Tech Football National Signing Day - A Public Service Announcement
by LondonRaider on Feb 2, 2010 1:50 PM CST
Email
PrintOk everyone. Consider this post a public service announcement.
With national signing day just hours away, and to prevent – to the extent possible – a flood of malapropisms from streaming forth upon seeing the results of Tech’s recruiting performance, please allow me to provide some perspective on what we should expect at the conclusion of tomorrow’s results.
If tomorrow, after reading this post, you still see fit to build a statue in homage to Tuberville’s virility or to brand your left ass cheek with a ‘Pirate for Life’ tattoo (it's a free country after all), my hope is that you’ll do so armed with a little more information than you otherwise might have had.
Texas Tech’s Recruiting Performance from 2002 -2009 (Source: Scout.com)
(Sensitive Reader Alert: This section is replete with sarcasm and poor attempts at wit. No direct insults are intended, implied or otherwise contemplated).
From 2002-2009 Texas Tech’s average recruiting score was 2.83. Right now the class of 2010 is scoring a projected 2.79.
Our highest recruiting score was 3.29 way back in 2002. Our lowest recruiting performance was 2.56 in 2007.
You remember 2002 don’t you? The class that brought us heralded 5-star recruit Johnny Mack and nine 4-star recruits. Pop quiz – other than Joel Filani and Fletcher Session, which other 4-star recruit who later became a starter can you recall from that class?
Of course from the 2007 class we got stuck with a bunch of lowly 2-stars including the likes of Brandon Sharpe, Daniel Howard, Bront Bird, Colby Whitlock and a few other slackers I probably overlooked. (sarcasm font, just in case you missed it).
The chart below shows Tech's annual recruiting score from 2002-2009 (note 2002 is the first year Scout.com published its evaluations).
Texas Tech Recruiting (2002-2009)
(y-axis is yearly rating given by Scout.com)
Texas Tech’s Recruiting Performance relative to the Big 12 (2002-2009)
On average from 2002-2009 Texas Tech’s recruiting classes are ranked right about where you would expect to find them – number six overall.
Over this time frame we were regularly out-recruited by Texas, OU and Texas A&M. Our recruiting classes were also edged out by Nebraska and Oklahoma State.
Based on current projections, the class of 2010 is expected to be eclipsed by Missouri and the aforementioned five schools.
This year we can expect Tech’s recruiting class to drop from its customary position at number six all the way to number seven.
(I’ve read in places that our class is expected to fall below Baylor’s projected class which is currently scored dead last at 2.27 – that sort of fall does not seem likely).
Texas, however, is projecting its best class since 2002. So for those of you who are arguing that Tech was closing the gap with UT, and now it is not, you probably have a valid point (one I would also agree with).
Average Big 12 Recruiting Performance (2002-2009)
Texas Tech’s Recruiting Performance and Winning Percentages (2002-2009) Despite our mediocre showing in the recruiting wars, Texas Tech was the 17th most successful FBS program in terms of winning percentage from 2002-2009. Among these top 20 teams, nine teams had average recruiting scores less than 3.00. Winningest FBS Programs with Recruiting Scores Less than 3.00 (2002-2009)
A few notes, Boise State plays in the WAC; TCU and Utah play in the Mountain West Conference - in case you are someone who feels the need to put a thumb on the scale.
Auburn’s average recruiting score was 3.07 over the same period, and had the 13th winningest program. (Much more on this in a later post - Tubephiles should not get too comfortable yet).
The Top 5 FBS recruiting classes from 2002-2009 in order are 1) USC; 2) Florida; 3) UT; 4) Ohio State and 5) Oklahoma. Of course, all won national championships over the course of the decade.
In Summary
My two cents?
Sit back. Enjoy a cold one.
If after Wednesday:
-
Our results are the worst thing since the Great Depression (or Great Recession as it were), you can back away from the ledge. Seriously, back away.
-
Hance, the LAJ or anyone else tries to reserve a place for Tubs in the Hall of Honor, you’ll probably know what you can wipe any such statement with.
Wreck Em!!
68 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thanks LondonRaider - good advise
My doctor has advised me to drink a glass of red wine each evening for the betterment of my heart. The over acheiver that I am, I am taking the entire bottle and have since December 26. Please give me a wake up call so I don’t miss the spring game.
"There's going to be ups and downs but you have to enjoy the battle." Mike Leach
Still have Friday references
in first two paragaraphs
by jeffinhouston on Feb 2, 2010 2:35 PM CST up reply actions
damn picky lawyers
"I’ve established a reputation for integrity. I have maintained those high standards" - Craig James
Move to the Mountain West!!!
We could dominate that cupcake conference and get some BCS action!!! Oh wait, Leach struggled against TCU and we have scheduled Weber State already. LOL
Goes to show you just can’t measure a recruits drive, determination and desire with stars.
