Jump to content

Texas Recruiting Notes 2026: They Can't Keep Getting Away With This


Recommended Posts

Posted
30 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

John Turntine III, OT, Fort Worth (Texas) North Crowley 
OnTexasFootball ranking: 5-star
OTF's take: Texas leads Michigan

 

31 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Felix Ojo, OT, Mansfield (Texas) Lake Ridge  
OnTexasFootball ranking: 4-star++ 
OTF's take: Texas leads Ohio State and Texas Tech. 

 

With the D-line class we will have, if we get these 2 monster OTs, I'm content. 

Posted
49 minutes ago, MirrOlure said:

I did not have “Texas leads Baylor and Penn State” on my Bingo card….but it’s in there twice. 

We're going to need to keep a close eye on Kosi and Jamarion. Pretty sus.

Posted (edited)

Based on Gerry’s write up, there’s 20 recruits committing over the next few weeks, and I’d set the O/U for Texas at 7.5. That’s objectively pretty good, but I’m sure some will feel like the sky is falling with so many “losses” over a short period of time. Hold on to your hats.

Edited by Sock Monkey
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Sock Monkey said:

Based on Gerry’s write up, there’s 20 recruits committing over the next few weeks, and I’d set the O/U for Texas at 7.5. That’s objectively pretty good, but I’m sure some will feel like the sky is falling with so many “losses” over a short period of time. Hold on to your hats.

Based on the level of the prospects we brought in, it’s really good. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Mason Ramsey said:

Sounds like we'll be resetting the WR board.

get used to the “resetting” as sark is fumbling just about everything these days.

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 1
Posted

After we end up at 20 recruits in the next few weeks, we will wait patiently, reassess our needs, see who has developed and close strong before signing day. Same ole same ole.

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
13 minutes ago, Bevo said:

After we end up at 20 recruits in the next few weeks, we will wait patiently, reassess our needs, see who has developed and close strong before signing day. Same ole same ole.

Yep might flip a couple too

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

This is only half the equation.  Let’s see what the other 5 star backer does before we fling ourselves off the edge of the quarry. 

Yeah, but you wanna make sure and get a good place in line there… 

  • Haha 1
Posted
Ok so some of the stuff about how we're in unprecedented times of national recruiting has annoyed me, so I pulled the numbers. 
image.thumb.png.951b58a854d96dd91642409efc867827.png
Random thoughts: 
  • We currently have 7 OOS commits with about half the class in, so we're on pace to probably end up around where we were in 2023
  • Bijan was the only OOS signee in the 2020 class. I thought the contrast between 2020 having the lowest post-Mack OOS number but highest rating looked funny on the charts
  • Herman signed 4 OOS JUCO players in 2019, so that class would have had the highest number if they were included. Man, recruiting for Herman tanked after 2019
  • I think official visit data would be more illustrative but that would be harder to access
  • Transition classes are tough
  • Sark signed more OOS high school recruits in his first two full classes than Mack did in this timeframe (2002 - 2013). Hell, he signs more each year (minus transition) than Mack did in the classes that won the national championship combined (02-05).  So, I do get that the modern recruiting landscape is very different for people that have been following this for decades. 

I don’t understand making this comparison. You’re comparing OOS signees in previous classes to a class that still has months to go.

Also, when I think of the change in recruiting, I’m not thinking about how many are being signed. I’m thinking about how many are being brought in on official visits.

The difference between national recruiting versus in state recruiting is that traditionally we could expect to hit at a much higher rate of our instate targets, all other things being equal. All things were not equal quite often, but nonetheless over a long enough period of time Texas did quite well with instate recruiting.

I don’t personally have a good grasp on how transactional football recruiting is these days. I know it’s a huge factor, but how often is Texas losing recruiting battles when we’re the highest bidder? I question whether anyone has good data on that. Someone deep on the inside could make some guesses, but a lot of that is proprietary information that agents and other programs have a lot of agendas that dissuade them from being completely authentic, just as I’m sure the bidding on UT’s part isn’t exactly going to be an open book.

