Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Cr1028 said:

So, I seem to have been in a cave for a while. Did they do away with the 25 per class limit?

I believe they did away with it due to the transfer portal. Now you can sign as many as you want as long as you stay under the total limit of 85 scholarship players.

  • Upvote 3
  • Thanks 1
Posted
3 hours ago, 97and03 said:

I tend to ignore the class ranking since class size influences it. We are signing a big class, so lots of points. We only had 14 last year, so fewer points.
I prefer to look at average rating of the recruits. At 84.14, we are around 8th in the conference. Hardly overwhelming. 
For comparison, last year was 84.17.

The bottom four guys on the list had no other FBS offers. 

With three star players you just have to wait to see how they turn out. With different people from different regions ranking the players they can be very subjective. In many cases you can have multiple players given their ranking within a matter of hours, so again very subjective.

  • Upvote 3
Posted

Next year's class looks great. Unfortunately, those who excel will hit the portal. It seems if your in the G7 league and star..the P3's will be knockin on your door with that bag of cash. You'll re-boot every year. That's just the semi-pro league reality..

 

 

  • Upvote 5
  • Sad 2
Posted
21 minutes ago, greenjoe said:

Could a team have 85 scholarship players, and continue signing players by paying them in NIL money rather than scholarship money ?

BYU has a collective that is paying for the scholarships for all Walk-Ons that make the team. So basically that is adding additional scholarship players over the 85 

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Instead of hoarding more than 85 players it seems like it might be a better strategy to funnel any excess cash to to top players in an effort to keep them around. If you lose a few players to attrition or injury just go buy some more.

Man, I hate where this is headed.

  • Upvote 3
Posted
4 hours ago, El Paso Eagle said:

BYU has a collective that is paying for the scholarships for all Walk-Ons that make the team. So basically that is adding additional scholarship players over the 85 

Is that true? If so, sounds like it would be easy to bring a lawsuit against BYU (and the NCAA) for circumventing Title IX. Because no one can seriously pretend that women profit from this whole NIL scheme as much as men do.

  • Upvote 3
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, El Paso Eagle said:

With three star players you just have to wait to see how they turn out. With different people from different regions ranking the players they can be very subjective. In many cases you can have multiple players given their ranking within a matter of hours, so again very subjective.

And I don’t want it to see like I am totally dismissing this class, but raw facts matter. As does perspective.

So to prove both points, I will add that both of Morris’ classes have a higher avg rating than Seth’s top of the conference classes from 2019-21, which were in the 83-83.5 range. This is likely primarily due to the upgrade in conference and the portal meaning that we probably have a better pool of high school players to chose from since they are under recruited somewhat. To give Morris’ staff credit, the very top of these two classes have featured impressive talent. 

Edited by 97and03
  • Upvote 6
Posted
2 hours ago, dmaxel said:

Is that true? If so, sounds like it would be easy to bring a lawsuit against BYU (and the NCAA) for circumventing Title IX. Because no one can seriously pretend that women profit from this whole NIL scheme as much as men do.

But the schools do not run the collectives.  The actions of the collectives are not covered by Title IX.  At least not for now.

  • Upvote 2
Posted
12 hours ago, RBP79 said:

Next year's class looks great. Unfortunately, those who excel will hit the portal. It seems if your in the G7 league and star..the P3's will be knockin on your door with that bag of cash. You'll re-boot every year. That's just the semi-pro league reality..

 

 

Another huge advantage of the TF portal. The good news we are the 70’s as far as 247,  fans find ways to discredit this, but I’m sure they would be on the bitching band wagon if we rank in the 100’s like last year.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Posted

Honestly, with the amount of players being recruited now between high school, juco, and portal, these rankings are going to be less and less accurate. They've only ranked 3 of our transfers yet our transfer class rank is now number 59. With the amount of transfers we have coming from power conference programs, we really could be looking at a top 25 transfer class but the numbers won't reflect it. Look at DT Sheffield for example. Just last year he was the number 5 JUCO wide receiver but he's currently not rated as a transfer.

