Littrell's Texas Ties

[BillySee58]

For a lot of people, one of the major criteria for our head coach during our search was a coach with heavy Texas ties for recruiting. It wasn't as big a deal for me as being a genuinely good recruiter, because those ties would make themselves, and ties to coaches don't necessarily land individual recruits.

Based on the very early recruiting we have seen, I don't think Littrell has the Texas ties a lot of people had hoped for, or that he seemed to be touted as having. I think that's a big reason he kept both Patrick and Perry on the staff.

So far we had 3 mid-term signees and they were two JUCO players from JUCOs that Perry recruits, and a grayshirt from last class. Also so far we've had a few out-of-state offers confirmed, and the in-state confirmed offers were to the QB from nearby Liberty Christian after he decommitted from Ok State and an East Texas kid (Perry's recruiting region). Another chunk of our early recruiting has been to players who were offered under Mccarney.

So again, I don't think Littrell's Texas ties were anything special, but I don't think it's going to be a problem in recruiting. As long as he and his staff stay relentless and keep recruiting the area hard they'll build up a good reputation locally.

Edited December 27, 2015 by BillySee58

[Greenrex]

I am by no definition notably knowledgable regarding such things but, it seems to me that if everything else is pretty much okay, nothing is more important than recruiting. Nothing except player development.

 

Edited December 27, 2015 by Greenrex
Edited to make it seem that I know what I'm talking about

[UNT90]

I am by no definition notably knowledgable regarding such things but, it seems to me that if everything else is pretty much okay, nothing is more important than recruiting. Nothing.

 

Player development is just as important, if not more important.

UT gets the pick of the litter. How's that working out for them lately?

Edited December 27, 2015 by UNT90

[FirefightnRick]

Player development is just as important, if not more important.

UT gets the pick of the litter. How's that working out for them lately?

Or A&M for that matter.

 

Rick

[Marty]

Nice article by Goose;

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/rickgosselin/2015/12/26/gosselin-signing-day-success-mean-stars-will-align-later-cfp-berth

[FirefightnRick]

Nice article by Goose;

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/rickgosselin/2015/12/26/gosselin-signing-day-success-mean-stars-will-align-later-cfp-berth

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/rickgosselin/2015/12/26/gosselin-signing-day-success-mean-stars-will-align-later-cfp-berth

 

Was it two years ago in which the Super Bowl had no player in it that was a 5 star recruit out of HS?  Funny.

This is why I place very little emphasis on recruit ratings.

 

Rick

[BillySee58]

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/rickgosselin/2015/12/26/gosselin-signing-day-success-mean-stars-will-align-later-cfp-berth

 

Was it two years ago in which the Super Bowl had no player in it that was a 5 star recruit out of HS?  Funny.

This is why I place very little emphasis on recruit ratings.

 

Rick

You also have to take into account that there are only about 30 five-stars every year, about 250 four-stars, about 600 three-stars, and well over 1000 two-stars if you're just looking at one of the four recruiting services.

Collectively it's proven that five-stars get drafted at a higher rate than four-stars, four-stars get drafted at a higher rate than three-stars, etc. Individually the stars don't predict a player, but they do a good job collectively.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2015/5/5/8547409/nfl-draft-recruiting-rating-ranking

 

[Ben Gooding]

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/rickgosselin/2015/12/26/gosselin-signing-day-success-mean-stars-will-align-later-cfp-berth

 

Was it two years ago in which the Super Bowl had no player in it that was a 5 star recruit out of HS?  Funny.

This is why I place very little emphasis on recruit ratings.

 

Rick

That's just silly. I don't care what the NFL does. In recruiting, the teams that land the most highly touted players via recruiting services are better teams. Marshal out recruits everyone in CUSA on an almost annual basis per recruiting services. Marshal is almost always at the top of CUSA. Toledo for the past 3 years under Matt Campbell had the best classes in the MAC per recruiting services. They coincidentally had a breakout season this year and Campbell's recruiting ability landed him a P5 job. Boise per recruiting services almost annually out recruits the MWC and they typically own that conference. Alabama per the recruiting services has had the top class over the last 5 years and Alabama is being dominant. I understand there are hits and misses on players here and there but I trust the rating system because it has proven accurate at the college level. I also understand that we have to develop the talent that we do recruit, but players have ceilings and floors. We have to recruit better talent. We must have more 3 stars on our team. 

[FirefightnRick]

Per the Gosslin article...Iowa finished 5th in the playoff rankings averaging less than 3 stars (2.59) and zero 5 stars among their starting 22.  That's hilarious.

But non of this applies to us cause unless we get a freak situation happen like with Dillman we're not in the running for these kids,...which is why it's meaningless to keep up with as if its the be all end all.

 

Rick

 

 

That's just silly. I don't care what the NFL does. In recruiting, the teams that land the most highly touted players via recruiting services are better teams. Marshal out recruits everyone in CUSA on an almost annual basis per recruiting services. Marshal is almost always at the top of CUSA. Toledo for the past 3 years under Matt Campbell had the best classes in the MAC per recruiting services. They coincidentally had a breakout season this year and Campbell's recruiting ability landed him a P5 job. Boise per recruiting services almost annually out recruits the MWC and they typically own that conference. Alabama per the recruiting services has had the top class over the last 5 years and Alabama is being dominant. I understand there are hits and misses on players here and there but I trust the rating system because it has proven accurate at the college level. I also understand that we have to develop the talent that we do recruit, but players have ceilings and floors. We have to recruit better talent. We must have more 3 stars on our team. 