But regardless of how many out of state players Texas signs, there’s still been a sea change in the effort being put into national recruiting. That’s seen in the number of offers, and the number of official visits, especially when comparing the ratio of out of state versus in state in this year versus the history of Texas recruiting. It’s a massive difference this year.

It’s also seen in how often the staff is visiting out of state high schools. I have no idea how to measure that. I just know I’ve never seen the Texas staff make this many visits to out of state high schools in my lifetime. That kind of effort isn’t about the current recruiting class. That’s a systemic shift meant to signal to the rest of the country, Texas is interested in your players, whether that’s a message being sent to players, high school coaches, trainers, or agents.

In years past a different message would be sent by national recruiting efforts. If you’re not from Texas, you better be really talented at a position of need that we can’t fill adequately in state, or you better love Texas so much for whatever reason that there’s already a good shot you’re going to say yes if Texas recruits you.

That is not what is going on now.
Posted
1 hour ago, Bodacious Bevo said:

Ok so some of the stuff about how we're in unprecedented times of national recruiting has annoyed me, so I pulled the numbers. 

image.thumb.png.951b58a854d96dd91642409efc867827.png

Random thoughts: 

  • We currently have 7 OOS commits with about half the class in, so we're on pace to probably end up around where we were in 2023
  • Bijan was the only OOS signee in the 2020 class. I thought the contrast between 2020 having the lowest post-Mack OOS number but highest rating looked funny on the charts
  • Herman signed 4 OOS JUCO players in 2019, so that class would have had the highest number if they were included. Man, recruiting for Herman tanked after 2019
  • I think official visit data would be more illustrative but that would be harder to access
  • Transition classes are tough
  • Sark signed more OOS high school recruits in his first two full classes than Mack did in this timeframe (2002 - 2013). Hell, he signs more each year (minus transition) than Mack did in the classes that won the national championship combined (02-05).  So, I do get that the modern recruiting landscape is very different for people that have been following this for decades. 

I like that "Bijan!" is a watershed moment worthy of note on the chart. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Bodacious Bevo said:

Ok so some of the stuff about how we're in unprecedented times of national recruiting has annoyed me, so I pulled the numbers. 

image.thumb.png.951b58a854d96dd91642409efc867827.png

Random thoughts: 

  • We currently have 7 OOS commits with about half the class in, so we're on pace to probably end up around where we were in 2023
  • Bijan was the only OOS signee in the 2020 class. I thought the contrast between 2020 having the lowest post-Mack OOS number but highest rating looked funny on the charts
  • Herman signed 4 OOS JUCO players in 2019, so that class would have had the highest number if they were included. Man, recruiting for Herman tanked after 2019
  • I think official visit data would be more illustrative but that would be harder to access
  • Transition classes are tough
  • Sark signed more OOS high school recruits in his first two full classes than Mack did in this timeframe (2002 - 2013). Hell, he signs more each year (minus transition) than Mack did in the classes that won the national championship combined (02-05).  So, I do get that the modern recruiting landscape is very different for people that have been following this for decades. 

I appreciate the work on this, but I just think the landscape has changed so much that the comparisons are almost apples to oranges. Seems kids are far more likely to leave their state today compared to the early 2000s. 7 on 7 teams have become a factor. NIL is a game changer. Texas is in a different conference. In the Big 12 the footprint for recruits was basically Texas. The SEC has opened doors for Texas across the Southeast and its rich recruiting grounds. Sark has certainly pushed Texas recruiting beyond the state lines, but its hard to quantify how much of that was Sark or the changing landscape. 

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

I appreciate the work on this, but I just think the landscape has changed so much that the comparisons are almost apples to oranges. Seems kids are far more likely to leave their state today compared to the early 2000s. 7 on 7 teams have become a factor. NIL is a game changer. Texas is in a different conference. In the Big 12 the footprint for recruits was basically Texas. The SEC has opened doors for Texas across the Southeast and its rich recruiting grounds. Sark has certainly pushed Texas recruiting beyond the state lines, but its hard to quantify how much of that was Sark or the changing landscape. 

Agree with this take....it's cool information but rather irrelevant. 

