The two overarching criticisms on this board are that he 1. doesn't recruit worth a damn and 2. didn't compete for a conference title this season despite a bunch of returning talent. Which is it? Either he doesn't recruit talented players, or he shouldn't be expected to compete for a conference title given the returning talent. It can't really be both, can it?
Actually a fair point
It's actually a terrible point - you can think the current staff is good at identifying and landing talent but also think recruiting could be a little better. Also where's the option that they got badly outcoached in games like Vandy and WVU and Texas?
I think some people on this board that expected us to be contending for the XII this year are now more vocal than before about the state of our recruiting over that past few years. I don't think it's dichotomous as toothguy lays it out, but there is some hypocrisy with preseason expectations to compete for a championship and then saying our recruiting has been inadequate.
Considering that I do think we were relatively less talented this year compared to the XII even though our talent was better than most of the 2.0 rosters. XII was strong this year, there were only 2 bad teams this year and then 5 pretty good teams battling for #4 and this OU is the best XII team in years. Combine that with injuries and bad in-game management and our season was meh.
What I'm getting at is there were a lot of reasons we weren't very good this year. And yeah relative talent is one of them. But to be honest the only way kstate wins the XII is if it's a relative down year. Maybe that could change with venzy/leavitt, idk.
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk