Jump to content

Texas Recruiting Notes 2021


Reese Bennett

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Chicken/egg. And it doesn’t matter, improvement. Does Brandon Jones go higher than the third? Maybe. Do those prospects go pro at Texas? Maybe. As High? Who knows. The real problem with that list is the fact that Baylor is getting more 3 stars drafted in higher rounds than Texas with what is perceived (and in reality) inferior talent. You throw that into the mix with the sheer number of players for other schools and it’s a pretty compelling argument that Texas does less with more. Other schools are doing more with more, and other schools are doing more with less. 

Care to elaborate? EDIT: about the inferior talent part

Edited by LetYourNutsHang
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

11 minutes ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

Care to elaborate? EDIT: about the inferior talent part

 

8 minutes ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

They’ve had a better program over that period, so I’d be surprised only if they had fewer draft picks

These two posts of yours dovetail, so I'll answer both, since they are related. Per the various rankings sites, Baylor hasn't sniffed Texas's recruiting ranks during their entire successfun run under Briles, and now. We just literally stole the best commit from their last class a few weeks ago and he's probably, what, the 15th ranked player in our 2020 class (I looked it up he was our 14th highest ranked player, Baylor's 4th). Now, you can say there's room for error, and you can say there's superior evaluation, you can say there is player attrition you can say there's late risers, busts and flakes, and all of that can be true. But even if all that were true at once, when you're talking about a 10 year time period, and all the classes look like that related to one another (or worse) it's pretty safe and accurate to say that one school, from an athletic raw materials perspective, has a talent advantage over the other. Baylor's 2020 class had exactly two 4 stars. It wasn't ranked in the top 50. Their only top 25 class in the last decade was 2014, coming in at exactly 25. 

Better programs can lead to better draft picks, but that doesn't mean the programs have the same level of raw materials. It just means they're developing talent better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Maybe Alabama and Ohio state and LSU put more players in the league and in higher rounds because the best prospects go there?  How many Texas prospects has Texas wanted badly, who would have been drafted as a longhorn, but chose to go to those other places?

or are we thinking that okudah and chaisson and others wouldn’t have been drafted had they chosen Texas?  

That's for sure part of it, and this is exactly what Tom and the staff are having to sell these kids, that they the player themselves are by far the biggest part of the equation (partly true), along with "this is the year you start to see the progress MY staff has made here." The problem is, it just hits a little easier for these kids when they see the names and schools right in front of them, and there's five schools tellin' them what you don't want them to hear vs. just you. 

Edited by UncleBuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Rynoag04, a poster on Aggie 247.  There appear to be only 4 changes of significance (I've bolded them).

Notable A&M/State of Texas Related Changes in the New Top 247

#10 Tommy Brockermeyer (-1)
#11 Donovan Jackson (-1) – Ohio State
#16 Ja’Tavion Sanders (-1) – Texas
#19 Tony Grimes (-1)
#29 LJ Johnson (+2)
#32 Terrence Lewis (-15) – Tennessee
#36 Savion Byrd (+1)
#37 Billy Bowman (+1) – Texas
#42 Camar Wheaton (+2)
#52 Cody Jackson (+2) – OU
#57 Clayton Smith (+4) – OU
#67 Shemar Turner (+164)
#72 Jojo Earle (-4) – LSU
#73 Landon Jackson (-4) – LSU
#80 Tunmise Adeleye (+3) – Ohio State
#90 Kaidon Salter (-2) – Tennessee
#97 Jalen Milroe (-2) – Texas
#98 Dematrius Davis (-2) – Auburn
#107 Preston Stone (NC) – SMU
#112 Reuben Fatheree (+1)
#113 Bryce Foster (+1)
#117 Eli Stowers (+1) – Texas A&M
#118 Tywone Malone (+1)
#129 Shadrach Banks (+8) – Texas A&M
#132 Marcus Burris (-29)
#156 Ketron Jackson (-1)
#163 Sawyer Robertson (-4) – Mississippi State
#167 Jordon Thomas (-5) – Texas
#172 Latrell McCutchin (-5)
#174 Theodore Knox (-5)
#178 Quaydarius Davis (-4) – USC
#181 Romello Brinson (-4)
#191 Behren Morton (-6) – Texas Tech
#207 Garrett Nussmeier (-8) – LSU
#208 Andrew Mukuba (-6)
#218 Monkell Goodwine (-8)
#222 Tate Williams (NC) – Baylor
#224 Trey Zuhn (-7) – Texas A&M
#235 Deuce Harmon (-8)
#238 Ishmael Ibraheem (-139)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

 

 

These two posts of yours dovetail, so I'll answer both, since they are related. Per the various rankings sites, Baylor hasn't sniffed Texas's recruiting ranks during their entire successfun run under Briles, and now. We just literally stole the best commit from their last class a few weeks ago and he's probably, what, the 15th ranked player in our 2020 class (I looked it up he was our 14th highest ranked player, Baylor's 4th). Now, you can say there's room for error, and you can say there's superior evaluation, you can say there is player attrition you can say there's late risers, busts and flakes, and all of that can be true. But even if all that were true at once, when you're talking about a 10 year time period, and all the classes look like that related to one another (or worse) it's pretty safe and accurate to say that one school, from an athletic raw materials perspective, has a talent advantage over the other. Baylor's 2020 class had exactly two 4 stars. It wasn't ranked in the top 50. Their only top 25 class in the last decade was 2014, coming in at exactly 25. 

