Football Recruiting Thread

[kso_FAN]

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

I mean, I guess it depends who you mean by this. We have multiple kids we landed that had offers from multiple P5 conferences. At least this year, it doesn't seem like Tech and OSU or even Baylor are recruiting that much better than us.

I agree that Baylor has passed us as we are only 1-3, but we are 2-2 vs OSU and 4-0 vs Tech since going to the round robin format in the Big 12.

[WildcatNkilt]

Brent V. would not have let Kylan and Berry flip without a hard fight and maybe a crazy night out on the town. 

[Panjandrum]

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.

I feel like since he's gotten back, Snyder recruits to the culture more than he recruits pure talent.

I think he got tired of dealing with kids that didn't share his intrinsic value structure the first go around, so this time, he's recruiting kids that are more inclined to A) qualify and B) do as he says.

[meow meow]

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

I mean, I guess it depends who you mean by this. We have multiple kids we landed that had offers from multiple P5 conferences. At least this year, it doesn't seem like Tech and OSU or even Baylor are recruiting that much better than us.

I agree that Baylor has passed us as we are only 1-3, but we are 2-2 vs OSU and 4-0 vs Tech since going to the round robin format in the Big 12.

To your point on Tech, we are 4-0 against them because Snyder is clearly a better "coach" then Kingsbury.  My problem with recruiting is Snyder is going to be gone very soon, so if we don't want bottom feeder schools like Tech jumping us, we better leave the next coach some talent to beat schools like Tech, because without the scheme Doctor, Texas Tech's talent will probably beat us and this thing could unravel fast.

[Panjandrum]

I mean, I guess it depends who you mean by this. We have multiple kids we landed that had offers from multiple P5 conferences. At least this year, it doesn't seem like Tech and OSU or even Baylor are recruiting that much better than us.

I agree that Baylor has passed us as we are only 1-3, but we are 2-2 vs OSU and 4-0 vs Tech since going to the round robin format in the Big 12.

There is a discernible difference in the quality of this class versus what we've traditionally seen since the late 90's.

It's got a very TCU type feel to it.  We recruited a boat load of running backs, and we're just planning on finding positions for them.

That's a sign that we got the memo about needing more athletes.

Also, we only lost two commits all year, and they were both at the same position.  We haven't bled at the end of the signing period like we normally do.

I mean we even picked up a Top 250 guy. 

[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.

I feel like since he's gotten back, Snyder recruits to the culture more than he recruits pure talent.

I think he got tired of dealing with kids that didn't share his intrinsic value structure the first go around, so this time, he's recruiting kids that are more inclined to A) qualify and B) do as he says.

Yet I simply ask why is it that Urban Meyer and Nick Saban get all the prima donnas (in the minds of Tuck Nation) to do what they want?   I mean, I get it that they can scare them because they'll just recruit right over the top, but still the point remains.   Managing and relating to talented players is also part and parcel to the 6 and 7 figure salaries.

[steve dave]

We've mentioned this piece a lot ITT but it needs repeating every time someone says there isn't a clear/huge correlation between stars and winning. And we are the biggest outlier so hold onto your asses when our outlie'ing advantage retires any day now.

Big Six' Conference Teams by Recruiting Class
• FIVE-STAR: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, LSU, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas.

Note that, since 2003, the eleven teams in the "five-star" group have combined for 21 appearances in the BCS Championship game, compared to one appearance by any of the 64 teams listed below. (The lone exception in that span, Oregon, just barely missed the cut for five-star status.) The only "five-star" teams that never played for a title in the BCS era are Georgia and Michigan; among the rest, only Notre Dame failed to make a repeat trip.

• FOUR-STAR: Arkansas, California, Clemson, Miami, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ole Miss, Oregon, Penn State, South Carolina, Stanford, Tennessee, Texas A&M, UCLA, Virginia Tech, Washington.

• THREE-STAR: Arizona, Arizona State, Baylor, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisville, Maryland, Michigan State, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma State, Oregon State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, TCU, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt, Virginia, West Virginia.

• TWO-STAR: BYU, Cincinnati, Colorado, Georgia Tech, Houston, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, N.C. State, Northwestern, Purdue, South Florida, Utah, Washington State, Wisconsin.

• ONE-STAR: Boise State, Boston College, Central Florida, Connecticut, Duke, Iowa State, Kansas State, Memphis, SMU, Syracuse, Temple, Wake Forest.

