Football Recruiting Thread

[jtksu]

My how the Mighty have fallen, SEC Florida can not fill out a class without poaching from the WRSOAT.

Speaking of falling,  Randy Shannon is a LB coach now?   Dude couldnt get a DC job after his Miami days?

[kso_FAN]

[steve dave]

yeah, there is one factor above all others that dictates whether a program will have success and at what level. that is it.

[sonofdaxjones]

yeah, there is one factor above all others that dictates whether a program will have success and at what level. that is it.

But TuckNation says stars don't matter.   

If everyone is okay with coached up DITR's going 8-4 or 7-5 and getting clownsuited more times than not by more athletic teams that are well coached, than everything is going to be fantastic.

Baylor is now a machine, TCU has regained its footing and is firing on all cylinders, OU and OSU IMO have only hit speed bumps.

Vanier 2.0 is clearly for the next coach of K-State, otherwise it's pretty much the biggest waste of $70 million dollars in college football history.   We've been able to talk up $160 million dollars worth of facilities improvements at K-State combined with a track record of winning and yet this staff still can't move the needle on the recruiting trail.

[kslim]

i might sound like a tuck and trust me i love to get the 4/5 star athletic studs but im content as of now landing three stars simply because the 4/5 star studs never even end up here (or if they do they never play). we absolutely have a shitty staff when it comes to the big names but we do get 4-5 talented kids a year that make a difference right away.

[steve dave]

when landing highly ranked kids no longer correlates to winning more football games I'll be content signing whoever these losers decide they want/can sign.

[Dugout DickStone]

i might sound like a tuck and trust me i love to get the 4/5 star athletic studs but im content as of now landing three stars simply because the 4/5 star studs never even end up here (or if they do they never play). we absolutely have a shitty staff when it comes to the big names but we do get 4-5 talented kids a year that make a difference right away.

Should just quit trying then and when we do get a decent 3 star should then assume he is in the bag and leave him alone.

[kslim]

i might sound like a tuck and trust me i love to get the 4/5 star athletic studs but im content as of now landing three stars simply because the 4/5 star studs never even end up here (or if they do they never play). we absolutely have a shitty staff when it comes to the big names but we do get 4-5 talented kids a year that make a difference right away.

Should just quit trying then and when we do get a decent 3 star should then assume he is in the bag and leave him alone.

im not saying NOT to recruit the studs but our fallback plan when they eventually go to a bigger school sucks something awful. thats what happened at the end of DOD1 and its happening now.

[pissclams]

a lot of you seem to think that it's the staff's fault we don't sign 4 and 5 star kids

[meow meow]

yeah getting a bunch of 3 stars is one thing, it's another when we lose 3 stars, and sign a bunch of 2 stars in the last couple of weeks before signing day.  it's pathetic.  but if you dumbfucks would just watch a little video you'd understand that these guys are all just a bunch of studs everyone overlooked.

[kslim]

a lot of you seem to think that it's the staff's fault we don't sign 4 and 5 star kids

well they cant use the facilities as an excuse anymore so what is it? if they arent sending winters with these recruits on the town then they need to fire everyone immediately

[michigancat]

i might sound like a tuck and trust me i love to get the 4/5 star athletic studs but im content as of now landing three stars simply because the 4/5 star studs never even end up here (or if they do they never play). we absolutely have a shitty staff when it comes to the big names but we do get 4-5 talented kids a year that make a difference right away.

we need more. IMO one of our biggest problems with recruiting is depth. Generally, our starters can hang with most teams - the problem comes when a Zimmerman or Lockett gets hurt.

[kso_FAN]

i might sound like a tuck and trust me i love to get the 4/5 star athletic studs but im content as of now landing three stars simply because the 4/5 star studs never even end up here (or if they do they never play). we absolutely have a shitty staff when it comes to the big names but we do get 4-5 talented kids a year that make a difference right away.

a lot of you seem to think that it's the staff's fault we don't sign 4 and 5 star kids

Yeah, this.

Blast if you wish, but I've followed recruiting enough that I think "its hard to recruit to Manhattan" is a real thing. This is pretty much while I quit following recruiting and especially football recruiting.

Yeah, you can point out Beasley and Walker, but we all know that was an extremely unique situation.

I want us to land more 4 and 5 star kids as much as anyone, but I don't think any coach in America is going to bring more than a few every 5 years into Manhattan.

And that's okay.

[kslim]

i might sound like a tuck and trust me i love to get the 4/5 star athletic studs but im content as of now landing three stars simply because the 4/5 star studs never even end up here (or if they do they never play). we absolutely have a shitty staff when it comes to the big names but we do get 4-5 talented kids a year that make a difference right away.

we need more. IMO one of our biggest problems with recruiting is depth. Generally, our starters can hang with most teams - the problem comes when a Zimmerman or Lockett gets hurt.

agree 100% and we could fill those holes in the past by plugging in a juco here and there but we dont seem to be doing that anymore

[The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep]

there are a lot of things worth melting down about (see: basketball) and this just isnt one of them.

[kslim]

i dont think anyone is melting down, just trying to put pieces together per crabbys tweet.

