Jump to content

Texas recruiting notes 2019

bigup2dahorns

By bigup2dahorns
in 🤫$9.95🤫

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Machinator

    3301

  • texifornia

    2178

  • Katfid54

    1408

  • satyanash

    1292

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

closetojumping
closetojumping

There's more than just 2019 stuff in this update, but I'm not being paid to post, so I'm dumping it all here and you guys can do with it/disseminate it/ignore it as you like. Regarding the UA guy

Carl Winslow
Carl Winslow

word 😂 brooks not being a take clemson starting rb pistol whipped & robbed his own teammate he lead clemson to a national championship & 3 playoff appearances recruit to wi

RadiologyHorn
RadiologyHorn

Now Mpagi is better than Leal???!???    Guys tell me you’re trolling. Please tell me this isn’t real. I feel like I’m in a Seinfeld bizarro world episode. I can’t take this shit anymore. Whe

Posted Images

Levi

Levi 2668

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, futureman said:

so we scrape our way to 6 straight wins and still no commitments in the last couple weeks?  herman is so painfully in over his head, no idea what he’s doing.  can our BMDs afford jimbo’s buyout?  he’s won a MNC!!!1!1!!

Overreacting much? It’s not like we blew out Tulsa, k-State, or Baylor. 6 wins yes, but I think everyone one here sees that we play to our opponents level which isn’t the most attractive thing to watch. 

To the contrary, jimbo is 5-2 with 2  squeaky wins and that doesn’t look too hot as well. So both coaches are doing well in the win department but they’re ugly right now. 

Texas will be just fine if we just keep winning but be more progressive with it’s wins I.e. finishing when your up by 2+ TD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
futureman

futureman 22699

Posted
Posted
Just now, DoneWithit said:

Overreacting much? It’s not like we blew out Tulsa, k-State, or Baylor. 6 wins yes, but I think everyone one here sees that we play to our opponents level which isn’t the most attractive thing to watch. 

To the contrary, jimbo is 5-2 with 2  squeaky wins and that doesn’t look too hot as well. So both coaches are doing well in the win department but they’re ugly right now. 

Texas will be just fine if we just keep winning but be more progressive with it’s wins I.e. finishing when your up by 2+ TD. 

not what I expected but I’ll take it!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elmer_Fudd

Elmer_Fudd 22993

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, DoneWithit said:

Overreacting much? It’s not like we blew out Tulsa, k-State, or Baylor. 6 wins yes, but I think everyone one here sees that we play to our opponents level which isn’t the most attractive thing to watch. 

To the contrary, jimbo is 5-2 with 2  squeaky wins and that doesn’t look too hot as well. So both coaches are doing well in the win department but they’re ugly right now. 

Texas will be just fine if we just keep winning but be more progressive with it’s wins I.e. finishing when your up by 2+ TD. 

Aggy is starting to worry.  Last thing they want to see is Texas in a NY6 game.  They may keep the 2019 class together they bought and paid for, but going forward recruits will beat down the door to play at a winning Texas.

https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/2989428

Edited by Elmer_Fudd
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Post Oak

Post Oak 20565

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Elmer_Fudd said:

Aggy is starting to worry.  Last thing they want to see is Texas in a NY6 game.  They may keep the 2019 class together they bought and paid for, but going forward recruits will beat down the door to play at a winning Texas.

https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/2989428

The somewhat reasonable ags dealing with the nowit gomers is always a joy to read

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Levi

Levi 2668

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Elmer_Fudd said:

Aggy is starting to worry.  Last thing they want to see is Texas in a NY6 game.  They may keep the 2019 class together they bought and paid for, but going forward recruits will beat down the door to play at a winning Texas.

https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/2989428

It’s hard to say Texas will win out then beat OU twice(I hope that’d be awesome and put us in playoff picture for sure). But yeah the best thing is make a NY6 bowl and face Georgia,LSU or even Florida and we beat the helm out of them. 

