Will there be consequences?

[GOMG2013]

6 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

To which, I would expect Littrell to tell WB to "turn on the tape", "we got the guys we wanted", etc...     His off-brand ingredients might just be good.  The proof will be in the pudding.

I hope so.  I just think that he put himself and his staff in a must win situation.  Fans aren't going to wait on low rated recruits to pan out because the chances of their success is low.

Just listening to the radio today and they were talking to an undrafted NFL free agent and he said the hardest part about not having that high rating is when you fail, you don't get the second chances.  They expect you to look bad, and if you do, it confirms why you are rated low.  If you have a high rating, more people are willing to wait on you.

It's not fair, but that's the way it is.  These guys are going to have to hit 6 to shut everybody up.  If not, no one is going to take Littrell's word that his diamonds in the rough will pan out again.  

I think UNT has a shot to get to 6, but it's mainly due to the fact the defense hasn't lost much and they can win similar to last year.

[MeanGreenTexan]

16 minutes ago, GOMG2013 said:

I hope so.  I just think that he put himself and his staff in a must win situation.  Fans aren't going to wait on low rated recruits to pan out because the chances of their success is low.

Just listening to the radio today and they were talking to an undrafted NFL free agent and he said the hardest part about not having that high rating is when you fail, you don't get the second chances.  They expect you to look bad, and if you do, it confirms why you are rated low.  If you have a high rating, more people are willing to wait on you.

It's not fair, but that's the way it is.  These guys are going to have to hit 6 to shut everybody up.  If not, no one is going to take Littrell's word that his diamonds in the rough will pan out again.  

I think UNT has a shot to get to 6, but it's mainly due to the fact the defense hasn't lost much and they can win similar to last year.

Unless we are riddled with injuries, "hit 6" will be a dud of a season in my eyes.   Need to expect more.   Littrell took a 1-11 team and won 5 games with them.   Now, he has another year of prep with these guys, and more of "his guys" in here.  

It shouldn't take a poorly-graded recruiting class to put Littrell in a 'must-win' situation.

[TreeFiddy]

3 hours ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

To which, I would expect Littrell to tell WB to "turn on the tape", "we got the guys we wanted", etc...     His off-brand ingredients might just be good.  The proof will be in the pudding.

[KRAM1]

10 hours ago, Cerebus said:

It's that.

WARNING: Once you been here for 20+ years and seen 5 winning seasons you'll be just as bitter and decrepit as the rest of us.  

Been here since 1966.  That's going on 51 years.  Not bitter...not decrepit (well, maybe) and certainly remaining positive on the prospects for UNT Athletics!  One is master of their own attitude toward things.  I don't keep count of winning or losing seasons....it is always the "next one" that matters.  Here's hoping the "next one" is another bowl season!

[UNTLifer]

Looks like there were consequences

[TreeFiddy]

31 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

Looks like there were consequences

 

[outoftown]

This thread is useless in that there is nothing new. UNT90 has a point, but -as usual- he has gone a bit overboard in stating it. The recruiting rankings reflect a problem in salesmanship and in SL not having placed enough emphasis on hiring at least a few good salesmen to complement his good X and O guys. SL HAS to look at that and realize he needs to make space on the coaching staff next winter for a proven salesman or two. At some point UNTdoes need to land a few more playmakers with eyepopping talent of the kind even the recruiting services can see it. Also you need to get momentum in recruiting too. If you get 2-3 nice players, that tends to help with recruiting other players. And winning 6 or 7 games this season will not solve that problem it'd have to be more like 9 or 10 to solve it without better salesmen. If SL doesn't realise he needs to replace a coach or two in the winter after the next season, it is Wren Bakers job to make it clear to him. No need to replace half the staff. But while there is hardly anyone on this board who likes transparency more than me, there is no point for that to happen publicly. There is also no point in doing it before the 17' season ends. Good salesamen work decently within a month or so, and until then there is no point getting rid of a good X and O coach. Maybe somebody will be leaving for their own reasons anyway, and then it is just cruicial to emphasize recruiting chops when hiring this time.

Edited February 3, 2017 by outoftown

[GTWT]

For those of you who think this is a weak recruiting class, which of the 19 new kids would you drop?

[GOMG2013]

10 hours ago, outoftown said:

Also you need to get momentum in recruiting too. If you get 2-3 nice players, that tends to help with recruiting other players. And winning 6 or 7 games this season will not solve that problem it'd have to be more like 9 or 10 to solve it without better salesmen. 

This.  Especially the case with QB.  The QB situation is one of the first thing recruits look at.  And not just WRs.

Hell even in little league, my 11 year old and friends were asked to play on a team and first thing out of their mouths was... whos at quarterback?

[Eagle-96]

16 hours ago, GangGreen said:

Wait a minute....

5?????

Did I miss one? God, please don't say I actually missed a winning season. The last twenty years have been hell.

Only four in the last 20 but I think Cerebus made his point. We haven't been very good for a long time.

2002

2003

2004

2013

 

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/active/n/north_texas/index.php

[forevereagle]

2 hours ago, GTWT said:

For those of you who think this is a weak recruiting class, which of the 19 new kids would you drop?

