'17 TE Remington Lutz (Belton)

[BillySee58]

17 hours ago, aztecskin said:

I don't like it generally, but I can see a scenario where they do this and do _not_ burn bridges with high school guys. 

Like anything else, it is about not making this a habit. So this happened twice this cycle, is that a habit? I honestly do not know. 

On the other hand, is that it seems like NT was fairly up front about their preferences. I think there is room for a change of mind/projection. I don't know how the conversation went in which they said "You know how we said you could try to catch passes? Well now we are thinking you will fit better as a tackle." So I have to leave some room for it to have been honest. If it was honest and forthright, then I think this is not so bad. 

As it is, neither side threw the other under the bus. (Those assistant coaching subtweets we see every once in a while are indecorous).

My concern is that we're taking commitments we shouldn't be in the first place. With this kid, he never seemed to fit our offense, but based on what he said, he committed because he thought he'd be thrown the ball here compared to his other offers. 

But it seems the only way things would've actually ended up that way is if he had some miraculous leap forward as a receiver, and showed abilities that he hadn't previously, which he didn't. Then, when he appears to be the same player we knew he was when we accepted the commitment, we tell him (a 215 lb kid) that they will try to move him to tackle knowing he wasn't even considering schools that wanted him to be more of a blocking tight end. 

And the situations seem similar with Sewell and Donovan. To quote the late great Dennis Green, "they are who we thought they were."

I have a hard-time believing our coaches were big fans of these kids, accepted their commitments, and then they suddenly just stopped showing the abilities that our coaches offered them based on despite not getting injured.

And in the case of Sewell, he said we stopped contacting him before the season started and before he could've had a "bad season" or messed up grade-wise.

Pulling offers from commits for non-grade reasons is almost always messy. Whether we basically tell a kid he isn't as good as they hoped he was like Donovan or Lutz, or just cutting off contact like with Sewell, it's hard to defuse the situation. Neither looks good, so I hope our coaches don't make this a trend. 

Recruiting is tough, so I recognize it's easier said than done. But it's definitely something they can stand to get better at.

[UNTLifer]

15 minutes ago, BillySee58 said:

My concern is that we're taking commitments we shouldn't be in the first place. With this kid, he never seemed to fit our offense, but based on what he said, he committed because he thought he'd be thrown the ball here compared to his other offers. 

But it seems the only way things would've actually ended up that way is if he had some miraculous leap forward as a receiver, and showed abilities that he hadn't previously, which he didn't. Then, when he appears to be the same player we knew he was when we accepted the commitment, we tell him (a 215 lb kid) that they will try to move him to tackle knowing he wasn't even considering schools that wanted him to be more of a blocking tight end. 

And the situations seem similar with Sewell and Donovan. To quote the late great Dennis Green, "they are who we thought they were."

I have a hard-time believing our coaches were big fans of these kids, accepted their commitments, and then they suddenly just stopped showing the abilities that our coaches offered them based on despite not getting injured.

And in the case of Sewell, he said we stopped contacting him before the season started and before he could've had a "bad season" or messed up grade-wise.

Pulling offers from commits for non-grade reasons is almost always messy. [B/]Whether we basically tell a kid he isn't as good as they hoped he was like Donovan or Lutz, or just cutting off contact like with Sewell, it's hard to defuse the situation. Neither looks good, so I hope our coaches don't make this a trend. 

Recruiting is tough, so I recognize it's easier said than done. But it's definitely something they can stand to get better at.

I don't like pulling offers on commits either, but do you have any specific examples of the above hurt a team/coaching staff over the long term?

Edited January 8, 2017 by UNTLifer

[aztecskin]

30 minutes ago, BillySee58 said:

I have a hard-time believing our coaches were big fans of these kids, accepted their commitments, and then they suddenly just stopped showing the abilities that our coaches offered them based on despite not getting injured.

Agree. I'm just trying to see beyond my initial reaction. 

I wonder if we can't pin down who exactly is misevaluating. Filani was the lead on Lutz. 

Basically im trying to figure if this is on SL or a staff problem. 

[UNTLifer]

Since our coaches cannot comment, then this is all speculation.  Again, I think Lutz was a throw in to try and snag Belton's QB.  My assumption on Sewell is that they wanted him to graduate and be a mid term transfer.  Who knows with Donovan.  Could have been performance, classroom, etc...  Again, all assumptions.

[TheReal_jayD]

39 minutes ago, aztecskin said:

Agree. I'm just trying to see beyond my initial reaction. 

I wonder if we can't pin down who exactly is misevaluating. Filani was the lead on Lutz. 

Basically im trying to figure if this is on SL or a staff problem. 

