Other than what's on rivals, anyone have any additional information? Currently we are 31st nationally and 3rd in conference.
Recruiting
- Thread starter td71sooner
- Start date
I expect OU to move up, regardless of how the next game (or two) ends up. OU is in on some high level recruits according to at least three services (including Rivals and Scout).
Murray won't figure into the worth of the 2016 class, but his addition could really be significant.
Murray won't figure into the worth of the 2016 class, but his addition could really be significant.
OU may not look impressive right now on the rankings, but reading the pay board side in the past month or so, I can tell you that OU is getting more interest from elite level talent right now than in quite a number of years. In past years, OU would have already been scratched off alot of kids lists. But right now OU is still in on alot of elite kids that still have OU as one of their final choices. I can see OUs class closing extremely strong this year.
And it appears that the extreme reliance of Texas high school talent has become lessened....that OU is going coast-to-coast in recruiting, even in Canada if last year's haul is any indication.
That would be great news. It would be great to ride the impressive season with an equally impressive recruiting class.
I have loads of respect for you folks that know football and talent way better than I.
However, I'll suggest that recruiting rankings have always seemed a false economy to me. I understand there often are unmistakable differences between a 5-star guy and a 3-star guy, but I've seen way too many highly rated classes fold into dust and those 2 and 3 star guys are the ones who become stars.
For example, there was a long while that Texas cherry-picked their recruits and OU always kicked their ass anyway. 63-14, 65-13, 55-17, 63-21 etc...
And don't get me wrong, I know not every metric or rating can be correct, but OU is playing in the final four this year and we haven't had a top 4 class in recruiting ever, right?
T-Shirt wisdom: "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog."
However, I'll suggest that recruiting rankings have always seemed a false economy to me. I understand there often are unmistakable differences between a 5-star guy and a 3-star guy, but I've seen way too many highly rated classes fold into dust and those 2 and 3 star guys are the ones who become stars.
For example, there was a long while that Texas cherry-picked their recruits and OU always kicked their ass anyway. 63-14, 65-13, 55-17, 63-21 etc...
And don't get me wrong, I know not every metric or rating can be correct, but OU is playing in the final four this year and we haven't had a top 4 class in recruiting ever, right?
T-Shirt wisdom: "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog."
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
Yep, those services are a rough guideline rather than an exact science.
FWIW, Scout seems to treat OU more favorably as opposed to Rivals. If we're 31st in one, then we're probably 25th in the other. Just guessing, I haven't looked.
Besides, it's probably premium info that you have to pay for.
FWIW, Scout seems to treat OU more favorably as opposed to Rivals. If we're 31st in one, then we're probably 25th in the other. Just guessing, I haven't looked.
Besides, it's probably premium info that you have to pay for.
There is a lot of talk that the 2017 class is looking to be better ranked than the 2016 class. In addition, I've read that Murray is also making some conncetions to quite a few Texas recruits for 2016. From what I've been reading, the 2016 is expected to close the gap and also close strong.
You're exactly right LT. It all boils down to coaches evaluating talent, not recruiting services evaluating talent. Far more weight goes into a recruit/players chemistry with the coaches and/or team, and whether they can excel in whatever system that program is running. I believe that carries alot more weight over how fast or whatever physical ability that kid has as an individual. What does the kid bring to the TEAM.
The star rating system is clearly an inexact science, but so is every recruiting rating and/or evaluation and projection.
However......I doubt if there would be any second guessing if OU ever had the top rated class by any recruiting service.
The star rating system is a good measuring stick for rating talent as far as I'm concerned.....it's not at all an airtight system, but it seems to be the best way to grade recruiting classes, aside from the perennial underachievers at Texas. (I think the problem at Texas is mostly the inability to land topnotch quarterbacks, then having those quarterbacks play for rival teams).
What I think now is that OU is in line to have a productive recruiting class in February, perhaps a top 15 class when all is said and done. I think Stoops' overhaul of his staff, as well as the on-field success since the Texas game, is really helping.
However......I doubt if there would be any second guessing if OU ever had the top rated class by any recruiting service.
