Random Recruiting Thoughts

[Firebird]

1. Big XII country is a recruiting wasteland. Texas keeps the entire damn conference afloat. There are three Rivals top 25 classes from the Big XII-- Texas, OU, and A&M. There is one top ten team, UT at 4.

Contrast to the SEC--four classes in the top ten, (Bama, LSU, UGA, FLA), and 10 in the top 25 (Arkie, Ole Miss, S. Carolina, Auburn, Tennessee, Mississippi State). Even the ACC has more top 25 teams (FlaState, NC, Miami, VaTech.) Texas kids are the only thing that is keeping the elite Big XII teams anywhere near respectable. SEC and ACC country, which overlaps, is far deeper in talent than the Big XII. It will get worse as the plains states continue to empty out. Hell, even the Pac 10 managed to get three teams in the top 24 (USC,UCLA, Stanford).

2. Tradition and name still matters. Schools like Arkansas, UCLA, Texas A&M, Tennessee, Auburn, Miami, and Notre Dame still manage to outrecruit schools and conference foes that have in recent times performed far better on the field. Getting a new powerhouse started, especially in a BCS conference, continues to be an uphill battle. And Jim Harbaugh is doing something right out at Stanford.

3. We've gone over the calculus for the way Rivals does their class rankings. The biggest flaw in the system is that it does not take into account the players that schools already have on campus and doesn't weight according to need by position. For instance, it is very plausible that a team that has only three scholarship linebackers on campus but has six scholarship wide recievers would be smarter to recruit two three star LBs and one four star WR instead of two four star WRs and one three star LB. Yet according to the Rivals formula, if two schools found themselves in that situation, the one that went after the stars rather than the position need would get rewarded.

That's not to say that recruiting rankings are bunk or flawed (the correlation between performance and recruiting rankings among BCS schools is very, very strong). It is to say that just chasing stars can at times be counterproductive. Schools need to identify their needs and then target the best players at that position (or who could play that position) rather than simply looking to grab the best overall player on the board. Call this the Franchione Doctrine.

4. Texas and Oklahoma will continue to dominate the Big XII so long as they continue to dominate OL and DL recruiting in Texas. The two have traded back and forth at getting the best OL/DL in Texas for several years and the trend is simply becoming more pronounced. They pick who they want and leave the rest of the nation to fight over the pickings. Granted, this is Texas and so the pickings are pretty good, but there is still a noticeable gap. A top flight lineman in Texas would be foolish at this point to go anywhere else in the Big XII.

[TTURedRaider]

So where did you get these thoughts from?

[Firebird]

So where did you get these thoughts from?

From my brain.

[lonny23]

The foundation of a great team is along the lines and both Texas and OU have done well in that regard for years. Now saying that, I feel like the absolute #1 thing that is hardest to grasp is great DT's and that brings me to this chart:

http://texastech.rivals.com/TeamRank.asp?sort=0&year=2009&postype=12

The best Big 12 recruiting for DT this year was Mizzou at #4 overall. Texas Tech came in 6th, with Texas 7th, Colorado 18th, and OU 25th.

The Big 12 also does OK at DE with Texas coming in 2nd and 4 teams being in the Top 25:

http://texastech.rivals.com/TeamRank.asp?sort=0&year=2009&postype=11

There are also 5 teams in the Top 25 for OL, with Texas being 2nd:

http://texastech.rivals.com/TeamRank.asp?sort=0&year=2009&postype=2

I think the top 7 teams had solid classes, but there are a few clunkers in there at the bottom:

http://texastech.rivals.com/teamrank.asp?Sort=0&PosType=0&Year=2009&conf=0

Here is the complete formula to the rankings. Enjoy!:D

Here is the team ranking formula for those interested... (please keep in mind a statistician from UC-Berkeley developed this for us).

Please note you only take the top 20 prospects in this formula, ordered by # Stars descending.

POINTS = ((N / (N + 50)) * H) + ((50 / (N + 50)) * L)

where...

H = 250 for each 5-star commit + 140 for each 4-star + 75 for each 3-star + 20 for each 2-star + 10 for each 1-star

L = 18 for each 5-star + 12 for each 4-star + 8 for each 3-star + 3 for each 2-star + 1 for each 1-star

N = a big honkin' calculation, described below

CALCULATION OF N:
10 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (high school) ranked 1-10
9 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (high school) ranked 11-20
etc. down to...
1 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (high school) ranked 91-100

10 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (non-high school) ranked 1-10
9 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (non-high school) ranked 11-20
etc. down to...
6 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (non-high school) ranked 41-50

24 for each commit ranked #1 on his official position ranking
18 for each commit ranked #2-5 on his official position ranking
8 for each commit ranked 6-X on his official position ranking, where X is dependent on detail position, as listed below...

--Dual-threat QB: 25
--Pro-style QB: 25
--Running Back: 35
--All-Purpose Back: 15
--Fullback: 15
--Wide Receiver: 50
--Tight End: 20
--Offensive Tackle: 40
--Offensive Guard: 30
--Offensive Center: 10
--Defensive Tackle: 50
--Weakside Defensive End: 20
--Strongside Defensive End: 30
--Inside Linebacker: 35
--Outside Linebacker: 35
--Cornerback: 40
--Safety: 30
--Athlete: 25
--Kicker: (no points awarded for rank lower than 5th)

If the team's average stars are greater than 3, add (100 * (Avg stars -
> 3)) to N.

As far as your other points go, yes Texas (The state) supplies the conference as a whole. UT and A&M for the most part stay in state, but the other schools except maybe Baylor really work hard for out of state kids. Tech has started to get a decent stream of kids out of SEC country in recent years and that will only increase. Tech also does a good job getting kids out of Oklahoma. One thing that will probably increase over the years as a whole is how good the Big 12 South players are compared to the North. Baylor might become players in this game and Tech gets better every year. OSU will have a hard time gaining momentum because I think they burned a lot of bridges in Texas last year and it hurt them this year.

[TTURedRaider]

From my brain.

Okay but who is the we you are referring to here? You and your brain?

3. We've gone over the calculus for the way Rivals does their class rankings. The biggest flaw in the system is that it does not take into account the players that schools already have on campus and doesn't weight according to need by position. For instance, it is very plausible that a team that has only three scholarship linebackers on campus but has six scholarship wide recievers would be smarter to recruit two three star LBs and one four star WR instead of two four star WRs and one three star LB. Yet according to the Rivals formula, if two schools found themselves in that situation, the one that went after the stars rather than the position need would get rewarded.

That's not to say that recruiting rankings are bunk or flawed (the correlation between performance and recruiting rankings among BCS schools is very, very strong). It is to say that just chasing stars can at times be counterproductive. Schools need to identify their needs and then target the best players at that position (or who could play that position) rather than simply looking to grab the best overall player on the board. Call this the Franchione Doctrine.

[lonny23]

Okay but who is the we you are referring to here? You and your brain?The recruting rankings aren't an exact science. Brandon Williams was a 2-star DE in 2006 and now he's leaving after 3 years for the NFL. Tech has singed guys in recent years coming off of injuries and potential educational problems that might be gems. This Tech class is the best Leach has had yet and is a good foundation for the future regardless if the rankings say #34 in the country.