Recruiting has changed alot over the years. I know pulling a schollys on a kid is never good. But in today age with recruiting I think pulling a scholly has minimal effect in today's time. Definitely not the effect it used to have. With kids commiting and decommiting sometime 3 and 4 times before nsd. Texas state pulled over on a local QB commit days before nsd last year and it barely made a ripple on recruiting trail. I think we have to take each case with Sewell, Lutz and Donovan differently. I know coaches preach buying into their system and being committed to program. I believe Seth and co are 100% committed to this. They want ballers that fit their system but also want good character guys. I remember when the Sewell committed article came out and it read of course I'm paraphrasing. If I can get my grades ready I'm going to Cal if not I'll go to UNT. With Donovan I think might have not only had a poor senior season. But also lower on there list than newman and Moses. But also might have had some character problems. Lutz just didn't progress. And I think it was attempt to land QB combo. But with limited amount of schollys I don't mind pulling scholly on guys that don't progress senior year or guys we can improve from. There is also alot of other stuff going on that there will be suprises on NSD that I will have more on I can say after Feb 1st. But Seth and company are doing alot to maximize number of guys they can add on NSD and after before the season starts. I find this as a good thing with Mac here there were so many head scratchers I am not going to call kids out but it was kids that weren't stand out high school kids and come signing day we are like why are we offering this kid. And most of the times the kids never played and I know atleast 5 I am referring to are not with program any more....

4 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

Since our coaches cannot comment, then this is all speculation.  Again, I think Lutz was a throw in to try and snag Belton's QB.  My assumption on Sewell is that they wanted him to graduate and be a mid term transfer.  Who knows with Donovan.  Could have been performance, classroom, etc...  Again, all assumptions.

With Sewell I think it was after they landing Mackyle Sanders from Tyler I think the talent gap and age difference and so many other holes the staff couldn't justify using a scholly on both.

Edited January 8, 2017 by TheReal_jayD

[BillySee58]

2 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

I don't like pulling offers on commits either, but do you have any specific examples of the above hurt a team/coaching staff over the long term?

I'm more concerned about roster and recruiting class management than I am about reputation. As JayD said, it is a lot more commonplace than it used to be.

The problem is when you are tight on spots, other schools are too, and you waste months out of your recruiting cycle and that kid's recruiting cycle to have him as a commitment when you know they aren't really in your plans. It's unnecessary and doesn't help anyone. Don't accept early commitments from kids you aren't sold on. Or first, don't lead them on that you are sold on them to the point that they want to commit to you on a false perception.

Again, easier said than done and I completely acknowledge it.

1 hour ago, UNTLifer said:

Since our coaches cannot comment, then this is all speculation.  Again, I think Lutz was a throw in to try and snag Belton's QB.  My assumption on Sewell is that they wanted him to graduate and be a mid term transfer.  Who knows with Donovan.  Could have been performance, classroom, etc...  Again, all assumptions.

Okay, but we have quotes from the kids that are not speculation. Sewell told Vito when the communication was cut off. Lutz told us why he committed and then later after his decommitment told us our coaches presented moving to tackle to him. Being upset about defined timing and statements is not speculation.

2 hours ago, aztecskin said:

Agree. I'm just trying to see beyond my initial reaction. 

I wonder if we can't pin down who exactly is misevaluating. Filani was the lead on Lutz. 

Basically im trying to figure if this is on SL or a staff problem. 

I would say it all falls back on the head man. Unless we do things different than every other program I have known about, the HC has to sign off on all offers.

Edited January 8, 2017 by BillySee58

[TreeFiddy]

We are dealing with a coaching staff that has the head offensive dude and the head coach in positions they have never been in before.  It is not totally surprising that they have waffled a bit on some players.

Through experience, I think the coaches will learn how to better manage their commitments and learn the skills that represent someone they can accept an early commitment from versus those that need to wait until after their senior season.  

I am intrigued by their aggressive style and willingness to use approaches/tactics that seem to be aimed at getting the best talent possible in the door.  At times, the aggressive style raises some concerns, but when the staffs are hired/fired based on wins/losses it is hard to blame them for taking a win first attitude.  

 

The next month should be interesting.

[aztecskin]

7 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

ould say it all falls back on the head man. Unless we do things different than every other program I have known about, the HC has to sign off on all offers.

Ultimately, yes. 

I am wondering if Filani says "i found this kid etc etc" and SL says "I trust you" or what. 

I realize i'm simplifying here, and that outside of a tell-all i'm not sure if we'll know exactly. 