Results in the fall vs results in February?
Good stuff LondonRaider.
For me, I’ll certainly take results in the fall. This is in reference to the class rankings for aTm compared to their results on the field.
While I would like both good recruiting classes and results during the season, this is a good example of why NOT to judge your recruiting classes based on some mythical ‘star’ system.
Last I checked, Boise St has done pretty well against “BCS” schools (even one in our conference) and their average is considerably lower. It’s what you DO WITH the recruits that matters.
IMWTx
This fine analysis
Confirms my belief that you have to know who you are forewards and backwards, and you have to have a defined identity and know how to find people that fit it better than other programs. UT and OU and others can cast a wide net and just get studs. We have to find undervalued guys that fit our very unique system.
I think this was Leach’s strongest skill set….offensively. We have to be more isightful, detailed, thorough and prudent with our offering of scholarships than most schools that want to be a top 25 program.
I hope the staff looks at this way, and we have the same success that we have had in the past….despite not winning any recruiting accolades.
" I crammed 4 years of Tech into 5"- me
You know what they say about stats........
Another way to view the numbers is to evaluate our teams ranked compared to our peers. After all, we don’t play ourselves on Saturdays.
Team Rankings from 2002-2010 (Rivals:
2002-48th
2003-44th
2004-33rd
2005-37th
2006-25th
2007-52nd
2008-45th
2009-33rd
2010 (projected)-37th
Our average ranking in those nine years is 39.33, making 2010’s projected ranking actually above average at 37.
Our current 2010 projected class ranks tied for 3rd among the last 9 Tech recruiting classes.
Also, if you examine our ranking for the first 4 years since 2002, and the last four years you get the following:
2002-2005: 40.5 average rank
2007-2010: 41.75 average rank
You can look at numbers differently of course, but it’s clear that our rankings were actually slightly better earlier in Leach’s career, and worse his last four years.This would seem to discredit the notion that were making some sort of progress towards closing the recruiting gap against teams like Texas.
Bottom Line: If you look no real pattern stands out except that we do more with less, and have for at least a decade. Here is to hoping we get to try our hand at doing more with more in the future.
do more with less
Been saying that for years and years. You could actually make the same arguement when Spike was HC.
IMWTx
by imisswesttexas on Feb 2, 2010 3:50 PM CST up reply actions
Agree
Hopefully Tubbs can either get better recruits, or coach as well as Mike and Spike
by harrell4heisman on Feb 2, 2010 3:56 PM CST up reply actions
Real Bottom Line
Any of these guys get two wins in Norman and two wins in Austin……………..I’ll give 10 stars
"There's going to be ups and downs but you have to enjoy the battle." Mike Leach
thank you for saying what I was thinking
I don’t want to get a rep around here being all negative.
"There's going to be ups and downs but you have to enjoy the battle." Mike Leach
What this means
What this probably means is that the star rankings are pure BS. There are many good players out there, which the ‘star’ makers do not have the ability to recognize and the coaches do. As long as this trend continued we will be fine. We are still catching up the gap with ut though, may not be in stars, but in terms conference success in winning.
by jef on Feb 2, 2010 4:48 PM CST up reply actions
LOL ! And people continue to talk about them as if they are absolute.
They are great entertainment though.
Sometimes a river boat can out run a pirate ship.
I just think about the NFL draft and how often guys that are taken highly there end up as busts, and then the gym rats and the gamers taken in the later rounds outwork people and get to play.
Then I think about how many high school players there are vs. how many college players and how hard it must be to accurately gauge the talent of all of them relative to each other…. I wouldn’t want that job.. Well, I would, but I would be terrible at it.
Yes, and add to that this reality
Every player, each one of them, that is considered for the NFl, is scrutinized to the length of his toes…mutlitple times.
Given the numbers of players in their last season in hs and consider the manpower required to even look at them once. Then consider them as a poputlation set in the light of a normal bell shaped curve, even the top 3% (a cut that would establish the better players) and I am thinking you still cannot judge them all given the resources available. Judging requires much more than simply seeing.
Even with that, it remains fun…the reality part of it can be managed by those who know.
Sometimes a river boat can out run a pirate ship.
Dude...
You remember 2002 don’t you? The class that brought us heralded 5-star recruit Johnny Mack and nine 4-star recruits. Pop quiz – other than Joel Filani and Fletcher Session
You need to check your info, man. This all looks very in-depth, but filani wasn’t a four-star by any stretch of the imagination and Mack wasn’t a -star…check out the link below.
TTUMAR is correct
Guys, this post is based on scout.com (its plastered all over the post) and not rivals.com.
Here’s the link on Filani and Mack and the class of 2002
http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=8&toinid=671&yr=2002
I am aware that there are differences in the two services, but come on time constraints….
