Just a Recruiting Reminder

TheReal_jayD · June 5, 2017

I have seen a lot of upset comments on the board the last few weeks about kids with 0 or none offers. I just want to remind people it is just June 4th. There is still a lot of time between now and the December signing day. Just for reference here is some guys that UNT was in on this last recruiting class that had 0 FBS offers as of June before their Senior year. And i honestly believe there is not one kid on this list that any body on the board would complain about if they were wearing Mean Green come fall. Be patient!

Tariq Woolen

http://247sports.com/Player/Tariq-Woolen-46035648

Davian Ford

http://247sports.com/Player/Davion-Ford-46036902

Tyreece Lott

http://247sports.com/player/tyreece-lott-46037323

Trevon Bradley

http://247sports.com/Player/TreVon-Bradley-91345

Terrell Cooper

http://247sports.com/Player/Terrell-Cooper-93545

Malik Jackson

http://247sports.com/player/malik-jackson-91465

Emmet Perry

http://247sports.com/player/emmet-perry-46036156

Henry Klinge

http://247sports.com/Player/Henry-Klinge-45572492?Institution=23893

El Paso Eagle · June 5, 2017

@TheReal_jayD if you do not stop using logic in your post there's gonna be serious issues

TheReal_jayD · June 5, 2017

30 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

@TheReal_jayD if you do not stop using logic in your post there's gonna be serious issues

I will try to do better!!

UNTLifer · June 5, 2017

Thank you. I wanted to do this but was too lazy to research when the offers fell. Nice to see facts back up posts instead of jaded opinions. Now @TheReal_jayD, who is this QB?

MGNation92 · June 5, 2017

Not to play the devils advocate here(lord knows I have the last few weeks) but we still didn't sign any of these guys.

Im glad we're getting in early. Need to get and keep those commitments

BillySee58 · June 5, 2017

I think the point that keeps getting lost here is that the commits, individually, are not who the criticism and disappointment is surrounding. It's the coaching staff.

15 of our last 16 commits have had us as the only active FBS offers at the time of commitment. Sure there is time for these current commits to pick up more offers. Of course there are examples of players in the past being productive players despite having just one FBS offer. And maybe some of these guys will join such a list. Regardless, the posts I have seen have not been trashing recruits individually. It's a collective evaluation of the current state of UNT recruiting.

@MGNation92 received some pretty harsh criticism, and high-grade post misinterpretation recently. He's not the only one. This is about watching the third cycle of Littrell recruits and still not seeing any real progress in head-to-head recruiting results.

I don't get why it's so hard to understand people critically evaluating this and coming to the conclusion that this is concerning. Doesn't mean we aren't rooting for this team and program, or these commits.

Edited June 5, 2017 by BillySee58

MGNation92 · June 5, 2017

@BillySee58 gets it

untcampbell · June 5, 2017

Maybe we can compromise:

Complain all you want...it's what we do here. It's almost all we do here.

Don't derail a recruit's thread in doing so. It's what we shouldn't do here.

GMG

BillySee58 · June 5, 2017

22 minutes ago, untcampbell said:

Maybe we can compromise:

Complain all you want...it's what we do here. It's almost all we do here.

Don't derail a recruit's thread in doing so. It's what we shouldn't do here.

GMG

I agree on not derailing a recruit's thread. What I don't agree is that's it is "complaining." Intelligent, unbiased evaluations should not be confused with complaining.

UNTLifer · June 5, 2017

25 minutes ago, untcampbell said:

Maybe we can compromise:

Complain all you want...it's what we do here. It's almost all we do here.

Don't derail a recruit's thread in doing so. It's what we shouldn't do here.

GMG

This. If you want to voice your displeasure with recruiting just put it in a thread outside of the one committed to a player that just agreed to come to Denton.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · June 5, 2017

The points made by me and others are not a knock on recruits personally, but simply further evidence to many of us that we are paying more money to a coaching staff who is not getting any better results in recruiting that those in years (decades now) past.

RV set up a pretty easy OOC schedule for the better part of seven or eight more seasons. If Littrell can't get over six wins with the gimme games RV set up, we're spinning our wheels at FBS-level.

If we cannot win six games where three OOCs are Lamar, SMU, and Army, plus playing in the C-USunBelt, Littrell and Co. either need to be shown the door, or we need to drop down and spend the money elsewhere in the department. In other words, cut the charade: if we are going to recruit to the FCS level, get on the FCS level.

As it stands, since we've returned to I-A/FBS status:
-4 winning seasons, 18 losing seasons
-5 head coaches: Simon, Dickey, Dodge, McCarney, and Littrell. Only Dickey and McCarney have delivered winning seasons since we've returned. Only Dickey has delivered multiple winning seasons.

Recruiting matters. We are not getting much bang for the buck at this point.

I'll stand by my opinion, always, that the vast majority of talent is found by FBS coaches and recruiting services. Those who stand out get multiple offers by FBS schools. Those who don't are getting FCS and DIvision II offers...then, we sweep in.

And, although we are not supposed to mention UTSA, I'll go ahead and do it. They are getting three-star guys with multiple FBS offers. They had 10 in their 2017 class; we had four. They are beating us on and off the field. It's a problem.

