Coaching Staff

UNTLifer · February 5, 2015

I am one that likes to wait a few years before rating a recruiting class, but this one looks promising. Any of you that were complaining recently about our coaching staff's ability to recruit want to chime in?

Great job Mac and company!

Ben Gooding · February 5, 2015

Good class when looked at closely. However, too many fall enrollee JUCOS. We need JUCOS here in the spring. They are only here 2 years and these guys are suppose to be walk in difference makers. It's going to be hard especially for a QB to walk into fall camp and be a difference maker. Our season hinges on the QB position, specifically Denarcus Smith. To add to it...this staff has had too many misses on JUCO players to put a lot of stock in JUCO signees. HOWEVER, I think the JUCOS coming in THIS year are different. We just have to make sure that all of them find their way to Denton for fall camp.

BillySee58 · February 5, 2015

Yes, the coaches do deserve a ton of credit for all the work they put in. Recruiting as a college coach is one of the most hectic jobs out there, and they busted their tails doing it for us.

I don't want to people to get the wrong impression of my opinion. I don't think this is a bad class. I think it's an easy contender for the 2nd best class Mccarney has signed here, initially. Like you said, down the line is when it matters, but you can't compare this class to classes whose players actually have played games. That's why we look at ratings and offer lists to compare.

I should have a complete breakdown of the classes and their offer list classifications based on my rating system soon, but this class has a lot of players with "C+" and "B" offer lists and less "C" guys than in classes like 2011-2013. In the 2012 class, 13 out of 22 high school signings didn't have any other FBS offers. Carlos Harris worked out well, Dutton Watson was playing well before the injuries, and Sir Calvin Wallace appears to be a promising player who saw good playing time, but the rest of those guys who didn't have any offers from that class got buried and either still are or transferred out because of it. We played against the percentages with that class, and the percentages won. Which they usually do in the end, over time.

So I think looking at it that way, we did a great job where we exclusively brought in players who did have at least another FBS offer. The concerning part with this class is that we didn't get many players who had much more than 1 other FBS offer. Young and Barr were the headliner recruits. 2011 and 2013 had more "B+" and "A" recruits than this year. 2014 had many more "B+", "A", and "A+" recruits. And the players who have been all CUSA for us were highly recruited guys. Which is why not having many "B+" or better guys is concerning to me. You need all conference guys to compete for division and conference titles.

As for the JUCOs, it's been pretty simple, IMO. The JUCOs who had good offer lists worked out pretty well. The ones who didn't have good offer lists didn't contribute much. Probably the two most highly recruited JUCOs Mccarney signed were Andrew Power and James Jones. Not coincidentally, IMO, they worked out better than any of the other JUCOs he has signed here. I do feel confident in guys like Combs, Grindle (picked up a South Carolina offer here at the end), Gray, and some of these other ones. I like their film but, more importantly, so did FBS coaches. The key is going to be how much are we going to have to rely on these guys.

My question is what has everyone feeling the most optimistic about this signing class? What has people feeling like this is arguably coach Mccarney's best class here? Everyone should be excited on signing day. But, taking my biased opinion out, just strictly looking at the offer lists it isn't the best class. I'm just trying to hear people's opinions on what they like most about this signing class.

Edited February 5, 2015 by BillySee58

Ben Gooding · February 5, 2015

Size on the DL and Damarcus Smith. Those were the areas of concern for me personally and I think the staff attacked those areas with decent to above average players. The rest are shoe in guys that can, in time, contribute. I think the JUCO LB player of the year will be a dandy as well. But for me, it's the DL size that was recruited and D. Smith.

GrayEagle · February 5, 2015

I believe that we're going to like this mandate that each coach is responsible for recruiting his position. It's to their advantage to have FBS talent and job threatening if they don't.

I think that we'll see better talent because I believe that Coff and Howard are better recruiters than Skladany and Nelson. Since all coaches are captains of their own fate we need to give them a little leeway in order to get the best talent. So, if they need a more talented player and he is a JUCO who is not available until the fall, then I'd rather see him get that player rather than take a lesser talent. Players who have played two years beyond high school should pick up new systems easier and missing spring training is a small detriment but definitely not fatal. A quarterback has the summer to study the playbook and four weeks to familiarize himself with the players. This year, Smith and Chumley even get a fifth week as we have an opening week bye. The same is true for other position players who have less to learn playwise.

Harry · February 5, 2015

I believe that we're going to like this mandate that each coach is responsible for recruiting his position. It's to their advantage to have FBS talent and job threatening if they don't.

Amen. That was a very good point Gray. Don't tell me you don't have players --go recruit them. No excuses.