The star rating system is a good measuring stick for rating talent as far as I'm concerned.....it's not at all an airtight system, but it seems to be the best way to grade recruiting classes, aside from the perennial underachievers at Texas. (I think the problem at Texas is mostly the inability to land topnotch quarterbacks, then having those quarterbacks play for rival teams).
What I think now is that OU is in line to have a productive recruiting class in February, perhaps a top 15 class when all is said and done. I think Stoops' overhaul of his staff, as well as the on-field success since the Texas game, is really helping.
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
I agree, also, if OU wins 8, we'll easily pop into the top ten, probably top five. That's been the trend even as far back as 2000.
I think a better metric, although obviously with flaws as well, is looking at what programs offered a recruit a scholarship.
If the tOSU's and Alabama's of the world are offering, he's probably a good get regardless of stars.
But if only New Mexico State is offering, maybe he's just a project.
Not scientific, but has been pretty reliable.
If the tOSU's and Alabama's of the world are offering, he's probably a good get regardless of stars.
But if only New Mexico State is offering, maybe he's just a project.
Not scientific, but has been pretty reliable.
True, I tend to look at who else has offered as well, but in in line with your exception reference, are guys like Sam. Coach Stoops and his staff have historically been OUtstanding at identifying diamonds in the rough and making the most out of what he talent they have.
That's a real good analogy, Micco. Well done !
But at the same time, when I look at UConn's football commitment list and see four 3-star recruits with the rest being 2-star players (among 14 total commitments), I think that those 3-star guys won't be as good not just because UConn has recruited them, but also because they won't be playing alongside players of the Ohio State-Alabama-Oklahoma level, which would make those same players better than they would be at UConn.
Watching UConn play football is like watching a boxing match in which one fighter has one hand tied behind his back. Today's loss by UConn to Marshall is a good example.....a team with a decent defense that just isn't good enough to compensate for an impotent offense....Marshall won 16-10 with three field goals deciding the game. But UConn's a basketball school and fans in the Northeast gravitate towards professional sports and there might be 12-14 college football fans in all of New England....so no one gives a shit.
If we kick Bama's ass (again) this year (and I think we will), it might say something about class recruiting ratings. They've had much higher rankings than we the past 5 years. (Scout's rankings.)
2011: Bama 7, OU 15
2012 Bama 2, OU 10
2013 Bama 4, OU 15
2014 Bama 1, OU 13
2015 Bama 2, OU 14
(This year so far: Bama 3, OU 27)
We've beaten them the last three years we've played, including 45-31 with Trevor Knight at the helm a couple of years ago.
I glanced at Bama's all-time football record and I think they have a losing record only against Notre Dame, OU, and (shockingly) Utah, whom they've played only once.
2011: Bama 7, OU 15
2012 Bama 2, OU 10
2013 Bama 4, OU 15
2014 Bama 1, OU 13
2015 Bama 2, OU 14
(This year so far: Bama 3, OU 27)
We've beaten them the last three years we've played, including 45-31 with Trevor Knight at the helm a couple of years ago.
I glanced at Bama's all-time football record and I think they have a losing record only against Notre Dame, OU, and (shockingly) Utah, whom they've played only once.
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
Utah beat them?
How did that get by me? Mmm, curious. (unless it was in 1936 or something like that)
Just look at OU commit, 3 Star RB Abdul Adams. When Bama, UF, Mich, Miami, ND, Mich State and UGA all offer this guy. The recruiting services missed on this one.
One thing that we all need to remember when reading the Rivals, Scout, etc recruiting rankings, is that there are only a handful that actual work or go see the kids as compared to the hundreds, perhaps even thousands of coaches that see them. My point is that many kids are not even rated, primarily because of time & money.
Once it’s determined that a player has enough of the right the athletic stuff, evaluating the players intangible factors seems like an art.
Are they the NFL first guys? If so a high percentage of these types of players (not all) won’t put everything on the line for the university’s football program because they never developed the strong emotional bonds. They take plays off trying to preserve their bodies for the NFL.
