Littrell's Texas Ties

[Ben Gooding]

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.

Sure, this does happen. For us, it typically does not. We have too many lowly rated 2 stars and waaaay too many NR's on this roster. We need to land more 3 star recruits to have long term success. I am not in the camp that wants to fully develop 25 recruits every year and hope lightning strikes once every 4 years. I want to recruit existing talent and build off of that. In our geographic location there is no reason whatsoever that we can't land 10 three star recruits on an annual basis. if they can do this in Huntington, WV, we can do it in the DFW metroplex. 

[BillySee58]

Sure, this does happen. For us, it typically does not. We have too many lowly rated 2 stars and waaaay too many NR's on this roster. We need to land more 3 star recruits to have long term success. I am not in the camp that wants to fully develop 25 recruits every year and hope lightning strikes once every 4 years. I want to recruit existing talent and build off of that. In our geographic location there is no reason whatsoever that we can't land 10 three star recruits on an annual basis. if they can do this in Huntington, WV, we can do it in the DFW metroplex. 

Name one NR on our team that wasn't a walkon.

[HoustonEagle]

I think it is more about the positions we have not been able to recruit.  Namely DL and QB.  We have some good skill position players on this team outside of QB

[casual fan]

Stars are one thing, but offers are another.

T J Henson shows 2 stars, but he had  9 offers from D1 schools.

 

[NorthTexas16]

Stars (to some degree) are the imagination of the media. Sure, there is some thought and analysis that goes in to some of it. Mainly the 4 and 5 star recruits. The 2 and 3 stars are separated by how many offers they have. They don't have time the analyze each so they get stars based on offers only. 

 

We need to recruit players that can help us win and fit the scheme that we are going to run. The previous staff spent too much time worrying about offering kids because it looked good. Why waste time offering a kid that you are not going to get? Look at this years offers and tell me why we offered half of those guys? We had no chance of getting them!

 

 

[HarringtonFishSmeller]

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.

You have to understand that the "Texas ties" thing is way overblown. We pretend - some of you, anyway - that the coaches who led the program before did not recruit Texas, that none of the assistants recruited Texas, etc.

The fact is, it doesn't matter whether or not our head coach does or does not have "Texas ties."  What kids want to be a part of is a winning program.  Kids from all over the country flock to places like Oklahoma and Alabama because they win.  That they are outposts in po-dunk states makes no difference.

Win and kids don't care if your coach came from the moon.  

As stated before, we are way down the food chain even among Texas schools as far as getting Texas prep talent.  And, yes - all those other Texas schools have coaches with these mythical "Texas ties."

And, again, for all the blather over "Texas ties," it hasn't turned any state school into a national behemoth:  one national title since 1969 for any Texas school, none in the last decade.  Texas A&M will sometimes string two or three good seasons together, post-Sherrill/Slocum.  Occasionally, Texas will get on a tear, but not often since the late 60s and 70s. 

Post-Mack Brown, Texas is stumbling along like they did in the mid-80s until his hire in 1998.  Mack had never coached in Texas prior to being hired.  He was heavily rooted in the South, Southeast and Midwest, having coached at Florida State, Southern Miss, Memphis, Iowa State, LSU, Appalachian State, Oklahoma, Tulane, and North Carolina.  Before the North Carolina job, he was a vagabond like many other assistants - but, not in Texas.

Mack won a lot at North Carolina for many years, and that appealed to recruits.  "Texas ties" had nothing to do with Mack's tenure at Texas.  He was a kids from Tennessee who played ball at Vandy and Florida State.  He's a Southerner to the core.  But, he won.  And, that drew recruits. 

But, be realistic.  Seth Littrell - or, any other hire - was not going to waltz in here and take the state by storm.  Not by a long shot.  What we need is a coach and a coaching staff who can built AND maintain/sustain a winning program.  Dickey petered off eventually after building up the program.  McCarney fell off a ledge after building a bowl team.  

Forget about the "Texas ties" angle.  Every coach and assistant is going to recruit Texas.  Kids want to win.  Worry about winning because that is what takes care of 99% of the recruiting.  

