You’re moving the goalposts, dude. In your post, you literally cited reasons other than recruiting for why it didn’t work with Cal. That’s not unique to him. When I was referring to post-hoc, I’m saying you don’t take a top recruiting class, then they perform bad and then reinterpret the data as a bad recruiting class. That is a fallacy, sir. You’re applying post-hoc to something predictive. The issue would be something other than recruiting, be it fit, scouting, continuity, chemistry, injuries, morale, etc.