Trying to understand....

[untcampbell]

In the current recruiting paradigm, are we to just not recruit kids until signing day so they will have reduced time to get other offers and change their minds?

Why question a kids honor when he commits now and later, based on new information, decides to do something else? Especially when the paradigm is fully established and understood. We know the path it can take but every single time we get a commitment, the thread is hijacked to make the same well known observation.

Instead, perhaps assume good intent. Then trust, until someone gives you reasons not to.

Feels like we should be celebrating the decision with the recruit and his family when he opts to "commit" to this school. If you don't feel like celebrating, maybe just go sit in the corner and quit burning the party down. 

Maybe.

 

GMG

[meangreenfaninno]

1 hour ago, untcampbell said:

In the current recruiting paradigm, are we to just not recruit kids until signing day so they will have reduced time to get other offers and change their minds?

Why question a kids honor when he commits now and later, based on new information, decides to do something else? Especially when the paradigm is fully established and understood. We know the path it can take but every single time we get a commitment, the thread is hijacked to make the same well known observation.

Instead, perhaps assume good intent. Then trust, until someone gives you reasons not to.

Feels like we should be celebrating the decision with the recruit and his family when he opts to "commit" to this school. If you don't feel like celebrating, maybe just go sit in the corner and quit burning the party down. 

Maybe.

 

GMG

Agree 💯 

The issue that I am seeing is other schools seem to let us do the work of identifying talent and developing it only to have a lazy school swoop in and offer more NIL money and snatch said player away.  
 

The good news is I do think the staff is learning.  To my understanding, I think once a player “portals” himself, and transfers to a new school he cannot do it again without sitting out a year.  I think we should try to utilize this as well as continuing to land quality juco players who have been ignored in the new NIL environment.  Thoughts?

[NT80]

5 hours ago, meangreenfaninno said:

The good news is I do think the staff is learning.  To my understanding, I think once a player “portals” himself, and transfers to a new school he cannot do it again without sitting out a year.  I think we should try to utilize this as well as continuing to land quality juco players who have been ignored in the new NIL environment.  Thoughts?

I would totally recruit the portal and juco, for reasons you mentioned.   Plus, they are more mature and have been acclimated to college life and the speed of college football.  

[greenminer]

Recruit the best players you can find, no matter where they come from.

HS players are still in consideration.  If a few of them stay for 3+ years, bonus right?

Edited June 12, 2023 by greenminer

[Wag Tag]

Portal is the way to go! I would have 80% portal or Juco and would not sign any HS qb’s!

[greenminer]

 

[greengal]

We always support the high schools.  A lot of teachers at high schools graduated from UNT including me and hubby.

[El Paso Eagle]

2 minutes ago, greengal said:

We always support the high schools.  A lot of teachers at high schools graduated from UNT including me and hubby.

It is not a question of not supporting high schools. The reality is as more players develop and transfer out, schools will start thinking harder and harder about whether they want to invest the time and effort into developing players for another school. Unless something changes, it will probably get even worse for high school players to get FBS offers out of high school.

[greenminer]

Explain to me how much extra investment we have to put into HS players?  Don't all players that come in - xfer or HS - get prescribed diets and work out plans?  Being younger and anticipating strength/weight gain is simply a matter of a different diet/plan.

The way some of y'all post, it's like you think HS kids demand exponentially more time and resources (compared to new, incoming xfers).

Edited June 13, 2023 by greenminer

[Wag Tag]

45 minutes ago, greenminer said:

Explain to me how much extra investment we have to put into HS players?  Don't all players that come in - xfer or HS - get prescribed diets and work out plans?  Being younger and anticipating strength/weight gain is simply a matter of a different diet/plan.

The way some of y'all post, it's like you think HS kids demand exponentially more time and resources (compared to new, incoming xfers).

It does require more time and they can transfer any year. Dramatic difference physically from an 18 year old kid from Pilot Point to a 22 year old transfer that has been through the wt program and experience of a P5 or G5.

[UNTLifer]

27 minutes ago, Wag Tag said:

It does require more time and they can transfer any year. Dramatic difference physically from an 18 year old kid from Pilot Point to a 22 year old transfer that has been through the wt program and experience of a P5 or G5.

