Jump to content

Texas Recruiting Notes 2020

Reese Bennett

By Reese Bennett
in 🤫$9.95🤫

 Share

Recommended Posts

Ricky's one-hitter

Ricky's one-hitter 9,120

Posted
Posted

IT Humidor - State of recruiting from Wells

The only news here is Gibbs is giving Texas real (perceived) interest and Ford has never been on campus but flipped from Utah anyway. The rest is opinion or known info.

Spoiler

STATE OF RECRUITING

When Texas snagged Lone Star Frisco linebacker Jaylan Ford's signature on Thursday, the 2020 class rose one notch to #9 on 247's rankings, replacing none other than Oklahoma. It's actually impressive considering the circumstances: flat over the final two months of the season, firing the OC and DC two weeks before the early signing period, and even experiencing some de-commits from the class.

UT currently sits with 17 signees (eight of which will enroll early) with Tom Herman mentioning the need for "four-ish" more for 2020.

Over the next six weeks, Herman's plate is loaded. He needs to find new staffers, win a bowl game, and finish off this class.

Let's take a look at who remains on UT's board and where they stand as we end NSD1 and transition into NSD2. If the over/under is 20 for this class, I'll take the over. (these are all 2020 recruits)

Alfred Collins, Bastrop Cedar Creek, DL - The most asked-about Texas target since Malik Jefferson. Collins not signing during the early period was surprising, despite his insistence on that timeline since around September. It's still a Texas-Baylor battle with OU watching intently on the sidelines. He's taken officials to both schools, so who gets him on campus next might be your silent leader. He's worth the wait, and as long as Oscar Giles sticks around, UT will always have a good shot here.

Kelvontay Dixon, Carthage, ATH - Just like his brother two years ago, he'll wait until NSD2 to ink with his future program. It's about winning state now and always has been at Carthage since Scott Surratt took over 13 years ago. Kelvontay has slowly separated himself from just being "Keaontay's little brother," to "pretty damn good" in his own right. His game-winning TD catch vs Lampasas last week was just another example of his big-play ability. I'm as confident in UT's chances here as I was two months ago when it was apparent the Horns were pushing. The fact he hasn't publicly committed might put off some, but you're talking about a kid that goes by the beat of his own drum. While Keaontay is the serious one, Moochie is the laid-back dude who always has a smile. Right now, I'd bet Texas. I wonder if that scares off other schools.

Princely Umanmielen, Manor, DL - The former Texas pledge is a flavor of the month type who could be a destructive college defensive lineman. He's got the size (6-foot-4, 250), ability to stuff the run and get pressure from the inside, and he's really good at trolling other schools. He would also be my pick for first to enter the portal, so there's that. This guy wants to play in a four-down set, and now he'll get his wish if he picks Texas. Not sure who the leader is right now, but staying close to home might be for the best.

Isaiah Dunson, Tucker (GA), CB - The 6-foot-2, former FSU four-star pledge started hearing from UT a few months back. Jason Washington went to see him two weeks ago and Dunson is scheduling an official to Austin for January. I think he's got some upside, but I also think Texas could do better. His interest is legit, just curious how much UT's.

Tre Bradford, Lancaster, RB - The 5-foot-11, 195-pound back has the look of a Big Ten back. Ohio State, Wisconsin, and 24 others have offered, but this four-star wanted to wait until the second signing period. It seems more likely Texas will take another back to pair with Bijan Robinson, with its latest offer going out to...

Jahmyr Gibbs, Dalton (GA), RB - Another 5-foot-11, 190-pound back on the UT radar, Gibbs didn't sign with Georgia Tech this week. I'm told he wants to look around and that his interest in Texas is real. I believe he has one OV not accounted for, so he could use that. He's indicated to the staff he'd come to Austin on his dime next month. We're watching this one.

Rashad Battle, Creekside (Fairburn, GA) CB - Another Georgia target recently identified. With 20+ offers, the 6-foot-2 defensive back remains unsigned and also willing to use an official to see the ATX. I like his tape because you can see the dog in him. He's a corner until he's safety, but he's probably a safety. Let Jerrin Thompson hold down nickel and put Battle at boundary.

Notable name: Kelee Ringo. The nation's top defensive back sent in his LOI on Wednesday but didn't announce where. I won't spoil it for him, but it's not Texas.

