Texas Recruiting - WAM Appetizer
The thing is, coach Chris Petersen says the Huskies aren’t necessarily worried about their batting average. Success recruiting Texas, he said, is “a couple guys a year who can actually play and help you. Even one to three guys a year, I like it. But there’s a lot of competition in there in that state, with a lot of good Texas teams in there. So it’s a little tricky.”
The biggest challenge — aside from convincing teenagers why they should play football thousands of miles away from the football-crazed region where they grew up — is time and familiarity. UW coaches are regularly in California, for example, and have longstanding relationships with prep coaches there, so research on a prospect’s background is easier and more efficient. And, more simply, it takes a lot longer to fly from Seattle to Dallas or Austin than it does to shuttle between Seattle and Los Angeles.
“Any time you start going a little bit more away from your footprint, you don’t know as much, you’re not there as much, you’re not talking to the coach as much,” Petersen said. “That’s why I like being in our footprint out here. It’s the world we know.”
The Huskies still are trying to get to know Texas, where UW has offered 103 scholarships from the beginning of the 2015 recruiting cycle through 2020. That’s the second-most of any state besides California (and significantly more than in Washington, where the Huskies have offered 44 prospects in the same span, if you were curious). When the official UW Twitter account posted a graphic at the beginning of May detailing that week’s recruiting itineraries for its assistants, three of them were scheduled to spend at least two days each in Texas — including Kwiatkowski, who offered McDonald on that trip — and another was scheduled to stop there for a day.
That doesn’t mean the Huskies actively pursue every one of those offered prospects to the same degree, or that they expect all of them to seriously consider UW.
“If we can get one guy a year, that’s successful,” said Kwiatkowski, who also was instrumental in Levi Onwuzurike’s recruitment, picking up where ex-defensive line coach Jeff Choate left off. “… Recruiting in the Internet (era) is such a nationwide thing. We’re still more West Coast-oriented. We had success in Texas when we were at Boise State, and there are a lot of good players there. It’s just a matter of finding the guys who want to leave Texas and this (being) a good fit for them.”
Geography always will be an obstacle. Of the 98 Texas prospects with UW offers in that 2015-20 span who have signed letters of intent or are currently committed, 46 of them — or 47.3 percent — chose to stay in-state, per the 247Sports database. Texas and Texas A&M are the most popular destinations for Texas prospects who hold a UW offer — 13 players each, counting current commitments, have signed or pledged to those schools in that span, while seven chose TCU, four each chose Texas Tech, SMU and Baylor, and one chose Houston.
If you add in the eight Texas prospects with UW offers who instead chose Oklahoma and the six who chose Oklahoma State — for the sake of reference, consider that both campuses require less than a five-hour drive to the Dallas-Fort Worth area — that means roughly 61.2 percent of those prospects chose to play their college ball within a reasonable distance from where they grew up.
How does that compare to Texas prospects in general? It’s in roughly the same ballpark. Per the 247Sports composite ranking of the top 150 Texas prospects in the 2019 class, 71 either committed to, signed with or were thought to be favoring an in-state school. Add in Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, and that number moves to 89, or 59.3 percent of the top 150. Add in LSU and Arkansas, two more border-state schools, and the number rises to 96, or 64 percent.
Conversely, only 17 of the 103 Texas prospects with UW offers from 2015-20 committed or signed with schools west of their home state, a rate of 16.5 percent. UW landed six of them, more than any other West Coast destination among prospects who held an offer from the Huskies. UCLA signed three, USC and Stanford signed two each, and Arizona State, Oregon, Colorado and Fresno State signed one each. Only 22 of the top-150 Texas prospects in the 2019 class chose schools west of Texas, a rate of 14.6 percent.
