Unt rankings?

[Ben Gooding]

1 minute ago, UNT90 said:

The loss existed while everyone was trumpeting how Littrell was going to recruit so much better than Mac. I was the one doubting that and listing the loss as a reason. 

You can't come back and talk about the loss being the reason when you said during recruiting season that Littrell would overcome the loss. Those are the hypocrites, young Ben. 

All things considered (actually consider them and thank Dan Mccarney or RV; doesn't matter), this class was decent. 

[UNT90]

2 minutes ago, Ben Gooding said:

All things considered (actually consider them and thank Dan Mccarney or RV; doesn't matter), this class was decent. 

All things considered, this class was the same as every Dan McCarney class, whether you like it or not. 

[UNTLifer]

All things considered, what strikes me as odd is that when you roll out your reasons for putting on your turd colored glasses each day, those are facts.  When people choose to have a positive outlook and roll out their facts as to why, you call those excuses.  Seems to me the facts are in the eye of the beholder.

[Aldo]

20 hours ago, UNT90 said:

All things considered, this class was the same as every Dan McCarney class, whether you like it or not. 

If we had signed a full class (rankings are a cumulative score), we would be ranked in the 70-80s based on our per-player impact. But we couldn't, due to some mysterious McCarneyisms.

2017 is the year we can get a fair assessment, especially at QB.

[BillySee58]

19 minutes ago, Aldo said:

2017 is the year we can get a fair assessment, especially at QB.

It might not be. If the five former walkons deferred from the 2015 class to 2016 class is the reason why we only have one spot left in this class, then we've got more walkons we would have to defer to the 2017 class (Fernandes, Bean, Gunter, and Rice). 

21 hours ago, UNT90 said:

All things considered, this class was the same as every Dan McCarney class, whether you like it or not. 

Based on offer lists, this class would've been between Mccarney's second and third best classes. 56% were "B" or better recruits. Falls well short of the 2014 class, which had an impressive 78% rate.

[MeanGreenHoops]

2 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

Based on offer lists, this class would've been between Mccarney's second and third best classes. 56% were "B" or better recruits. Falls well short of the 2014 class, which had an impressive 78% rate.

So how is that 2014 class looking now? Seems as if that class should be making an impact this year and could be reason for optimism?

[GMG_Dallas]

22 minutes ago, MeanGreenHoops said:

So how is that 2014 class looking now? Seems as if that class should be making an impact this year and could be reason for optimism?

Fonzale Davis is no longer here, Caleb Chumley had offers but not necessarily for what we recruited him as (TE vs QB), Connor Means is a huge question mark. A few skill players to look forward to, though: Tee Goree, Willy Ivery, Jeffery Wilson. Josh Greer had 3 offers but he's no longer here. I feel like several other players from that class are gone. That, or they just have not gotten playing time.

[BillySee58]

43 minutes ago, MeanGreenHoops said:

So how is that 2014 class looking now? Seems as if that class should be making an impact this year and could be reason for optimism?

I think collectively they were the bright spot of 2015. Jeffery Wilson and Kishawn Mcclain, both from the 2014 class, are probably the best offensive and defensive players, respectively, on the team. Also, Tee Goree is probably our number 1 receiver heading into this year and Rutherford is in a good spot to grab the other starting outside receiver spot. Willy Ivery has made plays when he's had the chance, and should get more chances this year. Chris Miles was freshman all-conference last year and is on track to be a 4-year starter, and easily has all-CUSA potential.

Defensively I think Tillman Johnson and Brandon Garner start this year. Johnson was hampered by injury all season, but I think very highly of his abilities and expect a big comeback year. Set true freshman sack record in 2014. Garner made some plays last year in limited time. I expect to see more of him, and more consistency as he gets more experience.

Unfortunately it wasn't a bigger class, but I think if those players end up being the impact guys they appear on track to be, then the class will have a solid nucleus of guys who can win you games.

Edited February 10, 2016 by BillySee58

[Mean_Green09]

1 hour ago, BillySee58 said:

I think collectively they were the bright spot of 2015. Jeffery Wilson and Kishawn Mcclain, both from the 2014 class, are probably the best offensive and defensive players, respectively, on the team. Also, Tee Goree is probably our number 1 receiver heading into this year and Rutherford is in a good spot to grab the other starting outside receiver spot. Willy Ivery has made plays when he's had the chance, and should get more chances this year. Chris Miles was freshman all-conference last year and is on track to be a 4-year starter, and easily has all-CUSA potential.

Defensively I think Tillman Johnson and Brandon Garner start this year. Johnson was hampered by injury all season, but I think very highly of his abilities and expect a big comeback year. Set true freshman sack record in 2014. Garner made some plays last year in limited time. I expect to see more of him, and more consistency as he gets more experience.

Unfortunately it wasn't a bigger class, but I think if those players end up being the impact guys they appear on track to be, then the class will have a solid nucleus of guys who can win you games.

If Littrell can turn the potential from the 14 & 15 classes into production he will be very successful.

[Aldo]

6 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

It might not be. If the five former walkons deferred from the 2015 class to 2016 class is the reason why we only have one spot left in this class, then we've got more walkons we would have to defer to the 2017 class (Fernandes, Bean, Gunter, and Rice). 

[GMG_Dallas]

7 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

It might not be. If the five former walkons deferred from the 2015 class to 2016 class is the reason why we only have one spot left in this class, then we've got more walkons we would have to defer to the 2017 class.

