting class.
A week after landing Luke Woodley, Louisville received a verbal commitment from Mike Rocco, a 6-foot-3, 205-pound quarterback from Lynchburg (VA) Liberty Christian Academy.

"He talked with Coach (Matt) Wells and Coach Kragthorpe around 5 o'clock this evening and committed," Rocco's father, Frank, told InsideTheVille.com. "It is official."

Rocco, who threw for nearly 2,100 yards and 24 touchdowns with seven interceptions as a junior, also had an offer from Liberty. Rocco also considered a conditional offer from UNC and a greyshirt opportunity at Penn State. As a sophomore, Rocco threw for 2,200 yards and nearly 30 touchdowns, while completing 70 percent of his passes to earn all-state honors. He completed 66 percent of his throws as a junior.


"It really came down to people," Rocco said. "Coach Kragthorpe and Coach Wells were just the kind of people we were looking for. They were very hospitable and warm.

"We also love the fit for Mike in Louisville's offense. Mike plays in a one-back, multi-formation offense. As we watched some of the things that they do it was very similar to what Mike does in high school. So it was a very comfortable fit that way."

Rocco attended Louisville's camp last month and picked up an offer from the Cardinals shortly after. Last weekend, Rocco and his family made another visit to Louisville before calling the UofL coaching staff to announce his decision.

"We brought the whole family out there this weekend," Rocco said. "We had a chance to spend the weekend there and see the city and get to know the people even more. We feel good about it."

Rocco is the tenth prospect from the Class of 2010 to give the Cardinals a verbal commitment. Rocco also received interest from Wake Forest.

"We feel like Louisville is going to get that thing going the way it needs to be," Rocco said. "There was a lot of excitement around the building and it was a good feeling

http://louisville.scout.com/2/881126.html

why would he go there when they already have a QB in their recruiting class? That just seems dumb to me...

Just last week, Louisville picked up a verbal commitment from three-star quarterback Luke Woodley, and the Cardinals have a redshirt freshman in Zack Stoudt currently on the roster. [/b]"No matter where you go there is going to be competition," Rocco's father commented. "Mike has gone to a lot of those senior camps with the so-called five-star guys and he's out-competed them at every camp he's gone to. He's just going to do his best; you have to compete wherever you go."

[/b]

Wherever you go your going to compete, he feels as though he is better than the guy coming in.

The only good news is that QB Brown is probably in the streets and doing

I feel confident that having some experience with Kragthorpe in recruiting and knowing the Rocco family knows this business like few others, Mike was given many assurances to commit. Kragthorpe runs the type of offense that catches QBs' attention.

That is exactly what I was thinking Sly. Kragthorpe has help produce qb's over the last 7 or 8 years that know how to effectively run an offense and also really throw the ball.[/u]

Krathorpe probably won't be there next year if the season goes like most think it will. Most think Louisville is going to have a tough year and if so the UofL fans will demand a change be made. They are expanding the stadium to hold about 20,000 more people and people are already growing weary of the coach. They've gone from being in the Oragne bowl 3 years ago to finshing about last in the conference. So Mike will liekly be playing for a different coach if he sticks with this verbal.

libertyFANatic123 wrote:to Louisville

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

But apparently he wasn't meant to be a Flame.

flames1971 wrote:

libertyFANatic123 wrote:to Louisville

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

But apparently he wasn't meant to be a Flame.

You never know. A lot can happen this year, Louisville could have a bad season, its coach gets fired and the kid is thrown back into recruiting.

That's why we love (and hate) verbals.

Or he could leave, go to Louisville, and for whatever reason it doesn't work as planned and he transfers out.

yeah, this to me, seems like the best case scenario for us, short of him committing here. If he's good enough to beat out all of his competition, great. He'll be awesome. If he doesn't, we start to look pretty attractive to him.

Or we could pray pray pray

Do you want us to pray pray pray that Mike makes a complete sleaze ball move by backing out of his commitment or do you want us to pray pray pray that he fails and wish bad luck upon the kid?

Which one should we pray pray pray for?

SuperJon wrote:Do you want us to pray pray pray that Mike makes a complete sleaze ball move by backing out of his commitment or do you want us to pray pray pray that he fails and wish bad luck upon the kid?

Which one should we pray pray pray for?

you have such way with words SJ...how I've missed it so

SuperJon wrote:Do you want us to pray pray pray that Mike makes a complete sleaze ball move by backing out of his commitment or do you want us to pray pray pray that he fails and wish bad luck upon the kid?

Which one should we pray pray pray for?

No no no. Not bad luck, just that he changes his mind on where he wants to go.

flames1971 wrote:

SuperJon wrote:Do you want us to pray pray pray that Mike makes a complete sleaze ball move by backing out of his commitment or do you want us to pray pray pray that he fails and wish bad luck upon the kid?

Which one should we pray pray pray for?

No no no. Not bad luck, just that he changes his mind on where he wants to go.

It worked out well for us in the end when another LCA grad, Rashad Jennings, committed (and played for) the Pittsburgh Panthers.

you two have the same picture, and sometimes I get severely confused because I think one is making good posts and/or logical thoughts.

but in all fairness, 1971, i think we all applaud your restraint from using emoticons these past few weeks

rueful wrote:but in all fairness, 1971, i think we all applaud your restraint from using emoticons these past few weeks

Thank you. I am trying to be a better poster. Oh and BTW I had the pic before L4L. It actually confused me once because I thought I posted something that I knew I didn't- then I looked at the name.

flames1971 wrote:

rueful wrote:but in all fairness, 1971, i think we all applaud your restraint from using emoticons these past few weeks

Thank you. I am trying to be a better poster. Oh and BTW I had the pic before L4L. It actually confused me once because I thought I posted something that I knew I didn't- then I looked at the name.

I apologize for my avatar... I had the other logo, and then some guy said it brought up bad memories. So I changed it. And now I seem to have plagarized someone else! Oh well. I'll change it again.

Liberty4Life wrote:

flames1971 wrote:

rueful wrote:but in all fairness, 1971, i think we all applaud your restraint from using emoticons these past few weeks

Thank you. I am trying to be a better poster. Oh and BTW I had the pic before L4L. It actually confused me once because I thought I posted something that I knew I didn't- then I looked at the name.

I apologize for my avatar... I had the other logo, and then some guy said it brought up bad memories. So I changed it. And now I seem to have plagarized someone else! Oh well. I'll change it again.

Why don't you do something more personal. We've already got too many flames logos floating around (no offense, if you feel it, then go with it).

Andrew

This stinks for us, but Congrats to Mike and the family.