Presuming Sunday and McDonald both end up signing, the 2020 cycle will mark the first time UW has pulled multiple prospects from Texas in the same class since 2016, when the Huskies got receiver Aaron Fuller out of Lucas Lovejoy and four-star defensive lineman Onwuzurike — their biggest Texas coup to date — out of powerhouse Allen High; both schools are in the Dallas suburbs. UW also signed outside linebacker Myles Rice out of Houston Bush in 2015 and pulled offensive lineman Victor Curne from Houston Second Baptist in 2018.
“It’s a lot of homework, and a lot of energy and work goes into it,” Kwiatkowski said. “Guys are going to want to go to other schools, and that’s part of recruiting. If we can get one, two guys a year, that’s pretty good. That’s what we’re shooting for.”
Comments
-
My dick. It is hard.
-
So pretty much what we've been saying for 6 years- we will get 1-2 guys a year at best and will never beat out Texas, Oklahoma or A&M.
That is not worth the effort.
Everyone who said it was worth it argued that this was just building the foundation. Coaches say otherwise.
*unless we become Clemson of the west and can recruit nationally but no point wasting our time until that happens. -
Pretty much, the full article details how much easier recruiting CA is. Why not take 1-2 more "hidden gems" from SoCal instead of Texas? It's not as if we are depleting CA of talent.FremontTroll said:So pretty much what we've been saying for 6 years- we will get 1-2 guys a year at best and will never beat out Texas, Oklahoma or A&M.
That is not worth the effort.
Everyone who said it was worth it argued that this was just building the foundation. Coaches say otherwise.
*unless we become Clemson of the west and can recruit nationally but no point wasting our time until that happens. -
The coaches measure success as finding 1 player who can contribute every year from Texas. It's a low bar, no question, but that's what they care about.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Pretty much, the full article details how much easier recruiting CA is. Why not take 1-2 more "hidden gems" from SoCal instead of Texas? It's not as if we are depleting CA of talent.FremontTroll said:So pretty much what we've been saying for 6 years- we will get 1-2 guys a year at best and will never beat out Texas, Oklahoma or A&M.
That is not worth the effort.
Everyone who said it was worth it argued that this was just building the foundation. Coaches say otherwise.
*unless we become Clemson of the west and can recruit nationally but no point wasting our time until that happens. -
Of course they can pull one kid out of Texas a year. The argument has always been about efficiency.whatshouldicareabout said:
The coaches measure success as finding 1 player who can contribute every year from Texas. It's a low bar, no question, but that's what they care about.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Pretty much, the full article details how much easier recruiting CA is. Why not take 1-2 more "hidden gems" from SoCal instead of Texas? It's not as if we are depleting CA of talent.FremontTroll said:So pretty much what we've been saying for 6 years- we will get 1-2 guys a year at best and will never beat out Texas, Oklahoma or A&M.
That is not worth the effort.
Everyone who said it was worth it argued that this was just building the foundation. Coaches say otherwise.
*unless we become Clemson of the west and can recruit nationally but no point wasting our time until that happens.
If the coaches have more time and resources than they can conceivably use, then sure, efficiency is irrelevant.
Hard to believe it though. Especially if UW misses out on a big name recruit from our area. -
6/103 offers as a hit rate.whatshouldicareabout said:
The coaches measure success as finding 1 player who can contribute every year from Texas. It's a low bar, no question, but that's what they care about.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Pretty much, the full article details how much easier recruiting CA is. Why not take 1-2 more "hidden gems" from SoCal instead of Texas? It's not as if we are depleting CA of talent.FremontTroll said:So pretty much what we've been saying for 6 years- we will get 1-2 guys a year at best and will never beat out Texas, Oklahoma or A&M.
That is not worth the effort.
Everyone who said it was worth it argued that this was just building the foundation. Coaches say otherwise.
*unless we become Clemson of the west and can recruit nationally but no point wasting our time until that happens.
That's with how "selective" our recruiting is.
Do you think if we spent the time, effort, and energy that we do in Texas instead in the rest of the West and sent out 103 offers we'd only get six hits?
And you can't tell me these are irreplaceable kinds of talents we are getting from Texas either. There's no shortage of "depth" players in our geographic footprint.