Better programs can lead to better draft picks, but that doesn't mean the programs have the same level of raw materials. It just means they're developing talent better. 

You’re basing your argument on the false assumption that a recruit’s number of stars is an infallible measurement of said player’s level of talent. There were more four more 3-star first round draft picks this year than 5-star ones (7-3). Obviously part of that is a numbers game since there are many more 3-star recruits, but it’s still telling. Since 2015 we’ve had an equal number of 3-star draft picks as 4/5-star ones too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, UncleBuck said:

That's for sure part of it, and this is exactly what Tom and the staff are having to sell these kids, that they the player themselves are by far the biggest part of the equation (partly true), along with "this is the year you start to see the progress MY staff has made here." The problem is, it just hits a little easier for these kids when they see the names and schools right in front of them, and there's five schools tellin' them what you don't want them to hear vs. just you. 

That’s where a motivated Mack Brown did great things for us at one time, and appears to be doing the same things at unc for a second time. Talent above all else, and being able to land some bigger fish than your tackle should allow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

You’re basing your argument on the false assumption that a recruit’s number of stars is an infallible measurement of said player’s level of talent. There were more four more 3-star first round draft picks this year than 5-star ones (7-3). Obviously part of that is a numbers game since there are many more 3-star recruits, but it’s still telling. Since 2015 we’ve had an equal number of 3-star draft picks as 4/5-star ones too.

He's not saying they're infallible in any individual case, he's saying over time getting high-ranked recruits matters to team success, especially at the high P5 level where the coaching is all generally very good to elite . They also matter to player success in terms of likelihood of becoming All-Americans and getting drafted. This is a good aggregation of articles: https://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2016/2/2/10889856/national-signing-day-rankings-ncaa-football

Edited by texifornia
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

You’re basing your argument on the false assumption that a recruit’s number of stars is an infallible measurement of said player’s level of talent. There were more four more 3-star first round draft picks this year than 5-star ones (7-3). Obviously part of that is a numbers game since there are many more 3-star recruits, but it’s still telling. Since 2015 we’ve had an equal number of 3-star draft picks as 4/5-star ones too.

Thats actually not what he said at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Bob Lives! said:


What percent of 4/5 stars has Herman sent to the league in the last 5 years?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There’s so much wrong with what he said. First off, if going back 5 years/recruiting classes, only 2016 and 2017 recruits would’ve been even eligible to be drafted. It also ignores 3 three-star draft picks and 12 4-star recruits that have transferred/quit due to medical conditions/failed to make it on campus. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, texifornia said:

He's not saying they're infallible in any individual case, he's saying over time getting high-ranked recruits matters to team success, especially at the high P5 level where the coaching is all generally very good to elite . They also matter to player success in terms of likelihood of becoming All-Americans and getting drafted. This is a good aggregation of articles: https://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2016/2/2/10889856/national-signing-day-rankings-ncaa-football

I’m referencing the statement that Baylor has had inferior talent based on number of stars.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

I’m referencing the statement that Baylor has had inferior talent based on number of stars.

Over ten years, that's a valid statement. Briles and Rhule were better developers than late Mack/Strong/Herman. You're being obtuse.

Edited by texifornia
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A slightly rose-colored view might be that the Excel analysis shows that if you get 5 guys drafted per recruiting class, you're doing pretty well. Obviously Alabama is in a league by themselves.

Tom's first real class was 2018. It looks pretty much on track to me. Sterns and Ossai will get drafted for sure. I'd say things look good for Foster, Coburn, and Eagles. Then several more dudes like the rest of the DBs and Ingram could have a shot if they finish their careers strong. Helps that it was a big class, but even with a lot of attrition, I'd be surprised if we don't have 6+ drafted from that class at the end of the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, texifornia said:

Over ten years, that's a valid statement. Briles and Rhule were better developers than late Mack/Strong/Herman. 

It’s an opinion that is based on an assumption that a player’s recruiting ranking is infallible. We’ve had 3 three-star draft picks in the last two classes with players eligible to be drafted and will have a 3-star going in the first round next year according to every mock draft.

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

You’re basing your argument on the false assumption that a recruit’s number of stars is an infallible measurement of said player’s level of talent. There were more four more 3-star first round draft picks this year than 5-star ones (7-3). Obviously part of that is a numbers game since there are many more 3-star recruits, but it’s still telling. Since 2015 we’ve had an equal number of 3-star draft picks as 4/5-star ones too.

No, actually, I'm not basing my argument on that false assumption. I identified and recognized the flaws in the system when I outlined, attrition, busts, flakes, etc. I went WELL out of my way to identify the potential flaws in the recruiting system. Of course there were more 3 and 4 stars drafted in the first round. There are 32 (well call it 50) five stars a year, and there's literally a few hundred 4 stars and hundreds more 3 stars. 5 stars are a very tiny tiny percentage of players. 

It doesn't change the fact that while outliers and exceptions exist, generally speaking everyone here except you apparently agrees that recruiting class rankings are a fairly accurate gauge year to year of the talent that exists on a school's roster. Texas is overwhelmingly had more talent than Baylor. To think otherwise is lunacy. So, yeah, it makes sense this is where you would land. Or do you really want to make a case that Baylor's average class ranking of about 40 over the last 10 years is fundamentally more talented than the ones signed by Texas in the last decade? Show your work. And before you say "look at draft results" everyone knows that's horseshit because development matters, as does coaching, and we're talking about pure talent. And before you ask to show my work, my work is illustrated by the literal multiple recruiting services that have hundreds of employees that view, rank, and evaluate HS talent and come to a consensus. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bigpoppapump said:

Can we talk about cheese, kate or something else? Draft picks over the past 10 years is too depressing.

How about the Brockermeyers going Bama because we can't manage to get our shit straight?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

You’re basing your argument on the false assumption that a recruit’s number of stars is an infallible measurement of said player’s level of talent. There were more four more 3-star first round draft picks this year than 5-star ones (7-3). Obviously part of that is a numbers game since there are many more 3-star recruits, but it’s still telling. Since 2015 we’ve had an equal number of 3-star draft picks as 4/5-star ones too.

 

37 minutes ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

I’m referencing the statement that Baylor has had inferior talent based on number of stars.

 

32 minutes ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

It’s an opinion that is based on an assumption that a player’s recruiting ranking is infallible. We’ve had 3 three-star draft picks in the last two classes with players eligible to be drafted and will have a 3-star going in the first round next year according to every mock draft.

Oooof. There’s a whole lot of stupid in these posts. Tough L for the troll here, but I’m sure he’ll keep trying. 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This dude is like futureman with a little dash of "Derka rage-posting on the basketball board and responding to every single person that disagrees with him". In other words, he totally fucking sucks. Please put him on ignore like futureman and stop responding to his posts.

  • Like 7
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last month there was smoke around Jaylin Davies, Jamier Johnson, and Jaylin Smith, the California DBs. It appears that Davies is out, but recent reports have affirmed the real interest in Texas from Jamier Johnson and Jaylin Smith.

https://247sports.com/Player/Jaylin-Smith-46093610/

https://247sports.com/Player/Jamier-Johnson-46079629/

Johnson: Biggins, a west coast 247 mod affirmed that Texas is in the top group for Jamier Johnson, we're also in his "official top 7" posted in April. 

Smith: Roach recently did an interview here *I believe*, and he made a comment about Smith being a real candidate to join the class. Some pictures of him working out with Chris Adimora in California as well. 

It would appear they're working on some combination of Mukuba, Harmon, Smith, and Johnson. Probably 2 spots, but they may take a 3rd from this group if the 3rd isn't Harmon. Also depends on what Ish does. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

This dude is like futureman with a little dash of "Derka rage-posting on the basketball board and responding to every single person that disagrees with him". In other words, he totally fucking sucks. Please put him on ignore like futureman and stop responding to his posts.

...Are you saying my propensity to respond to everyone one of his (or anyone’s) posts to me is NOT a noble and honorable morally just pursuit? Certainly not. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

No, actually, I'm not basing my argument on that false assumption. I identified and recognized the flaws in the system when I outlined, attrition, busts, flakes, etc. I went WELL out of my way to identify the potential flaws in the recruiting system. Of course there were more 3 and 4 stars drafted in the first round. There are 32 (well call it 50) five stars a year, and there's literally a few hundred 4 stars and hundreds more 3 stars. 5 stars are a very tiny tiny percentage of players. 

It doesn't change the fact that while outliers and exceptions exist, generally speaking everyone here except you apparently agrees that recruiting class rankings are a fairly accurate gauge year to year of the talent that exists on a school's roster. Texas is overwhelmingly had more talent than Baylor. To think otherwise is lunacy. So, yeah, it makes sense this is where you would land. Or do you really want to make a case that Baylor's average class ranking of about 40 over the last 10 years is fundamentally more talented than the ones signed by Texas in the last decade? Show your work. And before you say "look at draft results" everyone knows that's horseshit because development matters, as does coaching, and we're talking about pure talent. And before you ask to show my work, my work is illustrated by the literal multiple recruiting services that have hundreds of employees that view, rank, and evaluate HS talent and come to a consensus. 