No they are not.  Did you take the time to read the article?

 

Rick

[H-towngreen]

You can throw USC out the window as they were under scholarship restrictions. Then 3/4 of the teams in the playoff finished with top 20 classes with Iowa being on the outside. But let's be honest, Iowa had the scheduling stars align for them. Recruiting is everything. For the most part look at the top few teams in every conference and you will see the top recruiting teams. It's that simple. 

[Wag Tag]

Player development is just as important, if not more important.

UT gets the pick of the litter. How's that working out for them lately?

Look at USC!!! We may not get 5 star guys but we should develop all conf players.

[FirefightnRick]

You can throw USC out the window as they were under scholarship restrictions. Then 3/4 of the teams in the playoff finished with top 20 classes with Iowa being on the outside. But let's be honest, Iowa had the scheduling stars align for them. Recruiting is everything. For the most part look at the top few teams in every conference and you will see the top recruiting teams. It's that simple. 

USC had the nation's highest ranked starting team...recruiting wise, and still finished fourth in conference.  

Recruiting is important but it's not the whole picture.  That's the point of the article.

 

Rick 

Edited December 27, 2015 by FirefightnRick

[Ben Gooding]

Per the Gosslin article...Iowa finished 5th in the playoff rankings averaging less than 3 stars (2.59) and zero 5 stars among their starting 22.  That's hilarious.

But non of this applies to us cause unless we get a freak situation happen like with Dillman we're not in the running for these kids,...which is why it's meaningless to keep up with as if its the be all end all.

 

Rick

 

 

No they are not.  Did you take the time to read the article?

 

Rick

You are bringing up exceptions. I wish people would stop that. Iowa also had one of the easiest P5 schedules in the country. 

[FirefightnRick]

You are bringing up exceptions. I wish people would stop that. 

Exceptions?  Really?....like bringing up Marshall recruiting in an article mostly about p5 recruiting?

 

Rick

[Ben Gooding]

Exceptions?  Really?....like bringing up Marshall recruiting in an article mostly about p5 recruiting?

 

Rick

I was bringing up programs that are our foes and how their recruiting is superior to ours as are their programs. Go to P5 and look at recruiting rankings and cross analyze actual rankings. In the P5 you will see a very similar trend as well. 

[GrandGreen]

Way too early to draw any conclusions on Littrell's recruiting. 

Actually, the recruiting ratings have been dead on as they apply to NT.  Bad recruiting equals bad teams.  This coaching up borderline kids to winning teams is largely a myth.  It can happen that a veteran team much like the HOD bowl team can win as experience can replace raw talent.  Problem, is that level of experience can only happen occasionally than you start over.  

By the way, low rated players can be very talented; but the odds of finding the oft quoted "steals" are not good.  

[H-towngreen]

USC had the nation's highest ranked starting team...recruiting wise, and still finished fourth in conference.  

Recruiting is important but it's not the whole picture.  That's the point of the article.

 

Rick 

So they didn't have any depth. Which is bc they had restrictions on their recruiting

[BillySee58]

Way too early to draw any conclusions on Littrell's recruiting. 

Actually, the recruiting ratings have been dead on as they apply to NT.  Bad recruiting equals bad teams.  This coaching up borderline kids to winning teams is largely a myth.  It can happen that a veteran team much like the HOD bowl team can win as experience can replace raw talent.  Problem, is that level of experience can only happen occasionally than you start over.  

By the way, low rated players can be very talented; but the odds of finding the oft quoted "steals" are not good.  

No conclusion were being drawn. Someone else brought up stars in a thread talking about which players Littrell is recruiting. Which again, indicates that he was not as familiar with Texas as we were led on to believe. But again, probably not going to be an issue for him with winning recruiting battles.

[FirefightnRick]

Way too early to draw any conclusions on Littrell's recruiting. 

 

 

Agree.

 

Rick

 

 

  

[UNT90]

Considering Littrell has zero new commits, any comment on hot recruiting is silly.

But there is lots of silliness around these days.

[BillySee58]

Considering Littrell has zero new commits, any comment on hot recruiting is silly.

But there is lots of silliness around these days.

Where did you see someone say "hot recruiting"?

[H-towngreen]

We've also been in a dead period pretty much the entire time Littrell has been here

[Cougar King]

UH's 2016 class shows the benefits of having a coach with deep Texas ties.

[casual fan]

How can anyone judge Littrell's ability to recruit?

High school recruiting is in a dead period from 12-14-15 until a week or so in Jan. 

That basically means hands off.

As far as the number of stars, that is so misleading.

If UT recruits a player, he may jump up from no stars to three stars or from 3 stars to four stars.

Then UT ends up with a highly rated recruiting class that, in reality, is just not that good.

[GMG24]

UH's 2016 class shows the benefits of having a coach with deep Texas ties.

please expand?? 

Edited December 28, 2015 by GMG24