HarringtonFishSmeller

I don't think anyone is panicking. I think we're just settled into reality: Littrell is obviously not going to recruit us out of the ditch we're in. Speaking of Tulane, they have this going for them as well: They are not in the C-USA. Yes, I know that getting into the C-USA was supposed to be better. In terms of more bowl opportunities, it is better. But, in reality, the C-USA that was is now The America Athletic. And, the C-USA now is Sun Belt 2.0 and start-ups/move-ups. Recruits know this - and are probably reminded of it by opposing coaching staffs during recruiting. (Again...thank you commish Banowksy for sleeping at the wheel.) We'll see how Fritz's offense works week in and week out against better competition. But, one thing is for sure, Tulane is putting together a pretty nice class, while we are getting what we've gotten in the past.

True...and, you have to consider that, given the opportunity through collective bargaining, worker will protect their own jobs. I'm just sayin': the NCAA and Universities get blamed for much of what is, really, out of their control.

Yes, as posted elsewhere. Only coach that seems to be able to handle JUCOs well is K-State's Bill Snyder. Plus, seems that most of these guys don't have other FBS offers. Again, you may occasionally hit on a "diamond in the rough" prospect...but, the odds of finding 85 of them are very slim. Finding even 22 as starters is slim enough. Where this hurts is depth down the line. If Littrell flames out within a two or three years, we will be in really, really bad shape depth-wise. Imagine trying to sell another 1-4 win season after 2016. It's really sad. Also, outside of the transfer, QB recruiting is looking very bleak as far as preps. JUCO in 2017? Keep spinning the transfer wheel? It just isn't looking that great. Sorry to be so brutally honest...but, after 26 years of this, I can't drink the kool-aid much longer. With Lemon and Akunne, you've got two preps that are now on NFL rosters. I think people are a bit too harsh on McCarney. McCarney's main sin was QB recruiting. And, really, that may have been more on him trusting Canales too easily. Appears he gave Chico free reign...and, it cost him his job. Either way...at this point, you are correct to point out that McCarney's first class seemed deeper with prep talent. Andrew Power, was a steady JUCO at TE out of that class as well. Had forgotten about him.

Looks like a lot of JUCO/stop-gap recruiting already out of this bunch. I know...time will tell. But, again, to me this isn't different that the three coaches that were here before Littrell: JUCO and preps with very few, if any, FBS offers. "Stealth" recruiting lives. Dickey should have trademarked the term, I suppose.

Yes, I can say that the NFLPA doesn't want to remove the three year rule because they've had decades to do it and they haven't. And, as for guitar - having attempted to teach some people guitar, I can accurately report that many people are unable to learn it. Music is like athletics: you are either a natural at it, or you work your butt off to succeed at it. Very few are the former, and even fewer of the later are willing to invest the time and discipline to do it.

I was set on letting ours play in junior high, and I see where many NFLers now say to wait until junior high or later. And, we are still debating it. He's a big little guy, and he's so eager to get out there and do it. The thing that got me thinking was Junior Seau's suicide. I always viewed him a one of the toughest guys to ever play the game. But, less than three years after he retired, the pain and confusion were so bad for him, he felt he had to kill himself. It also does bother me when industries hide their dirty laundry. Tobacco industry was a big one to me - having doctors hawk your product when you had studies showing you had bad it is. Here, NFL, the teams, their doctors, and the equipment companies all hid their dirty laundry when people came in the front door to visit. Whether or not our son ever plays, I'm happy that we have more information about the dangers of the sport than those in Junior Seau's generation and before had. Seeing him die, seeing the mighty Earl Campbell - maybe the best running back I've ever seen - in a wheelchair by 50...you know, it gives you second thoughts.