The #1 thing is the Rivals rankings really only compare the top 20 players on your list and we also know having 2 star players lowers your score. There is a lot to be said for teams recruiting their needs and Tech loses points every time they take a kicker (Last year) or get to the end and need DE's (This year and had some 2-stars). The rankings don't say much for guys like Matt Goetz, who was a 2-star based upon the past, but he's gotten 3 inches taller and 30 pounds heavier and at 17 is still growing.

[slorch]

1. Big XII country is a recruiting wasteland. Texas keeps the entire damn conference afloat. There are three Rivals top 25 classes from the Big XII-- Texas, OU, and A&M. There is one top ten team, UT at 4.

Contrast to the SEC--four classes in the top ten, (Bama, LSU, UGA, FLA), and 10 in the top 25 (Arkie, Ole Miss, S. Carolina, Auburn, Tennessee, Mississippi State). Even the ACC has more top 25 teams (FlaState, NC, Miami, VaTech.) Texas kids are the only thing that is keeping the elite Big XII teams anywhere near respectable. SEC and ACC country, which overlaps, is far deeper in talent than the Big XII. It will get worse as the plains states continue to empty out. Hell, even the Pac 10 managed to get three teams in the top 24 (USC,UCLA, Stanford).

2. Tradition and name still matters. Schools like Arkansas, UCLA, Texas A&M, Tennessee, Auburn, Miami, and Notre Dame still manage to outrecruit schools and conference foes that have in recent times performed far better on the field. Getting a new powerhouse started, especially in a BCS conference, continues to be an uphill battle. And Jim Harbaugh is doing something right out at Stanford.

3. We've gone over the calculus for the way Rivals does their class rankings. The biggest flaw in the system is that it does not take into account the players that schools already have on campus and doesn't weight according to need by position. For instance, it is very plausible that a team that has only three scholarship linebackers on campus but has six scholarship wide recievers would be smarter to recruit two three star LBs and one four star WR instead of two four star WRs and one three star LB. Yet according to the Rivals formula, if two schools found themselves in that situation, the one that went after the stars rather than the position need would get rewarded.

That's not to say that recruiting rankings are bunk or flawed (the correlation between performance and recruiting rankings among BCS schools is very, very strong). It is to say that just chasing stars can at times be counterproductive. Schools need to identify their needs and then target the best players at that position (or who could play that position) rather than simply looking to grab the best overall player on the board. Call this the Franchione Doctrine.

4. Texas and Oklahoma will continue to dominate the Big XII so long as they continue to dominate OL and DL recruiting in Texas. The two have traded back and forth at getting the best OL/DL in Texas for several years and the trend is simply becoming more pronounced. They pick who they want and leave the rest of the nation to fight over the pickings. Granted, this is Texas and so the pickings are pretty good, but there is still a noticeable gap. A top flight lineman in Texas would be foolish at this point to go anywhere else in the Big XII.

and water is wet...

[Firebird]

Okay but who is the we you are referring to here? You and your brain?
http://www.5atexasfootball.com/forum/vB/showthread.php?t=46167

[jtk1519]

I think the problem in the Big XII is recruiting bases. If you can't get into Texas and get some top talent as a Big XII team, you are :Censor:ed... big time. Name one other Big XII state that produces top talent. Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas? Nope. Now contrast that to the SEC and ACC. They have Florida which produces as much talent as Texas, but then they also have top talent producing states like Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Virginia, etc. and then you have some programs like LSU and Arkiesaws who also recruit Texas well.

Just file this as reason #4,619,402 why the Big XII sucks. Without Texas talent, this conference is incapable of sustaining itself and with the stranglehold Texas and Mobilhoma have on the top Texas talent, the other 10 team are left fighting for scraps. Colorado can survive because they recruit California well and Okie Lite can survive because they take great talent that other school wont take a chance on. Other than that though, most of this conference is just dragging the top teams down.

[cajun]

I think the problem in the Big XII is recruiting bases. If you can't get into Texas and get some top talent as a Big XII team, you are :Censor:ed... big time. Name one other Big XII state that produces top talent. Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas? Nope. Now contrast that to the SEC and ACC. They have Florida which produces as much talent as Texas, but then they also have top talent producing states like Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Virginia, etc. and then you have some programs like LSU and Arkiesaws who also recruit Texas well.

Just file this as reason #4,619,402 why the Big XII sucks. Without Texas talent, this conference is incapable of sustaining itself and with the stranglehold Texas and Mobilhoma have on the top Texas talent, the other 10 team are left fighting for scraps. Colorado can survive because they recruit California well and Okie Lite can survive because they take great talent that other school wont take a chance on. Other than that though, most of this conference is just dragging the top teams down.

This is true..

Another thing is every school in the nation has a shop set up in Texas...That makes it tough also for Big 12 teams....Iowa St just won't win many recruiting battles with say a Michigan or some of them....

[cajun]

One thing I've noticed is that Texas A&M is really hitting/recruiting Louisiana hard lately...They've already offered 6 or 7 Louisiana kids for 2010...I think that's great...Texas A&M has always recruited Louisiana decent, but I'm seeing more of an effort in the last couple years....I don't really like the way Texas Tech recruits Louisiana-kinda a last minute thing with them, in my opinion....

Texas Tech may offer a couple kids over here and if the kids decide to go someplace else lonny wanna talk bad about them...:rolleyes:

If you are going to fish better get to the good spots early and be serious about it...Just my opinion...

[HUM398]

One thing I've noticed is that Texas A&M is really hitting/recruiting Louisiana hard lately...They've already offered 6 or 7 Louisiana kids for 2010...I think that's great...Texas A&M has always recruited Louisiana decent, but I'm seeing more of an effort in the last couple years....I don't really like the way Texas Tech recruits Louisiana-kinda a last minute thing with them, in my opinion....

Texas Tech may offer a couple kids over here and if the kids decide to go someplace else lonny wanna talk bad about them...:rolleyes:

If you are going to fish better get to the good spots early and be serious about it...Just my opinion...

If you think about it...Texas A&M is in position to do really well in Louisiana...They are about 4 hours away for Baton-Rouge... Shrevport is about 6 or so hours... You can really get them to feel like they are a lot closer to home, as well sell them on their "tradition". you can use a similar approach that LSU uses on the Golden Triangle and SE Texas

[slorch]

Other than that though, most of this conference is just dragging the top teams down.

why are you so dumb sometimes. Or maybe it's just the rusty uteri in your head doing it to you...

Texas has won one conference title in the last 10 years, but it's just us leading the conference...and...um...oh...and the Sooners.

The conference has done nothing to resemble the Big 8 from the 70's and 80's that was really a two team race every year. The South division alone had 4 teams in the top 12 of the country basically all season. Mizzou, kansas, and nebraska, while not world beaters, were certainly competitive.

When folks talk about the stupidity and arrogance that is UT and its fans, remember this stupid f:Censor:ing post you made...:rolleyes: What's really funny is watching you include OU in your "greatness" list.

[jtk1519]

why are you so dumb sometimes. Or maybe it's just the rusty uteri in your head doing it to you...