ChristopherRyanWilkes · February 5, 2015

@BillySee, objectively and going off the recruiting sites, I'm not super excited. I'm not an expert in this category and don't claim to be. I've been one to give in to the hype I read on here before but if you look at how the recruiting sites have ranked us in the past; it generally correlates with how well we've done (outside of 2013-14). This class puts us at about 7th or 8th in the Conference USA by most measures. Not exactly anything to get ecstatic about...

All About UNT · February 5, 2015

So is each position coach to now recruit their own players? Makes perfect sense

GOMG2013 · February 5, 2015

I'm excited about the JUCOs, because like billy said, the JUCOs that have decent offer lists, have worked out. I'm not expecting all of them to hit and be starters, but I'm looking at the ones with the good offer lists to come in and have a jjones impact and become a solid starter next year. Multiple d1 teams wanted them, so they should be able to step in and play for us.

cogido · February 5, 2015

Come on boys...., looks goooood.

NorthTexan95 · February 5, 2015

I'm most excited about the top JC guys we got who will hopefully bring immediate help. Last year we signed the flashy receivers and running backs. This year it's more about the offensive line and defense so not as exciting.

My concern is that we could wind up with a few standouts but most of the class winding up as just average. We need headliners but we also need the level of play of our non-stars to increase. We need more depth. Hopefully four or five years from now we not only see a handful of all conference players from this class but also many solid contributors to a winning team.

97and03 · February 5, 2015

I am most excited about the two late flips at defensive tackles. Both have legit inside size and the kind of accolades that indicate talent and high-level performance. Now let's hope they are ready to play and stay in the program four years.

Withers940 · February 5, 2015

I really like this class and think in two years a lot of these guys are going to be big contributors. What I dont understand is how bad our recruiting ranking is?

I know its not your rank that matters but what you do with the kids you recruit.

ChristopherRyanWilkes · February 5, 2015

I really like this class and think in two years a lot of these guys are going to be big contributors. What I dont understand is how bad our recruiting ranking is?

I know its not your rank that matters but what you do with the kids you recruit.

Because if you take a step back and really look at things, our recruiting ranking makes sense. Outside of the obvious such as having almost a losing record as a football program and only 2 bowl wins, there are a lot of factors. 1) Coach Mac and his staff have almost no connections to any Texas high school program. I know I saw a post on here that argued that this wasn't a main factor in recruiting but you can't tell me it doesn't have any effect at all. 2) We have the lowest recruiting budget in C-USA. This really limits our coaching staff. 3) Perception. We still just aren't there yet with being known as a successful football program, even compared to a lot of our C-USA peers.

ChristopherRyanWilkes · February 5, 2015

If you mean why does this class look so good to you and the recruiting sites don't seem to indicate that -- its probably because we are North Texas fans. Every class looks good to us and we try to brush off star-rating systems because it doesn't align with how we feel about a class we have signed.

MeanGreenTexan · February 5, 2015

Because if you take a step back and really look at things, our recruiting ranking makes sense. Outside of the obvious such as having almost a losing record as a football program and only 2 bowl wins, there are a lot of factors. 1) Coach Mac and his staff have almost no connections to any Texas high school program. I know I saw a post on here that argued that this wasn't a main factor in recruiting but you can't tell me it doesn't have any effect at all. 2) We have the lowest recruiting budget in C-USA. This really limits our coaching staff. 3) Perception. We still just aren't there yet with being known as a successful football program, even compared to a lot of our C-USA peers.

I don't understand the low recruiting budget, unless McCarney and Grant are fine with it. We had 3 helmets/uniforms last year. I would think we could spend some of that money on recruiting if McCarney would rather allocate it there.

This year, with 2 paycheck games, there would be no good reason why the recruiting budget would be so low... unless McCarney & Grant are fine with it.

ChristopherRyanWilkes · February 5, 2015

I don't understand the low recruiting budget, unless McCarney and Grant are fine with it. We had 3 helmets/uniforms last year. I would think we could spend some of that money on recruiting if McCarney would rather allocate it there.
This year, with 2 paycheck games, there would be no good reason why the recruiting budget would be so low... unless McCarney & Grant are fine with it.

Well for a while there it was because we were 2nd lowest in revenue compared to the other C-USA teams. That's not the case anymore but maybe they have allocated the new funds somewhere else rather than adding to the recruiting budget.

MeanGreenTexan · February 5, 2015

I want to know when our coaches/GAs will be doing this... although I think Byrd would blow out the woofers doing this.

BYU has one of these for each guy they signed yesterday.

Harry · February 5, 2015

I really like this class and think in two years a lot of these guys are going to be big contributors. What I dont understand is how bad our recruiting ranking is?

I know its not your rank that matters but what you do with the kids you recruit.