[Katpappy]

there are a lot of things worth melting down about (see: basketball) and this just isnt one of them.

Get out of here, banned poster. 

[michigancat]

i might sound like a tuck and trust me i love to get the 4/5 star athletic studs but im content as of now landing three stars simply because the 4/5 star studs never even end up here (or if they do they never play). we absolutely have a shitty staff when it comes to the big names but we do get 4-5 talented kids a year that make a difference right away.

a lot of you seem to think that it's the staff's fault we don't sign 4 and 5 star kids

Yeah, this.

Blast if you wish, but I've followed recruiting enough that I think "its hard to recruit to Manhattan" is a real thing. This is pretty much while I quit following recruiting and especially football recruiting.

Yeah, you can point out Beasley and Walker, but we all know that was an extremely unique situation.

I want us to land more 4 and 5 star kids as much as anyone, but I don't think any coach in America is going to bring more than a few every 5 years into Manhattan.

And that's okay.

Maybe, but we should at least be in the ballpark of schools like OSU and Tech*. It would also be nice to win the occasional battle on a 3 star someone else with a pulse wants.

*I used to include Baylor, but they've clearly passed us

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

a lot of you seem to think that it's the staff's fault we don't sign 4 and 5 star kids

I read somewhere about a month ago that the entire big xii had collectively landed one five star (UT).

[sonofdaxjones]

I've said it a thousand times, I don't expect 4 and 5 star guys.   

[meow meow]

Yes, I think OSU, is a good comparison.  Ag schools, smaller fanbases, new shiny stuff.  I'd be happy with no 5 stars, 2-3 4 stars, and about 15 3 stars, and 2-3 2 stars every year.  The lack of production in the Dallas/Fort Worth area is particularly head scratching to me given the direct flights, and that we can sell that we'll play 2 games in the state of Texas at a minimum each year, yet we only have a couple of Texas kids.

[Mixed-Nutz]

i might sound like a tuck and trust me i love to get the 4/5 star athletic studs but im content as of now landing three stars simply because the 4/5 star studs never even end up here (or if they do they never play). we absolutely have a shitty staff when it comes to the big names but we do get 4-5 talented kids a year that make a difference right away.

a lot of you seem to think that it's the staff's fault we don't sign 4 and 5 star kids

Yeah, this.

Blast if you wish, but I've followed recruiting enough that I think "its hard to recruit to Manhattan" is a real thing. This is pretty much while I quit following recruiting and especially football recruiting.

Yeah, you can point out Beasley and Walker, but we all know that was an extremely unique situation.

I want us to land more 4 and 5 star kids as much as anyone, but I don't think any coach in America is going to bring more than a few every 5 years into Manhattan.

And that's okay.

Maybe, but we should at least be in the ballpark of schools like OSU and Tech*. It would also be nice to win the occasional battle on a 3 star someone else with a pulse wants.

*I used to include Baylor, but they've clearly passed us

We are. This class is one of our better class in recent history. We can't fundamentally change who we are and how we got where we are now. Maybe we should worry about building class with solid depth before we start considering going after plethora of 4 stars. Maybe if one more of the old farts hangs it up we would have a chance.   

[Panjandrum]

when landing highly ranked kids no longer correlates to winning more football games I'll be content signing whoever these losers decide they want/can sign.

While not the entire correlation, I think offer bias seeps into the rankings.

By looking at the results on the field, especially last year, you can't tell me that the SEC is actually landing 10 of the best 15 classes year over year.  Maybe four or five, legitimately, but not the number they are.

Kids get a star bump when they get offered by a particular school.  I think guys like Saban and Meyer are great at finding and landing obvious talent, so I'm sure a lot of those four or five star kids get a bump early in the process when they're at camps and getting attention from a big name coach.

I guess what I'm saying is that the rankings don't necessarily lead the coaches to great kids, but the great coaches lead the services to the rankings, if that makes sense.

[sonofdaxjones]

Squash the excuses, minutiae and the strawmen that Tuck Nation clings to . . . no one expects 4 or 5 stars, everyone gets that there's going to be some DITR's, and the walk-ons are a nice cute little airwave filler for the radio and tv guys.   Everyone understands that recruiting is hard,  but when you get paid 6 and 7 figure salaries you usually have a job that's a challenge and there's expectations across many facets of the position.   No one expects K-State to spend days and weeks chasing a bunch of kids that will never come to K-State.

But it's not even remotely unreasonable to expect K-State to recruit better than they do. 

[PIPE]

Yes, I think OSU, is a good comparison.  Ag schools, smaller fanbases, new shiny stuff.  I'd be happy with no 5 stars, 2-3 4 stars, and about 15 3 stars, and 2-3 2 stars every year.  The lack of production in the Dallas/Fort Worth area is particularly head scratching to me given the direct flights, and that we can sell that we'll play 2 games in the state of Texas at a minimum each year, yet we only have a couple of Texas kids.

This I can't figure out either.  Our only TX commits are what, a couple of 2 stars we robbed from some NAIA school?  We need new "Young" blood in our recruiting.  Hayes, Dimel, Latimore.....GMAFB