[GreenMachine]

10 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

My concern is that we're taking commitments we shouldn't be in the first place. With this kid, he never seemed to fit our offense, but based on what he said, he committed because he thought he'd be thrown the ball here compared to his other offers. 

But it seems the only way things would've actually ended up that way is if he had some miraculous leap forward as a receiver, and showed abilities that he hadn't previously, which he didn't. Then, when he appears to be the same player we knew he was when we accepted the commitment, we tell him (a 215 lb kid) that they will try to move him to tackle knowing he wasn't even considering schools that wanted him to be more of a blocking tight end. 

And the situations seem similar with Sewell and Donovan. To quote the late great Dennis Green, "they are who we thought they were."

I have a hard-time believing our coaches were big fans of these kids, accepted their commitments, and then they suddenly just stopped showing the abilities that our coaches offered them based on despite not getting injured.

And in the case of Sewell, he said we stopped contacting him before the season started and before he could've had a "bad season" or messed up grade-wise.

Pulling offers from commits for non-grade reasons is almost always messy. Whether we basically tell a kid he isn't as good as they hoped he was like Donovan or Lutz, or just cutting off contact like with Sewell, it's hard to defuse the situation. Neither looks good, so I hope our coaches don't make this a trend. 

Recruiting is tough, so I recognize it's easier said than done. But it's definitely something they can stand to get better at.

However, you are some dude that reads about recruits and their abilities while our coaches are paid to do their jobs 24/7. Let's quit acting like we know more than these guys that get paid for recruiting. It's super easy to second guess everybody, all the time. We could always doubt bar owners, financial advisors, porn producers etc, but probably best we sit back and let the experts do their jobs. We are nothing but avid UNT sports fans, nothing less, nothing more.

[BillySee58]

6 hours ago, GreenMachine said:

However, you are some dude that reads about recruits and their abilities while our coaches are paid to do their jobs 24/7. Let's quit acting like we know more than these guys that get paid for recruiting. It's super easy to second guess everybody, all the time. We could always doubt bar owners, financial advisors, porn producers etc, but probably best we sit back and let the experts do their jobs. We are nothing but avid UNT sports fans, nothing less, nothing more.

Let's quit acting like I ever said or implied that I know more about recruiting than our coaches.

Trust me, no matter what we say or do on here, the experts are going to do their job. Whether we "sit back" or whether we post on here. But on football recruiting forums, people discuss recruiting.

People didn't like when I was critical of Mccarney's recruiting the last two classes either. Not saying Littrell's recruiting will be on the level of Mccarney's, but I am saying that criticism, even if hypothetical, is welcome.

8 hours ago, aztecskin said:

Ultimately, yes. 

I am wondering if Filani says "i found this kid etc etc" and SL says "I trust you" or what. 

I realize i'm simplifying here, and that outside of a tell-all i'm not sure if we'll know exactly. 

Yeah, but I've still never heard of a program where the HC doesn't watch the film before the offer goes out.

Maybe it isn't safe to assume we do things the same way, but in your hypothetical, SL would still deserve blame for not taking the time to watch the film.

[UNT90]

8 hours ago, GreenMachine said:

However, you are some dude that reads about recruits and their abilities while our coaches are paid to do their jobs 24/7. Let's quit acting like we know more than these guys that get paid for recruiting. It's super easy to second guess everybody, all the time. We could always doubt bar owners, financial advisors, porn producers etc, but probably best we sit back and let the experts do their jobs. We are nothing but avid UNT sports fans, nothing less, nothing more.

Never question anything UNT. Play the violin on deck as the ship sinks. The Rick Villarreal years revisited.

Personally, I'm glad we are keeping an eye on recruiting and a few courageous and knowledgable people have issued warnings about potential problems in recruiting. 

Consistent low rated classes produce consistent losers. Consistent high rated classes producer consistent winners.

But ya, we should just sit back and trust like we did for 15 years of failure under the Hattiesburg Hustler.

Edited January 9, 2017 by UNT90

[UNTLifer]

51 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

Never question anything UNT. Play the violin on deck as the ship sinks. The Rick Villarreal years revisited.

Personally, I'm glad we are keeping an eye on recruiting and a few courageous and knowledgable people have issued warnings about potential problems in recruiting. 

Consistent low rated classes produce consistent losers. Consistent high rated classes producer consistent winners.

But ya, we should just sit back and trust like we did for 15 years of failure under the Hattiesburg Hustler.

