Printable View
This staff seems to be recruiting very well. I?m wondering what has happened. Leach has notably not been a great recruiter at his other stops. Here however he really seems to be recruiting well. Better than both Mullen and Moorhead it seems. What do we attribute this to? Opinions?
Leach recruited to real nowhere schools and not the SEC - that's the difference. Even then, he normally recruited better at TT and WSU than other coaches had done previously or done since.Quote:
Originally Posted by preachermatt83
Guy can recruit and has a team of coaches that seem to get it.
Sometimes it's the land not the man.
This^^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Lambert
He has name recognition too. He's Mike ****ing Leach. Him back in the SEC is a bigger deal than most want to admit.
I'd hold up at least a little. If you compare our current average, we're still about 25 or so based on last years rankings with a full class. We've got a shot at about top 20 but it'll be tough. More likely 20-25, which is strong still but not some huge difference.
Far from the first time it's been said, but if you look at both recruiting and defensive rankings at TTU and WSU before and during Leach's time at each (and after in the case of TTU), you won't see much difference. Like Brunswick said, it's the programs Leach has been at that are responsible for his mediocre reputation in those areas, not his own ability or anything related to it.
If, IF they hit on the remaining targets that they are in on, this can possibly be a 15-18 ranked class.
That’s damn DAMN impressive. Pretty sure not many people thought this recent commit was even a possibility so there is always the possibility of a surprise here and there.
I'm as pumped as anyone, but I'd also encourage us to slow down a little bit. We do most of our work in the summer, and then it seems like we have to hold on for dear life in December. And it's been like that under Mullen, Moorhead, and then last year with Leach. I don't know why it's that way, but it is.
Now, I will say that what I like about Leach's staff is they seem to have solid back-up plans. If a guy decommitted from us in the past, Mullen would just go pluck a guy off of South Alabama's commit list that wasn't an SEC player. Besides a few of our DB commits last year, most of our backup plans were solid. I think they've got a shot at a top 20 class this year, but they're going to have to hold on to what we get. A commitment means nothing until the pen hits the paper in December/February. I do like what I'm seeing though.
Very few recruiters really move the needle that much, especially as head coach. Leach basically recruited where you'd expect at his prior two stops, maybe a little better than you'd expect. The same as he appears to be doing here. As bad as Mullen's reputation was as far as being a recruiter, we basically recruited to our average or a little better while he was here. Maybe if he'd been better he could have capitalized better on some of his success. As big as everybody talked about Moorhead, he basically recruited like Mullen. The big difference being that he actually filled needs for the most part, where as Mullen's staff would often leave gaping holes at a particular position.Quote:
Originally Posted by preachermatt83
It seems to me Leach and his staff do a good job of getting good QB's, W/R's an D/B's. I hope he's getting quality OL, DL, and L/B players, because that's where most games seem to be won or lost.
Pullman is smaller and more remote than Starkville, and has way, way fewer P5 level prospects nearby. He did about as well recruiting there as anyone could have.
This is a major part of the processQuote:
Originally Posted by TrapGame
I know. What I’m saying is I was thinking most people expected us to take a step back in recruiting with leachQuote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
Bc we are not playing in the same ball park as them if you can understand what im saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by KOdawg1
You're probably right that most people did, but I am guessing most people here or on sixpack probably did not expect that, because it was discussed pretty early on after his hiring that he recruited at least as well as anybody else did to Texas Tech or WSU.Quote:
Originally Posted by preachermatt83
It probably also helps that we actually kept the coaching staff intact. We always lost coaches every year which has to affect recruiting. I know we lost some off the field guys though.
Just imagine how recruiting will go if we actually win.
Based on the past, it won't change that much. BUt maybe that's where Dan's dislike of recruiting showed up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowbell
Think how muck better he might have been if he has not been in the bus ticket line after every Alabama game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
Please don't get me wrong, I do like the optics of looking like we are going to be a top 25 team. I just don't see where all the hype is coming from, I don't know recruiting all that much and I know there are a lot of guys on here that think star power means nothing. I am not one of those, and we have a lot of kids that are lower on the totem pole that what I would like. Even our 4 stars are extremely low 4 star players. This is reminding me of the early years of Butch Jones at Tennessee he cracked the top ten, but, his class had massive amounts of 3 star players, and well we see what happened with ole Buchy.
Are the kids that we are getting currently under valued? Are we looking for them to get massive bumps soon?
I mean we can sit here all day and say that star power doesn't matter but, there is a reason why Georgia, Alabama, Ohio State and the rest of those darlings stay at the top. Yes they have good coaching but, they get the best players in the country. They wouldn't be where they are with our recruiting.
Please help me make sense of this!
We have a much better ?network? than his last 2 schools. It helps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maverick91
This. Will try to repQuote:
Originally Posted by TrapGame