Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
9 minutes ago, akriesman said:

Yep.   We climbed 6 spots in about 2 weeks.   Fantastic job of "stealth" recruiting by Littrell and staff :)

Turner got ranked 2 stars is what I see. Congrats to the staff! Nice job under the circumstances! GMG

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Mean_Green09 said:

Probably just a little better. I feel pretty safe saying DMac wouldve had us in last place.

DMac never had us in last place. Comparing to DMac's actually recruiting classes, not where anyone thinks he would have had us this year.

People getting excited about a class ranked 106? Lolz. 

Edited by UNT90
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 5
Posted
5 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

DMac never had us in last place. Comparing to DMac's actually recruiting classes, not where anyone thinks he would have had us this year.

People getting excited about a class ranked 106? Lolz. 

Not sure anyone is turning cartwheels over this class, but it is a lot better than the disaster it looked like it could be a week before signing day.  Mac's classes turned out to be about as rated, not very good.  No one knows how Littrell's first recruiting class will perform, but there is always hope from most with a new coach.   

I will be much more concerned if Littrell's second class of high school recruits is not substantially better.   

  • Upvote 4
Posted (edited)

DMac had trouble evaluating talent. It was't his rankings that bothered me, but the results from those he did recruit. I do not care what Littrell's class is ranked. I just want to see how they turn out on the field.

Edited by Eagleisland
  • Upvote 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, Eagleisland said:

DMac had trouble evaluating talent. It was't his rankings that bothered me, but the results from those he did recruit. I do not care what Littrell's class is ranked. I just want to see how they turn out on the field.

The worst teams are consistently at the bottom of recruiting rankings. Every stop to think there is a correlation? 

As has been posted about on here numerous times by those much more knowledgable than I, recruiting rankings matter. And matter a lot.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Posted
2 hours ago, UNT90 said:

DMac never had us in last place. Comparing to DMac's actually recruiting classes, not where anyone thinks he would have had us this year.

People getting excited about a class ranked 106? Lolz. 

I think we would have last this year with Mac coming off of this season and the fact that they didn't seem interested in recruiting.  

  • Upvote 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, NorthTexan95 said:

I think we would have last this year with Mac coming off of this season and the fact that they didn't seem interested in recruiting.  

Projecting something that can't be projected. You folks say DMac's bad recruiting got us to where we were last year, then turn around and jubilantly celebrate a class JUST LIKE THE ONES YOU CRITICIZED DMAC FOR HAVING. 

Just so much Lolz. All you are doing is still celebrating a coaching hire. It's just more than a bit ridiculous.

Edited by UNT90
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, NorthTexan95 said:

I think we would have last this year with Mac coming off of this season and the fact that they didn't seem interested in recruiting.  

Were Middleton & Hair'Griffin the only two to commit after Jr camps/Friday Night Lights last year?  Middleton didn't make it (at least, not yet) and I'm hoping Hair'Griffin is a player for us... but I would expect many more commitments after these types of events this year.

  • Upvote 2
Posted
30 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

Projecting something that can't be projected. You folks say DMac's bad recruiting got us to where we were last year, then turn around and jubilantly celebrate a class JUST LIKE THE ONES YOU CRITICIZED DMAC FOR HAVING. 

Just so much Lolz. All you are doing is still celebrating a coaching hire. It's just more than a bit ridiculous.

If we compare Macs recruiting through Game 5 last year versus Game 5 the previous years, what do we get? 

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, NorthTexan95 said:

If we compare Macs recruiting through Game 5 last year versus Game 5 the previous years, what do we get? 

Or, let's compare Littrell's first class to Mac's first class and see what you get. 

You keep wanting to make this about Mac this year. It isn't. It's about Littrell and how this fan base is celebrating a class just like the ones Mac landed in previous years. 

EDIT: And DMac had the #105 rated recruiting class by 24/7 in 2011. 4 years later that class gave us 1-11. Yet some think this is a good class.

Littrell needs to do SUBSTANTIALLY better next year or else we will be seeing him ride off in the sunset to another assistant coaching gig in 2019.

oh, and even though Chad Morris had the same time frame last year, his class was rated #82. But how can little ole UNT ever hope to keep up with SMU, right?

Edited by UNT90
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

Or, let's compare Littrell's first class to Mac's first class and see what you get. 

You keep wanting to make this about Mac this year. It isn't. It's about Littrell and how this fan base is celebrating a class just like the ones Mac landed in previous years. 

EDIT: And DMac had the #105 rated recruiting class by 24/7 in 2011. 4 years later that class gave us 1-11. Yet some think this is a good class.

Littrell needs to do SUBSTANTIALLY better next year or else we will be seeing him ride off in the sunset to another assistant coaching gig in 2019.

oh, and even though Chad Morris had the same time frame last year, his class was rated #82. But how can little ole UNT ever hope to keep up with SMU, right?