Texas has won one conference title in the last 10 years, but it's just us leading the conference...and...um...oh...and the Sooners.

The conference has done nothing to resemble the Big 8 from the 70's and 80's that was really a two team race every year. The South division alone had 4 teams in the top 12 of the country basically all season. Mizzou, kansas, and nebraska, while not world beaters, were certainly competitive.

When folks talk about the stupidity and arrogance that is UT and its fans, remember this stupid f:Censor:ing post you made...:rolleyes: What's really funny is watching you include OU in your "greatness" list.

Big picture, pizza boy... big picture. Outside of Texas and the trash (and Nebraska in the 90s to a lesser extent), NOBODY has done anything of significance in this conference. Last year was a myth. All those supposed "great" Big XII teams were exposed for the frauds that they were in the bowl games.

Dollar Bill, for all his faults, foresaw this when he was AD at Nebraska and opposed the formation of the Big XII. He said at the time as soon as the Big XII formed, the power would shift to the South and stay with whoever laid the claim to Texas talent. Amazing how right he was.

[cajun]

If you think about it...Texas A&M is in position to do really well in Louisiana...They are about 4 hours away for Baton-Rouge... Shrevport is about 6 or so hours... You can really get them to feel like they are a lot closer to home, as well sell them on their "tradition". you can use a similar approach that LSU uses on the Golden Triangle and SE Texas

Thats true too...Like alot of New Orleans kids ending up somewhere in Mississippi...

I still believe if TT beat the bushes over here though they would be surprised at what they could pull...I could be wrong....

Like the kid from Shrevport who committed to Missouri as an example....Here's a kid I feel like TT should have known about...Not saying he will go to Missouri and be all world, but at 6-4 180 and fast he would be perfect in the TT system....That's just one kid as an example...If this kid will go to Missouri I'm pretty sure you show him some love you can get him at TT...

Not every case is the same...Maybe they knew about him and thought he wasn't TT material, I dunno....He could be LSU material for all I know, some on the Bayou forum questioned Miles on this kid, just saying...

L'Damian Washington
http://rivals100.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?pr_key=91265&Sport=1

[Firebird]

HUM and Cajun:

I also like that A&M has been hitting up LA pretty hard recently. Texas is always going to be our recruiting base, but with the amount of national attention Texas gets, any school not named "The University of Texas" needs to get creative to try and match what UT can do in state.

Louisiana State is always going to pretty much have their pick of the kids in LA, but Texas A&M has (and is trying to again) been able to come in and raid a few here and there. LA has lots of good players and LSU can't sign them all. The trick is going to be getting them to come west instead of signing with another SEC school.

I was really glad to see Jonathan Stewart stick with his committment and Patrick Lewis is IMHO a steal. Expect to see more from Sherman's class. They are trying to make Louisiana a regular stop on the recruiting trail instead of a sometime detour.

[cajun]

HUM and Cajun:

I also like that A&M has been hitting up LA pretty hard recently. Texas is always going to be our recruiting base, but with the amount of national attention Texas gets, any school not named "The University of Texas" needs to get creative to try and match what UT can do in state.

Louisiana State is always going to pretty much have their pick of the kids in LA, but Texas A&M has (and is trying to again) been able to come in and raid a few here and there. LA has lots of good players and LSU can't sign them all. The trick is going to be getting them to come west instead of signing with another SEC school.

I was really glad to see Jonathan Stewart stick with his committment and Patrick Lewis is IMHO a steal. Expect to see more from Sherman's class. They are trying to make Louisiana a regular stop on the recruiting trail instead of a sometime detour.

What I mean exactly by "showing love" is offering kids before they get "stars" attached to them and then sticking by them the whole year-it's a full time job...That first offer sometimes goes along ways in these young kids heads...Not every time of course, but kids can feel the "love" most times...I'm seeing that with Texas A&M and it will pay off...My crazy opinion of course...

[HUM398]

HUM and Cajun:

I also like that A&M has been hitting up LA pretty hard recently. Texas is always going to be our recruiting base, but with the amount of national attention Texas gets, any school not named "The University of Texas" needs to get creative to try and match what UT can do in state.

Louisiana State is always going to pretty much have their pick of the kids in LA, but Texas A&M has (and is trying to again) been able to come in and raid a few here and there. LA has lots of good players and LSU can't sign them all. The trick is going to be getting them to come west instead of signing with another SEC school.

I was really glad to see Jonathan Stewart stick with his committment and Patrick Lewis is IMHO a steal. Expect to see more from Sherman's class. They are trying to make Louisiana a regular stop on the recruiting trail instead of a sometime detour.

They will have to hit the spots Texas doesn't normally go for to put a better product on the field.

LA is a great place to start, A&M has the name to get some of those big time recruits looking for somewhere to play that isn't LSU. LA kids for the most part are vastly overlooked by the SEC, which lends me to believe that they will be more inclined to head to B/CS.

The pitch i would imagine is rather easy.

1. State of the Art Facilities
2. Pretty much the same climate
3. Closer to home then The eastern SEC teams.
4. Highly regarded education
5. Tradition
6. Play on National T.V occasionally through-out the season.
7. BCS conference

[KT2000]

The pitch i would imagine is rather easy.

1. State of the Art Facilities
2. Pretty much the same climate
3. Closer to home then The eastern SEC teams.
4. Highly regarded education
5. Tradition
6. Play on National T.V occasionally through-out the season.
7. BCS conference

Tradition #5? Friggin 2%er.

[lonny23]

One thing I've noticed is that Texas A&M is really hitting/recruiting Louisiana hard lately...They've already offered 6 or 7 Louisiana kids for 2010...I think that's great...Texas A&M has always recruited Louisiana decent, but I'm seeing more of an effort in the last couple years....I don't really like the way Texas Tech recruits Louisiana-kinda a last minute thing with them, in my opinion....

Texas Tech may offer a couple kids over here and if the kids decide to go someplace else lonny wanna talk bad about them...:rolleyes:

If you are going to fish better get to the good spots early and be serious about it...Just my opinion...
I really don't care where Tech recruits. Tech obviously recruits Texas, but they're also heavily into Oklahoma every year. 2 years ago, Tech was heavy into Arkysaw. Nowadays, Tech is heavy into Tennessee. Last year, Tech was all over the map with Virginia and Alabama among others.

As far as your beloved state goes, Tech had some offers out last year and stuck with the Celestie offer. For what it's worth, most of your kids are a lot more likely to go to the Aggies vs. Tech if they care anything about location and being closer to home. If they cared about winning, they'd never step foot in B-CS!:D

Part 2 of the for what it's worth department, Oklahoma kids are a lot more willing to go to Tech than A&M or Texas. The Okies don't have a lot of talent, but you can pretty well count on every 4 star in that state having a Tech offer every year.

[lonny23]

HUM and Cajun:

I also like that A&M has been hitting up LA pretty hard recently. Texas is always going to be our recruiting base, but with the amount of national attention Texas gets, any school not named "The University of Texas" needs to get creative to try and match what UT can do in state.

Louisiana State is always going to pretty much have their pick of the kids in LA, but Texas A&M has (and is trying to again) been able to come in and raid a few here and there. LA has lots of good players and LSU can't sign them all. The trick is going to be getting them to come west instead of signing with another SEC school.