[kso_FAN]

To your point on Tech, we are 4-0 against them because Snyder is clearly a better "coach" then Kingsbury.  My problem with recruiting is Snyder is going to be gone very soon, so if we don't want bottom feeder schools like Tech jumping us, we better leave the next coach some talent to beat schools like Tech, because without the scheme Doctor, Texas Tech's talent will probably beat us and this thing could unravel fast.

I don't disagree with you on post-Snyder recruiting, whenever that happens. I'm not sure what it will look like, but I'm not going to concern myself with it until it happens and I see who the next coach is and who he hires.

[CHONGS]

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.

I feel like since he's gotten back, Snyder recruits to the culture more than he recruits pure talent.

I think he got tired of dealing with kids that didn't share his intrinsic value structure the first go around, so this time, he's recruiting kids that are more inclined to A) qualify and B) do as he says.

Yet I simply ask why is it that Urban Meyer and Nick Saban get all the prima donnas (in the minds of Tuck Nation) to do what they want?   I mean, I get it that they can scare them because they'll just recruit right over the top, but still the point remains.   Managing and relating to talented players is also part and parcel to the 6 and 7 figure salaries.

The hard truth of the matter is that they are much better coaches than Bill.

[troubledscribe]

I don't see a single kid from this class contributing next year except for Zuber when the coaches realize how absymal our wr core is. Or maybe Heath when they see Jones go down with an ankle injury and Warmack can't handle the load.

[Mixed-Nutz]

To your point on Tech, we are 4-0 against them because Snyder is clearly a better "coach" then Kingsbury.  My problem with recruiting is Snyder is going to be gone very soon, so if we don't want bottom feeder schools like Tech jumping us, we better leave the next coach some talent to beat schools like Tech, because without the scheme Doctor, Texas Tech's talent will probably beat us and this thing could unravel fast.

I don't disagree with you on post-Snyder recruiting, whenever that happens. I'm not sure what it will look like, but I'm not going to concern myself with it until it happens and I see who the next coach is and who he hires.

Ron went to a bowl game with Bill's players, Bill gets better talent into the program than perceived.

[steve dave]

To your point on Tech, we are 4-0 against them because Snyder is clearly a better "coach" then Kingsbury.  My problem with recruiting is Snyder is going to be gone very soon, so if we don't want bottom feeder schools like Tech jumping us, we better leave the next coach some talent to beat schools like Tech, because without the scheme Doctor, Texas Tech's talent will probably beat us and this thing could unravel fast.

I don't disagree with you on post-Snyder recruiting, whenever that happens. I'm not sure what it will look like, but I'm not going to concern myself with it until it happens and I see who the next coach is and who he hires.

Ron went to a bowl game with Bill's players, Bill gets better talent into the program than perceived.

Well, Bill missed a bowl game two years in a row before Ron so maybe Ron just coached up players that Bill couldn't

[Panjandrum]

I don't see a single kid from this class contributing next year except for Zuber when the coaches realize how absymal our wr core is. Or maybe Heath when they see Jones go down with an ankle injury and Warmack can't handle the load.

Part of the strategy of signing a bunch of 2-3 stars is that you make them sit on the bench for 2-3 years, go through S&C, and then drill them for 2 hours and 47 minutes every practice for three years so that when they do play, they don't play like 2-3 stars.

[troubledscribe]

I don't see a single kid from this class contributing next year except for Zuber when the coaches realize how absymal our wr core is. Or maybe Heath when they see Jones go down with an ankle injury and Warmack can't handle the load.

Part of the strategy of signing a bunch of 2-3 stars is that you make them sit on the bench for 2-3 years, go through S&C, and then drill them for 2 hours and 47 minutes every practice for three years so that when they do play, they don't play like 2-3 stars.

We are going to suck next year.

[Panjandrum]

I don't see a single kid from this class contributing next year except for Zuber when the coaches realize how absymal our wr core is. Or maybe Heath when they see Jones go down with an ankle injury and Warmack can't handle the load.

Part of the strategy of signing a bunch of 2-3 stars is that you make them sit on the bench for 2-3 years, go through S&C, and then drill them for 2 hours and 47 minutes every practice for three years so that when they do play, they don't play like 2-3 stars.

We are going to suck next year.

Depends on your definition of suck.

I think we'll go 8-5.

