Mac's Recruiting Shortfalls Put Us Here

MGNation92 · February 2, 2017

Now hear me out, and @TheReal_jayD touched on this on the podcast. I am not one to make excuses by any means. Point blank we got our asses handed to us on the recruiting trail while landing a few good players. Recruiting has to be improved and I think will be as Littrell and staff continue to improve all of the previous practices and procedures of Mac's staff.

We also have to evaluate why we are where we are. Yes, losing a lot over the last 20 or so years has severely hurt us in public perception, but at the same time, it has to be noted that Littrell had 65 scholarship players last season because of Mac's lack of recruiting quality players. Littrell and staff are still establishing their culture, and I can guarantee you they are recruiting a lot of guys simply for the depth that was non-existent last year in a system that requires rotating constantly to keep the tempo and to keep guys fresh.

Littrell is not an ace recruiter, but don't forget, he is recruiting to survive. He doesn't have the backfill of a full roster to really go after these highly rated guys like nUTSAck does.

I am not happy with this class rating like most of you here, but am excited to have these guys establishing Seth's culture. I am curious to see how Seth recruits with a full roster. I can almost guarantee it will be much better

Just my two cents

BTG_Fan1 · February 2, 2017

Agreed, I think some of these guys were offered for depth and with the knowledge/likely hood that they will make it to campus compared to higher rated/risker players, along with them being here for the entire 4 years. along with finding guys who wanted to be at UNT and guys who will help reinforce the mindset and culture that SL wants/wanted.

ChristopherRyanWilkes · February 2, 2017

This is a valid reason, I'll give you that. Roster mismanagement has put us in a bad spot. I just worry that the vicious cycle continues and we never get out of our scholarship troubles.

outoftown · February 2, 2017

I give you that being low on scholly players may have partially been Macs fault (altough coaching changes always come with attrition, and seth also came in and cleaned house maybe more than strictly necessary, but thats a discussion for another time).

But even given that it was a good deal Macs fault, It is now Seths job to improve that. If we don't have more than 70 scholly players this season, then that is on him. I honestly don't know what the number is now.

GMG24 · February 2, 2017

10 hours ago, outoftown said:

I give you that being low on scholly players may have partially been Macs fault (altough coaching changes always come with attrition, and seth also came in and cleaned house maybe more than strictly necessary, but thats a discussion for another time).

But even given that it was a good deal Macs fault, It is now Seths job to improve that. If we don't have more than 70 scholly players this season, then that is on him. I honestly don't know what the number is now.

Which is still 15 short of everyone else. You'll see the blueshirting for at LEAST two more seasons I think. It is the only way to get the roster up to speed, its a backwards way of getting 25 a class.

BillySee58 · February 2, 2017

13 minutes ago, GMG24 said:

Which is still 15 short of everyone else. You'll see the blueshirting for at LEAST two more seasons I think. It is the only way to get the roster up to speed, its a backwards way of getting 25 a class.

A common misconception I keep seeing is that all the other schools are playing with 85 scholarship guys. The 25 scholarship per class has been in play since the 2013 class, which means redshirt seniors all the way down to true freshmen were signed in capped classes. Schools have had to deal with that cap for 5 straight classes.

That, plus guys on rosters who leave after signing day, and signees who don't make it in, if teams are heading into week 1 with 80 scholarship guys then they're in a good spot.

GMG24 · February 2, 2017

12 minutes ago, BillySee58 said:

A common misconception I keep seeing is that all the other schools are playing with 85 scholarship guys. The 25 scholarship per class has been in play since the 2013 class, which means redshirt seniors all the way down to true freshmen were signed in capped classes. Schools have had to deal with that cap for 5 straight classes.

That, plus guys on rosters who leave after signing day, and signees who don't make it in, if teams are heading into week 1 with 80 scholarship guys then they're in a good spot.

True, I should have changed that to allowed cap. I wish that we could Redshirt each Blueshirt to make sure the preceding classes don't end up being short by their senior year. What do you think about this strategy? I wish after next season we would not blue shirt anymore and sign full classes.

BillySee58 · February 2, 2017

1 hour ago, GMG24 said:

True, I should have changed that to allowed cap. I wish that we could Redshirt each Blueshirt to make sure the preceding classes don't end up being short by their senior year. What do you think about this strategy? I wish after next season we would not blue shirt anymore and sign full classes.

I think the key is that they're bringing in guys who are worth the scholarship. Let's say our options are:

- bring in 5 blueshirts who don't have any other FBS offers and have 75 scholarship guys going into the season. Then we only get 20 guys for the next spot.

- don't bring in any blueshirts, head into the season with 70 scholarship guys, and a full 25 spots for the next class.

If we're going to redshirt those blueshirt guys anyways, does it really make a difference that we technically head into the season with 75 scholarship players as opposed to 70?

The only way a kid will agree to a blueshirt is if we are his only FBS offer or maybe he has one more from a bottom-of-the-barrel FBS program like ULM (the case within Weatherspoon). They don't get to truely sign on signing day, and I believe they may even have to make one rent payment before being placed on scholarship, so we can't ask our top recruits with other options to do it.

If those guys aren't worth the scholarship, who cares that we had 5 extra bodies on the roster who weren't actually adding to our depth anyways? If that's the case then give me the 5 extra spots for the next class and I'll play with the same 70 other guys we would've been playing with anyways.

So that's the key. Making sure these blueshirt guys who really don't have any other FBS offers actually become legit FBS players

GMG24 · February 2, 2017

33 minutes ago, BillySee58 said:

I think the key is that they're bringing in guys who are worth the scholarship. Let's say our options are:

- bring in 5 blueshirts who don't have any other FBS offers and have 75 scholarship guys going into the season. Then we only get 20 guys for the next spot.

- don't bring in any blueshirts, head into the season with 70 scholarship guys, and a full 25 spots for the next class.

If we're going to redshirt those blueshirt guys anyways, does it really make a difference that we technically head into the season with 75 scholarship players as opposed to 70?

The only way a kid will agree to a blueshirt is if we are his only FBS offer or maybe he has one more from a bottom-of-the-barrel FBS program like ULM (the case within Weatherspoon). They don't get to truely sign on signing day, and I believe they may even have to make one rent payment before being placed on scholarship, so we can't ask our top recruits with other options to do it.

If those guys aren't worth the scholarship, who cares that we had 5 extra bodies on the roster who weren't actually adding to our depth anyways? If that's the case then give me the 5 extra spots for the next class and I'll play with the same 70 other guys we would've been playing with anyways.

So that's the key. Making sure these blueshirt guys who really don't have any other FBS offers actually become legit FBS players

True, but I am ok with a RS and it giving us 5 more guys to give us legit looks in practice.