22 year old?  We are UNT not UAB/BYU.

[greenminer]

2 hours ago, Wag Tag said:

It does require more time

How so? This is what I'm asking.

If you mean time, as in our extra resources, that is the detail I want.

If you mean time, as in time to grow into their new frame, that simply means we have to wait while they are growing and are thus not contributing.  I would contend that xfers are a risk to not contribute either.  We have experienced a number of examples over the years, kids coming in from P5 who sat the bench at their old stop...and ended up sitting on the bench here.  How is that any different than a HS recruit not contributing in their first year?

Neither of us have the exact numbers, so I don't think we're going to change the other's mind.  But I will throw out there, I believe in the possibility that the risk/reward is similar, but with HS kids you have the bonus possibility that they stay for 3 or 4 years.

Edited June 13, 2023 by greenminer

[97and03]

2 hours ago, Wag Tag said:

It does require more time and they can transfer any year. Dramatic difference physically from an 18 year old kid from Pilot Point to a 22 year old transfer that has been through the wt program and experience of a P5 or G5.

@greenminer
This, plus the investment from the support staff getting them adapted to college life and the routine of being a student athlete at this level. As a former advisor that dealt with athletes (not a primary duty but advised many over the years) I can tell you that advising a freshman/sophomore is significantly more difficult and time consuming than an upperclassman. They have to figure out how to accomplish their academic goals in harmony with their athletic obligations. That takes some adjusting, especially given long road trips during the season and mandatory practices that conflict with the times for mandatory courses. 
So add that to the work the training and strength staffs have done (plus the coaching, obviously) it is a significant upfront investment to get a kid ready to be a full time starter. 

Edited June 13, 2023 by 97and03

[Mean Green 93-98]

3 hours ago, greenminer said:

 

He is indeed wrong.  Bryce Drummond, for one.

[greenminer]

7 minutes ago, 97and03 said:

@greenminer
This, plus the investment from the support staff getting them adapted to college life and the routine of being a student athlete at this level. As a former advisor that dealt with athletes (not a primary duty but advised many over the years) I can tell you that advising a freshman/sophomore is significantly more difficult and time consuming than an upperclassman. They have to figure out how to accomplish their academic goals in harmony with their athletic obligations. That takes some adjusting, especially given long road trips during the season and mandatory practices that conflict with the times for mandatory courses. 
So add that to the work the training and strength staffs have done (plus the coaching, obviously) it is a significant upfront investment to get a kid ready to be a full time starter. 

Thanks.

Sounds like a lot of resources that are not under the AD.

Still chewing on this.  Wish we were a few more years into NIL, and had solid numbers about HS recruits leaving their first school.

I also think some of you (not directed at you 97) are seeing all of this unfold through an intense I-HATE-WHAT-NIL-IS-DOING-TO-THE-GAME lens, and your views are knee-jerk/angry.

[97and03]

14 minutes ago, greenminer said:

Thanks.

Sounds like a lot of resources that are not under the AD.

Still chewing on this.  Wish we were a few more years into NIL, and had solid numbers about HS recruits leaving their first school.

I also think some of you (not directed at you 97) are seeing all of this unfold through an intense I-HATE-WHAT-NIL-IS-DOING-TO-THE-GAME lens, and your views are knee-jerk/angry.

The AD has a full staff of academic advisors and tutors, plus all the rest of their support staff. My personal experience was outside of that but there is a separate AD structure dealing with academic and other issues (like a positions that work on NCAA compliance issues, Title IX, NIL, etc) that all require funds and contribute to the development of a student athlete. An upperclassman can surpassed some of these hurdles, in part at least do their familiarity with the processes and system. As an example, picking a major and building a course schedule. A Junior transfer generally has a major already and understands how to register and build a schedule. 

[greenminer]

12 minutes ago, 97and03 said:

The AD has a full staff of academic advisors and tutors, plus all the rest of their support staff. My personal experience was outside of that but there is a separate AD structure dealing with academic and other issues (like a positions that work on NCAA compliance issues, Title IX, NIL, etc) that all require funds and contribute to the development of a student athlete. An upperclassman can surpassed some of these hurdles, in part at least do their familiarity with the processes and system. As an example, picking a major and building a course schedule. A Junior transfer generally has a major already and understands how to register and build a schedule. 