[michigancat]

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

I mean, I guess it depends who you mean by this. We have multiple kids we landed that had offers from multiple P5 conferences. At least this year, it doesn't seem like Tech and OSU or even Baylor are recruiting that much better than us.

I agree that Baylor has passed us as we are only 1-3, but we are 2-2 vs OSU and 4-0 vs Tech since going to the round robin format in the Big 12.

I'll admit I haven't paid much attention. glad we're fighting for guys we want.

But we haven't recruited as well as OSU or Tech, which is kind of my point. Or maybe we have?

[kso_FAN]

I'll admit I haven't paid much attention. glad we're fighting for guys we want.

But we haven't recruited as well as OSU or Tech, which is kind of my point. Or maybe we have?

I haven't paid much attention either. I just looked at the rivals rankings and they go like this: #40 BU, #41 OSU, #46 Tech, #54 KSU. Doesn't seem significantly different.

[pissclams]

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. 

by which measure are you judging?  obviously not on the field results because they've been damn good.

[troubledscribe]

I don't see a single kid from this class contributing next year except for Zuber when the coaches realize how absymal our wr core is. Or maybe Heath when they see Jones go down with an ankle injury and Warmack can't handle the load.

Part of the strategy of signing a bunch of 2-3 stars is that you make them sit on the bench for 2-3 years, go through S&C, and then drill them for 2 hours and 47 minutes every practice for three years so that when they do play, they don't play like 2-3 stars.

We are going to suck next year.

Depends on your definition of suck.

I think we'll go 8-5.

That would be a miracle. I don't see us winning more than 6.

[Katpappy]

To your point on Tech, we are 4-0 against them because Snyder is clearly a better "coach" then Kingsbury.  My problem with recruiting is Snyder is going to be gone very soon, so if we don't want bottom feeder schools like Tech jumping us, we better leave the next coach some talent to beat schools like Tech, because without the scheme Doctor, Texas Tech's talent will probably beat us and this thing could unravel fast.

I don't disagree with you on post-Snyder recruiting, whenever that happens. I'm not sure what it will look like, but I'm not going to concern myself with it until it happens and I see who the next coach is and who he hires.

Ron went to a bowl game with Bill's players, Bill gets better talent into the program than perceived.

Well, Bill missed a bowl game two years in a row before Ron so maybe Ron just coached up players that Bill couldn't

Guys, I don't see the problem with recruiting to BSFS after the 160 mil investment.  OSU recruiting wasn't that good until the improvements happened.  Unless we get an AssClown for a coach to replace LHCBS, we'll get a better crop of athletes. 

[Mixed-Nutz]

I'll admit I haven't paid much attention. glad we're fighting for guys we want.

But we haven't recruited as well as OSU or Tech, which is kind of my point. Or maybe we have?

I haven't paid much attention either. I just looked at the rivals rankings and they go like this: #40 BU, #41 OSU, #46 Tech, #54 KSU. Doesn't seem significantly different.

Evaluation of 2 & 3 Stars is very muddy. Rivals network isn't big enough to get an accurate read on kids that haven't been labeled freaks in good leagues.

[420seriouscat69]

I think it's funny that if you don't freak out over recruiting rankings, kids decisions, etc. You're a perceived tuck. I've seen many busts that were highly touted recruits. The closest we've ever been to a natty was with, like, back to back #60th ranked classes (granted Arthur was a part of that).    Looks like to me, that the staff is improving based off rankings.

[sonofdaxjones]

When I think about Tucks and recruiting it pretty has nothing to do with recruiting rankings or stars.

[michigancat]

I think it's funny that if you don't freak out over recruiting rankings, kids decisions, etc. You're a perceived tuck. I've seen many busts that were highly touted recruits. The closest we've ever been to a natty was with, like, back to back #60th ranked classes (granted Arthur was a part of that).    Looks like to me, that the staff is improving based off rankings.

It also had some Ron Prince talent!

[Katpappy]

I think it's funny that if you don't freak out over recruiting rankings, kids decisions, etc. You're a perceived tuck. I've seen many busts that were highly touted recruits. The closest we've ever been to a natty was with, like, back to back #60th ranked classes (granted Arthur was a part of that).    Looks like to me, that the staff is improving based off rankings.

Wacky, I don't think we're that worried about recruiting 5* with LHCBS; it's the aftermath we're worried about. 

Personally, I think with the improvements, we'll be just fine in the future.