Stopped reading after more 3- and 4-stars picks than 5-stars. I wrote more 3 stars than 5 stars. Big difference. And just for future reference, pointing out flaws in an assumption doesn’t by definition no longer make it an assumption. It makes it a more sound assumption, but still an assumption. I can tell this is going nowhere, so I’ll leave it at that. Not going to keep arguing about the definition of a word.

  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

This dude is like futureman with a little dash of "Derka rage-posting on the basketball board and responding to every single person that disagrees with him". In other words, he totally fucking sucks. Please put him on ignore like futureman and stop responding to his posts.

Doesn’t a troll make ad hominem statements?

  • Like 2
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, texifornia said:

Yeah, just futureman 2.0

Time to purify the page

You can have that perspective, and it doesn't faze me one bit. But the reality is I continue to positively impact hundreds of lives each year through my job and enjoy the mutual respect and gratitude shared with my students and colleagues. And now I'm going to go pack for my family's 10-day trip to Orlando.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chicken/egg. And it doesn’t matter, improvement. Does Brandon Jones go higher than the third? Maybe. Do those prospects go pro at Texas? Maybe. As High? Who knows. The real problem with that list is the fact that Baylor is getting more 3 stars drafted in higher rounds than Texas with what is perceived (and in reality) inferior talent. You throw that into the mix with the sheer number of players for other schools and it’s a pretty compelling argument that Texas does less with more. Other schools are doing more with more, and other schools are doing more with less. 

Give me 3 hours with recruiting data and I can guarantee you I can figure out a way to present the data so that Texas looks pretty good and other teams look worse than they do now. All data can be manipulated to advantage.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, LetYourNutsHang said:

Stopped reading after more 3- and 4-stars picks than 5-stars. I wrote more 3 stars than 5 stars. Big difference. And just for future reference, pointing out flaws in an assumption doesn’t by definition no longer make it an assumption. It makes it a more sound assumption, but still an assumption. I can tell this is going nowhere, so I’ll leave it at that. Not going to keep arguing about the definition of a word.

Oh, you’ll address none of the points in the argument but instead will focus entirely on pedantry that has nothing to do with the issues laid out? Shocker. Futureman Jr. indeed.  
 

I doubt any here will hold their breath while eagerly anticipating your analysis on how Baylor’s recruiting classes could be considered more talented than those of Texas the last decade. I’m sure challenging accepted notions with the defense of “Well that’s just, like, your opinion man” works on other people, it’s not going to be a convincing argument to most posters here. 

Do me a favor and put me on ignore while you slink away. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ricky's one-hitter said:

Last month there was smoke around Jaylin Davies, Jamier Johnson, and Jaylin Smith, the California DBs. It appears that Davies is out, but recent reports have affirmed the real interest in Texas from Jamier Johnson and Jaylin Smith.

https://247sports.com/Player/Jaylin-Smith-46093610/

https://247sports.com/Player/Jamier-Johnson-46079629/

Johnson: Biggins, a west coast 247 mod affirmed that Texas is in the top group for Jamier Johnson, we're also in his "official top 7" posted in April. 

Smith: Roach recently did an interview here *I believe*, and he made a comment about Smith being a real candidate to join the class. Some pictures of him working out with Chris Adimora in California as well. 

It would appear they're working on some combination of Mukuba, Harmon, Smith, and Johnson. Probably 2 spots, but they may take a 3rd from this group if the 3rd isn't Harmon. Also depends on what Ish does. 

 

How different would WR recruiting be if Texas loaded up with 5 DBs from (Ish, Deuce, Coffey, Mukaba, Johnson, and Smith) and let Bowman play WR?

Edited by HtownHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thiefery said:

Been thinking the same thing..

Both of you should stop thinking that. For starters we’re not landing all those dudes. Additionally Bowman is better at DB than any of them. Does anyone lose sleep at night wondering if we should have played Earl Thomas at WR?

 

WR recruiting blows. Fortunately we have talented youngsters on the roster who should be able to act as a stop-gap. But we need to kill it next class. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Both of you should stop thinking that. For starters we’re not landing all those dudes. Additionally Bowman is better at DB than any of them. Does anyone lose sleep at night wondering if we should have played Earl Thomas at WR?

 

WR recruiting blows. Fortunately we have talented youngsters on the roster who should be able to act as a stop-gap. But we need to kill it next class. 

idiot GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the feeling on Mukuba right now that we're running 2nd to Clemson, and they might fill up before he can visit? Y'all have been a little more optimistic on him the last few days.

Would be nice for the fucking ball to bounce our way for once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...