Texas Tech Recruiting Roundup

by Seth C on Feb 7, 2008 6:05 AM CST in Recruiting

Texas Tech Football Recruiting:

For those of you who think the recruiting class is pitiful, then please see the DTN spreadsheets first. I don't think this class is bad at all, and if you throw out the kicker ranking (I think kickers are almost always a 2 star rating) and the average gets even higher. The Texas Tech 2007 class had an average Rivals rank of 2.73, the 2006 class was 2.88, and the 2005 class was 2.67. The 2008 class has an average Rivals rank of 3.07.

Once again, I don't know that I'll have the time to give the recruiting class the analysis it deserves. I've got a ton of thoughts running in my head and just not enough time to type everything that I'm thinking. For now, just links:

Red Raider Sports Armen Williams has a great (and I'm not using this term lightly) discussion with Ruffin McNeill on the defensive recruits. I thought this was great. Loved this. Williams gets McNeill's thoughts on every defensive player and I thought this quote from McNeill summed up how this staff felt after yesterday's defections:
"The guys that didn't come, I wish them well. It's like we talked about the other day, we were in the office and I said 'you know what? I'm ready to coach the guys that are coming and the guys that already came' and I meant that.
"Because the way we work at Tech, everybody can't handle that. We work hard in the off-season and during the season and we have a lot of demands on people and some people can't handle that. The ones that are here now understand that. If a guy hesitates then that's his loss not being a part of our nation and our football team and being a part of our fan base. I mean that sincerely and hope them well but these are the ones that want to be here and I want these guys."
"The theory behind that is the guys that want to come here have been productive on and off the field. Those guys that wanted to come to Tech have been the most productive players. I don't get into the five and four-star thing, we go on what fits our packages and our needs and the guys that have come here are steadfast. Two examples are (McKinner) Dixon and then when (Broderick) Marshall gets here. Those guys stay committed to us and they are ready for the demands we're going to put on them as a staff and as a football team, and not just from us but from other players as well.

If you read the whole article, you'll know that Ruffin somewhat confirmed what I thought, that he's going to play the best 4 players, almost regardless of position, next year. Give that man some players!
The official Texas Tech football site has notes on each player as well as a video of Leach being interviewed on the telephone by CSTV folks (IE only and click on link with camera).
DMN's Chuck Carlton does an excellent job of breaking down this year's class and had this from Coach Mike Leach:
"We only signed 16 players and that's just based on what we had available. The most important thing to us was to get offensive linemen and defensive linemen. ... Those are the two most important positions on any football team. If you don't believe me, ask the New England Patriots when they went against the Giants' defensive line."
The FWST takes a look at Texas Tech's 2008 recruiting class as well as a slideshow of some of the facilities at Texas Tech. Both of these are worth your time this morning.
LAJ's Don Williams rounds up Texas Tech's class.
SAEN's Dan McCarney says that this class year's class was light on talent, and I'd like for him to show me where that's true. As discussed above, it was light on quantity, not quality. The SAEN staff compiles a capsules on the Big 12 South's classes.

0 recs | Comment 11 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Quality recruits?

I guess its great that the recruits that we did get "really want to be here" which I think should be a given. I suppose the coaches and the pro Tech bloggers have to put a positive spin on the recruiting class but it simply isnt a quality class. ESPN has us ranked LAST in the BIG 12 and gave us a D+ in 2008. Additionally, wasn't at least one of our big JUCO recruits a former player and just couldn't keep his grades up?

Listen, I am happy for the success that Tech football program has had and the Bowl wins have been exciting but it would be really nice to win a Big 12 South title in my lifetime.

Ok I am done venting...Git your guns up!

by walker72 on Feb 7, 2008 9:37 AM CST 0 recs

Its really easy to look

at the size of our class and say "wow, the red raiders couldn't get many guys to commit." Not the case whatsoever. I think Tech wanted to take a maximum of 17 guys this year. Most of the recruiting websites go by both quantity and quality. They feel that our class sucked because we didn't sign 20+ guys this year.

The real truth is that we didn't have room for much and we went after our REAL needs and didn't just pad the rest of the class with who ever else wanted to come. I think we had something like the 2nd youngest team in all of college football last season. That translates into not many scholarships available, and not many starters leaving. The staff was very picky on who they let be a part of this class.

I personally love the class. Rivals.com has Tech ranked the #4 class in the nation for Defensive Ends. Thats pretty good, and a position that we were in desperate need of some talent upgrade. We signed a good kicker who will probably take the kickoff duties next season with the loss of Trlica. We signed an impact running back. The rest add depth for the future.

liquidsmoke

by liquidsmoke on Feb 7, 2008 10:12 AM CST 0 recs

We had

more recruits sign than...6 schools. That's right. Out of 119 D-1 programs, we had almost the fewest recruits sign. Sure, some were decent players, but you need depth, depth, depth. Scholarships are handed out at the rate of 85 at any one time. We had more than 16 to give I GUARANTEE it. We lost at least two players we wanted, maybe three. They were targeting 20 total, if memory serves.