I was really glad to see Jonathan Stewart stick with his committment and Patrick Lewis is IMHO a steal. Expect to see more from Sherman's class. They are trying to make Louisiana a regular stop on the recruiting trail instead of a sometime detour.The hard part is getting kids from SEC country to leave SEC country. Tech is making good inroads in Tennessee, but they still face guys who want to stay in the SEC. Tech also goes to Mississippi, but it's the same story.

[lonny23]

What I mean exactly by "showing love" is offering kids before they get "stars" attached to them and then sticking by them the whole year-it's a full time job...That first offer sometimes goes along ways in these young kids heads...Not every time of course, but kids can feel the "love" most times...I'm seeing that with Texas A&M and it will pay off...My crazy opinion of course...
Sure "Love" goes a long ways:

1. Tech got Joel Gray because they stuck with him after he got hurt, unlike Texas and Oklahoma.
2. Tech got Pearlie Graves because they stuck with him after he committed to Michigan.
3. The first offer does work, but dream schools and money trump that most of the time.
4. Don't be so caught up on whether or not Tech is offering Louisiana kids. Look at who they're offering and take it for what it's worth. I could care less where the QB comes from. I just want a good one. If Tech can get 5 great players from your side of the Red, that's fine. If they get 5 great Okies, that's fine, too.
5. Tech has 43 offers out right now for 2010. They're mostly Texans right now, but they include Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Hawaii. You can count on more states to be added after prospects come off the board during Junior Days. You have to recruit your base first and then move on to other locations. Texas never has to leave their base, but Tech always does and will.

[Firebird]

They will have to hit the spots Texas doesn't normally go for to put a better product on the field.

LA is a great place to start, A&M has the name to get some of those big time recruits looking for somewhere to play that isn't LSU. LA kids for the most part are vastly overlooked by the SEC, which lends me to believe that they will be more inclined to head to B/CS.

The pitch i would imagine is rather easy.

1. State of the Art Facilities
2. Pretty much the same climate
3. Closer to home then The eastern SEC teams.
4. Highly regarded education
5. Tradition
6. Play on National T.V occasionally through-out the season.
7. BCS conference

That pitch is very easy to make when you are making a bowl every season and contending for conference titles. But the fact is that A&M was 4-8 this past year and that matters when Alabama, Florida, Georgia, etc. come calling in LA. If Texas A&M can even get into plus territory, I think we start winning even more recruiting battles in LA.

I am cautiously optimistic about this class. I will not sit here and say that I am thrilled-- we did much worse than OU and Texas and lost most of our head to head battles with those two, the teams to beat in our division. The haul that we got is great for a 4-8 school but will not vault us to the top of the conference, which is where you want to be. Sherman did, at least, actually address team needs with the class. If Sherman can get into a bowl next year (win three more games), then I will think we're on the right track.

[jtk1519]

I thought Mack made some good points yesterday at his presser when he was asked why Texas doesn't recruit nationally...

Q: Are there any trends, anything different about this year in recruiting that you've seen from years past?

A: No, not really. I did think, for whatever reason, we had more really good players commit immediately at junior days last year, and that surprised us.

We didn't think we finished as well as we needed to. And all of a sudden we have a good bowl game. But we come in here and just about the best at every position started committing to us, and it just kind of steamrolled. And I think, again, some of that credit needs to go to Garrett for getting it started and making it okay to come and the future looks bright because every young person wants to play with a great quarterback for the future.

Secondly, I've talked to Terry Donahue probably 25 years ago, 20 years ago whether he quit at UCLA, and they recruited nationally a lot. And Terry said you get about 20 percent of the national kids. We usually offer 4 or 5 of them, we hope to get one, maybe we can get two. And that's something that probably won't change, because we have five kids on our team now from out of state and that's counting Derek Johnson today. And most of our out-of-state kids have ties.

So we understand that we'll take a shot out of state every now and then. If there's a tie, the two young men from Georgia and Alabama, Major (Applewhite) and Will (Muschamp) had ties with. The young man in Phoenix, his dad played for the Cowboys, so we felt we had a tie with him. And Derek Johnson had lived in El Paso at one time.

So you just throw out there the opportunity for them to come. You bring them in. If you like them, you hope it works. But again, if we're encouraging every kid to stay in the state of Texas, it's really hard unless the young man wants to leave his state for us to convince him that's the best thing to do. Because if it's in state or out of state, we want to make sure that we do really well at home.

Q: Why limit that to four or five when schools that are similar to you, Florida, same recruiting as Texas and USC, same recruiting, he'll offer 30 to 40 out of state guys and take their chances with that?

A: I do think our state is a state that commits early. And we want to make sure that we do our job in state. And if we do not, then we're not going to make it in my estimation, and with the passion of the high school football coaches in the state of Texas, if we don't give them proper attention and recruit the guys properly in this state, and if we're late coming back on them, there are so many other people recruiting them in this state, most of the kids that will be in here on Sunday already have 18 offers.

So they're going to ask me, Sunday, are you going to offer me? If not, I'm going to commit to somebody else when I leave. I don't think that's the way everywhere.

So for us to properly evaluate 30 guys out of state it's going to take a whole lot more money, it's going to take a whole lot more time, and we're going to have to slow down on our early recruiting. And we'll lose some really key players in state in our estimation, if we start doing that.

So if we'll continue to do what we're doing in-state and keep our foothold here, and we would like to get the four guys we offered. We'd like to do that. Maybe we'd need to offer eight to get four, but we do not want to take the emphasis away from our state. That's really, really important to me and to our staff.

[Firebird]

I thought Mack made some good points yesterday at his presser when he was asked why Texas doesn't recruit nationally...

Mack and Co. have the right tact. They do not need to offer nationwide. If they hit homeruns inside the state they are guaranteed to have a class that will be about as good as anyone. A class that can play on the field with anyone.

[pied]

Mack and Co. have the right tact. They do not need to offer nationwide. If they hit homeruns inside the state they are guaranteed to have a class that will be about as good as anyone. A class that can play on the field with anyone.


I don't disagree, but I think they could get more cherries so to speak w/a little more effort there. If a$m were more competitive in state they would be in a much more needy position in needing OOS prospects. As it is, they seem to get in late on some that we could possibly get in on.

Then again, it's hard to argue the success on or off the field the last ten years or so.

Note, I said hard to argue, not to say 2-5 teams would have better arguments. I am ok w/that.

[lonny23]

That pitch is very easy to make when you are making a bowl every season and contending for conference titles. But the fact is that A&M was 4-8 this past year and that matters when Alabama, Florida, Georgia, etc. come calling in LA. If Texas A&M can even get into plus territory, I think we start winning even more recruiting battles in LA.