My favorite thing about this class is most players are coming from programs our coaches used to work at or come from high school programs our coaches have strong relationships with. It gives me hope that these players will actually show up to campus and not transfer out after spring because they're coming into a good situation. I'm more optimistic about this transfer class than I was last year's for those reasons.

  • Upvote 5
Posted
2 hours ago, TreeFiddy said:

But the schools do not run the collectives.  The actions of the collectives are not covered by Title IX.  At least not for now.

The limit of 85 applies only to scholarships, not NIL. So, in theory, they can have unlimited NIL on the football roster.

NIL vs. Title IX. Something’s gonna give.

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
18 hours ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

The spin. 

The reality. 

I’m not trying to spin anything. @97and03is right that average is a great way to look at a recruiting class. I don’t think this class is world beaters by any means, but it does look like a great step forward from the year before. Now in 2025, Morris can build on that even more

  • Upvote 2
Posted

I’m glad we’re trending up, but I’m not too concerned about our rankings/stars. 

Our best transfers last year were Rogers (not rated in last years class), Miner (rated 76), and Rauschenberg (78).  I feel more confident in our staff identifying the talent we need than a company rating players. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Ray 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, GoGreenBeans said:

I’m not trying to spin anything. @97and03is right that average is a great way to look at a recruiting class. I don’t think this class is world beaters by any means, but it does look like a great step forward from the year before. Now in 2025, Morris can build on that even more

It's not. Our average has declined. Our bottom 5 players in this class had 1 offer, UNT. 

Let's let them apply ratings, but it will be status quo. We aren't the only program with unrated players. 

College football, outside of the 30 programs that "matter", is dead. Every single rule, or lack thereof, is designed to break parity down and further the gap. Stipulations, much like what the NIT has initiated, will inevitably be placed on college basketball in due time. There is no more theory of keeping up. The fast cars are now way too fast. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Sad 1
  • Downvote 3
Posted

The DMN has great article today on number of athletes playing Olympic sports recruited from local high schools getting NIL money. This bodes major problems for G5/ Mid Major programs and all their other sports.

  • Upvote 2
  • Puking Eagle 1
Posted (edited)

And how many were players that we really need? DL......

We all know the offense will be good and we need to continue this, but without much change on the defensive side of the ball (the worst part of our team). Are we really changing much?

Edited by BigWillie
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Posted
12 hours ago, Wag Tag said:

Another huge advantage of the TF portal. The good news we are the 70’s as far as 247,  fans find ways to discredit this, but I’m sure they would be on the bitching band wagon if we rank in the 100’s like last year.

Our composite average is 100s. More doesn't mean better. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Oh Boy! 1
  • Eye Roll 1
  • Downvote 1
  • Puking Eagle 1
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Our composite average is 100s. More doesn't mean better. 

Yeah i feel like it was a strength in numbers class but not any one guy I was super enthralled about if that makes sense.

Edited by meangreenfaninno
  • Confused 2
  • Downvote 2

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.

  • Tell a friend

    Love GoMeanGreen.com? Tell a friend!
  • What's going on Mean Green?

    1. 137

      Oregon State (11/25/24)

    2. 137

      Oregon State (11/25/24)

    3. 5

      Northern Iowa (11/28/24)

    4. 23

      Honest tactical question here…

  • Popular Contributors

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      15,480
    • Most Online
      1,865

    Newest Member
    meangreen0015
    Joined
  • Most Points

    1. 1
    2. 2
      NT80
      NT80
      130,573
    3. 3
      KingDL1
      KingDL1
      128,580
    4. 4
      greenminer
      greenminer
      118,940
    5. 5
      TheReal_jayD
      TheReal_jayD
      105,184
  • Biggest Gamblers

    1. 1
      EdtheEagle
      EdtheEagle
      26,589,381
    2. 2
      UNTLifer
      UNTLifer
      4,156,819
    3. 3
      untphd
      untphd
      779,763
    4. 4
      flyonthewall
      flyonthewall
      670,422
    5. 5
      3_n_out
      3_n_out
      578,480
    6. 6
    7. 7
    8. 8
    9. 9
    10. 10
      outoftown
      outoftown
      314,541
×
×
  • 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.