We "released" an undersized 2-star TE, a 2 star JUCO that probably would not have arrived until summer and a 3 star OL.  The OL is concerning, but let's be honest about the other two.  I wish Lutz nothing but success wherever he ends up, but he was a HS TE that caught 13 passes in 12 games and needed to add about 30 pounds of good weight with very few other offers.  Sewell was intriguing and had a pretty good year, but we don't know his graduation status.  He good be a grade risk that the staff didn't want to take a risk on at this time after getting burned last year.  Not sure what to make of the Donovan decommit.  I was really excited about this young man, but like all three of these, we only get one side of the story.

I love what some of our posters provide regarding recruiting, but let's be honest, it is all opinion pretty much.  I do like how Billy analyzes offer sheets when rating the potential success of recruits, as this shows that people other than our own coaches think they are good ball players (or our coaches blowing smoke to try and make their class look better).  Then again, I look at another thread on this board about "who was the best NT player you witnessed in person" and see it full of people like Cobbs, Quinn, Fitzgerald, Hall, Jones, etc... that were not heavily recruited.  It is an inexact science to say the least.  It just amuses me that you refer to RV, and his cute nicknames you have labelled him with, all the while promoting a young man that has offers from Drake, Texas A&M Commerce and Northeastern State.  If that was anyone other than a family friend, you would be claiming the same ol' same ol' applies for North Texas.  You can't criticize the coaching staff for not offering players that you deem unworthy of a scholarship while you promote a lower rated player, but I have come to learn that you will spin  it as you see fit.

[UNT Mean Green]

2 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

Let's quit acting like I ever said or implied that I know more about recruiting than our coaches.

Trust me, no matter what we say or do on here, the experts are going to do their job. Whether we "sit back" or whether we post on here. But on football recruiting forums, people discuss recruiting.

People didn't like when I was critical of Mccarney's recruiting the last two classes either. Not saying Littrell's recruiting will be on the level of Mccarney's, but I am saying that criticism, even if hypothetical, is welcome.

Yeah, but I've still never heard of a program where the HC doesn't watch the film before the offer goes out.

Maybe it isn't safe to assume we do things the same way, but in your hypothetical, SL would still deserve blame for not taking the time to watch the film.

Wasn't it shown on a Beyond The Green Episode, that every morning at staff meeting, the entire coaching staff watches 5 prospects films at the beginning of each meeting?

[GMG24]

3 minutes ago, UNT Mean Green said:

Wasn't it shown on a Beyond The Green Episode, that every morning at staff meeting, the entire coaching staff watches 5 prospects films at the beginning of each meeting?

Correct. 

[UNT90]

30 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

We "released" an undersized 2-star TE, a 2 star JUCO that probably would not have arrived until summer and a 3 star OL.  The OL is concerning, but let's be honest about the other two.  I wish Lutz nothing but success wherever he ends up, but he was a HS TE that caught 13 passes in 12 games and needed to add about 30 pounds of good weight with very few other offers.  Sewell was intriguing and had a pretty good year, but we don't know his graduation status.  He good be a grade risk that the staff didn't want to take a risk on at this time after getting burned last year.  Not sure what to make of the Donovan decommit.  I was really excited about this young man, but like all three of these, we only get one side of the story.

I love what some of our posters provide regarding recruiting, but let's be honest, it is all opinion pretty much.  I do like how Billy analyzes offer sheets when rating the potential success of recruits, as this shows that people other than our own coaches think they are good ball players (or our coaches blowing smoke to try and make their class look better).  Then again, I look at another thread on this board about "who was the best NT player you witnessed in person" and see it full of people like Cobbs, Quinn, Fitzgerald, Hall, Jones, etc... that were not heavily recruited.  It is an inexact science to say the least.  It just amuses me that you refer to RV, and his cute nicknames you have labelled him with, all the while promoting a young man that has offers from Drake, Texas A&M Commerce and Northeastern State.  If that was anyone other than a family friend, you would be claiming the same ol' same ol' applies for North Texas.  You can't criticize the coaching staff for not offering players that you deem unworthy of a scholarship while you promote a lower rated player, but I have come to learn that you will spin  it as you see fit.

So you want to bring your degredation of a 17 year old kid into this thread, also? Priceless. And yes, UNT not contacting that kid to discuss a PWO offer is stupid on their part. You and others have put out the faux narrative that I was demanding a scholarship for this kid. Complete hogwash, but that's what you do when it comes to me. 

My post had nothing to do with that issue and I asked that his thread be locked because it turned into an attack on me by the usual 6 people. Move on. 

Rick Villarreal was a hustler. The fact that you still can't see that with all the evidence given to you doesn't say good things about your ability to analyze information.

