Throwback Thursday: Rutgers Football and Miami Ohio starters as recruits
One of The Knight Report’s weekly game preview pieces is our Throwback Thursday piece, where we compare the projected Rutgers Football starters as recruits to their team’s opponent each week.
With that being said, let’s compare the Scarlet Knights to the Miami (OH) RedHawks football team to see what they looked like and where they were ranked in high school.
Quarterback
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
QB | Athan Kaliakmanis | 91.20 (No. 202 in 2022) |
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
QB | Dequan Finn | 83.68 (No. 1115 in 2019) |
Running Back
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
RB | Antwan Raymond | 86.90 (No. 816 in 2024) |
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
RB | Kenny Tracy | 82.87 (No. 1266 in 2020) |
Wide Receivers
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
WR | Ian Strong | 84.54 (No. 1204 in 2023) |
WR | KJ Duff | 90.70 (No. 273 in 2024) |
WR | DT Sheffield | 88.69 (No. 37 JUCO in 2020) |
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
WR | Deion Colzie | 94.25 (No. 101 in 2021) |
WR | Cole Weaver | N/A (Unranked in 2023) |
WR | Keith Reynolds | 84.33 (No. 1242 in 2023) |
Tight End
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
TE | Kenny Fletcher OR Colin Weber | 88.33 (No. 474 NATL.) 79.10 (No. 1986 NATL.) |
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
TE | Brian Shane | N/A (Unranked in 2021) |
Offensive Line
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
LT | Dantae Chin | 82.50 (No. 1452 in 2022) |
LG | Bryan Felter | 85.53 (No. 805 in 2020) |
C | Gus Zilinskas | 80.56 (No. 1670 in 2021) |
RG | Kwabena Asamoah | 86.72 (No. 701 in 2022) |
RT | Taj White | 85.47 (No. 887 in 2022) |
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
LT | Eric Smith | 80.56 (No. 1876 in 2022) |
LG | Greg Smith Jr. | N/A (Unranked in 2023) |
C | Kris Manu | 83.15 (No. 1881 in 2024) |
RG | Austin Uke | 89.01 (No. 311 in 2021) |
RT | Drew Terrill | 79.36 (No. 2064 in 2022) |
Similar to last week, Rutgers Football has the majority of the higher ranked recruits in the starting lineup, but Miami (OH) does have some highly ranked high school prospects, as they boast the highest rated offensive lineman and highest rated wide receiver between the two programs.
Overall though, Rutgers has the higher ranked prospects as high school recruits for the majority here.
Defensive Line
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
DE | Eric O’Neill | N/A (Unranked in 2021) |
DT | Keshon Griffin | 82.83 (No. 1069 in 2021) |
DT | Zaire Angoy | 81.90 (No. 1294 in 2021) |
DE | Bradley Weaver | 80.11 (No. 1772 in 2021) |
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
DE | Adam Trick | 81.67 (No. 1617 in 2022) |
DT | Roosevelt Andrews III | 81.64 (No. 1841 in 2023) |
DT | Nasir Washington | 80.59 (No. 1658 in 2021) |
DT | Josh Lukusa | 82.34 (No. 1490 in 2022) |
Linebackers
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
LB | Dariel Djabome | N/A (Unranked in 2022) |
LB | Moses Walker | 91.63 (No. 208 in 2022) |
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
LB | Corban Hondru | 81.54 (No. 1397 in 2021) |
LB | Oscar McWood | N/A (Unranked in 2021) |
Defensive Backs
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
CB | Jacobie Henderson | 83.15 (No. 1314 in 2022) |
CB | Bo Mascoe | 85.80 (No. 933 in 2023) |
NB | Cam Miller | 91.02 (No. 239 in 2022) |
S | Jett Elad | 80.27 (No. 1920 in 2019) |
S | Kaj Sanders | 88.76 (No. 495 in 2024) |
POSITION | PLAYER | HIGH SCHOOL INDUSTRY RATING |
CB | Kaleb Martin | 82.16 (No. 2130 in 2024) |
CB | Luke Evans | 87.80 (No. 612 in 2023) |
NB | Silas Walters | N/A (Unranked in 2021) |
S | Eli Blakey | 81.58 (No. 1382 in 2021) |
S | Koy Beasley | 93.33 (No. 134 in 2024) |
While the offense was somewhat comparable when looking back at the high school rankings, the Scarlet Knights defense looks like it has a lot more talented prospects at first glance, especially in the secondary.
💬 Wondering what other Rutgers fans are saying?
Head to The Round Table and jump into the discussion →