Eagleisland · June 5, 2017

The recruiting treads are getting boring as can be. We know everyone's perspective by now (so no sense in repeating the same stuff over and over again). As for "not getting any better results in recruiting"....we just do not know that yet. The only results that count come when they are on the field.

If that weren't the case, then Boise State, who for years recruited virtual unknowns, who have never risen to the level they are now....and TCU never would have made the first step to the level they are at. It was only after some success with lower rated classes did they begin to bring in higher rated recruits than some of their rivals.

Cr1028 · June 5, 2017

Let's see if the results improve now that's we lost 3 of those piss-poor recruiters from the past couple seasons. It a good thing we passed those problems onto those resource-poor P5 programs. Haha. They have no idea how far south their recruiting is about to go.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · June 6, 2017

21 hours ago, Eagleisland said:

The recruiting treads are getting boring as can be. We know everyone's perspective by now (so no sense in repeating the same stuff over and over again). As for "not getting any better results in recruiting"....we just do not know that yet. The only results that count come when they are on the field.

If that weren't the case, then Boise State, who for years recruited virtual unknowns, who have never risen to the level they are now....and TCU never would have made the first step to the level they are at. It was only after some success with lower rated classes did they begin to bring in higher rated recruits than some of their rivals.

Boise State did not "for year recruit virtual unknowns." They took advantage of the then-Pac-10/12's academic requirements to sweep in some nice players who didn't qualify to enter Pac-10/12 schools. They positioned themselves as a "play now" option over the JUCO route many non-qualifiers took.

It worked for them, to a degree. They were never invited into a bigger conference even though they occasionally slayed a bigger dragon.

untjim1995 · June 6, 2017

27 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Boise State did not "for year recruit virtual unknowns." They took advantage of the then-Pac-10/12's academic requirements to sweep in some nice players who didn't qualify to enter Pac-10/12 schools. They positioned themselves as a "play now" option over the JUCO route many non-qualifiers took.

It worked for them, to a degree. They were never invited into a bigger conference even though they occasionally slayed a bigger dragon.

The other thing that people don't realize about Boise State's rise up was that the Pac-12 North Teams would actually play games at Boise. It gave them huge wins over Oregon, Oregon State, and Washington in seasons past. It would be like us getting OU, UT, or A&M to play here and then we beat them.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · June 7, 2017

On 6/6/2017 at 10:59 AM, untjim1995 said:

The other thing that people don't realize about Boise State's rise up was that the Pac-12 North Teams would actually play games at Boise. It gave them huge wins over Oregon, Oregon State, and Washington in seasons past. It would be like us getting OU, UT, or A&M to play here and then we beat them.

Which makes sense because Boise's roster was full of Pac-12 non-qualifiers.

Our roster isn't full of Big 12 non-qualifiers. Big 12 non-qualifiers tend to go to JUCOs in Texas, NEO A&M in Miami, OK, or one of the Kansas JUCOs.

People might ask, "Why couldn't we do the same?" Well, yeah...why couldn't we? After all, we were in a conference with Boise at about the time the mid-2000 schedules were being set in late 90s.

The largest reason of all, I'd venture to say, is that Boise had already invested in upgrading their stadium and facilities. The blue turf was installed in 1986. The stadium was expanded/renovated in 1997. The same year, 1997, they began hosting bowl games.

Whom to throw under the bus here for not doing the same? Matt Simon, who was the coach when Boise began picking off Pac-12 non-qualifiers? Darrell Dickey who followed soon after? The athletic directors before RV for not moving sooner to upgrade or replace Fouts, upgrade facilities, and attempt to get a bowl game in Denton?

There are any number of mistakes we've made along the way. Boise rolled the dice many times - with the backing of their alumni and community because there really isn't a whole hell of a lot to compete with Boise State football when it comes to sports entertainment in Idaho.

Being so close to the metroplex, the average person on the street has dozens more entertainment options in DFW than in Boise on a Saturday afternoon or Saturday night.

I don't care about any of that. It's water under the bridge, and so what matters is the present. And, presently, we are paying a coach $1 million and getting the same type of recruits we always have. That bothers some people; others, it doesn't.

I think Seth Littrell and Wren Baker are nice guys. But, I don't think they are the pull-a-rabbit-out-of-the-hat types who can really deliver long term for the good of the program.

I view them both as stop-gap players who will use us as a stepping stone and will jump the first chance they get. Hence the signing of a home and home with Liberty, hiring an OL coach who has been in recruiting trouble with the NCAA before, and then allowing him to give scholarships to players coveted by McNeese State and NW Oklahoma State.

Some will argue, "He got Houston!" Yes, so did RV. And, RV also got a long term deal with a service academy. Phone me when Wren can get a long term deal with Navy or Air Force.

I know you understand this; but, many others do not. Or, they do and simply hate the look of reality when it has set in so hard, like so much concrete.

Edited June 7, 2017 by MeanGreenMailbox

untjim1995 · June 7, 2017

5 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Which makes sense because Boise's roster was full of Pac-12 non-qualifiers.