I agree on that notion: let the P5s be a minor league if the NFL pays for it. No taxpayer scholarship money for those athletes at that point. If you really want to play out the farce, play it out; quit trying to have it both ways: taxpayers funded the scholarships to kids we say shouldn't have academic standards. I'd rather see that scholarship money go to kids who really will go to class, earn a degree, then make something of themselves if it comes down to P5s being able to opt their football and basketball players - because, that's who we're really talking about here - out of the academic qualifications part. What a joke.

After I read it was the Big 12 makes the case, I just laughed to myself. The old Big 8 from which is was borne was one of the last conferences to do away with the old Prop 48 rule which let you take on a couple or so players a year who couldn't make the cut academically. The bar is already lowered for athletes coming in. The Big 12 now says, "Take the bar away." Bad old NCAA for expecting kids to be able to read, write, and do some very basic math after 13 years, K-12! Considering the source, predictable; not surprising at all. No conference whines like the Big 12. Yes. And, Texas...their alumni will tell you what geniuses all of their recruits are as well. All of them could have made it in with the non-athlete students, of course.

Yes, but again...how is that on the NCAA and universities? It is the NFLPA that has made the three year rule, not the NCAA and universities. Also, it is up to the NFL owners to decide whether they want a minor league. Baseball is infinitely cheaper than football. Less equipment, fewer players on each roster. Crappier fields. Do you honestly think, based on the failure of so many other alternative football leagues that minor football would really be financially viable enough for owners to subsidize it? I doubt it. How many Arena League teams have come and gone just in the DFW area over the past two decades? Do you go buy season tickets to the Frisco Roughriders to see guys who might someday play in the major leagues? Based on the attendance at those games, very few people do. Look...just because you have a "skill set" doesn't mean someone owes you money for it. I've played the guitar for 33 years and am very good at it. But, does someone owe me a career or payment for it? No. If I want to make money at it, I've got to hustle for it myself. Succeeding in music to the extent that you can make a living at it have extremely long odds. I like food, shelter, and clothing, so I haven't chucked my life and moved to New York, Nashville, or LA to give it a go. For kids coming out of high schools with the football "skill set," the place to hustle and make it is college. But, no one requires them to do it. They make the choice to do it. I fully understand that other sports' athlete have other venues where they can make money. But, no one owes it to them either. Football players choose football. They know there is no minor league. Unlike basketball and soccer, they can't go to many other countries and be pros. That's just the way it is. But, the whole "they're being screwed by the NCAA and universities" is patently false. Their beef is with the entity that prevents them from becoming professionals right out of high school - the NFL Players' Association. So, go beef with them and leave the NCAA and universities alone.

Thanks. Thought it was strange to be overbearing by just taking into consideration what a former NFL player said. Okay...but, look...some people never smoke cigarettes, but still get some form of cancer. So, do we say, "Ah...go ahead an smoke because you might get cancer from some other source or nothing at all anyway?" No. If there is something we know increases the risk, we do our best to bring it to light and warn people about it. It is easy to get on YouTube and pull up commercials from the 1950s and 60s of doctors hawking cigarettes. We know now that the tobacco companies were hiding studies they knew showed their product was harmful. I'm not saying you can't get concussions in other sports. I'm not even arguing that you shouldn't let your kids play football. We're still on the fence with it. But, the only reason we're on the fence with it is the new studies. And, unfortunately, it does look more and more like the NFL and equipment makers may have downplayed the extent to which they knew their equipment was not as protective as they claimed. I think Antwaan Randle El is probably going a bit overboard with thinking football will become extinct within three decades. I think more along the lines of others who believe we'll see more rules to protect players, better equipment, and taking injury protocol out of the coaches'/teams' hands to a larger degree. The rule I'd like to see in football - from high school all the way to the NFL - is that if you cause an injury to another player on a play in which you are also penalized - i.e., you did it on purpose/personal foul - you are suspended for as many games as the player you injured is out because of the injury you caused. So, you dive at a lineman's or QB's knees and he's out for the rest of the year, you are out for the rest of the year...without pay. You head hunt a guy and give him a concussion and he's out a game or two, you are out a game or two with no pay. Crackback block on a DE or linebacker that injures him...suspended for as long as he's out. Again, without pay.