It seems like we are trying to be mediocre in Texas instead of great in California.
Sounds like left over little dog mentality from Petermen. He needs to shed that mentality and be the premier program on the West Coast. Own it. -
According to the article, this is not a given. Considering we have been crushing it in Cali lately, I'm in camp LIPO for a couple more classes. Who knows, maybe we get a visit from the bald beauty.Houhusky said:
Of course they can pull one kid out of Texas a year. The argument has always been about efficiency.whatshouldicareabout said:
The coaches measure success as finding 1 player who can contribute every year from Texas. It's a low bar, no question, but that's what they care about.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Pretty much, the full article details how much easier recruiting CA is. Why not take 1-2 more "hidden gems" from SoCal instead of Texas? It's not as if we are depleting CA of talent.FremontTroll said:So pretty much what we've been saying for 6 years- we will get 1-2 guys a year at best and will never beat out Texas, Oklahoma or A&M.
That is not worth the effort.
Everyone who said it was worth it argued that this was just building the foundation. Coaches say otherwise.
*unless we become Clemson of the west and can recruit nationally but no point wasting our time until that happens.
If the coaches have more time and resources than they can conceivably use, then sure, efficiency is irrelevant.
Hard to believe it though. Especially if UW misses out on a big name recruit from our area.
"Conversely, only 17 of the 103 Texas prospects with UW offers from 2015-20 committed or signed with schools west of their home state, a rate of 16.5 percent. UW landed six of them, more than any other West Coast destination among prospects who held an offer from the Huskies. UCLA signed three, USC and Stanford signed two each, and Arizona State, Oregon, Colorado and Fresno State signed one each. Only 22 of the top-150 Texas prospects in the 2019 class chose schools west of Texas, a rate of 14.6 percent." -
I’ll add an extra piece from the article.
It may or may not mean that traction is starting to be made, but I found it interesting:
When UW first reached out, Onwuzurike said he knew nothing about them. Fuller said the same thing: “Hadn’t seen a game, barely even knew where Seattle was.” Rice said he never considered leaving the Houston area before Choate started recruiting him. At that time, he said, “I didn’t know a whole lot about the program, or the state itself.”
It’s a similar story for Sunday, who said, “I didn’t know anything about them. It was my first time hearing about them.” But he did his research, connected with running backs coach Keith Bhonapha and expressed a desire to leave Waco for school; his unofficial visit to Seattle “blew my mind.”
Cooper McDonald was more familiar with Petersen and UW’s program, “especially when they were in the College Football Playoff. I was rooting for them. Ever since then, I’ve kind of been keeping an eye on them.”
He was ecstatic when the Huskies offered him a scholarship. So were his friends and teammates.
“They view Washington as a really good program,” he said. “When I got my offer, I had a bunch of my friends coming up saying, ‘Dude, that’s sick.’ ”
-
Let me clarify/reiterate they could get 5 players out of Texas a year if they wanted to... it’s about the opportunity cost of doing so.fosterworth said:
According to the article, this is not a given. Considering we have been crushing it in Cali lately, I'm in camp LIPO for a couple more classes. Who knows, maybe we get a visit from the bald beauty.Houhusky said:
Of course they can pull one kid out of Texas a year. The argument has always been about efficiency.whatshouldicareabout said:
The coaches measure success as finding 1 player who can contribute every year from Texas. It's a low bar, no question, but that's what they care about.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Pretty much, the full article details how much easier recruiting CA is. Why not take 1-2 more "hidden gems" from SoCal instead of Texas? It's not as if we are depleting CA of talent.FremontTroll said:So pretty much what we've been saying for 6 years- we will get 1-2 guys a year at best and will never beat out Texas, Oklahoma or A&M.
That is not worth the effort.
Everyone who said it was worth it argued that this was just building the foundation. Coaches say otherwise.
*unless we become Clemson of the west and can recruit nationally but no point wasting our time until that happens.