This is worrisome to me. Littrell offered a lot of pwo's this past recruiting season. Hopefully he doesn't intend to turn too many of those guys into scholarship guys unless they are performing at a high level. And if he does offer them scholarships within the next 2 years, that would only keep hurting our recruiting classes moving forward.

Thoughts? 

[UNT90]

9 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

All things considered, what strikes me as odd is that when you roll out your reasons for putting on your turd colored glasses each day, those are facts.  When people choose to have a positive outlook and roll out their facts as to why, you call those excuses.  Seems to me the facts are in the eye of the beholder.

Littrell's first class ranked 106.

DMac's first class ranked 105.

Fact.

 

9 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

Based on offer lists, this class would've been between Mccarney's second and third best classes. 56% were "B" or better recruits. Falls well short of the 2014 class, which had an impressive 78% rate.

This is my point. Hopefully with a full year, Littrell can do better. Time will tell. 

[untcampbell]

Respecting UNT90's concern for the facts (and I am taking a quick stab at this looking at 24/7 so there may some discrepancies), here are some additional numbers behind the first SL and DM classes:

There were 120 FBS teams in 2011 and 128 in 2016. NT ranked 105 in 2011 and 113 in 2016. 

NT had one 3-star recruit (of 25) in 2011 and 5 (of 17) in 2016.

The average recruit scored a 70.94 in 2011 and a 78.67 in 2016. I defer to Billy See to assess if there is grade inflation or a different rating system now vs. then. 

Taking a quick look at the average recruit scores in 2011 and 2016, I found 15 school's with lower per recruit averages in 2016 (two ranked below us had higher per recruit averages), including #67 ranked UAB, and no schools ranked above us in 2011 with lower per recruit averages (two ranked below us had higher per recruit averages).

With the caveat that my quick research may have missed something, the possibility of a different grading system in 2011 and 2016 and that I am not completely sure 2011 was DM's first class, one could argue that the first SL class outperformed the first DM class ON PAPER. Saying this, being ranked 105 or 113 is no bragging point, just what I believe to be the facts. I am sure we can reach entirely different conclusions using other recruiting sources.

Please correct my inaccuracies so that we may compare the two classes on their merits.

GMG

[UNT90]

All great information, and proves the point that we are recruiting on a DMac level this year.

Again, considering the late start, that's fine. But people are acting like this class is some godsend. On paper, it isn't. It's what we pretty much have done before. Littrell was brought here to do better. Let's hope he does next year. 

The inane overrating and acting like this class was some huge accomplishment is just plain silly. 

[Wag Tag]

48 minutes ago, untcampbell said:

Respecting UNT90's concern for the facts (and I am taking a quick stab at this looking at 24/7 so there may some discrepancies), here are some additional numbers behind the first SL and DM classes:

There were 120 FBS teams in 2011 and 128 in 2016. NT ranked 105 in 2011 and 113 in 2016. 

NT had one 3-star recruit (of 25) in 2011 and 5 (of 17) in 2016.

The average recruit scored a 70.94 in 2011 and a 78.67 in 2016. I defer to Billy See to assess if there is grade inflation or a different rating system now vs. then. 

Taking a quick look at the average recruit scores in 2011 and 2016, I found 15 school's with lower per recruit averages in 2016 (two ranked below us had higher per recruit averages), including #67 ranked UAB, and no schools ranked above us in 2011 with lower per recruit averages (two ranked below us had higher per recruit averages).

With the caveat that my quick research may have missed something, the possibility of a different grading system in 2011 and 2016 and that I am not completely sure 2011 was DM's first class, one could argue that the first SL class outperformed the first DM class ON PAPER. Saying this, being ranked 105 or 113 is no bragging point, just what I believe to be the facts. I am sure we can reach entirely different conclusions using other recruiting sources.

Please correct my inaccuracies so that we may compare the two classes on their merits.

GMG

2011 class had 25 commits 2016 had 19. This will play a huge roll in  ranking. That is roughly a 25% swing.One of the criteria that I notice to get in the 80's in nat'l rankings is 10 to 11 3 stars and the rest of the 25 class being 2 Star. I know this can vary but this is what I expect next year. This will also put us in the top 4 in conference! Thanks for the info. GMG

[untcampbell]

FYI Wag Tag, I used the information as 24/7 provided it. They have us listed as having 17 recruits (they didn't include the two transfers, I believe).

GMG

[BillySee58]

7 hours ago, GMG_Dallas said:

This is worrisome to me. Littrell offered a lot of pwo's this past recruiting season. Hopefully he doesn't intend to turn too many of those guys into scholarship guys unless they are performing at a high level. And if he does offer them scholarships within the next 2 years, that would only keep hurting our recruiting classes moving forward.

Thoughts? 

I don't have a problem with it, necessarily. What I think he needs to steer clear from is being like Mccarney where he's putting a walkon on scholarship before 2 seasons (where they have to count towards the recruiting class) and they don't even hardly play. 

The only way that should happen is if the walkon is starting or is a co-starter/key rotational player. With all due respect, you shouldn't have to run out of spots in your class because you decided to put your 13th leading receiver on scholarship.

[Aldo]

5 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

The only way that should happen is if the walkon is starting or is a co-starter/key rotational player. 

Or you lose an entire recruiting class 

[Wag Tag]

11 hours ago, untcampbell said:

FYI Wag Tag, I used the information as 24/7 provided it. They have us listed as having 17 recruits (they didn't include the two transfers, I believe).

GMG

Sorry didn't catch that. It makes the class ranking even more impressive compared to Mac's first!