Noteworthy: Jaylan Ford set up his Texas OV for January. It'll be his first visit to Austin. UT sent two staffers to see him in the last two weeks, so flipping the Utah pledge this late tells you how he feels about the school. A true inside linebacker, the Horns still could use another LB in this class.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 47.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Machinator

    3246

  • texifornia

    2658

  • Elmer_Fudd

    1323

  • Fud

    1204

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Boerne Horn
Boerne Horn
truthbringerlrac
truthbringerlrac

just tired of losing recruits to colleges oozing with beautiful thots while ut only has nerdy awkward thots to present to recruits........fun fact malik jefferson was getting clowned on ig by other re

Txsbigeasy1
Txsbigeasy1

for you anything!  

Posted Images

Katfid54

Katfid54 8,635

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Ricky's one-hitter said:

Notable name: Kelee Ringo. The nation's top defensive back sent in his LOI on Wednesday but didn't announce where. I won't spoil it for him, but it's not Texas.

If this news was already posted earlier this week, I missed it.  That sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cochamps

cochamps 1,879

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Katfid54 said:

If this news was already posted earlier this week, I missed it.  That sucks.

From the pic set up at Bijan’s signing, it looks like tOSU for Ringo.  That’s the way I interpreted it, cause I don’t think Salpointe’s other recruits would be pursued by the Suckeyes.

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ricky's one-hitter

Ricky's one-hitter 9,120

Posted
Posted
Just now, cochamps said:

From the pic set up at Bijan’s signing, it looks like tOSU for Ringo.  That’s the way I interpreted it, cause I don’t think Salpointe’s other recruits would be pursued by the Suckeyes.

Except for their committed and signed safety, Lathan Ransom

Different schools

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harvdog

Harvdog 2,300

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, MoJames said:

Yup, momentum after a bowl loss in a game they don't want to be in.

They don’t want to be there. They feel like it’s their birthright being in the meat grinder that is the SEC they should be in the playoffs with 2 losses.  Advantage lower tier Big XII 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hiphopopotamos

Hiphopopotamos 20,876

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Feels to me like Georgia is playing games, and having Evans and ringo sign but hold off announcing to make a splash later.  

I don't know about Evans - but hasn't Ringo been planning to announce at the All-American game (whichever one hes at) for a while?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burt Macklin

Burt Macklin 19,038

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Bob Lives! said:

Little brother looks like a good addition to the WR crew to me:

 

 

 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Yeah. I think he'd be a really good pickup.  This is obviously pretty much a best case scenario, but if we added Dixon, Collins, Princely, and Bradford, our class score would be 278.68, which would move us ahead of aggy for 6th place. I would die laughing/overdosing on aggy tears if we ended up ahead of them by NSD2. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ricky's one-hitter

Ricky's one-hitter 9,120

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

You, uh, got some of that Humidor?

Image result for Dave Chappelle crack head

Spoiler

THE OC SEARCH CONTINUES

I believe Tom Herman when he says he isn't in a hurry to name a new offensive coordinator. I even believe him when he says he's looking towards the NFL. But like with the DC search, I think it's possible Herman could hear 'no' a few times, causing him to revise his lofty goals. Temper your expectations accordingly.

The three names that seam the most realistic at this point are Kirk Ciarrocca at Minnesota, David Yost at Texas Tech, and Rhett Lashlee at SMU. Lashlee's name keeps popping up, which as you'll read, should be no surprise. Make sure you read about Ciarrocca and Yost in Ian's quality introductory piece on OC candidates. We left out Lashlee. Here's what Ian had to say:

"Rhett Lashlee runs the Tom Herman offense. It's the closest I've seen to it of the candidates. The SMU offense versus TCU is remarkably similar to the Texas offense. Also, overall it looks a lot like the Jarrett Stidham offense at Auburn. They've got Ehlinger's old pal from Westlake as an undersized TE. They flex him to the field so they can put James Proche into the boundary slot for match up reasons. That's a huge chunk of their game plan versus TCU."

Lashlee and Herb Hand are close and that's very likely a positive for Lashlee (we'll do a shot in honor of 'alignment' at the happy hour today). He's known as being a straight-arrow, a great guy, and someone his players love. My best source on Lashlee is uncertain if he would leave. "SMU is going to continue rolling next year. There might not be a better coach to work for than Dykes and he might have his pick of a Arkansas State or Troy type job in the South soon."