Baylor has the 40th ranked class in the nation on Rivals. We are at 37. Why is it so illogical that we drop below them?
Scout and Rivals are way off from each other. One or the other is biased.
And after looking at our 2002 Rivals recruiting list, this class has multiples the talent that class had. Heck we had half 2 stars then. I’m not sure this post is at all accurate.
See above
Guys, this post is based on scout.com (its plastered all over the post) and not rivals.com.
Here’s the link on Filani and Mack and the class of 2002
http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=8&toinid=671&yr=2002
I am aware that there are differences in the two services, but come on time constraints….
I’m conversing with myself:
Here are the number of four star recruits:
2010: 6 currently
2009: 5
2008: 3
2007: 1
2006: 4, three of which never played much
2005: 1
2004: 4 and 1 5 star (robert johnson)
2003: 2
2002: 2
It would take from 2002 to halfway through 2006 to get the number of four stars we have had in just the last two classes.
As weird as it seems....
If i look at Logan’s data next to our historical team rankings, you could argue 2004-2006 where our best recruitment years. Smack dab in the middle of Leach’s tenure.
Well go look at Rivals and see who the four star guys were. Guys like Ofa (MMA guy) were four stars, but they were bottom of the barrel guys. I mean physically talented but had tons of problems. So we got these guys b/c other programs didn’t want to take the risk. While we still see that with guys like Griffin this year (maybe OU or OSU didn’t want him but he is a 4* RB in their backyard), the trend is much less common. We get more four star recruits that are solid recruits now, instead of those that are gambles. At least it appears that way to me from these lists. Cleary the 2008 season has had a significant impact on our recruiting.
If Tubs can win the Big 12 this year, look for the number of top recruits to go up even more.
Also, one thing I noticed while doing this that I didn’t keep track of, was that it seemed the number of 2 star recruits has gone dramatically down. Of course many of our best players have been two stars but overall its an interesting trend that I noticed. Maybe I will quantify later. And there were a number of NFL linemen who all seemed to be 3 star guys. Making our bottom tier of recruit a three star instead of two star is as big a deal as more four star guys IMO.
Check for Offers
I know that stars are really important as far as rivals and scout goes, but I tend to look at the offer sheets. Take Shawn Corker for example in this class, it is absolutely incredible to me that he is not listed as a 4* prospect with offers from ND, UF, AU, UM. On FlaVaristy.com they list the top prospects in Florida and he is rated 59th ahead of many other 4* products in the state, this is a rivals affiliate, and to me this makes no sense
Consider that offers also impact the number of stars...
Sometimes a river boat can out run a pirate ship.
OK, I'm seeing too many stars
so I gonna take LR’s advise and open another bottle. Let me know when they are all signed.
"There's going to be ups and downs but you have to enjoy the battle." Mike Leach
I posted a number of articles last year:
And last year
I was much more productive, but then again last year, I didn’t have to write about our coach getting canned.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
Thanks, Seth
I thought all of this seemed familiar. While the level of star-power increased for Tech, it also improved for other programs. Then again, maybe the rating organizations are just getting better with their overall assessment. Although, with the recent commits Tubs got, it appears some players still are not reviewed by those organizations as well as it appears they should. I am anxiously awaiting the end of the day tomorrow to see how many of our commits actually sign on the dotted line for Tech. I do feel Leach was right in seeking to have overall balance in those he signed. I hope the new coaches consider doing the same, as it seems to maintain a good and balanced depth chart.
TTpilk
recruiting class rankings and pre season polls
They are both worth the same amount….ZERO.
They are both simply opinions….many by people (sports writers/media) who’ve NEVER put a jock on in their lives. It’s just something for all of us to talk about, and give them a sense of importance
There are to many examples to list….but here’s food for thought. Humor me for a minute and play a hypothetical game.
Let’s say you can get a 5 star…and a 2 star in the same year. The 5 star comes in as a prima donna and turns into baby James (with talent). The two star comes in with humility. He’s coachable, works his ass off….and turns into Wes Welker.
Now, tell me….which do you want?
The ONLY way to judge a class is 5 years later….INCLUDING graduation rate. THAT makes ‘horn, sooner, and aggie’s rating drop. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that TTU’s graduation rate is higher.
I am as proud as the next Raider about our graduations rate..
but at the end of the day, these kids are paid to play football. If I’m honest, I don’t give any points to a recruiting class five years later just because they did what they were supposed to do at school. Five years later I’m looking at whether they beat Texas from time to time and gave a chance at good bowls. Just being honest. Leach pointed out our graduation rates, and it was a feather in our cap. But I am not a professor or a member of the administration. In the end, I would trade that academic record for Big 12 Championships.
I agree with you. Grad rates are for Duke or Rice or places like that. Crap grad rates don’t seem to impact UT or other schools’ reputations.