If the coaches have more time and resources than they can conceivably use, then sure, efficiency is irrelevant.
Hard to believe it though. Especially if UW misses out on a big name recruit from our area.
"Conversely, only 17 of the 103 Texas prospects with UW offers from 2015-20 committed or signed with schools west of their home state, a rate of 16.5 percent. UW landed six of them, more than any other West Coast destination among prospects who held an offer from the Huskies. UCLA signed three, USC and Stanford signed two each, and Arizona State, Oregon, Colorado and Fresno State signed one each. Only 22 of the top-150 Texas prospects in the 2019 class chose schools west of Texas, a rate of 14.6 percent." -
Yes, exactly. UW will be able to recruit Texas when we are a national program.
But all our efforts until then are wasted whether or not it ever happens. McDonald and his friends weren’t excited because Kawasaki was roaming the halls once a month. They were excited because UW was in the playoffs and the national conversation. You think Clemson had to “make traction” in Folsom? Fuck no they are fucking Clemson they just waltzed in like theyhad always owned the place. -
I didn’t really clarify my thought. This is what I meant by making traction. The National respect is starting to grow so recruits out of footprint might take notice.FremontTroll said:Yes, exactly. UW will be able to recruit Texas when we are a national program.
But all our efforts until then are wasted whether or not it ever happens. McDonald and his friends weren’t excited because Kawasaki was roaming the halls once a month. They were excited because UW was in the playoffs and the national conversation. You think Clemson had to “make traction” in Folsom? Fuck no they are fucking Clemson they just waltzed in like theyhad always owned the place.
That doesn’t mean I think the resources and effort are worth it.
Never said that, so don’t twist. -
Whatever, I’m excited about Curne.
-
I do buy that in Texas, there will be X percentage of kids who want to get the fuck out of there - for whatever reason they just want out. By definition that means they'll be going to an out of region programs who would otherwise bat a low % in Texas. Why the fuck wouldn't we want that to be us?
-
Because then they go to the SEC.sinceredawg said:I do buy that in Texas, there will be X percentage of kids who want to get the fuck out of there - for whatever reason they just want out. By definition that means they'll be going to an out of region programs who would otherwise bat a low % in Texas. Why the fuck wouldn't we want that to be us?
-
The question always comes down to what the cost is
The argument against recruiting Texas is that we can be doing better in California. But who in California are we really missing on?
I get all the arguments but the reality is that culture and fit matter a lot to this staff. Those that receive what we are about will gravitate towards us. Those that don’t wont.
Ultimately the key in Texas is gaining traction. Getting a player like Levi is huge. As the Texas players on our roster produce and get to the league our reputation will only further grow there.
Until there’s tangible evidence that our efforts in Texas are wasted, then it’s a worthwhile INVESTMENT for the program to make if they deem that they have the resources to devote to it -
If we are not getting players that are hard to come by in California or the west coast then I don't see the value in it. Mainly linebackers and edge players and maybe skill players on offense sometimes depending on the year.
Cooper McDonald seems like someone we could have found an equivilent to imo closer to uw. -
Justin Flowe, Elias Ricks, Clark Phillips, Kendall Milton, Jordan Banks...Tequilla said:The question always comes down to what the cost is
The argument against recruiting Texas is that we can be doing better in California. But who in California are we really missing on?
I get all the arguments but the reality is that culture and fit matter a lot to this staff. Those that receive what we are about will gravitate towards us. Those that don’t wont.
Ultimately the key in Texas is gaining traction. Getting a player like Levi is huge. As the Texas players on our roster produce and get to the league our reputation will only further grow there.