Those emotional bonds were strong for the 2000 OU team and they appear to be very strong this season. Without these emotional feelings for the program a lot of the 5 star players never live up to the recruiting service rankings. The right emotional investment is why we sometimes see over achieving 2 star / walk-on players doing well.
The right emotional/ intangible factor is VERY underrated by the recruiting services IMHO.
Are they the NFL first guys? If so a high percentage of these types of players (not all) won’t put everything on the line for the university’s football program because they never developed the strong emotional bonds. They take plays off trying to preserve their bodies for the NFL.
Those emotional bonds were strong for the 2000 OU team and they appear to be very strong this season. Without these emotional feelings for the program a lot of the 5 star players never live up to the recruiting service rankings. The right emotional investment is why we sometimes see over achieving 2 star / walk-on players doing well.
The right emotional/ intangible factor is VERY underrated by the recruiting services IMHO.
I have a friend who was a bigtime insider for the first 29 years of the Dallas Cowboys. This story may sound extraneous, but it makes a valid point in the discussion.
There was a consensus top 15 player back in the 1970s from I think Jackson State who played linebacker. I believe he ended up going in the top seven or eight picks. Had several All Pro seasons and more than a half dozen Pro Bowls. The Cowboys didn't even have him on their draft list. Some would argue that to be a pretty dumb thing. And he was gone by the time the Cowboys took their first player. But he wasn't on their list because they didn't think he was smart enough to play in their defense, which was pretty complicated.
The Cowboys were using a gap assignment defense in a day when that wasn't very common. It was really what the Flex Defense was all about, along with designated pressure from only two of the front four on first and ten and running downs.
The point is that some guys might be better athletes, but for whatever reason, might not fit the way you coach defense. Or offense. You obviously have to recruit guys who've actually heard of your school. and who would consider going there. But some pretty good players might fit that, but not the way you play. In the Big XII right now, your linebackers better be able to be pretty good in pass coverage and tackle in space. There are some great inside linebackers, who would not be a good fit for Big XII schools, because while they're great run stoppers, and are killers at the LOS, they couldn't cover a back anywhere.
Some strong safeties are great at filling a gap at the edge of the LOS on running downs, but if they're going to play in the Big XII, they can't just be two deep guys that help out over the top. Most safeties in OUr conference have to be decent at least in man pass coverage. Not all are.
There was a safety about a decade ago, who went to USC and he was tall, thick, really fast, and could knock your head off. Top ten national recruit and top one or two at safety. But he absolutely stunk at reading ball flight. He was great at filling for the run, and he could play decent coverage within 15-20 yards of the pocket. But on the deep ball, he was not too hard to beat deep. It showed up in the Pac 10-12. And then when he went to the NFL, he looked miserable on the deep ball drills at the combine, dropped substantially in the draft and never really started in the NFL.
He'd have been an all American in the wishbone days, tackling the quarterback on the option, but he pass coverage deficiencies were huge factors.
Most of the really highly rated guys in the Rivals and other rankings are because of spectacular combinations of size and speed, or remarkable high school stats, or multi sport guys who showed versatility, or terrific records as a wrestler or shot putter or maybe track sprinters or jumper or various other factors that might not necessarily make them elite college football players. I mean Jerry Rice was voted the number one player in the NFL ever, by the poll on the NFL network. He went to like Mississippi Valley State.
Maybe the most statistically impressive player in this year's NFL draft class is likely to be Shawn Oakman from Baylor. Outrageous physical numbers. But he's not a great playmaker. He can dominate lesser guys, but he's not even the best defensive lineman on his own team. There was a long article in Sports Illustrated two or three months ago, talking about what a mistake it would be for any pro team to take him early.
He is pretty good at hitting opponents in the back.
The same principal applies to college recruiting. You have to find players that will fit into what you do. And then teach them and develop them really well.
I mean if one of the best three quarterbacks in the country could have walked on at two schools, then it's pretty obvious that recruiting rankings might have some value, but how you play is what matters.
Who's OU's best defensive big guy? I'd argue that it's Charles Walker, and he was a three star recruit. I saw his high school tape and didn't look much like that label. He may have moved up to a low four after OU got his commitment. But he was a guy with tremendous ability.
