UTSA picks up two 2015 commits

BillySee58 · February 23, 2014

These guys.

http://arizona.scout.com/a.z?s=106&p=8&c=1&nid=7498961

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/player-D'Anthony-Hopkins-158870

I like to think this is the year we break through and get some commits in the spring, rather than wait until summer to see a few commits. Although I am expecting a big summer as well after the success of our talon talent and friday night lights camps last year. FWIW, I think Hopkins was a Texas State verbal so probably a good chance he doesn't exactly shut his recruitment down.

Cooley · February 23, 2014

I know it makes for good early conversation (commitments) but I'd rather we be extremely selective early in the process. I'm all for offering the very best recruits early but it seems that we often offer kids that we could get in January. Because of this, I prefer for most of our commitments to come later. Unfortunately, we are not UT, A&M and other top programs; where they can lock up the state's top 100 recruits early. (and often hang on to them) We generally have to wait until their allotments are full before we can go after the best of what's left over. (which is still a ton of kids) The commitments we have secured early, have historically not been to the top kids in our classes. (with the exception of a handful) We annually end up running short of valuable ships for those higher rated prospects; that always seem to fall through the cracks.

Without sounding too negative, but what is the benefit to the top rated recruit committing to UNT (or similar) so early? I'm thinking they know that our offer will always be on the table. (if they are a top recruit) I personally would never offer a kid early if I thought I could get them in late January. Is this a gamble? Absolutely! But again, this isn't a top recruit.

As we all know, kids want to feel wanted. They often state that such and such school was there for me early in the process and that's why I signed. I get that. But just make sure this is a top kid we're offering early. Stay on these kid early, let them know that you are interested but just don't offer too soon because you have your full allottment. We have to be judicious with these scholarships and treat them as the valuable commodities they are.

If we're unable to lock up the top targets early, so be it. I like our chances against other mid-majors in the state and region for the remaining top talent. But, later in the process.

Edited February 23, 2014 by Cooley

North Texas Shep · February 23, 2014

Kid runs a 4.49... If is a real player I doubt that commitment sticks at all.

BillySee58 · February 23, 2014

Kid runs a 4.49... If is a real player I doubt that commitment sticks at all.

Read very little into listed 40 times. The two things you should care about for speed are laser-timed 40s and how fast the kid is on the field. He does appear to be very fast, though.

H-towngreen · February 23, 2014

I know it makes for good early conversation (commitments) but I'd rather we be extremely selective early in the process. I'm all for offering the very best recruits early but it seems that we often offer kids that we could get in January. Because of this, I prefer for most of our commitments to come later. Unfortunately, we are not UT, A&M and other top programs; where they can lock up the state's top 100 recruits early. (and often hang on to them) We generally have to wait until their allotments are full before we can go after the best of what's left over. (which is still a ton of kids) The commitments we have secured early, have historically not been to the top kids in our classes. (with the exception of a handful) We annually end up running short of valuable ships for those higher rated prospects; that always seem to fall through the cracks.

Without sounding too negative, but what is the benefit to the top rated recruit committing to UNT (or similar) so early? I'm thinking they know that our offer will always be on the table. (if they are a top recruit) I personally would never offer a kid early if I thought I could get them in late January. Is this a gamble? Absolutely! But again, this isn't a top recruit.

As we all know, kids want to feel wanted. They often state that such and such school was there for me early in the process and that's why I signed. I get that. But just make sure this is a top kid we're offering early. Stay on these kid early, let them know that you are interested but just don't offer too soon because you have your full allottment. We have to be judicious with these scholarships and treat them as the valuable commodities they are.

If we're unable to lock up the top targets early, so be it. I like our chances against other mid-majors in the state and region for the remaining top talent. But, later in the process.

An early signing period would make it all so much easier for kid and school.

BillySee58 · February 23, 2014

I know it makes for good early conversation (commitments) but I'd rather we be extremely selective early in the process. I'm all for offering the very best recruits early but it seems that we often offer kids that we could get in January. Because of this, I prefer for most of our commitments to come later. Unfortunately, we are not UT, A&M and other top programs; where they can lock up the state's top 100 recruits early. (and often hang on to them) We generally have to wait until their allotments are full before we can go after the best of what's left over. (which is still a ton of kids) The commitments we have secured early, have historically not been to the top kids in our classes. (with the exception of a handful) We annually end up running short of valuable ships for those higher rated prospects; that always seem to fall through the cracks.

Without sounding too negative, but what is the benefit to the top rated recruit committing to UNT (or similar) so early? I'm thinking they know that our offer will always be on the table. (if they are a top recruit) I personally would never offer a kid early if I thought I could get them in late January. Is this a gamble? Absolutely! But again, this isn't a top recruit.

There is A LOT of benefit to getting commits locked up early. Sure you might not be able to hang on to all of them, but the longer you have a kid locked up, the more not only he, but his parents get settled into the idea of him going to that school. People were nervous about our chances of keeping Fonzale Davis because it was so early, but it ended up helping that we locked him up so early.

Another big advantage that happens in the time that we currently live in has to do with social media. You get early commits and they get in the ear's of other prospects to come check out UNT, whether at camps, combines, 7 on 7 tournaments, or especially on twitter. If the kid commits in January of his senior year, he has no time to pull other recruits towards UNT.

Plus, with major recruiting websites, kids interested in UNT can see who we have committed. I know you think very little of the star system, but if a kid is interested in UNT and he looks and sees they have a good amount of early commits and they're good/highly rated players it will pique the interest of a 17 year-old kid, since they grew up with the star system.

Finally, having a lot of guys locked up by the time your season starts allows you to zero in on the guys you really want. That way you can be more selective later in the process.

I'll confess to not having followed recruiting nearly as long as you have, but you can't compare the era of recruiting that we are in to much farther in the past. Social media has completely changed the game and everyone (coaches, players, analysts) acknowledges that. There are plenty of ways to make room for a guy late in the game who falls through the cracks, not to mention you'll still likely have a spot or two open for those guys anyways. The early commits create a great foundation for your class and become ambassadors in the recruiting scene for your school. That is invaluable in today's recruiting.

Cooley · February 23, 2014

Don't disagree with the merits of getting early commits. In fact, totally agree with you about the benefits.

My concern is offering guys so early in the process who may not be the top prospects. Example: Why would we offer a kid with no other offers? Of course we may know something others don't but I would think there is a reason the kid has no other offers.

Another concern early is offering kids that we project to play another position. Can we not find ( early) a top kid that already plays that position?

Anyway, just an idle thought during a slow time.

BillySee58 · February 23, 2014

Don't disagree with the merits of getting early commits. In fact, totally agree with you about the benefits.
My concern is offering guys so early in the process who may not be the top prospects. Example: Why would we offer a kid with no other offers? Of course we may know something others don't but I would think there is a reason the kid has no other offers.
Another concern early is offering kids that we project to play another position. Can we not find ( early) a top kid that already plays that position?
Anyway, just an idle thought during a slow time.

I think that's why you see a lot of our offers going out to guys like Jalin Barnett, Dominique Hearne, Ryan Newsome, etc. Guys who we don't really have a realistic shot with, but are clearly worthy of the offer.

I agree that being a kid's first offer is risky, but it does mean a lot to those kids knowing that you believed in their ability to play D1 ball first. Although it can be risky if they end up being a reach of an offer. Just the game you have to play being a school from a non P5 conference.