I see your point and understand the concern.  However Littrell is giving undersized guys who are either not ranked or our only offer a shot.  Mac gave guys who had the prototypical D1 height and weight requirements their only D1 shot big difference IMO.  Anyway back to this class.  Due to all the walk on's Mac put on ship before year 2 of playing he has consistently forced classes to be smaller and smaller.  This year I believe the final count was 5 count them 5 spots where we could not sign a player because a walk-on was put on ship.  I would have personally liked to see what Littrell's staff did with those other 5 ships, however I believe there were a few guys who Dmac Shipped that I was ok with.  Anyway to each their own, but Mac really put us in a tough spot because of his lack of roster management.

 

Morris has a helicopter surely that swayed a recruit or two?  And I believe (too lazy) to look it up that he signed a full class.  Add those 5 I talked about above I bet we could have gotten to 90's and into the 80's pretty easy.  

Edited by GMG24
Posted
7 minutes ago, GMG24 said:

I see your point and understand the concern.  However Littrell is giving undersized guys who are either not ranked or our only offer a shot.  Mac gave guys who had the prototypical D1 height and weight requirements their only D1 shot big difference IMO.  Anyway back to this class.  Due to all the walk on's Mac put on ship before year 2 of playing he has consistently forced classes to be smaller and smaller.  This year I believe the final count was 5 count them 5 spots where we could not sign a player because a walk-on was put on ship.  I would have personally liked to see what Littrell's staff did with those other 5 ships, however I believe there were a few guys who Dmac Shipped that I was ok with.  Anyway to each their own, but Mac really put us in a tough spot because of his lack of roster management.

 

Morris has a helicopter surely that swayed a recruit or two?  And I believe (too lazy) to look it up that he signed a full class.  Add those 5 I talked about above I bet we could have gotten to 90's and into the 80's pretty easy.  

We were signing players with no other offers. Our big QB recruit had a D2 offer. You really think scholarship count mattered for the quality of players we were getting?

If you will recall, my biggest concern about a guy with purely P5 pedigree is that he wouldn't understand the challenges he would face at UNT in whole number of areas, recruiting being the most important. That's why I wanted a guy with experience as a head coach winning in a place that hadn't won before.

Littrell showed very little with this first class. Let's hope he picks it up substantially next year, otherwise it's the same song, 4th verse over the last 15 years.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

We were signing players with no other offers. Our big QB recruit had a D2 offer. You really think scholarship count mattered for the quality of players we were getting?

If you will recall, my biggest concern about a guy with purely P5 pedigree is that he wouldn't understand the challenges he would face at UNT in whole number of areas, recruiting being the most important. That's why I wanted a guy with experience as a head coach winning in a place that hadn't won before.

Littrell showed very little with this first class. Let's hope he picks it up substantially next year, otherwise it's the same song, 4th verse over the last 15 years.

He picked up some really nice pieces IMO.... again to each their own.  He retained some good local, talent.  

  • Upvote 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Army of Dad said:

And what was Mac recruiting to when he took the job? 

Mac took over a 2-10 team with a number of close loses including an end of the season near upset against Kansas State.

Latrell took over a 1-11 team with 10 losses by 14 points or more.

Mac also took over a team that was about to open a brand new stadium.

He had a lot more buzz going for him then,  than Littrell does now.

Mac also left Littrell with a 66-7 loss to Portland State albatross hanging around his neck.

 

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, casual fan said:

Mac took over a 2-10 team with a number of close loses including an end of the season near upset against Kansas State.

Latrell took over a 1-11 team with 10 losses by 14 points or more.

Mac also took over a team that was about to open a brand new stadium.

He had a lot more buzz going for him then,  than Littrell does now.

Mac also left Littrell with a 66-7 loss to Portland State albatross hanging around his neck.

 

 

Excuses excuses excuses. 

There isn't much difference between 2-10 or 1-11. 

Portland St. Hurt recruiting and will hurt attendance, but Littrell was going to overcome that, remember?

He will either get better recruits or be out in 4 years. And he knows it. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Posted
22 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

Excuses excuses excuses. 

There isn't much difference between 2-10 or 1-11. 

Portland St. Hurt recruiting and will hurt attendance, but Littrell was going to overcome that, remember?

He will either get better recruits or be out in 4 years. And he knows it. 

You use facts and arrange them to fit your agenda. According to you, it's THE worst loss in modern FBS college football when you want to criticize (and rightfully so) RV, but when you want to bith about something or someone else a 59 point loss to an FCS school on homecoming is just an "excuse." 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Ben Gooding said:

You use facts and arrange them to fit your agenda. According to you, it's THE worst loss in modern FBS college football when you want to criticize (and rightfully so) RV, but when you want to bith about something or someone else a 59 point loss to an FCS school on homecoming is just an "excuse." 

The loss existed while everyone was trumpeting how Littrell was going to recruit so much better than Mac. I was the one doubting that and listing the loss as a reason. 

You can't come back and talk about the loss being the reason when you said during recruiting season that Littrell would overcome the loss. Those are the hypocrites, young Ben. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.