Rankings are interesting, and most of us would love to have a class of four's and five's only. But OUr last two Heisman winners weren't exactly recruited by everybody.
There was a consensus top 15 player back in the 1970s from I think Jackson State who played linebacker. I believe he ended up going in the top seven or eight picks. Had several All Pro seasons and more than a half dozen Pro Bowls. The Cowboys didn't even have him on their draft list. Some would argue that to be a pretty dumb thing. And he was gone by the time the Cowboys took their first player. But he wasn't on their list because they didn't think he was smart enough to play in their defense, which was pretty complicated.
The Cowboys were using a gap assignment defense in a day when that wasn't very common. It was really what the Flex Defense was all about, along with designated pressure from only two of the front four on first and ten and running downs.
The point is that some guys might be better athletes, but for whatever reason, might not fit the way you coach defense. Or offense. You obviously have to recruit guys who've actually heard of your school. and who would consider going there. But some pretty good players might fit that, but not the way you play. In the Big XII right now, your linebackers better be able to be pretty good in pass coverage and tackle in space. There are some great inside linebackers, who would not be a good fit for Big XII schools, because while they're great run stoppers, and are killers at the LOS, they couldn't cover a back anywhere.
Some strong safeties are great at filling a gap at the edge of the LOS on running downs, but if they're going to play in the Big XII, they can't just be two deep guys that help out over the top. Most safeties in OUr conference have to be decent at least in man pass coverage. Not all are.
There was a safety about a decade ago, who went to USC and he was tall, thick, really fast, and could knock your head off. Top ten national recruit and top one or two at safety. But he absolutely stunk at reading ball flight. He was great at filling for the run, and he could play decent coverage within 15-20 yards of the pocket. But on the deep ball, he was not too hard to beat deep. It showed up in the Pac 10-12. And then when he went to the NFL, he looked miserable on the deep ball drills at the combine, dropped substantially in the draft and never really started in the NFL.
He'd have been an all American in the wishbone days, tackling the quarterback on the option, but he pass coverage deficiencies were huge factors.
Most of the really highly rated guys in the Rivals and other rankings are because of spectacular combinations of size and speed, or remarkable high school stats, or multi sport guys who showed versatility, or terrific records as a wrestler or shot putter or maybe track sprinters or jumper or various other factors that might not necessarily make them elite college football players. I mean Jerry Rice was voted the number one player in the NFL ever, by the poll on the NFL network. He went to like Mississippi Valley State.
Maybe the most statistically impressive player in this year's NFL draft class is likely to be Shawn Oakman from Baylor. Outrageous physical numbers. But he's not a great playmaker. He can dominate lesser guys, but he's not even the best defensive lineman on his own team. There was a long article in Sports Illustrated two or three months ago, talking about what a mistake it would be for any pro team to take him early.
He is pretty good at hitting opponents in the back.
The same principal applies to college recruiting. You have to find players that will fit into what you do. And then teach them and develop them really well.
I mean if one of the best three quarterbacks in the country could have walked on at two schools, then it's pretty obvious that recruiting rankings might have some value, but how you play is what matters.
Who's OU's best defensive big guy? I'd argue that it's Charles Walker, and he was a three star recruit. I saw his high school tape and didn't look much like that label. He may have moved up to a low four after OU got his commitment. But he was a guy with tremendous ability.
Rankings are interesting, and most of us would love to have a class of four's and five's only. But OUr last two Heisman winners weren't exactly recruited by everybody.
Last edited:
The population base in Oklahoma will never let OU recruit a roster full of 4 and 5 star players and even if OU could, some are not going to be good fit for whatever reason.
Along with a few highly recruited players OU’s national title teams have normally had several lowly recruited players; including walk-on’s who have over achieved...
Recruiting mostly comes down to how well OU coaches evaluate and recruit players. Developing them and getting them to fully buy into the program is another matter that helps show why the intangible factors on a team are so important.
Along with a few highly recruited players OU’s national title teams have normally had several lowly recruited players; including walk-on’s who have over achieved...