Until there’s tangible evidence that our efforts in Texas are wasted, then it’s a worthwhile INVESTMENT for the program to make if they deem that they have the resources to devote to it -
Yeah I don't get the argument that resources are wasted by recruiting Texas. Take LSU. People should say that they are wasting resources by recruiting California and Utah. Two non-traditional areas for them. But that has resulted in them getting Elias Ricks and Siaki Ika the last two cycles. Yes Orgeron has connections in Cali but Petersen has the same connections in Texas as he has been recruiting there forever. Also if UW continues to be nationally relevant that exposure does some of the initial footwork needed to get the attention of Texas recruits. People make it sound like it's some kind of big time allocation devoted to Texas when it's just not true. If it's 5% of your recruiting allocation time and you pull 1 out of 20 kids in a recruiting cycle that sounds okay to me. And as you get better the quality of that 1 recruit also gets better.Tequilla said:The question always comes down to what the cost is
The argument against recruiting Texas is that we can be doing better in California. But who in California are we really missing on?
I get all the arguments but the reality is that culture and fit matter a lot to this staff. Those that receive what we are about will gravitate towards us. Those that don’t wont.
Ultimately the key in Texas is gaining traction. Getting a player like Levi is huge. As the Texas players on our roster produce and get to the league our reputation will only further grow there.
Until there’s tangible evidence that our efforts in Texas are wasted, then it’s a worthwhile INVESTMENT for the program to make if they deem that they have the resources to devote to it -
Except those are elite talents of which there are few in the nation. UW isn't going after kids like that in Texas. They are recruiting mostly "diamonds in the rough" or guys who are overlooked etc.whuggy said:
Yeah I don't get the argument that resources are wasted by recruiting Texas. Take LSU. People should say that they are wasting resources by recruiting California and Utah. Two non-traditional areas for them. But that has resulted in them getting Elias Ricks and Siaki Ika the last two cycles. Yes Orgeron has connections in Cali but Petersen has the same connections in Texas as he has been recruiting there forever. Also if UW continues to be nationally relevant that exposure does some of the initial footwork needed to get the attention of Texas recruits. People make it sound like it's some kind of big time allocation devoted to Texas when it's just not true. If it's 5% of your recruiting allocation time and you pull 1 out of 20 kids in a recruiting cycle that sounds okay to me. And as you get better the quality of that 1 recruit also gets better.Tequilla said:The question always comes down to what the cost is
The argument against recruiting Texas is that we can be doing better in California. But who in California are we really missing on?
I get all the arguments but the reality is that culture and fit matter a lot to this staff. Those that receive what we are about will gravitate towards us. Those that don’t wont.
Ultimately the key in Texas is gaining traction. Getting a player like Levi is huge. As the Texas players on our roster produce and get to the league our reputation will only further grow there.
Until there’s tangible evidence that our efforts in Texas are wasted, then it’s a worthwhile INVESTMENT for the program to make if they deem that they have the resources to devote to it -
Lots of twisting out here.Tequilla said:The question always comes down to what the cost is
The argument against recruiting Texas is that we can be doing better in California. But who in California are we really missing on?
I get all the arguments but the reality is that culture and fit matter a lot to this staff. Those that receive what we are about will gravitate towards us. Those that don’t wont.
Ultimately the key in Texas is gaining traction. Getting a player like Levi is huge. As the Texas players on our roster produce and get to the league our reputation will only further grow there.
Until there’s tangible evidence that our efforts in Texas are wasted, then it’s a worthwhile INVESTMENT for the program to make if they deem that they have the resources to devote to it
In any organization the person pitching the new INVESTMENT must prove its worthwhile not vice versa. What are they teaching at TCU these days?
In terms of resources it isn't about the money. Its about the coaches' time.
Especially those coaches that aren't as successful on the recruiting front and may suffer the most with less time to devote to their west coast targets.
The position where we have by far the most disproportionate percentage of offers out in Texas the next two classes? RB.
The same position where our highest rated and most nationally coveted target supposedly wasn't hearing much from UW.