I am cautiously optimistic about this class. I will not sit here and say that I am thrilled-- we did much worse than OU and Texas and lost most of our head to head battles with those two, the teams to beat in our division. The haul that we got is great for a 4-8 school but will not vault us to the top of the conference, which is where you want to be. Sherman did, at least, actually address team needs with the class. If Sherman can get into a bowl next year (win three more games), then I will think we're on the right track.If I were an Aggie, I wouldn't give a flying fart about the class. You always have a decent class (Most years aren't any worse or any better). If I were you, I'd be worried about how good the coaching staff is!:D

I take that back. If I were an Aggie, I'm not sure what I would be worried about!:D

[Dawg Fan]

If I were an Aggie, I wouldn't give a flying fart about the class. You always have a decent class (Most years aren't any worse or any better). If I were you, I'd be worried about how good the coaching staff is!:D

I take that back. If I were an Aggie, I'm not sure what I would be worried about!:D


don't be a dick:rolleyes: How many games did Leach win his first year? Lets give the staff a couple of years to get things going for goodness sake..

BTW we are all very thankful you are not an Aggie:p

[jtk1519]

How many games did Leach win his first year?

Seven

[lonny23]

I thought Mack made some good points yesterday at his presser when he was asked why Texas doesn't recruit nationally...
I'll tell you why Mack doesn't recruit out of state and I ran the numbers yesterday and I have to tip my hat to the job Texas does because it's truer for them than anybody in the country.

BY AND LARGE, TEXAS GETS WHO THEY WANT TO GET.

I'm sure some of it is they offer guys they think they can get, but they also get top-notch guys from Texas. The end result is Texas gets who they want early and starts working on the next class really before they get to the point of offering at Junior Day. It's really smart to hold on to an offer and wow the guys at Junior Day. I gripe about the pressure tactics at times, but the 'horns do have a lot of kids beating down the door wanting to play there.

Anyway, the numbers for 2009:

1. UT- 20 recruits on 32 offers
2. A&M- 28 recruits on 80 offers
3. Tech- 26 recruits on 87 offers
4. OU- 23 recruits on 93 offers
5. Okie Lite- 23 recruits on 103 offers

I also counted out of state offers, how global the teams go, and how successful they are:

Texas teams:

1. UT- 19-25 in Texas and 1-7 to 6 states outside Texas
2. A&M- 24-59 in Texas and 4-21 to 8 states outside Texas
3. Tech- 21-57 in Texas and 5-30 to 11 states outside Texas

Oklahoma teams:

1. OU- 5-9 in Oklahoma and 18-84 to 21 states outside Oklahoma (11-38 in Texas and 7-46 for the rest)
2. Okie Lite- 7-14 in Oklahoma and 16-89 to 12 states outside Oklahoma (7-49 in Texas and 9-40 for the rest)

[lonny23]

I don't disagree, but I think they could get more cherries so to speak w/a little more effort there. If a$m were more competitive in state they would be in a much more needy position in needing OOS prospects. As it is, they seem to get in late on some that we could possibly get in on.

Then again, it's hard to argue the success on or off the field the last ten years or so.

Note, I said hard to argue, not to say 2-5 teams would have better arguments. I am ok w/that.
1. Texas should chase better talent even though the %'s aren't as good with them.
2. The flipside is Texas owes these kids something if they're going to use scare tactics such as "Don't visit this place or we'll pull your offer". If you're going to tell kids that, you better not be trying to find a better date for the prom once they agree to play at Texas.
3. Sometimes it almost seems like Texas doesn't think they can play football in the other states, but those guys have talent, too.
4. There is something to be said for the coaching and player development in Texas, but I did read something interesting a few days ago when somebody said you have to watch out for kids from Texas because some guys come into college almost a finished product (Size, speed, and knowledge of the game), whereas somebody from Pahokee, FL might still be growing, developing, and learning from good coaching.

[lonny23]

don't be a dick:rolleyes: How many games did Leach win his first year? Lets give the staff a couple of years to get things going for goodness sake..

BTW we are all very thankful you are not an Aggie:p
Dude, it's true. A&M always has one of the best classes. I'm sorry, but any coach that goes into that town should be winning a lot more than they do.

Since you want to compare, let's compare:

Leach went 7-6 and lost a bowl game in 2000. This was his first college head coaching job at a major level. He instituted an all-out passing offense on a team that had been running and he also took over a team that had traditionally struggled at recruiting and was currently still serving probation sanctions from various violations.

Sherman went 4-8 in 2008. He was an experienced coach as an assistant and was also a NFL head coach. His offense is not lights-out radically different from Fran's (08 A&M passed a little more, but was way more effective, which was contrasted with a running game that went from good to horrible, but they still tried). He took over a stable of Top 20 recruiting classes and A&M hasn't been on probation for a while.

I'm sorry, but Sherman didn't come close to matching Leach from 2000.

[Firebird]

Dude, it's true. A&M always has one of the best classes. I'm sorry, but any coach that goes into that town should be winning a lot more than they do.

Since you want to compare, let's compare:

Leach went 7-6 and lost a bowl game in 2000. This was his first college head coaching job at a major level. He instituted an all-out passing offense on a team that had been running and he also took over a team that had traditionally struggled at recruiting and was currently still serving probation sanctions from various violations.

Sherman went 4-8 in 2008. He was an experienced coach as an assistant and was also a NFL head coach. His offense is not lights-out radically different from Fran's (08 A&M passed a little more, but was way more effective, which was contrasted with a running game that went from good to horrible, but they still tried). He took over a stable of Top 20 recruiting classes and A&M hasn't been on probation for a while.

I'm sorry, but Sherman didn't come close to matching Leach from 2000.

That's true, he didn't. I don't know of any Aggie that is happy with 2008s year. IMHO, the Arkansas State loss was the only truly inexcusable one, however.

We have discussed some of this a bit before. For instance, how many scholarship linemen did Leach have when he arrived on campus? Enough to put together a two deep? If he did, then that is a luxury that Sherman didn't have.

Even the Horns on here, in their lucid moments, will admit that although Fran signed highly ranked classes, he did virtually no planning when it came to signing and offering players. He liked to see the Rivals stars and gave little thought to what sort of a team he could actually field.

I'll direct you to a good post on Texags that explains the problem of previous recruiting rankings and why they aren't what they seem to be:

http://www.texags.com/main/forum.reply.asp?topic_id=1355389&forum_id=5

[lonny23]

That's true, he didn't. I don't know of any Aggie that is happy with 2008s year. IMHO, the Arkansas State loss was the only truly inexcusable one, however.

We have discussed some of this a bit before. For instance, how many scholarship linemen did Leach have when he arrived on campus? Enough to put together a two deep? If he did, then that is a luxury that Sherman didn't have.

Even the Horns on here, in their lucid moments, will admit that although Fran signed highly ranked classes, he did virtually no planning when it came to signing and offering players. He liked to see the Rivals stars and gave little thought to what sort of a team he could actually field.

I'll direct you to a good post on Texags that explains the problem of previous recruiting rankings and why they aren't what they seem to be:

http://www.texags.com/main/forum.reply.asp?topic_id=1355389&forum_id=5
I don't know exactly how many lineman he had, but I do know he was operating a team that had reduced scholarships when he took over.

[slorch]

don't be a dick:rolleyes: How many games did Leach win his first year? Lets give the staff a couple of years to get things going for goodness sake..

BTW we are all very thankful you are not an Aggie:p

Leach has never had a losing season at Tech, and arguably never had the talent the Aggies have.