On Ciarrocca, I hear he isn't the high energy performance artist that PJ Fleck is. Those two are wired in opposite directions but it works well for them. Fleck likely wouldn't try to hold him back from Texas. He recommends his guys move onward and upward, as he did with Mo Linguist, current A&M defensive backs coach.

Oddly enough, I don't know a whole lot on Yost but if things heat up with him I'll research further.

I think these candidates, and probably some others, set the floor (in a good way). But I don't know where the ceiling is, or the drop-down ceiling fan is either.

TEAM NOTES

Tom Herman said the team was supposed to meet with new defensive coordinator Chris Ash on Thursday but I don't think that happened. In any event, from what I gather the players are excited about moving to a 4-2-5 man-press scheme. I fielded two unsolicited calls regarding the transition and interestingly enough, former players are excited for the current players, too.

It sounds like Craig Naivar is getting a head start on the new front as the defense has been running four-man quite a bit in bowl practice. I'm not sure if this is because of the Ash hire, because that's what Naivar wants to run, or because that's a smart way to defend Utah, but it should serve as a solid springboard into spring practices. With Utah's offense being run-centric this front makes sense. They've been backing this front with man coverages, another Ash staple that make sense versus the Utes.

Marqez Bimage is playing end quite a bit. He deserves it based off his last performance. That's how meritocracy is supposed to work. Others in the rotation along the defensive line include Malcolm Roach (end, B), Moro Ojomo (end), Keondre Coburn (NT, 1-tech), T'Vondre Sweat (NT, 1-tech, 3-tech), and Ta'Quon Graham (end, 3-tech). These guys are rotating a lot.

At this point, Collin Johnson is a maybe to play. He's telling people he intends on playing but we'll see.

Program sources like their chances heading into the bowl game. "I think they can beat them. It's a pretty favorable match up but definitely one you have to buckle your chinstrap for. Texas has the better offense and Utah shouldn't move the ball very easily. It's a motivated team. They don't want to go through the entire off-season with a loss hanging over their head on top of falling short of expectations."

We've heard the players really like interim wide receiver coach Andre Coleman. The former Kansas State offensive coordinator was on the support staff this season and now the players are seeing a different side of him.

Speaking of wide receivers, in an effort to get more twitch on that side of the ball, we'll likely see Kobe Boyce work at the position in the spring. Athletically he's a pretty even swap for Josh Moore, who we do not expect to return.

Moving Boyce would also clear up some room on the depth chart for Kenyatta Watson. We expect D'Shawn Jamison to get a good look at nickel next spring, along with a returning Josh Thompson. Thompson won't play in the bowl game in order to preserve his redshirt. Ditto for Watson.

Today is the last day of practices before Christmas break. Players will get to go home before returning to Austin and then heading to San Antonio on the 26th.
 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ricky's one-hitter

Ricky's one-hitter 9,120

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/infractions/decisions/Dec2019D1INF_TCUPUBLICInfractionsDecision.pdf

Summary of football violations and punishment

Spoiler

This case involved impermissible student-athlete employment compensation in the football and men's and women's basketball programs, in addition to unrelated coaching staff limitation and practice violations in the men's and women's swimming and diving programs at Texas Christian University (TCU). 

The parties agreed that the violations in the football and men's and women's basketball programs centered on payment to student-athletes for work not actually performed. Specifically, from 2015 through 2018, the institution's Physical Plant Summer Maintenance Program employed student-athletes from all three programs who, at times, did not clock out when they left the job site. This resulted in 33 football and basketball student-athletes being credited for hours they did not work and receiving pay-for-work-not performed, which rendered the student-athletes ineligible. The panel concludes that these violations are Level II.

1. Aggravating factors [Bylaw 19.9.3]

(a) A history of Level I, Level II or major violations. [Bylaw 19.9.3-(b)]

(b) Multiple Level II violations by the institution. [Bylaw 19.9.3-(g)]

(c) Persons of authority condoned, participated in or negligently disregarded the violation or related wrongful conduct. [Bylaw 19.9.3-(h)]

2. Mitigating factors [Bylaw 19.9.4]

(a) Prompt self-detection and self-disclosure of the violations. [Bylaw 19.9.4-(a)]

(b) Prompt acknowledgement of the violation, acceptance of responsibility and imposition of meaningful corrective measures and/or penalties. [Bylaw 19.9.4-(b)]

(c) Affirmative steps to expedite final resolution of the matter. [Bylaw 19.9.4-(c)]

(d) An established history of self-reporting Level III or secondary violations. [Bylaw 19.9.4-(d)]5