1 minute ago, irishtexan said:

Kids are going out of state more often because they can legally get paid. They're following the money. It's not that complicated.

 

 

A Texas HS kid cannot get paid legally if they commit to a school in a state like Missouri.

Edited by BurntOrange&White
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
41 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:


I don’t understand making this comparison. You’re comparing OOS signees in previous classes to a class that still has months to go.

Also, when I think of the change in recruiting, I’m not thinking about how many are being signed. I’m thinking about how many are being brought in on official visits.

The difference between national recruiting versus in state recruiting is that traditionally we could expect to hit at a much higher rate of our instate targets, all other things being equal. All things were not equal quite often, but nonetheless over a long enough period of time Texas did quite well with instate recruiting.

I don’t personally have a good grasp on how transactional football recruiting is these days. I know it’s a huge factor, but how often is Texas losing recruiting battles when we’re the highest bidder? I question whether anyone has good data on that. Someone deep on the inside could make some guesses, but a lot of that is proprietary information that agents and other programs have a lot of agendas that dissuade them from being completely authentic, just as I’m sure the bidding on UT’s part isn’t exactly going to be an open book.

But regardless of how many out of state players Texas signs, there’s still been a sea change in the effort being put into national recruiting. That’s seen in the number of offers, and the number of official visits, especially when comparing the ratio of out of state versus in state in this year versus the history of Texas recruiting. It’s a massive difference this year.

It’s also seen in how often the staff is visiting out of state high schools. I have no idea how to measure that. I just know I’ve never seen the Texas staff make this many visits to out of state high schools in my lifetime. That kind of effort isn’t about the current recruiting class. That’s a systemic shift meant to signal to the rest of the country, Texas is interested in your players, whether that’s a message being sent to players, high school coaches, trainers, or agents.

In years past a different message would be sent by national recruiting efforts. If you’re not from Texas, you better be really talented at a position of need that we can’t fill adequately in state, or you better love Texas so much for whatever reason that there’s already a good shot you’re going to say yes if Texas recruits you.

That is not what is going on now.

 

17 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

I appreciate the work on this, but I just think the landscape has changed so much that the comparisons are almost apples to oranges. Seems kids are far more likely to leave their state today compared to the early 2000s. 7 on 7 teams have become a factor. NIL is a game changer. Texas is in a different conference. In the Big 12 the footprint for recruits was basically Texas. The SEC has opened doors for Texas across the Southeast and its rich recruiting grounds. Sark has certainly pushed Texas recruiting beyond the state lines, but its hard to quantify how much of that was Sark or the changing landscape. 

I’m not trying to make a specific comparison. Just visualizing and sharing some data about recruiting trends over time. 

I agree that the OV data would be more interesting. It would just require a lot more effort.

Posted
2 hours ago, Mason Ramsey said:

Sounds like we'll be resetting the WR board.

I would be shocked if there isn't at least one 5 star receiver signed in the class, particularly later in the season once there's time for the budget to be a little more predictable.  

Posted (edited)

Even if we don't sign an elite prospect at RB, WR, TE, CB, or S in this class (which I can't imagine will be the case come signing day), guess which positions are the easiest to come by with top talent in the portal...

It will never be a bad thing to build around top QB, OL, and DL talent in high school recruiting. Some of y'all are acting like you want to go back to the Mensa Tom era where damn near all of our top-10 recruits were RB, WR, CB, or S.

And again, I have every bit of faith that we won't be outbid often come December for guys this staff determine are must haves. 

Edited by MuellerHorn
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

I would be shocked if there isn't at least one 5 star receiver signed in the class, particularly later in the season once there's time for the budget to be a little more predictable.  

Bishop likely ends up at WR and he's a 5 star #1 ranked athlete in the country according to 247 composite.

Edited by BurntOrange&White
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)

ESPN must have updated its rankings.  Bell is #4 nationally and Wesley is #11.  All three of our DL are in the ESPN 3000 with Wells being the highest rated.  Robertson is in the 300 and Wright is a 4* outside of it.  BOMC I guess?

Edited by Elmer_Fudd
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Bishop likely ends up at WR and he's a 5 star #1 ranked athlete in the country according to 247 composite.