Some initial thoughts:

None of this resource talk is different from before NIL/portal.  A coach from 2013 would have had no problem utilizing all these resources if it meant having a healthy program full of HS recruits from rosters top-to-bottom.

Which brings us back to, how many HS kids are leaving after 1 or 2 years? Certainly more than before, but I am not on board with someone like @Wag Tag who is of the belief that it is a waste to have more than 20% of your roster populated by HS recruits.  At least, I'm not yet ready to make that kind of leap.

Edited June 13, 2023 by greenminer

[97and03]

Not there yet either, but it is a fact that there are significant upfront "costs" for high school recruits compared to bringing in developed players.

[NT80]

58 minutes ago, greenminer said:

Some initial thoughts:

None of this resource talk is different from before NIL/portal.  A coach from 2013 would have had no problem utilizing all these resources if it meant having a healthy program full of HS recruits from rosters top-to-bottom.

Which brings us back to, how many HS kids are leaving after 1 or 2 years? Certainly more than before, but I am not on board with someone like @Wag Tag who is of the belief that it is a waste to have more than 20% of your roster populated by HS recruits.  At least, I'm not yet ready to make that kind of leap.

The Portal along with the NIL (and society) has created incentive for any dissatisfied first year player, that doesn't want to redshirt or ride the bench waiting for his time, to leave for any reason to try another school.  This is the same in the current work-force generation....they want the corner office now, not wait for the ladder-climbing process.  

It's better to invest in an older, more mature athlete that has used his portal opportunity to come to UNT!

[El Paso Eagle]

1 hour ago, greenminer said:

and your views are knee-jerk/angry.

So once again, if others' views do not match yours, they must be "knee-jerk/angry" since your viewpoint is the correct one.

[Wag Tag]

2 hours ago, greenminer said:

Some initial thoughts:

None of this resource talk is different from before NIL/portal.  A coach from 2013 would have had no problem utilizing all these resources if it meant having a healthy program full of HS recruits from rosters top-to-bottom.

Which brings us back to, how many HS kids are leaving after 1 or 2 years? Certainly more than before, but I am not on board with someone like @Wag Tag who is of the belief that it is a waste to have more than 20% of your roster populated by HS recruits.  At least, I'm not yet ready to make that kind of leap.

It would be interesting to see how many HS kids were cut? Example CU. You look at any school last year that had unexpected success, it was the transfers that created that success. Most within their first year.

 

[ntmeangreen11]

I made a post last season about how loaded the sophomore class was, how many of them had flashed already and how much I was looking forward to them progressing. So many of those guys transferred. Gone are the days of getting excited about a strong class and what it could be once their seniors. It's a season to season league now, putting all that time in for a high school recruit, making a plan for their development, seeing them have success only to leave you high and dry after two seasons doesn't seem worth it. 

[Tommy Gadberry]

17 minutes ago, ntmeangreen11 said:

I made a post last season about how loaded the sophomore class was, how many of them had flashed already and how much I was looking forward to them progressing. So many of those guys transferred. Gone are the days of getting excited about a strong class and what it could be once their seniors. It's a season to season league now, putting all that time in for a high school recruit, making a plan for their development, seeing them have success only to leave you high and dry after two seasons doesn't seem worth it. 

No doubt we lost a lot from that class. 

[greenminer]

4 hours ago, Wag Tag said:

You look at any school last year that had unexpected success, it was the transfers that created that success.

Yes I’ve seen that. Part of me is in wait and see mode, because I want to know if this (and everything that has transpired) is a new norm, or if some of this is year 1 (or year 2) behavior and not sustainable.

Edited June 14, 2023 by greenminer

[El Paso Eagle]

13 hours ago, greenminer said:

Yes I’ve seen that. Part of me is in wait and see mode, because I want to know if this (and everything that has transpired) is a new norm, or if some of this is year 1 (or year 2) behavior and not sustainable.

It will be interesting to see how long the money stays there for buying players if the teams do not win. My guess is if they do not find a way to reign in pay-for-play and uncontrolled spending, we will see a more significant divide than we have now between the "haves" and the "have-nots."