Edited December 28, 2015 by HarringtonFishSmeller

[Mean Green 93-98]

Stars (to some degree) are the imagination of the media. Sure, there is some thought and analysis that goes in to some of it. Mainly the 4 and 5 star recruits. The 2 and 3 stars are separated by how many offers they have. They don't have time the analyze each so they get stars based on offers only.

 

 

That's simply not true.  What is it about 3-star recruit D-Aundrey Bradley's offer list that separates him from 2-star recruit Roderick Young's offer list?

[untjim1995]

Higher star ratings are for the top P% programs--I pay no attention to their inflated classes that are used for subscriptions to follow said P5 giant by blowing smoke up their collective asses.

That said, one thing I do thing matters in recruiting rankings, in a very big way, though, is when collectively, your class(es) are low ranked against your peers. That's usually a sure sign that you are about to suck badly. And that is what we have endured, basically, under McCarney. I'm fairly certain that the Carthage WRs we have our very solid players who could probably play at any P5 school in the country--but collectively, the class they came in with was ranked dead-ass last for a reason by Rivals, when comparing it against other G5 teams. Those low-rated classes in 2014, 2013, 2012, and 2011 combined to get us here, along with poor coaching schemes and an offensive gameplan that was ancient.

Now, maybe that 2015 class that finished ahead of about 30 other G5 programs will be the one that Littrell leads up to a winning season in a few seasons, like Mac did with Dodge's 2009 and 2010 classes in our 2013 HoD Bowl Championship season. I don't expect anything from this upcoming class--its almost impossible to see him building up enough talent in such a short amount of time to be decently ranked, as a class, against our G5 peers. But if he can find a few pieces that are developable and can add that to classes in 2017 and beyond that are more talented than anything we have seen around here in five years, he's going to have something cooking by 2018 and 2019. And even if he leaves or gets fired, if he can duplicate recruiting classes like Dodge did, his successor will be light years ahead of where his predecessor put him today. We thought Dickey left Dodge a talent-poor roster--those leftovers for Dodge look like a diamond compared to what McCarney has left Littrell. And its all a moot point, for sure, if he cannot get a decent QB in here soon.

[NorthTexas16]

That's simply not true.  What is it about 3-star recruit D-Aundrey Bradley's offer list that separates him from 2-star recruit Roderick Young's offer list?

One is a WR and one is DT. Their offers are similar but neither had P5's. The WR has good size and not sure what his 40 time was but probably above average. DT is right at avg in height. Also depends on what time each blossomed as a player. Some kids get stars early and some late. The point I am making is college recruiters care more than how many stars a kid has. Just ask them! Most of them don't even believe the camps 40 times that are sponsored by UA, Nike. They want them at a camp of their own to watch and time them in person.

[GOMG2013]

That's simply not true.  What is it about 3-star recruit D-Aundrey Bradley's offer list that separates him from 2-star recruit Roderick Young's offer list?

if I had to guess without doing any research, even though he did not get an offer, he had texas a&m showing serious intrest.  That means more than just the mass generic mail outs. He had a recruiter assigned to him and in contact with him.  Probably after his junior year...then grades came into play.  He was able to get some offers late, but just getting P5 intrest your jr year may be enough to get you 3 stars or close.  Just a guess. 

[Mean Green 93-98]

2 hours ago, NorthTexas16 said:

One is a WR and one is DT. Their offers are similar but neither had P5's. The WR has good size and not sure what his 40 time was but probably above average. DT is right at avg in height. Also depends on what time each blossomed as a player. Some kids get stars early and some late. 

Okay.  So just to clarify then, you are acknowledging that your claim "The 2 and 3 stars are separated by how many offers they have. They don't have time the analyze each so they get stars based on offers only" is incorrect.

[NorthTexas16]

Not at all! 

 

Why don't you share with all of us how they are evaluated? I assure you they don't go through the film of every 2 star to determine if he should be 3. 

Edited December 28, 2015 by NorthTexas16

[BillySee58]

8 hours ago, HarringtonFishSmeller said:

You have to understand that the "Texas ties" thing is way overblown. We pretend - some of you, anyway - that the coaches who led the program before did not recruit Texas, that none of the assistants recruited Texas, etc.