-
Also everyone wants to play in the SEC right now and LSU is one of the premier SEC programs.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Except those are elite talents of which there are few in the nation. UW isn't going after kids like that in Texas. They are recruiting mostly "diamonds in the rough" or guys who are overlooked etc.whuggy said:
Yeah I don't get the argument that resources are wasted by recruiting Texas. Take LSU. People should say that they are wasting resources by recruiting California and Utah. Two non-traditional areas for them. But that has resulted in them getting Elias Ricks and Siaki Ika the last two cycles. Yes Orgeron has connections in Cali but Petersen has the same connections in Texas as he has been recruiting there forever. Also if UW continues to be nationally relevant that exposure does some of the initial footwork needed to get the attention of Texas recruits. People make it sound like it's some kind of big time allocation devoted to Texas when it's just not true. If it's 5% of your recruiting allocation time and you pull 1 out of 20 kids in a recruiting cycle that sounds okay to me. And as you get better the quality of that 1 recruit also gets better.Tequilla said:The question always comes down to what the cost is
The argument against recruiting Texas is that we can be doing better in California. But who in California are we really missing on?
I get all the arguments but the reality is that culture and fit matter a lot to this staff. Those that receive what we are about will gravitate towards us. Those that don’t wont.
Ultimately the key in Texas is gaining traction. Getting a player like Levi is huge. As the Texas players on our roster produce and get to the league our reputation will only further grow there.
Until there’s tangible evidence that our efforts in Texas are wasted, then it’s a worthwhile INVESTMENT for the program to make if they deem that they have the resources to devote to it
Like I was saying- if UW wins a playoff game this year and Eason is drafted top 5- then we may be able to get to that echelon where we can beat Texas and Oklahoma for some guys in their own region.
But if that happens its due to our emergence as a national program it has almost nothing to do with all the time we've spent there the last 6 years. -
We are going to get Banks lol.
-
whuggy said:
Yeah I don't get the argument that resources are wasted by recruiting Texas. Take LSU. People should say that they are wasting resources by recruiting California and Utah. Two non-traditional areas for them. But that has resulted in them getting Elias Ricks and Siaki Ika the last two cycles. Yes Orgeron has connections in Cali but Petersen has the same connections in Texas as he has been recruiting there forever. Also if UW continues to be nationally relevant that exposure does some of the initial footwork needed to get the attention of Texas recruits. People make it sound like it's some kind of big time allocation devoted to Texas when it's just not true. If it's 5% of your recruiting allocation time and you pull 1 out of 20 kids in a recruiting cycle that sounds okay to me. And as you get better the quality of that 1 recruit also gets better.Tequilla said:The question always comes down to what the cost is
The argument against recruiting Texas is that we can be doing better in California. But who in California are we really missing on?
I get all the arguments but the reality is that culture and fit matter a lot to this staff. Those that receive what we are about will gravitate towards us. Those that don’t wont.
Ultimately the key in Texas is gaining traction. Getting a player like Levi is huge. As the Texas players on our roster produce and get to the league our reputation will only further grow there.
Until there’s tangible evidence that our efforts in Texas are wasted, then it’s a worthwhile INVESTMENT for the program to make if they deem that they have the resources to devote to it
UW brand isnt LSU brand
UW isnt in the SEC
UW isnt in the South
UW doesnt play bag games
When LSU calls every recruit in the country knows who it is, knows their mascot, there school colors. When "Washington" calls most people are thinking about Trump/DC or call it Washington University, or Huskie or some other dumbshit.
To say that because LSU or some SEC school can grab recruits from California therefore UW (or pac12) schools should be able to go into the south and win recruiting battles with similar ease has no baring in reality. I cannot express to you how different football is treated in the South than it is in Southern California. There are plenty of recruits all around the country that say "I want to play in the SEC".... How many big time recruits from the South would ever say "I want to play in the Pac12"?
Your California examples like Elias Rick just prove the point though, why waste resources at all in Texas (south) when Southern California is ripe for the picking and UW is currently the premiere program on the west coast? Why go to Texas to compete against LSU, UT, TAMU, Oklahoma, Alabama, Georgia, etc for a same or lessor recruit that has no idea who UW even is when players like Ricks or Smalls are sitting in our region that we should be dominating?