Other than that, i guess you have a point.

[slorch]

I don't know exactly how many lineman he had, but I do know he was operating a team that had reduced scholarships when he took over.

not to mention the fact that they went from basically a power I running attack to the Air Raid, which requires vastly different blocking skills from the OL. That was the time when Tech would finish the game and the opponent would just be shaking their heads, saying Kliff KIngsbury was the toughest SOB they ever played. He spent a lot of time running for hhis life, and that was IF he saw them coming first.

Sherman's 2008<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Leach's 2000

[Dawg Fan]

Leach has never had a losing season at Tech, and arguably never had the talent the Aggies have.

Other than that, i guess you have a point.

so did Leach's team get better after that first year? Everyone is ready to write Sherman off after one year with a team he inherited that was in complete disarray. I think Leach would have struggled with the team Sherman had to deal with. JMO

[pied]

1. Texas should chase better talent even though the %'s aren't as good with them.-I don't disagree with that
2. The flipside is Texas owes these kids something if they're going to use scare tactics such as "Don't visit this place or we'll pull your offer". If you're going to tell kids that, you better not be trying to find a better date for the prom once they agree to play at Texas.-These scare tactics are done by every coach in the country that has the leverage to do so.
3. Sometimes it almost seems like Texas doesn't think they can play football in the other states, but those guys have talent, too.-I think Mack is playing the part that Texas has everything you need and if you recruit it well, you can satisfy your needs. You also don't read much about HS coaches having any issues w/Texas' program. I think the staff goes out of their way to cultivate those relationships at the risk of not recruiting potentially better OOS players in favor of the coaches at home.
4. There is something to be said for the coaching and player development in Texas, but I did read something interesting a few days ago when somebody said you have to watch out for kids from Texas because some guys come into college almost a finished product (Size, speed, and knowledge of the game), whereas somebody from Pahokee, FL might still be growing, developing, and learning from good coaching.

Very possible. There are some programs in this state that don't produce as developed prospects.

[pied]

so did Leach's team get better after that first year? Everyone is ready to write Sherman off after one year with a team he inherited that was in complete disarray. I think Leach would have struggled with the team Sherman had to deal with. JMO

I think this class '10 will be what determines Sherman's fate. He failed at getting the type of players to beat Texas/ou and Tech this year. Geting CM was a big coup, but in the end Texas/ou/LSU did not make a serious run for him. It may prove to have been a very poor decision by these programs.

[cajun]

4. Don't be so caught up on whether or not Tech is offering Louisiana kids. Look at who they're offering and take it for what it's worth. I could care less where the QB comes from. I just want a good one. If Tech can get 5 great players from your side of the Red, that's fine. If they get 5 great Okies, that's fine, too.
5. Tech has 43 offers out right now for 2010. They're mostly Texans right now, but they include Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Hawaii. You can count on more states to be added after prospects come off the board during Junior Days. You have to recruit your base first and then move on to other locations. Texas never has to leave their base, but Tech always does and will.

I'm not caught up at all really...I was just making an observation about A&M and Texas Tech recruiting Louisiana....You are the one that seems to be caught up when Louisiana Kids don't consider Tech, at least that's what your previous messages indicated...

Looking at your post here with 43 offers out and no La kids offered that tells me you will probably see 0-1 Louisiana kid at Tech in 2010 at this rate...That's fine with me if that's how they wanna do things....Texas A&M on the other hand may pull 3-5 La kids in 2010...That's fine with me also....

You are kidding yourself though if you think TT will ever make a living in Tennessee and Hawaii....:rolleyes:

You'd be better served throwing some "love" to the Pelicans.....

[lonny23]

so did Leach's team get better after that first year? Everyone is ready to write Sherman off after one year with a team he inherited that was in complete disarray. I think Leach would have struggled with the team Sherman had to deal with. JMO
1. Yes, Tech got better.
2. Yes, A&M can get better.
3. A&M should never be 4-8 with their talent level.
4. I still say Sherman can't be expected to be too much of a miracle worker because he got fired with Brett Favre at QB.
5. I don't expect Sherman to ever be any more than a 7-5 and 8-4 in a good year coach at A&M and they should so better than that with their talent.
6. Here's my take. A&M better get in gear FAST because they only have a couple of years before they start to lose the stream of talent that they get and that talent will start to head to Lubbock, Waco, Fort Worth, and Houston in droves and they'll really be in trouble.

[lonny23]

I think this class '10 will be what determines Sherman's fate. He failed at getting the type of players to beat Texas/ou and Tech this year. Geting CM was a big coup, but in the end Texas/ou/LSU did not make a serious run for him. It may prove to have been a very poor decision by these programs.
I'll give you the "Lonny the amateur recruiter" stance:

It's better to chase a 5-star recruit THIS year that you MIGHT get than wait until NEXT year when you MIGHT NOT get the other guy. UT, OU, and LSU didn't chase him because they want Lache Seastrunk, but AT LEAST 2 of those teams won't get him, either. I'm sure somebody in the group THINKS they're getting Seastrunk and somebody PROBABLY has gotten word to him that they didn't chase Michael because they want him, but I also know a few teams are going to get left at the altar and we're talking about the whims of 17-19 year old kids!:D

I absolutely refuse to use the age-old analogy to describe the situation because I hate that term!:D

[lonny23]

I'm not caught up at all really...I was just making an observation about A&M and Texas Tech recruiting Louisiana....You are the one that seems to be caught up when Louisiana Kids don't consider Tech, at least that's what your previous messages indicated...

Looking at your post here with 43 offers out and no La kids offered that tells me you will probably see 0-1 Louisiana kid at Tech in 2010 at this rate...That's fine with me if that's how they wanna do things....Texas A&M on the other hand may pull 3-5 La kids in 2010...That's fine with me also....

You are kidding yourself though if you think TT will ever make a living in Tennessee and Hawaii....:rolleyes:

You'd be better served throwing some "love" to the Pelicans.....
1. A lot of this is simple geography. I don't check how many offers to LA schools that the Texas schools make, but I do see who the big-time LA kids have on their list of teams they're considering. Generally-speaking, kids that live in LA and DON'T like close to Texas DON'T give a lot of thought to heading west. Kids from the middle or east parts of the state generally look to the east if they don't stay in state.
2. I've said it before, but it seems to me from TV and the newspaper and just checking out the general public, that it almost seems like people in Louisiana think the world ends at the western boundary of the state. I've often said that Shreveport-Bossier City are almost like Texas and have more of a Texas feel than the middle of the state. I think the same can be said for Lake Charles, Natchitoches, and any other place pretty close to the line.
3. I think teams should first recruit their home state and then go from there if they need other players. Tech will have a whole new set of offers out there after Texas' Junior Days, but they at a minimum had to beat OU and UT to the punch as far as who they were going to offer to stem the tide of getting kids to commit at Junior Days. It's not like Tech is offering garbage kids. Many of those offers are out to 4 and 5-star kids.
4. I never said Tech was going to make a living off of Hawaii, Tennessee, or any other state. All I said was that they have good contacts to get good players. The odds are Sam Fehoko's brother will end up at Tech and he'll be a 3 or 4-star from Hawaii. Being in Hawaii gave Tech a chance to go after Teo. Being in Tennessee gives Tech a chance to go after 3 and 4-star kids over there. There aren't a lot, but Tech can chase them. The Okies might only have about 5-8 players a year with 4 stars, but Tech can chase all of them and usually does. In 08, Tech signed 4 of the top 15 players from Oklahoma (Harrison Jeffers was a 4-star RB) and were in on Jameel Owens, Stacey McGee, Kye Staley, and K.J. Williams. Tech got 4-star Graves this year and was chasing most of the top 16 players from OK.
5. Location is a huge factor in getting kids, especially the mama's boys. At the end of the day, I bet Pearlie Graves and his mama talked about Lubbock being a lot closer to Tulsa than Ann Arbor.
6. Lubbock to