Recruiting mostly comes down to how well OU coaches evaluate and recruit players. Developing them and getting them to fully buy into the program is another matter that helps show why the intangible factors on a team are so important.
It might considered an intangible ... maybe not. But Bob is also very interested in who they are off the football field. Everybody has a grade risk or two. But he seems to spend special effort finding out what kind of students they are. Leadership. What their teachers and fellow students think of them. Basically, can a guy be a good teammate?
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
Yep, over the years Bob has developed a very astute sense of character, humility.
Like, for example, not once this bowl season has any players gotten into any real trouble. Knock on wood.
That hasn't been the case in the past.
As someone posted on the pay board, "I hope there isn't a Burlington Coat Factory near the hotel."
I can remember a couple of recruiting classes that demonstrated how much a coach evaluation is worth. The 1975 freshmen included:
Kent Bradford
Greg Byram (highly-recruited, mostly ran track)
Barry Dittman
Jody Farthing
Victor Hicks
Bud Hebert
Daryl Hunt
Kenny King
Reggie Kinlaw
Thomas Lott
Greg Roberts
Greg Sellmeyer
Woody Shepard
Paul Tabor
Phil Tabor
Uwe Von Schamann
But, I still remember the what they hey attitude when we signed Mike Babb a day later. John Goodman, a mediocre tight end was another question. Why did we want them with all of this sensational talent? Babb fared pretty well and played three years. Goodman started as a rookie defensive tackle for the Steelers. Someone had seen his footwork and his build and knew he could grow into a tackle.
The following year, we had another great freshman class. But, the radio stations and newspapers just couldn't get one name right. I think the Norman Transcript, Daily Oklahoman, and Oklahoma Journal each had a different spelling for an unknown out of Tyler: George Gumby, George Cumbie, George Cumby----whatever. With all of the blue-chippers, who was this kid? Even Cumby didn't think he could play at OU, originally opting for JC. Three year All-American? Everyone missed on this kid.
Kent Bradford
Greg Byram (highly-recruited, mostly ran track)
Barry Dittman
Jody Farthing
Victor Hicks
Bud Hebert
Daryl Hunt
Kenny King
Reggie Kinlaw
Thomas Lott
Greg Roberts
Greg Sellmeyer
Woody Shepard
Paul Tabor
Phil Tabor
Uwe Von Schamann
But, I still remember the what they hey attitude when we signed Mike Babb a day later. John Goodman, a mediocre tight end was another question. Why did we want them with all of this sensational talent? Babb fared pretty well and played three years. Goodman started as a rookie defensive tackle for the Steelers. Someone had seen his footwork and his build and knew he could grow into a tackle.
The following year, we had another great freshman class. But, the radio stations and newspapers just couldn't get one name right. I think the Norman Transcript, Daily Oklahoman, and Oklahoma Journal each had a different spelling for an unknown out of Tyler: George Gumby, George Cumbie, George Cumby----whatever. With all of the blue-chippers, who was this kid? Even Cumby didn't think he could play at OU, originally opting for JC. Three year All-American? Everyone missed on this kid.
Based on your past posts, I'm starting to believe that you're adding little white lies in your stories of the past in an effort to embellish yourself. You have a track record for not telling the truth.
Soonersincefitty
Sooner starter
Yep, George Cumby, former RB, convert to LB. Switzer was genius for that. In fact, I think ole George was probably the fastest linebacker the Sooners have had.
The guy had closing speed that was nuts.
I can't remember who we were playing, but George got pancaked on his ass, got up and shagged down the runner from behind, stopping the TD.
Unbelievable.
LOL. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
I think it's more of a 5 star recruiter vs a 3 star coach thing than missing on the recruit rankings. Saban is a 5 star coach, and his recruits mostly play to their potential. We've got a 5 star coach and mostly 3 and 4 star players. I'd rather have that than a bunch of 5 star players and a 3 star coach.... like a Lane Kiffin type.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Football Jeff Roberson has signed with Minnesota
- Latest: bookieradleysmiles
-
-
-
-
