Txfb Blog Link About Tcu....but Mentions Nt Several Times

OldTimer · March 12, 2008

http://www.texasfootball.com/index.php?s=&..._article_id=897

"Imagine if Patterson had lured in one class that ranked closer to what UT gets rather than what UNT gets"

" NT and SMU were in the list of 94 classes Rivals ranked better than TCU"

FirefightnRick · March 12, 2008

But imagine if Patterson had lured in one class that ranked closer to what UT gets than what UNT gets. Or heck, imagine if TCU had even cracked the Top 50. It might've been TCU -- and not Utah, Boise State and Hawaii -- busting the BCS party.

Some people just don't get it. I mean, in the article he plainly states he doesn't give Rivals recruiting the end-all, be-all?

In '06 after beating Pittsburgh in the Fiest Bowl Utah's class ranked 55th, Texas ranked 5th. Pittsburgh's class ranked 21st.

In '07 after beating Oklahoma in the Fiest Bowl Boise's recruiting class ranked 68th, Texas ranked 5th. Zero U's class ranked 14th.

And in '08 after making it to the Sugar Bowl Hawaii's class ranked 71st, Texas ranked 14th.

And he expects TCU to be right up there in the top 10? Does he have a clue how much money the mega programs spend on recruiting and how hard Rivals sucks up to them?

Rick

Edited March 12, 2008 by FirefightnRick

gangrene · March 12, 2008

http://www.texasfootball.com/index.php?s=&..._article_id=897
"Imagine if Patterson had lured in one class that ranked closer to what UT gets rather than what UNT gets"

I don't think that comment was intended as a compliment to us.

Edited March 12, 2008 by gangrene

MeanGreen61 · March 12, 2008

I don't think that comment was intended as a compliment to us.

Agree.

filmerj · March 13, 2008

I don't think that comment was intended as a compliment to us.

I thirdly agree. :glare:

NTPhiKap99 · March 13, 2008

I thirdly agree.

I agree as well but compliment or not we beat both SMU and TCU in recruiting so I'm happy.

March 13, 2008

They need to back off about TCU. They are rated low because they only took 15 recruits. It's true that they didn't get any big stars but they got some very good players.

If you follow Rivals (and they seem to be the most accurate) then look at the average stars. TCU averaged 2.40 with 6 three star players out of 15. North Texas was next of the three with an average of 2.30. SMU brought up the rear with 2.14.

I can only assume that TCU took only a small number because that's all they needed. Why take a large amount if you can't provide scholarships for them?

ADLER · March 13, 2008

"Imagine if Patterson had lured in one class that ranked closer to what UT gets rather than what UNT gets"

Oh, and once again North Texas is acknowledged as THE poster child of schools that don't have a commitment to athletics.

When are university leaders going to wake up and address the real issue?

FIX THE PROBLEM, and the symptoms will disappear.

FirefightnRick · March 13, 2008

Oh, and once again North Texas is acknowledged as THE poster child of schools that don't have a commitment to athletics.
When are university leaders going to wake up and address the real issue?
FIX THE PROBLEM, and the symptoms will disappear.

Again, TRUTH!!!!

Rick

flyeater · March 13, 2008

Some people just don't get it. I mean, in the article he plainly states he doesn't give Rivals recruiting the end-all, be-all?
In '06 after beating Pittsburgh in the Fiest Bowl Utah's class ranked 55th, Texas ranked 5th. Pittsburgh's class ranked 21st.
In '07 after beating Oklahoma in the Fiest Bowl Boise's recruiting class ranked 68th, Texas ranked 5th. Zero U's class ranked 14th.
And in '08 after making it to the Sugar Bowl Hawaii's class ranked 71st, Texas ranked 14th.
And he expects TCU to be right up there in the top 10? Does he have a clue how much money the mega programs spend on recruiting and how hard Rivals sucks up to them?
Rick

"Sucks up" isn't quite the term I'd used, but close. More like "sucks o@#".