Albuquerque 321 miles
Oklahoma City 350 miles
Dallas 351 miles
Tulsa 456 miles
Houston 519 miles
Shreveport 537 miles
New Orleans 864 miles

When you run the numbers, you know the smartest thing for Tech to do is chase the 4-star kids from New Mexico (Just not enough of them as there have been only 3 players since 06 that were 3 or 4-star players and Tech didn't want Landry Jones) because that state doesn't have a BCS university and Tech is close. Tech hits OK pretty well and hits Dallas, but the recruiting is going to taper off in LA unless it's some kid close to the Texas line or a 5-star guy like Davenport. Tech's LA offers were to:

Lake Charles (30 miles from border) for E.J. Celestie
Coushatta (30 miles from border) for Bennie Logan
Shreveport (15 miles from border) for Jonathan Stewart
Mansfield (15 miles from the border) for Chris Davenport

If you want more Tech offers for LA, move your state closer to West Texas. I mean Tech to a certain extent is wasting their time on a lot of guys who will say "Why should I go 800 miles to West Texas when I can go to another SEC besides LSU that is a lot closer." Another factor that I think should be in there is that besides the guys who live close to Texas, I think there is a lot more hate factor towards Texas from LA than states like Tennessee, Virginia, MS, and others. My big gripe about LA kids not looking west for college isn't really about not looking at Tech, but the fact that they usually don't look at A&M or Texas, either. I know Tech needs to try for more kids from the state because you never know if you'll get a kid until you ask, but they're also looking at wanting kids and location doesn't matter to them, but it does matter more for the kids and Tech should play their hand smart. For the record, Tech offered:

4 LA kids in 09 and got Celestie
0 LA kids in 07 and 08
7 LA kids in 06 (Chris Mitchell-Marrero, Kentrell Lockett-Hahnville, Cory Chappell-Baton Rouge, Chaz Washington-Destrehan, and Jai Eugene-Destrehan) and got 2 (Brian Duncan-Baton Rouge and Jonathan Hollins-Baton Rouge)
1 LA kid in 05 from Shreveport that went to 'bama

Just wait, your LA offers from Tech will be headed your way soon.

Texas offered Perriloser in 05 and nobody else since then.

Of the 3, A&M is in the best position geographically to get LA kids and I'd even agree that A&M is the most like home for most of the kids that don't live in New Orleans.

A&M offered

05 3 recruits from LA and got 1. Nic Harris got away, but they knew he'd be a good Aggie harkening us back to the days of yore!
06 5 recruits and got 0.
07 3 recruits and got 1.
08 1 recruit and got 0.
09 9 recruits and got 3.

05-09 totals:

Texas 1 LA offer and 0 signees
Tech 12 LA offers and 3 signees
A&M 21 LA offers and 5 signees

8 signees out of 34 offers is probably par for the course for getting out of state kids, but you have to expect Tech, A&M, and Texas to chase the kids from the home state first because they'll start off with more loyalty and name brand affiliation for Big 12 football.

[cajun]

1. A lot of this is simple geography. I don't check how many offers to LA schools that the Texas schools make, but I do see who the big-time LA kids have on their list of teams they're considering. Generally-speaking, kids that live in LA and DON'T like close to Texas DON'T give a lot of thought to heading west. Kids from the middle or east parts of the state generally look to the east if they don't stay in state.
2. I've said it before, but it seems to me from TV and the newspaper and just checking out the general public, that it almost seems like people in Louisiana think the world ends at the western boundary of the state. I've often said that Shreveport-Bossier City are almost like Texas and have more of a Texas feel than the middle of the state. I think the same can be said for Lake Charles, Natchitoches, and any other place pretty close to the line.
3. I think teams should first recruit their home state and then go from there if they need other players. Tech will have a whole new set of offers out there after Texas' Junior Days, but they at a minimum had to beat OU and UT to the punch as far as who they were going to offer to stem the tide of getting kids to commit at Junior Days. It's not like Tech is offering garbage kids. Many of those offers are out to 4 and 5-star kids.
4. I never said Tech was going to make a living off of Hawaii, Tennessee, or any other state. All I said was that they have good contacts to get good players. The odds are Sam Fehoko's brother will end up at Tech and he'll be a 3 or 4-star from Hawaii. Being in Hawaii gave Tech a chance to go after Teo. Being in Tennessee gives Tech a chance to go after 3 and 4-star kids over there. There aren't a lot, but Tech can chase them. The Okies might only have about 5-8 players a year with 4 stars, but Tech can chase all of them and usually does. In 08, Tech signed 4 of the top 15 players from Oklahoma (Harrison Jeffers was a 4-star RB) and were in on Jameel Owens, Stacey McGee, Kye Staley, and K.J. Williams. Tech got 4-star Graves this year and was chasing most of the top 16 players from OK.
5. Location is a huge factor in getting kids, especially the mama's boys. At the end of the day, I bet Pearlie Graves and his mama talked about Lubbock being a lot closer to Tulsa than Ann Arbor.
6. Lubbock to

Albuquerque 321 miles
Oklahoma City 350 miles
Dallas 351 miles
Tulsa 456 miles
Houston 519 miles
Shreveport 537 miles
New Orleans 864 miles

When you run the numbers, you know the smartest thing for Tech to do is chase the 4-star kids from New Mexico (Just not enough of them as there have been only 3 players since 06 that were 3 or 4-star players and Tech didn't want Landry Jones) because that state doesn't have a BCS university and Tech is close. Tech hits OK pretty well and hits Dallas, but the recruiting is going to taper off in LA unless it's some kid close to the Texas line or a 5-star guy like Davenport. Tech's LA offers were to:

Lake Charles (30 miles from border) for E.J. Celestie
Coushatta (30 miles from border) for Bennie Logan
Shreveport (15 miles from border) for Jonathan Stewart
Mansfield (15 miles from the border) for Chris Davenport

If you want more Tech offers for LA, move your state closer to West Texas. I mean Tech to a certain extent is wasting their time on a lot of guys who will say "Why should I go 800 miles to West Texas when I can go to another SEC besides LSU that is a lot closer." Another factor that I think should be in there is that besides the guys who live close to Texas, I think there is a lot more hate factor towards Texas from LA than states like Tennessee, Virginia, MS, and others. My big gripe about LA kids not looking west for college isn't really about not looking at Tech, but the fact that they usually don't look at A&M or Texas, either. I know Tech needs to try for more kids from the state because you never know if you'll get a kid until you ask, but they're also looking at wanting kids and location doesn't matter to them, but it does matter more for the kids and Tech should play their hand smart. For the record, Tech offered:

4 LA kids in 09 and got Celestie
0 LA kids in 07 and 08
7 LA kids in 06 (Chris Mitchell-Marrero, Kentrell Lockett-Hahnville, Cory Chappell-Baton Rouge, Chaz Washington-Destrehan, and Jai Eugene-Destrehan) and got 2 (Brian Duncan-Baton Rouge and Jonathan Hollins-Baton Rouge)
1 LA kid in 05 from Shreveport that went to 'bama

Just wait, your LA offers from Tech will be headed your way soon.