This would not be a productive discussion. These are our guys now. Encouraging people to bash our own players is not going to produce good results.

[greenminer]

3 hours ago, GTWT said:

For those of you who think this is a weak recruiting class, which of the 19 new kids would you drop?

I wanted to turn this question around on you, but will pass.  @forevereagle is right...this is a horrible direction to take this discussion.

These are our guys now.  I am behind them 100%.

[Mo Green]

What I wonder about (w/o reading all the above) is if you look at what we are paying for all our FB coaches compared to say UTSA, F_U's how did we compare in recruiting and the ROI for the Ex's? This can go for any sport we have- God love John!!

I need this info from you math guys out there for a meeting next week, please.

This is why I don't care to post as much any more, because of the some posters holding rv so high-and-mighty getting in your face and defending him in private posts to me while we threw away money left & right for no return at all ( i.e. empty seats). At the time, I was a guy who gave $$$$. I repeat WAS! We still have dead wood in the athletic dept.

[UNTLifer]

The entire discussion is ridiculous at this point.  These young men have yet to set foot on campus.

[AustinFromUNT]

Go ahead and put my prediction in the hall of fame because here is where SL's classes will rank in C-USA over his first 5 years and the records for those years

Year 1: 5-8, 12th in recruiting

Year 2: 8-5, 8th in recruiting

Year 3: 8-5, 8th in recruiting

Year 4: 9-4, 6th in recruiting

Year 5: 9-4, 4th in recruiting

Edited February 3, 2017 by AustinFromUNT

[GTWT]

3 hours ago, forevereagle said:

This would not be a productive discussion. These are our guys now. Encouraging people to bash our own players is not going to produce good results.

It's a rhetorical question designed to make people think about how silly it is to bash our class on the basis of stars or offers.  Bashing an individual player is counter-productive.  Bashing the entire class is worse.

[Aldo]

1 minute ago, GTWT said:

It's a rhetorical question designed to make people think about how silly it is to bash our class on the basis of stars or offers.  Bashing an individual player is counter-productive.  Bashing the entire class is worse.

I understand your point, but folks here aren't bashing the class, but the coaching's staff's ability to compete with other schools for recruits.

[GTWT]

Just now, Aldo said:

I understand your point, but folks here aren't bashing the class, but the coaching's staff's ability to compete with other schools for recruits.

How is that different?

[Aldo]

1 minute ago, GTWT said:

How is that different?

So you're implying that by criticizing the coach we are inherently criticizing the player he ends up signing?

No. Our coaches can't keep a target from going to another G5 school. That's the criticism. 

[GTWT]

That's not how one of our players reading GMG will see it.  They'll think we don't like the class - that the coaches should have been able to get better players.

Those 19 kids are on our team - support them.

[UNTFan23]

6 minutes ago, Aldo said:

So you're implying that by criticizing the coach we are inherently criticizing the player he ends up signing?

No. Our coaches can't keep a target from going to another G5 school. That's the criticism. 

We can't stop a recruit from checking out another school. Period.

I guess the coaching staff could go after bigger, better targets but the risk is that we may not land them. The reward is obvious in that they can help make a big difference of course. Schools need to plan to have a backup plan in case they don't land those coveted top recruits.

[TreeFiddy]

7 minutes ago, GTWT said:

That's not how one of our players reading GMG will see it.  They'll think we don't like the class - that the coaches should have been able to get better players.

Those 19 kids are on our team - support them.

Simple question.  If Team A, continues to sign a top 1/2/3 class, in the eyes of the professional talent envalutors that rate these things, and Team B continues to sign a class that is rated 11/12/13, on average would it be reasonable to expect Team A to perform better than Team B?

 

[Aldo]

10 minutes ago, GTWT said:

Those 19 kids are on our team - support them.

Whoa whoa whoa. Back up. We aren't going there. These are our dudes and they're here to play.

7 minutes ago, UNTFan23 said:

We can't stop a recruit from checking out another school. Period.

I guess the coaching staff could go after bigger, better targets but the risk is that we may not land them. The reward is obvious in that they can help make a big difference of course. Schools need to plan to have a backup plan in case they don't land those coveted top recruits.

Can't stop them from checking out another school sure, but we should convince them they are integral to North Texas' vision as a football program. And I'm not talking about 4 or 5 star players. Talking about your Jimmy and Joe 3 star players, which if I looked at it correctly, there were 1,787 of them this year.

[UNTFan23]

Just now, Aldo said:

Can't stop them from checking out another school sure, but we should convince them they are integral to North Texas' vision as a football program. And I'm not talking about 4 or 5 star players. Talking about your Jimmy and Joe 3 star players, which if I looked at it correctly, there were 1,787 of them this year.

Every school tells a recruit that though.

[MeanGreen_MBA]

Just to be clear.  A school that is #1 rated in their conference in recruiting should be highly successful that next football season according to this board......

What happened to Marshall who had the C-USA #1?  UAB tossed their team, #2  ODU was way down the list at #10......  Teams were all over the place.  While I agree, getting the best players give you a better chance to win....coaching plays a HUGE roll at this level....

With that, rankings did not predict last season in The-C

http://247sports.com/Season/2016-Football/CompositeTeamRankings?Conference=C-USA