<sigh> I'd rather we contract than expand. Or, if we're going to expand, only Texas, Louisiana, or Arkansas teams. We're not going to get a traditionally shiny, sexy program anyway, so...like I've argued before, get someone closer who might have a snowball's chance in hell of having alumni close enough to buy tickets to the games against us and put their butts onto Apogee's notably empty bleachers for a change. List of the only schools I want in conference with us: 1.a. Arkansas State 1.b. Louisiana 2. Texas State 3. ULM 4. Abilene Christian...because it's going to happen one day down the line anyway. There is a lot of alumni money at ACU and tons of alumni in the Metroplex. They've already bought their way up from D-II to FCS. This week, they announced that they had surpassed the $30 million goal to begin construction on their football stadium...since 2014: http://www.acusports.com/news/2016/1/20/FB_0120164741.aspx?path=football I hate the thought of sharing a conference with them, but...would it really be any worse than sharing with UTSA, the F?Us, and far flung Old Dominions and UNC-Charlottes?

Wow...the Oklahoma QB will visit Northern Colorado, but not us? Gee...wonder if Brock Berglund will put in a good word for us while he's there.

So, basically, with some of you, ignore the Earl Campbells who are in wheelchairs by the age of 50, the Atwaan Randle Els who have trouble walking down stairs in the mid-30s, suicides by the Junior Seaus, and the Tony Dorsetts with CTE...or be labelled an overprotective parent?

Jadaveon Clowney can't even play football AFTER a college career. If he couldn't handle the rigors of the college and pro game, how do you think he would have handled it at 18 years old, straight out of high school? This whole discussion is a joke.

Agree. The fact is, some kid "unranked" or with a star or two might become a superstar. No one denies that. But, you can't have a whole roster full of kids that you are "hoping" will overachieve. I mean, a few kids might get overlooked in high school or be late bloomers. But, you can't count on finding 85 of them. At some point, if you are going to compete well and consistently, you are going to have to be able to get the bigger, faster, "already bloomed" athletes. If you've watched tons of pro and college football, you can pretty much sit and watch a high school game and see whether any of them have the size and speed to do it at the FBS level. Very, very few do. And, 99 times out of 100, those very, very few who do end up choosing to go to the best "football schools" that offer them a scholarship. It's like people talking about Tom Brady being drafted in the 7th Round, so everyone drafted has an equal chance. Well...not exactly. Give me some other examples of 7th Rounders with as many Super Bowl rings as Brady. Lightning does strike; but, not often enough to change the regular pace of life.

From Antwaan Randle El: “The kids are getting bigger and faster, so the concussions, the severe spinal cord injuries, are only going to get worse,” Randle El said. “It’s a tough pill to swallow because I love the game of football. But I tell parents, you can have the right helmet, the perfect pads on, and still end up with a paraplegic kid. “There’s no correcting it. There’s no helmet that’s going to correct it. There’s no teaching that’s going to correct it. It just comes down to it’s a physically violent game. Football players are in a car wreck every week.” He added: “I wouldn’t be surprised if football isn’t around in 20, 25 years.” http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jan/19/super-bowl-xl-star-antwaan-randle-el-says-he-regrets-ever-playing-football -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anyone have an opinion here? I bring this up because the article goes to the heart of something we've discussed recently with other parents whose kids play on my son's basketball team. We all have 9- to 10-year old boys. Most of the boys on this team do not play football. In discussions with other parents, we note that our sons beg us to let them play tackle football. But, we have thusfar held the line in telling them no. My son will be 10 years old next month and already weighs 120 pounds. The other kids on his basketball team are also big, tall, or both. I figure our boy will be 5'11" or so and weight 200-220 pounds before he's 18. We get asked all the time which football team he plays for; the answer is always, none. Football is the only thing he haven't let him play. He's played soccer, lacrosse, basketball, and baseball. Our hope is that he forgets football. If Antwaan Randle El is right, football will be gone anyway. I like to watch football; but, I don't want my son to struggle down staircases when he's 36 years old. I don't think football will disappear, but you never know. Seems there is always something out there to kill the "Golden Goose." Football is mired in injury problems and lawsuits. And, with another discussion on here, we've already discussed to death the NCAA P5 programs and the money squeeze it is for schools like ours to keep up with them. I see many football-related lawsuits over the next few years - for injuries and players' rights. It could well eat itself if the problems surrounding it get too big.