Edited January 9, 2017 by UNT90

[Army of Dad]

50 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

We "released" an undersized 2-star TE, a 2 star JUCO that probably would not have arrived until summer and a 3 star OL.  The OL is concerning, but let's be honest about the other two.  I wish Lutz nothing but success wherever he ends up, but he was a HS TE that caught 13 passes in 12 games and needed to add about 30 pounds of good weight with very few other offers.  Sewell was intriguing and had a pretty good year, but we don't know his graduation status.  He good be a grade risk that the staff didn't want to take a risk on at this time after getting burned last year.  Not sure what to make of the Donovan decommit.  I was really excited about this young man, but like all three of these, we only get one side of the story.

I love what some of our posters provide regarding recruiting, but let's be honest, it is all opinion pretty much.  I do like how Billy analyzes offer sheets when rating the potential success of recruits, as this shows that people other than our own coaches think they are good ball players (or our coaches blowing smoke to try and make their class look better).  Then again, I look at another thread on this board about "who was the best NT player you witnessed in person" and see it full of people like Cobbs, Quinn, Fitzgerald, Hall, Jones, etc... that were not heavily recruited.  It is an inexact science to say the least.  It just amuses me that you refer to RV, and his cute nicknames you have labelled him with, all the while promoting a young man that has offers from Drake, Texas A&M Commerce and Northeastern State.  If that was anyone other than a family friend, you would be claiming the same ol' same ol' applies for North Texas.  You can't criticize the coaching staff for not offering players that you deem unworthy of a scholarship while you promote a lower rated player, but I have come to learn that you will spin  it as you see fit.

Aren't you the guy who excoriates a recruit for decommiting and 'not keeping his word'? So in these cases it's likely our coaches may have done that and you're ok with it...

[brooks91]

[MeanGreenTexan]

Haven't y'all had a temp ban for chirping back and forth like this before?   Why would either of you wish to continue?

Both of you need to learn that not everything is personal.

[UNTLifer]

22 minutes ago, Army of Dad said:

Aren't you the guy who excoriates a recruit for decommiting and 'not keeping his word'? So in these cases it's likely our coaches may have done that and you're ok with it...

Yes, I have done that in the past.  I would prefer that both sides keep their word.  The Donovan and Sewell, from what we know, do bother me in that it appears our coaching staff stopped reaching out to them.  The Lutz decommit doesn't bother me as much because I think we were upfront in deciding it would be best for us to try and add weight to him and move him to OL.  He didn't want to do that, so we "mutually" parted ways.  Again, because coaches are not allowed to talk about a player until he signs on the dotted line, we only know one side of the story and probably will never hear the coach's side of the decision.

[GrandGreen]

Someone correctly stated that only one side of the recruiting question can be analyzed as the recruiters cannot speak.  Recruiting is and always has been a messy business.  The question on these pulled ships is whether NT is just trying to back out on a questionable commit or there is more to the story.  It is common for underperforming recruits to get the message they are no longer wanted.  Usually, it goes something like this; you are our commit and we will stand by it; but you will have no real chance of ever playing here.   Most quickly find other offers if they can.  

The reported stories are very unfavorable to NT.   One commit, you just never communicate with.  Very damning unless he was never really a recruit in the first place.  A tight end that was mislead about his recruited position on the team.   Again, this makes no sense; why would any team misrepresent their intensions on a borderline recruit whose conversation to another position is risky at best. 

There is still time for this class to substantially improve, and that it what is important.   

 

[UNT Mean Green]

2 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

Someone correctly stated that only one side of the recruiting question can be analyzed as the recruiters cannot speak.  Recruiting is and always has been a messy business.  The question on these pulled ships is whether NT is just trying to back out on a questionable commit or there is more to the story.  It is common for underperforming recruits to get the message they are no longer wanted.  Usually, it goes something like this; you are our commit and we will stand by it; but you will have no real chance of ever playing here.   Most quickly find other offers if they can.  

The reported stories are very unfavorable to NT.   One commit, you just never communicate with.  Very damning unless he was never really a recruit in the first place.  A tight end that was mislead about his recruited position on the team.   Again, this makes no sense; why would any team misrepresent their intensions on a borderline recruit whose conversation to another position is risky at best. 

There is still time for this class to substantially improve, and that it what is important.   

 

1) It was communicated to the kid that he wouldn't play here

2) Quite the contrary, same thing as the kid received honest communication from the staff regarding foreseeable playing time, and help in getting him FCS offers across the state, hence the "decommitment"

[GrandGreen]

5 minutes ago, UNT Mean Green said:

1) It was communicated to the kid that he wouldn't play here

2) Quite the contrary, same thing as the kid received honest communication from the staff regarding foreseeable playing time, and help in getting him FCS offers across the state, hence the "decommitment"

Care to elaborate how you could possibly know this?  

[Cr1028]

ACU