The fact is, it doesn't matter whether or not our head coach does or does not have "Texas ties."  What kids want to be a part of is a winning program.  Kids from all over the country flock to places like Oklahoma and Alabama because they win.  That they are outposts in po-dunk states makes no difference.

Win and kids don't care if your coach came from the moon.  

As stated before, we are way down the food chain even among Texas schools as far as getting Texas prep talent.  And, yes - all those other Texas schools have coaches with these mythical "Texas ties."

And, again, for all the blather over "Texas ties," it hasn't turned any state school into a national behemoth:  one national title since 1969 for any Texas school, none in the last decade.  Texas A&M will sometimes string two or three good seasons together, post-Sherrill/Slocum.  Occasionally, Texas will get on a tear, but not often since the late 60s and 70s. 

Post-Mack Brown, Texas is stumbling along like they did in the mid-80s until his hire in 1998.  Mack had never coached in Texas prior to being hired.  He was heavily rooted in the South, Southeast and Midwest, having coached at Florida State, Southern Miss, Memphis, Iowa State, LSU, Appalachian State, Oklahoma, Tulane, and North Carolina.  Before the North Carolina job, he was a vagabond like many other assistants - but, not in Texas.

Mack won a lot at North Carolina for many years, and that appealed to recruits.  "Texas ties" had nothing to do with Mack's tenure at Texas.  He was a kids from Tennessee who played ball at Vandy and Florida State.  He's a Southerner to the core.  But, he won.  And, that drew recruits. 

But, be realistic.  Seth Littrell - or, any other hire - was not going to waltz in here and take the state by storm.  Not by a long shot.  What we need is a coach and a coaching staff who can built AND maintain/sustain a winning program.  Dickey petered off eventually after building up the program.  McCarney fell off a ledge after building a bowl team.  

Forget about the "Texas ties" angle.  Every coach and assistant is going to recruit Texas.  Kids want to win.  Worry about winning because that is what takes care of 99% of the recruiting.  

Completely agree

[greenit]

Not at all! 

 

Why don't you share with all of us how they are evaluated? I assure you they don't go through the film of every 2 star to determine if he should be 3. 

Most of them publish their criteria and then normally have one category that is a little more subjective that would require things like watching film. 

Normally, in three or four measurable categories such as size, speed, strength, weight, etc... Each candidate is measured and ranked against his current peers and historical numbers. These numbers are gathered at various camps around the country by the major stating services. It really isn't that complicated. 

These numbers provide a basis from which to start. Many times these numbers represent potential rather than finished product, especially in the 3 star range. 

There will always be exceptions where players only rated two stars have lots of offers because they either did not test well or they have shown great ability during games and receive offers despite the below average camp numbers. 

It isn't that we can't find good/great players that are two stars or unrated, it is just that history shows the odds are stacked against them. 

Not at all! 

 

Why don't you share with all of us how they are evaluated? I assure you they don't go through the film of every 2 star to determine if he should be 3. 

Most of them publish their criteria and then normally have one category that is a little more subjective that would require things like watching film. 

Normally, in three or four measurable categories such as size, speed, strength, weight, etc... Each candidate is measured and ranked against his current peers and historical numbers. These numbers are gathered at various camps around the country by the major stating services. It really isn't that complicated. 

These numbers provide a basis from which to start. Many times these numbers represent potential rather than finished product, especially in the 3 star range. 

There will always be exceptions where players only rated two stars have lots of offers because they either did not test well or they have shown great ability during games and receive offers despite the below average camp numbers. 

It isn't that we can't find good/great players that are two stars or unrated, it is just that history shows the odds are stacked against them. 

[Ben Gooding]

10 hours ago, HarringtonFishSmeller said:

You have to understand that the "Texas ties" thing is way overblown. We pretend - some of you, anyway - that the coaches who led the program before did not recruit Texas, that none of the assistants recruited Texas, etc.

The fact is, it doesn't matter whether or not our head coach does or does not have "Texas ties."  What kids want to be a part of is a winning program.  Kids from all over the country flock to places like Oklahoma and Alabama because they win.  That they are outposts in po-dunk states makes no difference.