That a whole different discussion, right there...Texas Tech grads and what they say about themselves and Tech. They are as bad as Aggie when it comes to that. That is why they are called, Sand Aggie.

It isn't the schools and NCAA that forbids players from going to the NFL, it's the NFLPA's rule. And, who comprises the NFLPA? Former college football players: Article 6, Section 2 (b) https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/collective-bargaining-agreement-2011-2020.pdf So, direct your "college players are screwed" angst at the NFL players a.k.a. former college players. Also, college players are not a workforce. They are students who happen to be athletes, and were offered a scholarship to a school to continue playing their game for a few more seasons. And, again, they voluntarily choose which offers to accept to play football. And, again, only a handful of schools even make money on their athletic departments. Many have to borrow from their schools in order to make ends meet. So, what you are advocating would only be financially feasible for a few universities. At that point, then, football programs would be dropped. And, so, where does that leave the high school player with his so-called "skill set" that the NCAA and colleges were "screwing" him for? Well, for one, he'd have to apply for college with the rest of the students, and attempt to be accepted under the same standard they are instead of having the bar lowered for them. So, what do you say? For the sake of the richest schools, we eliminate dozens of programs and thousands of opportunities for a kid who might not otherwise be able to go to college for free and better their lives? Oh...no, no, no, Harrington! You've got it all wrong. The vast majority of these players would easily be as motivated to apply for school as those "regular" students. And, paying for it would be a breeze. Give me a break. These kids of football scholarship are getting the opportunity of a lifetime...and, some would piss it away so that the best of the athletes could be (openly) paid by the OUs, Texases, Alabamas, etc. of the college football world.

Hmmm. Let's play that out. How much are the non-athlete students paid out of university funds? For instance, let's take a trombone player at UNT, majoring in music. Does trombone player get a cash cut of money raised by/donated to the music departments. When I make a donation to the English department, does the school take that cash and give it to English majors? No? College athletes have a choice about where - and whether - they go to school. They have expenses paid for that many other student have to borrow for, work for, and often times, both. The football players are not required to play, they are offered an opportunity to play and get an education at the same time. So, cut the "the players don't get one red cent" baloney. The players get plenty. And, now a stipend on top of everything else. If they want to keep staring the gift horse in the mouth, it will spell problems for schools our size. The P5s will be semi-pro, and we will be an afterthought. Here is the problem with the type of arguments you make as well, why the uber focus on football? Ah...it must be that the other athletes - the swimmers, the soccer players, the golfers, the gymnasts, etc. - are using the academic part of their opportunity to earn degrees that have value in the business world. I have a simple solution, then, for the poor, put-upon football players who are having 100% of the tuition, books, room and board paid for - plus given a stipend: require that they major in business, a science, or education. Such contrived "problems" with these football players...all the time. And, supposedly, these are masculine people. Please. Go whine to the "normal" students taking out loans and working two jobs about having your tuition, books, room and board paid for, then getting a stipend on top of it. Tell them how you're being screwed. Ingrates.