(e) Exemplary cooperation. [Bylaw 19.9.4-(f)]

Payment for Work Not Performed

Over the course of four summers, TCU's Physical Plant recruited and employed student-athletes (and a small number of non-student-athletes) whose primary responsibility was to change lightbulbs across the entire campus. Taking advantage of the program's lax time accountability, some student-athletes did not always clock out when leaving the jobsite. Consequently, 33 student-athletes received payment for more work than they actually performed. The excess payments totaled nearly $20,000 over the four years and resulted in 22 of the student-athletes competing and receiving actual and necessary expenses while ineligible. This conduct violated Bylaws 12 and 16. Bylaw 12 governs amateurism and athletics eligibility, including how the employment of student-athletes can affect their eligibility. Specifically, Bylaw 12.4.1 establishes criteria for compensating student-athlete employees and includes the requirement that student-athletes be paid only for work actually performed, as specified in Bylaw 12.4.1-(a). When a student-athlete is ineligible, Bylaw 12.11.1 obligates the institution to withhold the student-athlete from competition. Benefits are governed under Bylaw 16. Bylaw 16.8.1 allows member institutions to provide actual and necessary expenses for student-athletes in conjunction with competition but only when student-athletes are eligible to compete. During the summers of 2015 through 2018, lax supervision by TCU Physical Plant personnel allowed 33 student-athletes to receive pay for work not performed associated with a campus summer maintenance program. The genesis of these violations can be traced to the Physical Plant manager (oh, I'm sure...), who, on his own initiative, hired 10 to 15 students each summer to work at the Physical Plant. The duties focused on changing light bulbs across the entire campus and required balance and working at heights. Consequently, the plant manager recruited primarily current or former student-athletes because of their physical stature and balance. In addition, because most students do not remain on campus during the summer, the plant manager found it convenient to hire student-athletes, because many football and basketball student athletes remained in the area for summer school and athletics activities. Although the plant manager primarily hired student-athletes, he also hired non-student-athletes. The manager did not review or approve student workers' hours for payroll. As a result, some of the student-athletes learned they could take advantage of this unsupervised aspect of the payroll system by not always clocking out when leaving the jobsite. Consequently, student-athletes received payment for more work than they actually performed. The impermissible pay violated Bylaw 12.4.1-(a). The receipt of impermissible pay rendered student-athletes ineligible and the institution failed to withhold these student-athletes from competition in violation of Bylaw 12.11.1. Finally, ineligible student-athletes received impermissible expenses associated with competition in violation of Bylaw 16.8.1. Consistent with Bylaw 19.1.2, these violations are Level II because they provided more than a minimal but less than a substantial or extensive impermissible benefit to the student-athlete employees. 

Level II violations are significant breaches of conduct that provide or are intended to provide more than a minimal but less than a substantial or extensive recruiting or competitive advantage.

Core Penalties for Level II-Mitigated Violations (Bylaw 19.9.5)

1. Probation: One year of probation from December 20, 2019, through December 19, 2020. (Self-imposed.)

2. Financial penalty: A financial penalty of $19,796. (Self-imposed.) Additionally, because of the ineligible participation of a men's basketball student-athlete in a championship event due to receipt of unearned wages in the campus summer maintenance program, the panel prescribes an additional financial penalty Accordingly, the institution shall pay a fine equal to 10% of the value of one unit the institution earned for participation in the first round of the 2018 Division I Men's Basketball Championship.

8. During this period of probation, the institution shall:

d. Inform prospective student-athletes in writing in the involved sport programs (football, men's basketball, women's basketball and swimming and diving) that the institution is on probation for one year and detail the violations committed. If a prospective student athlete takes an official paid visit, the information regarding violations, penalties and terms of probation must be provided in advance of the visit. Otherwise, the information must be provided before a prospective student-athlete signs a National Letter of Intent; and

e. Publicize specific and understandable information concerning the nature of the infractions by providing, at a minimum, a statement to include the types of violations and the affected sport program and a direct, conspicuous link to the public infractions report located on the athletic department's main or "landing" webpage. The information shall also be included in men's basketball media guides and in an alumni publication. The institution's statement must: (i) clearly describe the infractions; (ii) include the length of the probationary period associated with the infractions case; and (iii) provide a clear indication of what happened in the infractions case. A statement that refers only to the probationary period with nothing more is not sufficient.

The NCAA really did TCU a solid by delaying to 12/20. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...