Win and kids don't care if your coach came from the moon.  

As stated before, we are way down the food chain even among Texas schools as far as getting Texas prep talent.  And, yes - all those other Texas schools have coaches with these mythical "Texas ties."

And, again, for all the blather over "Texas ties," it hasn't turned any state school into a national behemoth:  one national title since 1969 for any Texas school, none in the last decade.  Texas A&M will sometimes string two or three good seasons together, post-Sherrill/Slocum.  Occasionally, Texas will get on a tear, but not often since the late 60s and 70s. 

Post-Mack Brown, Texas is stumbling along like they did in the mid-80s until his hire in 1998.  Mack had never coached in Texas prior to being hired.  He was heavily rooted in the South, Southeast and Midwest, having coached at Florida State, Southern Miss, Memphis, Iowa State, LSU, Appalachian State, Oklahoma, Tulane, and North Carolina.  Before the North Carolina job, he was a vagabond like many other assistants - but, not in Texas.

Mack won a lot at North Carolina for many years, and that appealed to recruits.  "Texas ties" had nothing to do with Mack's tenure at Texas.  He was a kids from Tennessee who played ball at Vandy and Florida State.  He's a Southerner to the core.  But, he won.  And, that drew recruits. 

But, be realistic.  Seth Littrell - or, any other hire - was not going to waltz in here and take the state by storm.  Not by a long shot.  What we need is a coach and a coaching staff who can built AND maintain/sustain a winning program.  Dickey petered off eventually after building up the program.  McCarney fell off a ledge after building a bowl team.  

Forget about the "Texas ties" angle.  Every coach and assistant is going to recruit Texas.  Kids want to win.  Worry about winning because that is what takes care of 99% of the recruiting.  

Bingo. 100% agree. The Texas tie stuff is just drilled in garbage. I'm sure it helps here and there  and few and far between. Create a fun atmosphere in Denton and at UNT, storm social media (which Littrell is showing he doesn't do much of), and just win baby. 

As much as this pains me to say, Tom Herman is doing everything right from a (coach) marketing standpoint as well as creating a fun atmosphere within the AD. From day 1 he also stormed social media with reckless abandon. It's paying off for UH. 

[Mean Green 93-98]

5 hours ago, NorthTexas16 said:

Not at all! 

 

Why don't you share with all of us how they are evaluated? I assure you they don't go through the film of every 2 star to determine if he should be 3. 

Obviously, the recruiting websites' analysis of lower-rated recruits is more shallow and superficial than that of the superstars of each class.  That goes without saying.  But your comment was plainly misinformation, and your refusal to correct it does not reflect well on your honesty.

[casual fan]

What would be a good  recruiting class this year?

Forget stars and look at offers.  A recruiting class with 100 D1 offers would be a good goal.

The 2015 recruiting class had just over 40 offers by other D1 schools.

Kevin Dillman had 14 of those.

Let's hope this staff can flip some recruits in the next few weeks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[GOMG2013]

2 hours ago, Ben Gooding said:

Bingo. 100% agree. The Texas tie stuff is just drilled in garbage. I'm sure it helps here and there  and few and far between. Create a fun atmosphere in Denton and at UNT, storm social media (which Littrell is showing he doesn't do much of), and just win baby. 

As much as this pains me to say, Tom Herman is doing everything right from a (coach) marketing standpoint as well as creating a fun atmosphere within the AD. From day 1 he also stormed social media with reckless abandon. It's paying off for UH. 

Tom Herman built his staff with coaches with very strong texas ties.  Especially houston area.  Naviar, giles, pope, applewhite...Tom herman is definitely doing his part, but the staff he put together is one of the best.

[UNT90]

10 hours ago, GOMG2013 said:

Tom Herman built his staff with coaches with very strong texas ties.  Especially houston area.  Naviar, giles, pope, applewhite...Tom herman is definitely doing his part, but the staff he put together is one of the best.

The best at what they do hire underlings who are also the best at what they do.

A fact sadly and completely lost on Rick Villarreal. 

