Recruiting "champions"

CMJ · October 3, 2008

There's really only one way.

Still funny. :lol:

Green P1 · October 3, 2008

Still funny.

Might be called for a bit too often.... but very enjoyable.

H-towngreen · October 3, 2008

People talk about Dickeys classes that he brought in from 2000-04. Those teams were built off of one solid class. The class of 2000. Scott Hall and the rest. The class of 2000 was tough as nails, not so much any of the others. The class of 04 are SR's now, other than a walk on WR, name some difference makers. One class led to those championships.

Got5onIt · October 3, 2008

Hard nosed running teams have that "smashmouth" feel to them. The spread offense is a straight up finesse style. I think that has a lot to do with why we "see" this difference between DD's & TD's teams. DD's teams focused on having a ball control, run based, clock consuming offense with a quick defense(he didn't always succeed in having this, but you get my point). DD's teams had better athletes on the defensive side of the ball and I think that was part of his philosophy. TD's teams have better athletes on offense. Not a coincidence, IMO.

Edited October 3, 2008 by Got5onIt

LongJim · October 3, 2008

Hard nosed running teams have that "smashmouth" feel to them. The spread offense is a straight up finesse style. I think that has a lot to do with why we "see" this difference between DD's & TD's teams. DD's teams focused on having a ball control, run based, clock consuming offense with a quick defense(he didn't always succeed in having this, but you get my point). DD's teams had better athletes on the defensive side of the ball and I think that was part of his philosophy. TD's teams have better athletes on offense. Not a coincidence, IMO.

Good post. There's no reason this offense can't run when necessary, and they're doing that. The offense is doing some good things, and will get even better. UNT needs at least 1-2 more classes in order to address depth on the lines, and this team is going to be very very good. When the MG start forcing 3 and outs and begin getting good field position consistently due to kicking, watch out. Let's see what happens in conference play.

Dodge2007 · October 3, 2008

It all starts on the line of scrimmage, both sides of the ball.

I bet 70% of the recruiting class will be lineman and LB's.

TWISMUNT · October 3, 2008

I think ideally you want "tough champions." This team would look a lot different if we were bigger in the trenches and better in the secondary. If we could get some of those players like Cody Spenser and Taylor Casey, who were like a "heat seeking missle" with a nose for where the ball was going, our pass defense would be dramaticly better. If we were 6-3 to 6-5 and 250+ on the defensive and offensive lines, we would have better running lanes and passing lanes, and getting more pressure on the opposing QB. Right now, we look like shrimp compared to our opponents. We have some weight on the OL and DL, but it looks more like fat than muscle. We have very good skill position players, but we need some more of the "warrior" types on defense and OL.
P.S. None of it matters if you can't tackle.
The 2000-2004 teams were nasty. They did have the smash-mouth attitude and it won games in the SBC. I would argue that if we had better skill position players to compliment the warriors on those team, we would have picked up a few more OOC wins as well.

I like this explanation. It is funny that you phrased it that way. We were a different team then. There was a little less Under Armour, the only person that had a visor on his helmet was Evan Cardwell and that is because he sustained an eye injury and we had no budget to speak of. "Balling on a Budget" was a common phrase. One summer Coach Dickey even made us shirts that said I.S.H.P.B.I.H.S on the front and on the back it said "I should have played better in High School." Some of us had better High School records than others but it was a great team of somewhat overlooked players that knew how to win. A High School winner in College is just like a High School graduate in college. They are qualified to be there, but they might not workout. You have to work hard and not just expect things. Dickey did a great job of setting that expectation and maybe we have gotten away from it. He rewarded us with things these kids are taking for granted. We win Conference, we get to wear black pants in the N.O. bowl and things like that. We had game gear and practice gear. If we ripped an Under Armour shirt or a pair of gloves you better make it last until it wont work anymore. There was no new pair of gloves everyday. Now I see about 75 QBs on the sidelines with red Under Armour hats on and think what the hell....where is that money coming from? I know Under Armour probably gives them too us, but these guys dont know how good it is now. And to be honest, the look on the sidelines was not as concerned as it should have been after losing by 57 points to RICE. That was embarassing. I know they are working hard but are they working hard enough? Are we recruiting the right kids if losses like that are exceptable? Sorry I'm a little off topic here....the point is after 3 harsh losing seasons.......do you want High School Champions that all run 4.4 dashes or are this size or whatever else people think make a good recruit..... or do you want guys that will work hard and do what it takes to win? That is what we need to recruit on, not what an Area, State or National list says, not what a High School record says, but what a visit and some game film says. Thanks!