He's a 5-star in 247's rankings. In their composite he's ranked 127. 247 is the only service that has him ranked that high. On3 Doesn't even rank him nationally. He's ranked 165 and 163 by ESPN and Rivals, but who gives a shit what they think. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Elmer_Fudd said:

ESPN must have updated its rankings.  Bell is #4 nationally and Wesley is #11.  All three of our DL are in the ESPN 3000 with Wells being the highest rated.  Robertson is in the 300 and Wright is a 4* outside of it.  BOMC I guess?

I thought we didn't trust ESPN because their ratings were calculated using an AI based on old Tom Lemming rankings from the 90's?

Posted
1 minute ago, LCHorn said:

I thought we didn't trust ESPN because their ratings were calculated using an AI based on old Tom Lemming rankings from the 90's?

Sir, we trust our coaches though.  If they want a player, let's go get him. I don't think we need a RB but if we can get a rock star, let's do it.

Posted
19 minutes ago, Elmer_Fudd said:

ESPN must have updated its rankings.  Bell is #4 nationally and Wesley is #11.  All three of our DL are in the ESPN 3000 with Wells being the highest rated.  Robertson is in the 300 and Wright is a 4* outside of it.  BOMC I guess?

They moved the qbs around after elite 11, but idk what else

https://www.espn.com/college-football/recruiting/story/_/id/45582787/college-football-recruiting-rankings-qb-moves-elite-11-new-five-stars

Posted
21 minutes ago, Park Gothic said:

f8b05a1ce78aad4781c305c39d58ca9f.gif

247 lists him as a safety but the tweet says running back. Scouting report says he can play RB, so I'm guessing this guy is our back up plan? If so, nice. 

He's a very good RB prospect, but Miami might pay whatever he wants to keep him home.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Park Gothic said:

f8b05a1ce78aad4781c305c39d58ca9f.gif

247 lists him as a safety but the tweet says running back. Scouting report says he can play RB, so I'm guessing this guy is our back up plan? If so, nice. 

Not sure if you're serious, but he's one of the top backs in the country, depending on which service you trust. He's a Miami lean and has been on their campus 9 times. According to On3, he's never visited Austin. It'd be awesome to get him, but he's in no way a "backup plan"

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
37 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

Not sure if you're serious, but he's one of the top backs in the country, depending on which service you trust. He's a Miami lean and has been on their campus 9 times. According to On3, he's never visited Austin. It'd be awesome to get him, but he's in no way a "backup plan"

ferris-bueller-nine-times.gif

  • Haha 6
Posted
45 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

Not sure if you're serious, but he's one of the top backs in the country, depending on which service you trust. He's a Miami lean and has been on their campus 9 times. According to On3, he's never visited Austin. It'd be awesome to get him, but he's in no way a "backup plan"

Derrek Cooper visited in April

https://www.on3.com/news/elite-rb-derrek-cooper-visits-texas-for-the-first-time-this-did-a-lot-for-my-interest-in-texas/

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)

Bobby and Gerry stated this morning that they feel Texas is prioritizing LOS players with regards to NIL.  It would make sense.  They are saying that Texas is right in there for James Johnson.  If we get Johnson and Guervil that will be an insane haul to go along with Presley when you include Vodney Cleveland.  We are also looking good for two 5 star tackles.  We may very well end up with four 5 star line of scrimmage players.  
 

Why over spend on freshman WRs when you can get guys like Matthew Golden, AD Mitchell, Emmitt Mosley likely that are ready to produce and may not cost you much more.  Hard to find elite LOS guys in the portal.   No point in paying them to sit on the bench.

 

Sark also just did an interview with Greg McElroy where he said he feels great, not good, about the WR room.   I imagine he’s not as concerned about landing expensive WR prospects this cycle if Ffrench, Lockett, and McCutcheon are a year in front of them.
 


 

Edited by victory88
  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted (edited)

Dia Bell top QB, who would guess? Sark was a QB, coached plenty in to college and NFL greatness.  One position we never have a concern under Sark. And WR TE he'll get what he wants. 

Edited by hornlife

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...