Edited December 29, 2015 by UNT90

[NorthTexas16]

9 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

Obviously, the recruiting websites' analysis of lower-rated recruits is more shallow and superficial than that of the superstars of each class.  That goes without saying.  But your comment was plainly misinformation, and your refusal to correct it does not reflect well on your honesty.

You are pretty brave questioning my integrity as an honest man behind your computer, but I will let it pass. Go back to my original post and you will  see that in parenthesis I stated "to some degree"! 

[Mean Green 93-98]

1.  The point you qualify with "to some degree" I don't disagree with at all.

2.  It seems that you are the one trying to be a tough guy behind the computer screen.  I never suggested anything physical, you did.  But I assure you, I would say nothing different to your face.

3.  You are presenting as fact something that is not fact.  You stated that 2-3 star recruits "get stars based on offers only."  Then in another post you acknowledge that recruiting services will look at their measurables such as 40 time.  These two statements are incompatible with each other.  Measurables are something in addition to offers.

4.  We all are wrong at times and simply misstate things at other times.  The honest thing to do is to acknowledge when we realize it and move on.

[NorthTexas16]

4 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

1.  The point you qualify with "to some degree" I don't disagree with at all.

2.  It seems that you are the one trying to be a tough guy behind the computer screen.  I never suggested anything physical, you did.  But I assure you, I would say nothing different to your face.

3.  You are presenting as fact something that is not fact.  You stated that 2-3 star recruits "get stars based on offers only."  Then in another post you acknowledge that recruiting services will look at their measurables such as 40 time.  These two statements are incompatible with each other.  Measurables are something in addition to offers.

4.  We all are wrong at times and simply misstate things at other times.  The honest thing to do is to acknowledge when we realize it and move on.

Not being a tough guy at all.

 

You were the one who came out wanting me to recant my position. I won't!! I assumed that we agree in general on things such as 40 times and other measurable to get a baseline of a recruits talent.  Of course they do! There are obviously factors that start the process, but my point was that 2 stars very rarely get bumped to 3 stars by the end of their recruiting process. The subject that I was commenting on was that we don't need to chase X number of 3 star recruits.

 

This is a blog that allows for opinion. I stated mine and stand behind it. To be called a liar is off base. You immediately acted like some attorney during a trail to dismiss my opinion. I never suggested a single thing personal or physical towards you, The shot was from you claiming I was being dishonest and you wanted some sort of apology on my part!I  

 

 

[Mean Green 93-98]

42 minutes ago, NorthTexas16 said:

Not being a tough guy at all.

 

You were the one who came out wanting me to recant my position. I won't!! I assumed that we agree in general on things such as 40 times and other measurable to get a baseline of a recruits talent.  Of course they do! There are obviously factors that start the process, but my point was that 2 stars very rarely get bumped to 3 stars by the end of their recruiting process. The subject that I was commenting on was that we don't need to chase X number of 3 star recruits.

 

This is a blog that allows for opinion. I stated mine and stand behind it. To be called a liar is off base. You immediately acted like some attorney during a trail to dismiss my opinion. I never suggested a single thing personal or physical towards you, The shot was from you claiming I was being dishonest and you wanted some sort of apology on my part!I  

 

 

You really need to learn the difference between a statement of opinion and a statement of fact.

Opinion:  I really don't like the way recruiting services analyze lightly-recruited players.

Fact: Recruiting services rate players based on offer lists and measurables.

If I say, "UNT is in the SEC," is that just an opinion?  Can I just go ahead and start posting that without ever expecting anyone to call me on it?

[NorthTexas16]

31 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

You really need to learn the difference between a statement of opinion and a statement of fact.

Opinion:  I really don't like the way recruiting services analyze lightly-recruited players.

Fact: Recruiting services rate players based on offer lists and measurables.

If I say, "UNT is in the SEC," is that just an opinion?  Can I just go ahead and start posting that without ever expecting anyone to call me on it?

You are an idiot! That is a statement of fact!

[wardly]

Boys, I would like to suggest that our New Year's Resolution is to respect each others opinion whether you agree with it or not. There must be a better was to question someone post that to call them dishonest. This is something we all, including yours truly, need to work on. We are not kids in a school yard, so lets ALL try not to act like it.Having said that, I wish you all a Happy New Year!