I don't think Tech "finally" realized they were not in the same league as UT and A&M. That's simply been their reality from day one of their program. Same with all other Texas schools, us included. One of the chief complaints with Mac was his lack of recruiting prowess. All I'm saying is that Littrell is getting the same type of athlete Mac did...and Dodge did...and Dickey did. The difference will be in whether or not he can coach this level of athlete better than those. It's a tall order. Littrell needs to be aware that no matter what his offenses did, the majority of those seasons where he was OC, the teams had losing seasons because of the shortcomings on defense. Get a QB that can complete a five yard pass...yes, please. But, moreover, get bigger and faster on defense - or, switch the defense to something like BYU, Utah, TCU have run because they can't get the same size and speed. Dodge has already proven that tons of points won't win a bunch of games here. 2002-2004 and 2013 proved that a salty defense can carry your offense a long way...especially with where we are on the food chain of recruiting.

This is a McCarney-type reach. But, not just McCarney...all of his predecessors here as well made those types of reaches. We have to because we don't win enough. In the 18 years that these kids have been alive, we won three season when they were in preschool and once three seasons ago. Meanwhile, in those same 18 years, enough programs around the state have picked up the pace to put us further down the row of choices - namely, TCU, Baylor, and Houston. The thing is, if Littrell farts away his first season the way SMU Jesus did, he's still stuck with the same problem...still recruiting guys at the same level as his "we'll give him a pass" year. just like SMU Jesus is doing again. Everyone is stuck on "give him a pass" mode. I'm not in that mode. It will keep us wrecked in the ditch. We're not at a moment in time when we can be blowing off seasons. Too many other regional schools, G5 and higher, are winning around us. We need a quarterback who can complete passes five yards down the field...crazy, I know. And, we need a defense that can stop the run. It isn't all going to come recruiting WR/DBs listed at 5-9. He's got to win with who he has on the roster now, plus the QB transfer. Otherwise, we're spinning our wheels again. You all give him a pass, I expect six wins out of him and the team in the first season. "Hey this year we won three, but the year before we only won one...look at that new stadium!" isn't going to work on the recruiting trail. Littrell knew this was a tough gig. I expect him, like a true fullback, to man up and hit the hole as hard he can year one, and lead us to a bowl so he has something significant to show recruits. https://twitter.com/joelklatt?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

No, it is to take advantage of athletic mismatches...or, so preaches Joel Klatt when people ask him why those offenses don't work in the NFL.

Try again. I could look just as disgusting as those two in less than a month. I choose to be pretty.

All good points. However, part of the sell on Littrell was supposed to be some sort of theoretical "excitement" among preps about his coming to North Texas. I think the truth will bear that the "excitement" was just among fans who are happy to see a new face at the head coaching position after the disastrous 2014 and 2015 seasons. Every recruit is risky. However, for reasons unknown, schools who do get the better prep athletes do have better results over the long haul. Alabama isn't squeaking by on zero- to two-stars and having Saban coach like Jesus to get them national title after national title. Our situation is, of course, different. My hope is that people will accept the reality that we are not a school which can recruit our way out of our talent problem. We may hit on a handful of guys who were underrated coming out of high school. But, the likelihood of getting 22 like that, even 11, is pretty farfetched. My fear with Littrell isn't that he is a bad coach, but that he will overly rely on an offensive system for which he will never have enough good athletes to be consistently successful. He is committed to an offense where your players are required to out-athlete a defense. I'm not seeing it so far in the prep recruits he's brought in. And, think of this... ...some of you say he gets a pass this year. Well, how does that make sense? A "get a pass" class bites you two/three years down the line when you need quality depth. Are we settling for this mindset of "we can give him an excuse because we suck?" Well, if we have another losing season in 2016, what is changing in the minds of recruits next signing period? Then, do we go back down the path that so many other coaches take - desperately seeking JUCOs as band aids on a wound that never heals? It's a problem. It's been a problem for us for a long time. Just seems to me that whatever lightning people thought would strike simply due to the hiring of Littrell isn't really happening on the recruiting front. Littrell's going to have to win this year, plain and simple. Our program is way past the point of giving people passes, the benefit of the doubt, etc. College football has changed tremendously, and we have been behind the whole time. I hate to have to say or think any of this, but...we're in a tough reality. We simply have to win to get better recruits; no excuses.