TheTastyGreek · October 3, 2008

I like this explanation. It is funny that you phrased it that way. We were a different team then. There was a little less Under Armour, the only person that had a visor on his helmet was Evan Cardwell and that is because he sustained an eye injury and we had no budget to speak of. "Balling on a Budget" was a common phrase. One summer Coach Dickey even made us shirts that said I.S.H.P.B.I.H.S on the front and on the back it said "I should have played better in High School." Some of us had better High School records than others but it was a great team of somewhat overlooked players that knew how to win. A High School winner in College is just like a High School graduate in college. They are qualified to be there, but they might not workout. You have to work hard and not just expect things. Dickey did a great job of setting that expectation and maybe we have gotten away from it. He rewarded us with things these kids are taking for granted. We win Conference, we get to wear black pants in the N.O. bowl and things like that. We had game gear and practice gear. If we ripped an Under Armour shirt or a pair of gloves you better make it last until it wont work anymore. There was no new pair of gloves everyday. Now I see about 75 QBs on the sidelines with red Under Armour hats on and think what the hell....where is that money coming from? I know Under Armour probably gives them too us, but these guys dont know how good it is now. And to be honest, the look on the sidelines was not as concerned as it should have been after losing by 57 points to RICE. That was embarassing. I know they are working hard but are they working hard enough? Are we recruiting the right kids if losses like that are exceptable? Sorry I'm a little off topic here....the point is after 3 harsh losing seasons.......do you want High School Champions that all run 4.4 dashes or are this size or whatever else people think make a good recruit..... or do you want guys that will work hard and do what it takes to win? That is what we need to recruit on, not what an Area, State or National list says, not what a High School record says, but what a visit and some game film says. Thanks!

I don't know you, but I think I love you.

greenminer · October 3, 2008

Well hells bells we have 75 QBs. Can one of them step in Dibrell's spot?

LongJim · October 3, 2008

the point is after 3 harsh losing seasons.......do you want High School Champions that all run 4.4 dashes or are this size or whatever else people think make a good recruit..... or do you want guys that will work hard and do what it takes to win? That is what we need to recruit on, not what an Area, State or National list says, not what a High School record says, but what a visit and some game film says.

I believe that the point is that those choices and their qualities are not mutually exclusive. Food for thought though. Thanks!

mad dog · October 3, 2008

I know Under Armour probably gives them too us, but these guys dont know how good it is now. And to be honest, the look on the sidelines was not as concerned as it should have been after losing by 57 points to RICE. That was embarassing. I know they are working hard but are they working hard enough? Are we recruiting the right kids if losses like that are exceptable? Sorry I'm a little off topic here....the point is after 3 harsh losing seasons.......do you want High School Champions that all run 4.4 dashes or are this size or whatever else people think make a good recruit..... or do you want guys that will work hard and do what it takes to win? That is what we need to recruit on, not what an Area, State or National list says, not what a High School record says, but what a visit and some game film says. Thanks!

Thanks for posting. We appreciate your input.

filmerj · October 3, 2008

I like this explanation. It is funny that you phrased it that way. We were a different team then. There was a little less Under Armour, the only person that had a visor on his helmet was Evan Cardwell and that is because he sustained an eye injury and we had no budget to speak of. "Balling on a Budget" was a common phrase. One summer Coach Dickey even made us shirts that said I.S.H.P.B.I.H.S on the front and on the back it said "I should have played better in High School." Some of us had better High School records than others but it was a great team of somewhat overlooked players that knew how to win. A High School winner in College is just like a High School graduate in college. They are qualified to be there, but they might not workout. You have to work hard and not just expect things. Dickey did a great job of setting that expectation and maybe we have gotten away from it. He rewarded us with things these kids are taking for granted. We win Conference, we get to wear black pants in the N.O. bowl and things like that. We had game gear and practice gear. If we ripped an Under Armour shirt or a pair of gloves you better make it last until it wont work anymore. There was no new pair of gloves everyday. Now I see about 75 QBs on the sidelines with red Under Armour hats on and think what the hell....where is that money coming from? I know Under Armour probably gives them too us, but these guys dont know how good it is now. And to be honest, the look on the sidelines was not as concerned as it should have been after losing by 57 points to RICE. That was embarassing. I know they are working hard but are they working hard enough? Are we recruiting the right kids if losses like that are exceptable? Sorry I'm a little off topic here....the point is after 3 harsh losing seasons.......do you want High School Champions that all run 4.4 dashes or are this size or whatever else people think make a good recruit..... or do you want guys that will work hard and do what it takes to win? That is what we need to recruit on, not what an Area, State or National list says, not what a High School record says, but what a visit and some game film says. Thanks!

Well said sir... well said...

Monkeypox · October 4, 2008

You want tough guys who are also big and fast and strong. I like an overachiever as much as the next guy, but you won't sustain wins with a team full of guys who don't have projectable size, speed, strength, etc. You'll get blown out by the big boys just like now. But, hey, in the short-term you can enjoy a few quality wins against Belt teams.