Thats hard to recruit against if your jimbo...a lot harder to negatively recruit against Texas if they beat a an actual SEC opponent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tired of Lurking

Tired of Lurking 637

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Works for me. I'm getting a little tired of 4 yards and a cloud of dust. We need backs that can house it on every carry. 

I don't see that happening no matter who we get if our only run is inside zone. That play almost requires our RB to find a hole through the pile, make a guy miss, and pray for greenery ahead. We never give our RB an opportunity to operate in space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newy25

Newy25 7916

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, TommyGufano said:

opportunity cost. We still need beef this class.

I am curious what the ceiling is on guys we'd take who are at least beginning their careers as WRs. As high as 7??

I mean, we have the scholarships. So there is literally is no opportunity cost. We were not even close to maxing our 85 this year so numbers are not tight yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TommyGufano

TommyGufano 6023

Posted
Posted
Just now, Newy25 said:

I mean, we have the scholarships. So there is literally is no opportunity cost. We were not even close to maxing our 85 this year so numbers are not tight yet. 

On our path to 85, every scholarship that is allocated to WR is one that doesn't go toward some other position. Hell, there's opportunity cost associated with taking a slam dunk 5* guy at a position of need. Soo.... I disagree

Link to comment
Share on other sites
futureman

futureman 22699

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TommyGufano said:

On our path to 85, every scholarship that is allocated to WR is one that doesn't go toward some other position. Hell, there's opportunity cost associated with taking a slam dunk 5* guy at a position of need. Soo.... I disagree

there’s opportunity cost with any decision.  I’m not sure the point you’re trying to make.  there isn’t a coach in the country who wouldn’t take a 5* at a position of need.  we need receivers in this class. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fud

Fud 9724

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Newy25 said:

I mean, we have the scholarships. So there is literally is no opportunity cost. We were not even close to maxing our 85 this year so numbers are not tight yet. 

We have limited spots in the class, so the opportunity cost is taking from the other positions. If we go to six, it needs to be for a best player available, which would be Bru or Wilson 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newy25

Newy25 7916

Posted
Posted
Just now, TommyGufano said:

On our path to 85, every scholarship that is allocated to WR is one that doesn't go toward some other position. Hell, there's opportunity cost associated with taking a slam dunk 5* guy at a position of need. Soo.... I disagree

We are a ways off before we are bumping up against scholarship limits. I just disagree that we should not take talented players that want to play here because we are trying to perfectly balance the takes at each position. If we have a full 85 team, we likely are not in dire need of grad transfers and we certainly will not need to offer scholarips to walk ons. 

If both LJh and CJ skip their senior season, we could use the WR’s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TommyGufano

TommyGufano 6023

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, futureman said:

there’s opportunity cost with any decision.  I’m not sure the point you’re trying to make.  there isn’t a coach in the country who wouldn’t take a 5* at a position of need.  we need receivers in this class. 

The discussion is what's the balance between need and what resources it makes sense to address the need.

At what point does addressing the need at WR leave us short-handed at LB, DT, OL, NB down the road? 

Specifically I asked is that number as high as 7?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fud

Fud 9724

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Newy25 said:

We are a ways off before we are bumping up against scholarship limits. I just disagree that we should not take talented players that want to play here because we are trying to perfectly balance the takes at each position. If we have a full 85 team, we likely are not in dire need of grad transfers and we certainly will not need to offer scholarips to walk ons. 

If both LJh and CJ skip their senior season, we could use the WR’s. 

The number we're bumping up against is the class counter limit, not the 85 scholarship fall camp limit 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
futureman

futureman 22699

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, TommyGufano said:

The discussion is what's the balance between need and what resources it makes sense to address the need.

At what point does addressing the need at WR leave us short-handed at LB, DT, OL, NB down the road? 

Specifically I asked is that number as high as 7?

yeah I think 7 is probably high but if taking 6 gets us Bru I think the opportunity cost is worth it.  

don’t worry, though.  herman isn’t paying me to make those decisions.  yet.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fud

Fud 9724

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Newy25 said:

Based on current commits, how many more players can we have in this class? 