247 had us 6 or 7 in C-USA so that is an improvement from where we have been.

greenit · February 5, 2015

247 had us 6 or 7 in C-USA so that is an improvement from where we have been.

Scout is clearly the best recruiting service (this year).

UNT is top 4

http://northtexas.scout.com/a.z?s=353&p=9&c=14&view=2&yr=2015#/a.z?s=353&p=9&c=14&view=2&yr=2015

ChristopherRyanWilkes · February 5, 2015

Scout is clearly the best recruiting service (this year).

UNT is top 4

http://northtexas.scout.com/a.z?s=353&p=9&c=14&view=2&yr=2015#/a.z?s=353&p=9&c=14&view=2&yr=2015

I don't think any of them are "clearly" the best. From what I've heard and the limited case studies they've had, Rivals does the best job of projecting the success of recruits based on their star-system. http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/21641769

Based on Rivals who doesn't do a conference ranking per se, we are tied for 6th in C-USA for the amount of 3-star recruits we have. Definitely an improvement but I'd say nothing to be overwhelmed about.

Mean Green 93-98 · February 5, 2015

I think that we'll see better talent because I believe that Coff and Howard are better recruiters than Skladany and Nelson.

I'm not sure, but I'm assuming you're referring to Cosh and Patrick?

@BillySee, objectively and going off the recruiting sites, I'm not super excited. I'm not an expert in this category and don't claim to be. I've been one to give in to the hype I read on here before but if you look at how the recruiting sites have ranked us in the past; it generally correlates with how well we've done (outside of 2013-14). This class puts us at about 7th or 8th in the Conference USA by most measures. Not exactly anything to get ecstatic about...

24/7, which in the past year or two has asserted itself as the most thorough of the recruiting sites, has us ranked #6 out of 13: http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CompositeTeamRankings?Conference=C-USA

If there's anything to get ecstatic about, it's that it seems that this class addresses our needs. Dodge's 2008 class was highly rated, but we ended up with more DBs than we needed and nothing on the D-line where our needs were. Of course, whether or not this class meets our needs will be better assessed in the fall, and whether or not DeMarcus Smith ever actually makes it to campus.

I don't think any of them are "clearly" the best. From what I've heard and the limited case studies they've had, Rivals does the best job of projecting the success of recruits based on their star-system. http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/21641769

Based on Rivals who doesn't do a conference ranking per se, we are tied for 6th in C-USA for the amount of 3-star recruits we have. Definitely an improvement but I'd say nothing to be overwhelmed about.

Anything claiming Rivals is the best is dated, as is that 2-year-old article. Since Rivals' buyout by Yahoo, their best analysts have all left for 24/7

Edited February 5, 2015 by Mean Green 93-98

greenit · February 5, 2015

I don't think any of them are "clearly" the best. From what I've heard and the limited case studies they've had, Rivals does the best job of projecting the success of recruits based on their star-system. http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/21641769

Based on Rivals who doesn't do a conference ranking per se, we are tied for 6th in C-USA for the amount of 3-star recruits we have. Definitely an improvement but I'd say nothing to be overwhelmed about.

Tongue in cheek due to them having us ranked highest of the lists I have seen.

Edited February 5, 2015 by greenit

ChristopherRyanWilkes · February 5, 2015

I'm not sure, but I'm assuming you're referring to Cosh and Patrick?

24/7, which in the past year or two has asserted itself as the most thorough of the recruiting sites, has us ranked #6 out of 13: http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CompositeTeamRankings?Conference=C-USA

If there's anything to get ecstatic about, it's that it seems that this class addresses our needs. Dodge's 2008 class was highly rated, but we ended up with more DBs than we needed and nothing on the D-line where our needs were. Of course, whether or not this class meets our needs will be better assessed in the fall, and whether or not DeMarcus Smith ever actually makes it to campus.

Anything claiming Rivals is the best is dated, as is that 2-year-old article. Since Rivals' buyout by Yahoo, their best analysts have all left for 24/7

Could be, but there hasn't been enough time to test 24/7's ratings yet recently. Either way both have us at about 6th in recruiting. Not bad, but as Vito said still around middle-of-the-pack.

BillySee58 · February 5, 2015

247 had us 6 or 7 in C-USA so that is an improvement from where we have been.

Kind've. We were 9th out of 14 CUSA teams last year, and 102 overall. This year we were 6th out of 13 CUSA teams and 96th overall.

However, last class, we had 2 less commits counting towards our rating, and 7 were not rated by 247, so they were given a rating of 70 (lowest rating possible). That hurt our score. And going off of offer lists this class was not as good as last class. Ratings-wise they're pretty close.

Vito did a good job of buddying up with Brian Perroni at 247. They'll at least take the time to honestly rate and evaluate our players now.