Recruit outside of your region when you cant find a recruit you need within it. -
Here's what UW has pulled out of Texas in SIX YEARS of recruiting after scouting, researching, and evaluating 103 players. You know, because Washington is "selective" when finding "OKG's".
On average it is the bottom end depth of our class. The exception is obviously Levi but even counting him the average is low. Remove him and it looks even worse.
So there's essentially three arguments people are making.
1) We need these players for depth.
No, there are lots of players in our natural geographic footprint that we already recruit in that are "replacement" level(.8488 average) bottom end depth that we are passing on. This includes the state of Washington which has caused grumblings from the natives and which takes the LEAST amount of opportunity cost to recruit and lock up.
2) There's little opportunity cost to us recruiting Texas. We might as well do it.
This is a hilariously bad take. Are recruiting schedules intense? Are coaches' times valuable? If the answer to either of questions is "no" then fucking fire the coach. Every trip taken to Texas is a trip not taken to Utah, Arizona, California, Oregon, etc. and often times because of the distance is worth two of the others.
3) They are laying a foundation for future recruiting in Texas.
By the coaches own admission this isn't how they view it at this point. The foundation needed to recruit ELITE talent is winning on the national stage which will naturally lead to in-roads. This is why Clemson can recruit ELITE guys out of California. "Come play for Championships". The coaches have admitted they are looking for 1-2 guys to fill out depth and aren't swinging for big time players.
Everyone that tries to lambaste criticism of the "Texas strategy" as some lemming narrative can eat a giant pile of dicks. There's legitimate reasons to criticize this strategy and if you can't see them after this article then I suggest you drink bleach because there's no fucking hope for you. -
UW (or any Pac 12 team except USC when they are not shit) isn't going to be beat Texas, Aggie, or OU for top Texas kids. But that doesn't mean it isn't worth recruiting. There is so much talent in Texas that there are a ton of kids who fly under the radar. UW has excellent coaches--the best in the conference (IMHO) who can identify that type of talent. That is why they are in Texas.
The 2 best Texas kids chip pulled out of Oregon (LMJ and Huff) had offers from Minnesota/TCU (LMJ) and Buffalo/Colorado (Huff). -
There isn't a single recruit out West that UW wanted and would have gotten had they not "wasted time" recruiting Texas. Not a single one. They clearly have enough time to recruit both the West region and Texas. So who gives a fuck? We would not have had a better chance at getting Justin Flowe or Elias Ricks or whoever the fuck you think we could have gotten had we not recruited Texas at all this class. Some West coast kids are just not coming here no matter what. Even when UW wins a national title, there will still be a few elite West coast kids that don't want to come here.
If our hidden gems are coming from WA, CA, and TX that's fine with me. If you can create a bigger pool of hidden gems and select the top hidden gems from that larger pool of recruits, then the hidden gems you're getting have a better chance of panning out. For instance, there was no hidden gem offensive lineman on the West coast better than Victor Curne in his class. There is no hidden gem RB out West this class better than Jay'Veon Sunday. Those guys are upgrades over West coast guys we would have had to take had we not recruited Texas.
Plus, Texas kids just know how to play the game because the high school coaching down there is really good. We haven't had any Texas busts on this roster. They have played major roles already (Fuller and Onwuzurike) or will very soon (Curne the #2 RG and Rice the #2 Buck). -
LOL sure in Ballz' fantasy reality where we never miss on kids then of course you can be 100% certain we wouldn't have better results in a different hypothetical universe.StrongArmCobra said:There isn't a single recruit out West that UW wanted and would have gotten had they not "wasted time" recruiting Texas. Not a single one. They clearly have enough time to recruit both the West region and Texas. So who gives a fuck? We would not have had a better chance at getting Justin Flowe or Elias Ricks or whoever the fuck you think we could have gotten had we not recruited Texas at all this class. Some West coast kids are just not coming here no matter what. Even when UW wins a national title, there will still be a few elite West coast kids that don't want to come here.