I'm not sure what the hard cap is, probably something like 29 or 30, but with the knowledge that every player you sign in this class means one less in 2020, it would make sense for the coaches to take less unless 5* types want in late. Maybe 27?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownHorn

HtownHorn 15235

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Fud said:

We have limited spots in the class, so the opportunity cost is taking from the other positions. If we go to six, it needs to be for a best player available, which would be Bru or Wilson 

Not really, we have 18 commits and room for 12 more. We have need for 3 more OL, one needs to be a JUCO/GT. We have a need for 2 more DL, one should probably be a JUCO. There is a need for 2 more LBs with one being a JUCO.

That's 6/7 of the 12 remaining ships. That means there is room for Washington, Powell/Kennedy, 1 more RB, Catalon, and McCoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fud

Fud 9724

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, HtownHorn said:

Not really, we have 18 commits and room for 12 more. We have need for 3 more OL, one needs to be a JUCO/GT. We have a need for 2 more DL, one should probably be a JUCO. There is a need for 2 more LBs with one being a JUCO.

That's 6/7 of the 12 remaining ships. That means there is room for Washington, Powell/Kennedy, 1 more RB, Catalon, and McCoy.

We're not taking 30 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Treefidy

Treefidy 1507

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Fud said:

We have limited spots in the class, so the opportunity cost is taking from the other positions. If we go to six, it needs to be for a best player available, which would be Bru or Wilson 

Wilson is going to tOSU and nothing we do will change that.  I'm disappointed as I have seen every game he has played in HS, and I know he will be very good at the next level.  Hopefully things align and we get Bru.

we are building a solid base but we need to get more of those absolute next level players like sterns to start coming in every year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Funk Doctor Spock

Funk Doctor Spock 13287

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Lonestar88 said:

He wouldn't be my top choice, and he isn't for the staff, but I wouldn't feel awful about him being a backup plan.

The Katy RB thing is overplayed to me. Projecting players in different systems and at different levels of competition is what scouts and coaches get paid to do, they should be able to take into account the Katy system and still evaluate the RBs at Katy as individuals.

I agree with that. I mean, it's not like Rodney Anderson was some 5 star can't miss. Choklahoma just did a good job of evaluating and used their line to open up lanes for him. We can do the same with improved line play. I personally don't want Glass, but if the staff does, so be it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CastHorn

CastHorn 902

Posted
Posted

Ya know I’ve always had an undervalued perspective of Runningbacks. I felt like if you had a well developed offensive line room you could grab any physically imposing semi fast athlete out of East Texas and you’d have solid production at HB. Keontay Ingram has changed that view for me. He’s an example of what a skilled natural running back prospect can do for your offense. Watson is a good athlete that is put together really well for his size but he’s not the threat Ingram is. Ingram is made for that position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fud

Fud 9724

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, CastHorn said:

Ya know I’ve always had an undervalued perspective of Runningbacks. I felt like if you had a well developed offensive line room you could grab any physically imposing semi fast athlete out of East Texas and you’d have solid production at HB. Keontay Ingram has changed that view for me. He’s an example of what a skilled natural running back prospect can do for your offense. Watson is a good athlete that is put together really well for his size but he’s not the threat Ingram is. Ingram is made for that position.

Georgia's run last year also demonstrated what having several difference makers at the position can do for you 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Napoleon

Napoleon 8831

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Fud said:

We have limited spots in the class, so the opportunity cost is taking from the other positions. If we go to six, it needs to be for a best player available, which would be Bru or Wilson 


NEWS FLASH: We have "limited spots" in EVERY FUCKING CLASS!!!


Reminds me of a guy who laughed at the use of "Limited Edition" on some item before turning to me and saying...

"Even the Volkswagen Beetle was a 'Limited Edition'."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fud

Fud 9724

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, Napoleon said:


NEWS FLASH: We have "limited spots" in EVERY FUCKING CLASS!!!


Reminds me of a guy who laughed at the use of "Limited Edition" on some item before turning to me and saying...

"Even the Volkswagen Beetle was a 'Limited Edition'."

I was responding to someone saying that there's no opportunity cost to taking seven receivers 

  • Like 1
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...