Our roster isn't full of Big 12 non-qualifiers. Big 12 non-qualifiers tend to go to JUCOs in Texas, NEO A&M in Miami, OK, or one of the Kansas JUCOs.

People might ask, "Why couldn't we do the same?" Well, yeah...why couldn't we? After all, we were in a conference with Boise at about the time the mid-2000 schedules were being set in late 90s.

The largest reason of all, I'd venture to say, is that Boise had already invested in upgrading their stadium and facilities. The blue turf was installed in 1986. The stadium was expanded/renovated in 1997. The same year, 1997, they began hosting bowl games.

Whom to throw under the bus here for not doing the same? Matt Simon, who was the coach when Boise began picking off Pac-12 non-qualifiers? Darrell Dickey who followed soon after? The athletic directors before RV for not moving sooner to upgrade or replace Fouts, upgrade facilities, and attempt to get a bowl game in Denton?

There are any number of mistakes we've made along the way. Boise rolled the dice many times - with the backing of their alumni and community because there really isn't a whole hell of a lot to compete with Boise State football when it comes to sports entertainment in Idaho.

Being so close to the metroplex, the average person on the street has dozens more entertainment options in DFW than in Boise on a Saturday afternoon or Saturday night.

I don't care about any of that. It's water under the bridge, and so what matters is the present. And, presently, we are paying a coach $1 million and getting the same type of recruits we always have. That bothers some people; others, it doesn't.

I think Seth Littrell and Wren Baker are nice guys. But, I don't think they are the pull-a-rabbit-out-of-the-hat types who can really deliver long term for the good of the program.

I view them both as stop-gap players who will use us as a stepping stone and will jump the first chance they get. Hence the signing of a home and home with Liberty, hiring an OL coach who has been in recruiting trouble with the NCAA before, and then allowing him to give scholarships to players coveted by McNeese State and NW Oklahoma State.

Some will argue, "He got Houston!" Yes, so did RV. And, RV also got a long term deal with a service academy. Phone me when Wren can get a long term deal with Navy or Air Force.

I know you understand this; but, many others do not. Or, they do and simply hate the look of reality when it has set in so hard, like so much concrete.

A few things:

1.) At a school like ours, the BEST thing for us would be that the coaches and ADs were able to use us a stepping stone upward. Tulsa did that in hoops for a long time. UH has done it in football. That would be awesome to follow those schools...since the early 80's, we have had exactly one coach get hired away from here to move upward, Johnny Jones, who went to his alma mater and quickly fell apart there. Literally, not one football coach since Jerry Moore got hired to go to Tech in 1980 has seen anyone want them to be the head coach at their school after seeing what they have done at UNT (not one). Same with our ADs.

2.) You hit in the head perfectly about Boise's biggest advantage being located in Boise, Idaho. They have no other entertainment options to vie for competition from fans. They have schools around their region who would go and play there. They had a civic group who brought a bowl game to a place that nobody imagined wanting to go in December for a game, but yet it has lasted. And they had an administration that wanted athletics to serve as the primary window to their university, which has worked out greatly for them. It obviously is not guaranteed, as we have seen often, but you get zero hits on the pitches you don't swing at. Until very, very recently, our university refused to even pick up the bat for athletics, much less swing hard. Here's to hoping that is changing, although I believe its too late to make a difference for being FBS in the long-term now.

3.) There is exactly one school in the country that fits the exact same situation that we sit in, which is San Jose State. A commuter school, historically, that shares a market with Power schools in Cal and Stanford, not to mention the 4 major sports being represented with the Niners, Raiders, A's, Giants, Warriors, and Sharks. But they got the invitation to their perfect league, the MWC. We haven't, as soon as we finally got the invite to CUSA, it was already becoming the SBC 2.0, then ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa all jumped ship, which got us reunited with the old gang of FAU, MUTS, and WKU. In true UNT conference-affiliation luck, even the SBC teams we liked being in a conference with, Arky State and ULL, didn't get invited to move up, but instead we got the F_Us, relative newcomers at the time or now in UTSA, Charlotte, and ODU, and then two eastern SBC callups in MUTS and WKU that nobody around here cares too much about even when they are good. CUSA West is great for us, but CUSA overall, isn't much to celebrate, when its mostly SBC teams, big market teams with no history (Charlotte and ODU) or teams that are stuck here in Marshall, USM, and UAB.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · June 7, 2017

True, all. Especially about San Jose State. I've been to their stadium. It really was a Fouts-like piece of "architecture."

Thanks for the San Jose pro soccer team (Hunt money), they got some upgrades in the 2000s. But, it's still not a great stadium.

By the way, SJS also has a four game, home and home series with Army :-) Another similarity to us. They had a four game series with Navy as well at the beginning of the decade. They have a home-and-home with Cal in the future, but not other Pa-12 school; similar to our Tech deal.

Good points, many similarities with SJSU.

One thing SJSU does seem better at than us, though, is politicking. Didn't hurt to have Bill Walsh as an alumni, though. While still alive, he was very supportive of his alma mater.

Edited June 7, 2017 by MeanGreenMailbox