If our hidden gems are coming from WA, CA, and TX that's fine with me. If you can create a bigger pool of hidden gems and select the top hidden gems from that larger pool of recruits, then the hidden gems you're getting have a better chance of panning out. For instance, there was no hidden gem offensive lineman on the West coast better than Victor Curne in his class. There is no hidden gem RB out West this class better than Jay'Veon Sunday. Those guys are upgrades over West coast guys we would have had to take had we not recruited Texas.
Plus, Texas kids just know how to play the game because the high school coaching down there is really good. We haven't had any Texas busts on this roster. They have played major roles already (Fuller and Onwuzurike) or will very soon (Curne the #2 RG and Rice the #2 Buck).
What might be even more unbelievable is you are using a sample size of 6 players, 2 of which have actually played, to say that Texas kids "just know how to play the game" so they won't be busts. -
Those are six completely irreplaceable "hidden gems" though. There's not a single recruit in any of the West that could have served as a replacement for any of them.FremontTroll said:
LOL sure in Ballz' fantasy reality where we never miss on kids then of course you can be 100% certain we wouldn't have better results in a different hypothetical universe.StrongArmCobra said:There isn't a single recruit out West that UW wanted and would have gotten had they not "wasted time" recruiting Texas. Not a single one. They clearly have enough time to recruit both the West region and Texas. So who gives a fuck? We would not have had a better chance at getting Justin Flowe or Elias Ricks or whoever the fuck you think we could have gotten had we not recruited Texas at all this class. Some West coast kids are just not coming here no matter what. Even when UW wins a national title, there will still be a few elite West coast kids that don't want to come here.
If our hidden gems are coming from WA, CA, and TX that's fine with me. If you can create a bigger pool of hidden gems and select the top hidden gems from that larger pool of recruits, then the hidden gems you're getting have a better chance of panning out. For instance, there was no hidden gem offensive lineman on the West coast better than Victor Curne in his class. There is no hidden gem RB out West this class better than Jay'Veon Sunday. Those guys are upgrades over West coast guys we would have had to take had we not recruited Texas.
Plus, Texas kids just know how to play the game because the high school coaching down there is really good. We haven't had any Texas busts on this roster. They have played major roles already (Fuller and Onwuzurike) or will very soon (Curne the #2 RG and Rice the #2 Buck).
What might be even more unbelievable is you are using a sample size of 6 players, 2 of which have actually played, to say that Texas kids "just know how to play the game" so they won't be busts. -
Hook. Line. Sinker.backthepack said:We are going to get Banks lol.
-
Glad you could bring the AIDS to what is a decent thread.
Every single recruit out West that UW wanted and missed on was because they are "making an investment" recruiting Texas. Every single one. They clearly do not have enough time to recruit both the West region and Texas.... Damn its fun to make both wrong, overly definitive, and impossible to prove/disprove statements... Now I get it.StrongArmCobra said:There isn't a single recruit out West that UW wanted and would have gotten had they not "wasted time" recruiting Texas. Not a single one. They clearly have enough time to recruit both the West region and Texas.
"hidden gems" is this NCAA 14 or something?StrongArmCobra said:If our hidden gems are coming from WA, CA, and TX that's fine with me. If you can create a bigger pool of hidden gems and select the top hidden gems from that larger pool of recruits, then the hidden gems you're getting have a better chance of panning out. For instance, there was no hidden gem offensive lineman on the West coast better than Victor Curne in his class. There is no hidden gem RB out West this class better than Jay'Veon Sunday. Those guys are upgrades over West coast guys we would have had to take had we not recruited Texas.
Filling out an opening or two in the bottom of the class with high ceiling/low cost recruit is fine. Its extremely difficult in a state like Texas because you either have to spend a lot of resources finding that overlooked "gem" that every other schools in the country somehow missed (because everyone looks at Texas) OR you have to recruit directly against a school with a massive recruiting advantage.