Texas offered Perriloser in 05 and nobody else since then.

Of the 3, A&M is in the best position geographically to get LA kids and I'd even agree that A&M is the most like home for most of the kids that don't live in New Orleans.

A&M offered

05 3 recruits from LA and got 1. Nic Harris got away, but they knew he'd be a good Aggie harkening us back to the days of yore!
06 5 recruits and got 0.
07 3 recruits and got 1.
08 1 recruit and got 0.
09 9 recruits and got 3.

05-09 totals:

Texas 1 LA offer and 0 signees
Tech 12 LA offers and 3 signees
A&M 21 LA offers and 5 signees

8 signees out of 34 offers is probably par for the course for getting out of state kids, but you have to expect Tech, A&M, and Texas to chase the kids from the home state first because they'll start off with more loyalty and name brand affiliation for Big 12 football.

Interesting...I understand all that, believe me...

The point of the matter or my point was I'm not looking for more TT offers in Louisiana-they can do whatever they want....I'm just saying if you jump on the bus late you normally get a crappy seat or have to sit next to big fat smelly person, but don't complain to the driver...:cool:

Evangel Christian, La has a 2011 prospect that is suppose to be all world...The kid has two offers already...Texas A&M and UCLA...Texas Tech may offer in a couple years, but it will be too late...That's not saying UCLA and A&M will get this kid, but they are doing their work in my opinion and building that relationship...That's how you do it...Each kid is different and you can't say they won't go here or there...It's hard to get anyone these days...That's my only point...

[lonny23]

Interesting...I understand all that, believe me...

The point of the matter or my point was I'm not looking for more TT offers in Louisiana-they can do whatever they want....I'm just saying if you jump on the bus late you normally get a crappy seat or have to sit next to big fat smelly person, but don't complain to the driver...:cool:

Evangel Christian, La has a 2011 prospect that is suppose to be all world...The kid has two offers already...Texas A&M and UCLA...Texas Tech may offer in a couple years, but it will be too late...That's not saying UCLA and A&M will get this kid, but they are doing their work in my opinion and building that relationship...That's how you do it...Each kid is different and you can't say they won't go here or there...It's hard to get anyone these days...That's my only point...
1. Yes, getting to players early does make a difference.
2. There is a lot that happens behind the scenes and we don't know who is putting out feelers before making an offer.
3. Some of the kids Tech has offered will commit to Texas this weekend.
4. If he's a 2011 kid, Tech won't wait past this fall to start talking to him and maybe they're already doing it. I mentioned a stud 2011 kid on the Tech board last week.

[SLC]

Is anyone else amazed at the fact that Stanford had the 20th ranked recruiting class?.. With those high as hell acceptance standards there, I cant believe Jim Harbaugh is able to do what he does there...One of the better stories of this recruiting season if you ask me.

[lonny23]

Is anyone else amazed at the fact that Stanford had the 20th ranked recruiting class?.. With those high as hell acceptance standards there, I cant believe Jim Harbaugh is able to do what he does there...One of the better stories of this recruiting season if you ask me.
Personally, I don't get it, but I have to give him credit for doing it.

[cajun]

Is anyone else amazed at the fact that Stanford had the 20th ranked recruiting class?.. With those high as hell acceptance standards there, I cant believe Jim Harbaugh is able to do what he does there...One of the better stories of this recruiting season if you ask me.

Jim Harbaugh is earning his change, that's for sure...

[cajun]

4. If he's a 2011 kid, Tech won't wait past this fall to start talking to him and maybe they're already doing it. I mentioned a stud 2011 kid on the Tech board last week.

This Randy Jordan (Running Backs Coach/recruiter) for Texas A&M is on the job...Got several other targets in Louisiana already...This guy must be in charge of the La hub for A&M...

Randy Jordan (A&M)
http://pelicanpreps.rivals.com/viewcoach.asp?Coach=10&Team=82&Sport=1&Year=2009

A couple from Evangel Chrisitian...

Jermauria Rasco (2011)
http://pelicanpreps.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Sport=1&pr_key=79670

Brandon Jackson (2010)
http://pelicanpreps.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?pr_key=89402&sport=1

[lonny23]

This Randy Jordan (Running Backs Coach/recruiter) for Texas A&M is on the job...Got several other targets in Louisiana already...This guy must be in charge of the La hub for A&M...

Randy Jordan (A&M)
http://pelicanpreps.rivals.com/viewcoach.asp?Coach=10&Team=82&Sport=1&Year=2009

A couple from Evangel Chrisitian...

Jermauria Rasco (2011)
http://pelicanpreps.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Sport=1&pr_key=79670

Brandon Jackson (2010)
http://pelicanpreps.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?pr_key=89402&sport=1I must say Rasco is the anti-Davenport. Ol' Chris overpowered everybody on that OL-DL clinic and Rasco ran around them. I just hope they don't play on the same team in a few years!:D I'll be mentioning your ECA guys on the Tech board.

[cajun]

I must say Rasco is the anti-Davenport. Ol' Chris overpowered everybody on that OL-DL clinic and Rasco ran around them. I just hope they don't play on the same team in a few years!:D I'll be mentioning your ECA guys on the Tech board.

Yeah, I don't know alot about either on these Evangel kids, but they sure are talking about Jermauria Rasco quite abit over here...Hopefully they will get some film up...

[SMC020]

The recruting rankings aren't an exact science. Brandon Williams was a 2-star DE in 2006 and now he's leaving after 3 years for the NFL. Tech has singed guys in recent years coming off of injuries and potential educational problems that might be gems. This Tech class is the best Leach has had yet and is a good foundation for the future regardless if the rankings say #34 in the country.

The #1 thing is the Rivals rankings really only compare the top 20 players on your list and we also know having 2 star players lowers your score. There is a lot to be said for teams recruiting their needs and Tech loses points every time they take a kicker (Last year) or get to the end and need DE's (This year and had some 2-stars). The rankings don't say much for guys like Matt Goetz, who was a 2-star based upon the past, but he's gotten 3 inches taller and 30 pounds heavier and at 17 is still growing.

What rivals also does is rate the boys when they are juniors (most of the time). What I mean is that if you happen to get a profile as a junior and send in film, they rate you based on this. But if you have a stellar senior year and send in updated senior tape, they don't look at re-evaluating you. I know because I asked Rivals this question. They only keep on top of the 4 and 5 stars and their evaluations. So I guess what I'm saying is being rated with stars is really flawed and over rated. Let's see what happens in college.