Cut it any way you like, but this is a disapointing class. North Texas signed 26 guys, 10 of which are ranked, per ESPN. Baylor signed 22 players, 12 ranked players. Tech, by comparison, had 16 total with 7 ranked players. That's not brilliant work by any stretch.

by Tech92 on Feb 7, 2008 12:21 PM CST 0 recs

We may

have targeted 20 guys, but you have to realize that at least 2 of those guys were 2 of the top 3 WR's in the nation. Any program would have "made room" for those type of players.

Yes, we did lose two guys. One the night before signing day, and the other on signing day. You can't really do much about that. It's kinda hard to scramble around and pick up guys once its too late. Usually it happens the other way around. Tech has had a history in recent years of stealing commits from other programs in the final days before signing day. We stole Ra'Jon Henley from Oklahoma State on signing day in '06. Last year there were several guys who were previously committed to other programs and we picked them up in the final week or two. Lonnie Edwards is a perfect example--committed to Baylor, signed with us. He is probably our best O-Line recruit from last year too. The fact is that it happens. It just happened to us this year instead of the other way around.

You simply cannot add "depth, depth, depth" in every recruiting class when you already have it with a team FULL of Juniors, Sophomores and Freshmen. We weren't going to take many more than we did, and some of the ones we would have taken were a long shot at best.

I want to see you still talk about disappointment when Dixon and SeSay are your starting DE's and are All-Big 12 next season. Add in Carona booming kickoffs into the endzone, and Jeffers or Douglas returning kicks/punts, and you have a very solid class that addressed the few needs that we have for next season.

liquidsmoke

by liquidsmoke on Feb 7, 2008 1:54 PM CST up 0 recs

Well

What bothers me is who we lost those people to. J.R. Bryant, the LB we were trying to get, chose K State over us! Even after Leach flew a private jet to talk to his mom. Is K State that much more desireable than Tech?

We lost Keanon Cooper to Minnisota! Are you kidding me? They have a better draw than Tech?

Our DE chose Arkansas over us after committing to us a week earlier. If these committs were huge, then their loss was huge too.

I'm really angry about the embarrassment we got nationally. Julio Jones cancels his trip to Tech so he can attend a concert. That's embarrasing and nationally, K State, Minnisota, Oklahoma State, Colorado, and TAM have better pull than Tech.

I know young men will change their minds, but come on. We went 0 for 5 in the major recruits we were seeking. Is it because no one wants to come to Lubbock? I don't know, but nothing can change our location except plate tectonics. We still should not settle for that excuse. We swung at the stars and got none. I was hoping for at least one or two.

I am still confident of our recruits. They now have a chance to show what the anger of an underdog can do. I loved what Ruffin said and I think he will coach up the guys that we have.

by CoachT on Feb 7, 2008 7:02 PM CST up 0 recs

Well

first of all, JR Bryant chose Oklahoma over us, not Kansas State. You can understand why he would want to go to OU, because they get to BCS bowls every single year.

Cooper to Minnesota is about as crazy as you can get. Don't have a clue why, but I know he has about 3 other teammates that are going with him, so that was probably his deciding factor.

The Arkansas DE named Brian Christopher was going to play wherever his teammate Lavunce Askew went. Askew told Arkansas that he wanted to come to Tech, and Arkansas responded by giving Christopher an offer. I believe this was their plan all along. They were both going to Arkansas from the beginning, they just used us as an excuse to get Christopher an offer there.

About the 0 for 5 on major recruits, you have to set your sights high. Maybe we did strike out this year, oh well, try again next year. Last time I checked, Tech wasn't exactly a national powerhouse. We are getting close, and a very solid team, but never mentioned among the best teams in america. If we can take that step next season and get 10+ wins or a BCS bowl, I see our recruiting becomming a whole lot easier.

liquidsmoke

by liquidsmoke on Feb 7, 2008 9:26 PM CST up 0 recs

unknown

what was the Juco LB that chose K State over us? I thought it was Bryant, but I guess it was Davis?

by CoachT on Feb 7, 2008 10:17 PM CST up 0 recs

There

was a JUCO DT named Daniel Calvin who decided to go to K-State. He was blown away by their facilities, and didn't even bother to make his visit to Tech to find out that ours are much better. His loss....He might win 10 games over the next 2 seasons there, where he could have done that next year with us.

liquidsmoke

by liquidsmoke on Feb 8, 2008 11:24 AM CST up 0 recs

HA!

If you think that those two are all Big XII next year you have really drank the Kool Aid. They may start, but not all Big XII.

by Tech92 on Feb 7, 2008 7:37 PM CST up 0 recs

Its just great that

you are so positive about our recruits. SeSay is the most highly regarded player on the defensive line that Leach has ever signed. SeSay had over 70 written scholarship offers. He literally could have gone anywhere he wanted to and probably started immediately. What more do you want from a guy?

Dixon was a freshman All-American for Tech back in 2005. Having to go the JUCO route and making it back to Tech to play his final 2 seasons. You think this guy isn't motivated to prove himself?

Both of them will start, and both of them will be impact players. Maybe I shouldn't predict that they will be All Big 12, but they will both be a significant upgrade from what we have now.

liquidsmoke

by liquidsmoke on Feb 7, 2008 9:35 PM CST up 0 recs