Is it neat? Yep. But give me championships.
by Tech92 on Feb 2, 2010 7:19 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
or do you beat puppies?
I am inordinately proud of the graduation rates displayed by the Tech players, coaches and support staff. That being said its time to dominate the bullies of the big 12. I think it’s a super goal to do both things well. Why not set the bar high? Let Ou and UT keep their flawed and self serving construct. But let’s beat their butts in 2010 too.
"do routine things routinely"
by centexraider on Feb 2, 2010 11:36 PM CST up reply actions
i want both
"There's going to be ups and downs but you have to enjoy the battle." Mike Leach
by blackbeard on Feb 2, 2010 7:18 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
If you want championships at any price and without academic requirements, I guess that’s the NFL or maybe USC and Texas. This here is college ball, which means these kids have to go to college. Going to college shouldn’t be an annoying side-effect of them playing organized football at ages 18-22. If that’s the case we need to end the charade and just dump kids 18-22 into a professional football development league.
Most of these kids aren’t going to the NFL so this is pretty much their best chance to get a degree that will land them into a good career. I care about them taking advantage of the chance they’ve been given, and I hope the coaches encourage them to take advantage of it too. But ttumar and 92 are correct, it doesn’t improve the prestige or ranking of the football program.
Now your sharp shooting....
if you can circle the line in my comment that says “win championships at any cost” I will be happy to retract. Otherwise, refrain from putting words in my mouth. I simply stated I place a greater value on football teams that win, over football teams that score well on exams. The fact that they should graduate should be a given as they are in college. A players ability to play well is not a given, and I value players who stand out in this regard.
Yeah I probably mischaracterized your position. I don’t know what “any cost” means to you, but you did say you would trade academic success for championships. I was really just talking about academics and football players being student-athletes and not just guys who are paid to play football at the university. And then I agreed with you that it doesn’t really get you bonus points for your football program, so we basically agree, but you’re still evil for clubbing baby seals.
It’s a feather in our cap that Tech is one of the “good guys” that tries to graduate players and fulfill their part of the student-athlete/university agreement. I hope it continues under Tuberville and we win lots of championships.
I would think that a good graduation rate would help recruiting though (specifically of guys who aren’t really thinking they’ll be going pro) , wouldn’t you?
I had a similar response....
and what did a baby seal ever do to anyone ???
Sometimes a river boat can out run a pirate ship.
I might also remind some....
that our exemplary graduation rate is a new phenomenon when compared to our long football history, and came on the heels of a rather poor academic record amongst our players. Coach Leach mentions a few times in a press conference last year and all of the sudden we are Notre Dame.
Just so we don't get too big a head.....
NCAA 2009 Student Athlete Graduation Rates:
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/academics+and+athletes/education+and+research/academic+reform/grad+rate/2009/794tra601_2009_d1_school_grad_rate_data.html
Alabama: 82%
Florida: 85%
Ohio State: 78%
USC: 74%
Texas: 70%
Oklahoma: 70%
LSU:71%
Texas Tech: 67%
I would’nt exactly say these other sports powerhouses are flushing academics down the tubes….atleast not anymore than we are. Best I can tell we need to win more AND study harder.
Are you sure about that?
The cited graduation rates included all student athletes from all sports.
When you look specifically at football programs the scenario is not as rosy.
http://www.doubletnation.com/2010/1/29/1282906/a-look-at-texas-tech-football
(Make sure to review the discussion thread as well.)
by LondonRaider on Feb 3, 2010 12:50 AM CST up reply actions
I want both also and I do not take the positon that the kids are paid to play football.
IMHO, they are given a scholarship to be good student athletes and to learn character and the good stuff that goes with preparing and competing.
The coaches are the ones who are paid and who are the ones who are responsible and accountable.
Sometimes a river boat can out run a pirate ship.
I will be watching with beaded breath !
/s/
Mrs Malaprop
Sometimes a river boat can out run a pirate ship.
Stars
I think us TTU fans are well aware of the star discrepancies we have when compared to the usual top programs, including UT, OU, NU and A&M. Well, A&M not so much lately. The abilities of the coaches at Tech to get more out of their players than it appears other programs do is also a well known fact. We don’t need a lot of lists to tell us that. We witness it every year.Also, while we have not sent a whole lot of players to the NFL the last decade, the success of the team is comparable to those programs that did. I think we all agree in agreement that more NFL type players may be in the future for Tech, especially with the new coaching in place. Also, while some of you could care less about the graduation rates, it is exactly those rates that are indicative of the type of commitment Tech players have towards not only their grades, but the success of the team and what it takes to become successful. That is why the graduation rate is important. It says Tech players are solid and grounded, making them more teachable and trustworthy. I think that is important even if some of you don’t.
TTpilk
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
