Hopefully all 3Does Texas land one of Fasusi, Haywood and Rogers? What WR do they end up with this year?
Hopefully all 3Does Texas land one of Fasusi, Haywood and Rogers? What WR do they end up with this year?
Not sure your thoughts, but I think the days of Texas dominating the Top 10, or even the Top 20, in the state are over. Doesn’t mean we don’t need to improve nabbing a few more than we have lately, but being in the SEC completely changes the recruiting landscape. Yeah, recruiting Texas has gotten tougher, but opportunities in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, and Florida are more realistic than ever.Why? Because Texas isn't killing it?
What were you expecting when you say “momentum”? We are on just about every kid’a list, just no commitments. Getting commitments this early was never going to happen, CFP or not.I was under the impression that that playoff appearance was going to have a big effect on the 2025 class. Still early, but there doesnt appear to be much momentum. I guess we will find out in July.
Interestingly enough Ryan Clark just mentioned the comparison on First Take to Harden.
I think that language is too strong. These things move in cycles. The thing you're saying is also something someone might have said in the late 90s.Not sure your thoughts, but I think the days of Texas dominating the Top 10, or even the Top 20, in the state are over. Doesn’t mean we don’t need to improve nabbing a few more than we have lately, but being in the SEC completely changes the recruiting landscape. Yeah, recruiting Texas has gotten tougher, but opportunities in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, and Florida are more realistic than ever.
🤷♂️
You may know more about him than I do.
I mean, the top two in state are committed elsewhere already….three in the top 10. Having said that, Sark seems to have a big push in July so that’s why I mentioned that’s when we will find out.What were you expecting when you say “momentum”? We are on just about every kid’a list, just no commitments. Getting commitments this early was never going to happen, CFP or not.
I think it's less commitments and more not being the outright leader with more.What were you expecting when you say “momentum”? We are on just about every kid’a list, just no commitments. Getting commitments this early was never going to happen, CFP or not.
Because of him?Needless to say, the Weiss locker room was a hot mess in the days leading up to their first round blowout by Cedar Hill
Because like it or not they are 1 of the top 2 schools in the state, no matter what us Horns think of them. Most of these kids don’t view them through the same prism we do.Yes I understand the SEC part. What I can’t understand is why Aggy is in play for so many given 1.they are aggy, 2. The seasons they’ve had recently, 3. Coaching change.
They must be offering significantly more is my only guess. Otherwise why would a top recruit even consider them currently ?
Back injury.It’s quite odd that I keep hearing of Vasek’s injury by a poster here or there yet I’m not sure I’ve read any details of the injury by a mod. And not sure how the injury cost him “an entire year” of physical growth.
Because like it or not they are 1 of the top 2 schools in the state, no matter what us Horns think of them. Most of these kids don’t view them through the same prism we do.
Group effort.
I believe he had an injury from his senior year in HS that lingered, but I might be wrong.It’s quite odd that I keep hearing of Vasek’s injury by a poster here or there yet I’m not sure I’ve read any details of the injury by a mod. And not sure how the injury cost him “an entire year” of physical growth.
Cycles? I can’t think of a time since I’ve followed Texas football (1975) where for 3 years 1/3 of the recruiting classes were OOS kids. Also, we’ve never had a presence in the traditional SEC states (except maybe Florida) like we do now. That’s not a cycle. That’s a complete landscape change.I think that language is too strong. These things move in cycles. The thing you're saying is also something someone might have said in the late 90s.
I agree, but I think that was going to be the case, even if we had won the NC.I think it's less commitments and more not being the outright leader with more.
we're talking about the state of Texas, no?Cycles? I can’t think of a time since I’ve followed Texas football (1975) where for 3 years 1/3 of the recruiting classes were OOS kids. Also, we’ve never had a presence in the traditional SEC states (except maybe Florida) like we do now. That’s not a cycle. That’s a complete landscape change.
What’s the deal with Texas not being in on the very top recruits in the home state? Texas seems to look OOS before, or at least as much as, in-state.
I do wonder if the sense of urgency that other schools are showing before Texas in recruiting does have an impact.
For instance, there are big guys that Texas simply hasn't had on campus as much as other schools. It gives those schools some head starts.
Yes. My point is I don’t see Texas dominating the Top 20 in the state. You said the goal should be grabbing at least half of the 6.0+ guys. I would agree, but that is not as many as some OBs might think. Too many other big name schools in the mix with conference realignments, and I don’t think that changes. If anything, it becomes even more competitive with NIL and the Portal.we're talking about the state of Texas, no?
I do wonder if the sense of urgency that other schools are showing before Texas in recruiting does have an impact.
For instance, there are big guys that Texas simply hasn't had on campus as much as other schools. It gives those schools some head starts.
Yes. My point is I don’t see Texas dominating the Top 20 in the state. You said the goal should be grabbing at least half of the 6.0+ guys. I would agree, but that is not as many as some OBs might think. Too many other big name schools in the mix with conference realignments, and I don’t think that changes. If anything, it becomes even more competitive with NIL and the Portal.
Sooo, basically that’s been my entire point.
That has less to do with not making them priorities and more to do with the preferred timeline the coaches like to work with.
Take Micah Hudson last year. They had that kid on campus last year by his own free will and the preference was for him to simply come back in the summer for an official visit. They lacked immediate urgency... not because he was from in-state but because they prefer to wait until June/July to make the big push.
Your point is that they are making OOS kids as much or more of a priority. That's just not the case.
The process potentially comes with some unintentional flaws/problems.Never said they are making OOS recruits as much or certainly “more of a priority” than in-state. Just saying staying in-state isn’t as big a priority relative to what it was under previous staffs. And if the staff prefers to wait to push for any recruit, regardless, then that’s their process.
Is it possible that some kids don’t want to list Texas as there top school because it won’t be cool if Texas does not recruit them as a priority?I do wonder if the sense of urgency that other schools are showing before Texas in recruiting does have an impact.
For instance, there are big guys that Texas simply hasn't had on campus as much as other schools. It gives those schools some head starts.
Hard to say. It's probably different with every person.* The word on the street is that Baker knocked it out in his interview with Sarkisian, which might help explain why Sarkisian isn't worried about Baker as a recruiter.
==============================================================
@Ketchum If a coach has the "skills" to be a great recruiter, but he comes up from smaller programs to a huge program, in a different part of the country than he's used to, about how long does it take for him to get his feet on the ground in the new, more high profile environment? What's the typical adjustment period?
Is it possible that some kids don’t want to list Texas as there top school because it won’t be cool if Texas does not recruit them as a priority?
Texas doesn’t seem to tip their hat early and likes to evaluate them more throughly (character, leadership, determination, etc) than a lot of schools.
Ok, let me put it a different way.Not really IMO.
I don't think Texas not rushing has to do with evaluating the intangibles as you suggest as much as they prefer to chase instead of babysit. This staff does better on the offensive than the defensive, which is why they'd rather not deal with early commitments a lot of the times.
Perhaps I wasn’t being clear…I think sark did want the super blues but since he didn’t get them, he pivoted to oos kids rather than settle for the next tier of Texas kids (which is what Mack would have done).Of course, he is emphasizing OOS kids more, and by God, he should.
Yet, I have people in this thread arguing that he MEANT to lose the in-state super blue chip prospects on purpose.
Do you think Texas competes for a natty if Texas somehow acquired every Texas hs kid it wanted and eschewed oos recruits?Of course, he is emphasizing OOS kids more, and by God, he should.
Yet, I have people in this thread arguing that he MEANT to lose the in-state super blue chip prospects on purpose.