Of the Top 100 Texas High School recruits, Nebraska, Colorado, and Arkansas have verbaled a total of one Texas Top 100 recruit. All three schools formerly heavily recruited Texas.

Nebraska is suffering a double punch. The Huskers formerly got a lot of recruits out of the state of Missouri, because the Tigers were so hapless for so long. Now that Missouri has a good coach, Nebraska cannot raid Missouri like they did in the past.

Arkansas thought bringing in TAMU into SEC would boost their Texas recruiting. That hasn't happened. Sumlin, an ace recruiter who enjoys recruiting like Barry Switzer did at OU, has shut out Arkansas and TAMU/Sumlin are recruiting at a very, very high level in Texas.

Since Arkansas, Colorado, and Nebraska have lost the Texas high school recruiting ground, who has been the beneficiary(s)? That is simple enough. Oklahoma State, Baylor, Texas Tech, and TCU have been the primary beneficiaries.

Nebraska fans are giving their head coach a lot of heck. But that is not where Nebraska's long term problem is. Being now cut off from Texas recruiting, it is going to be difficult for Nebraska to retain the lofty achievements maintained under Osborne. Osborne took Nebraska to the top of the mountain. Osborne may also have taken Nebraska off the mountain by advocating leaving the B12.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/texas/football/r.../rank-3066

I didn't think CU heavily recruited Texas and I'm pretty sure UNL demise stems from losing access to JUCO transfers which were the foundation of Osborne's success.

(12-03-2013 01:15 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I didn't think CU heavily recruited Texas and I'm pretty sure UNL demise stems from losing access to JUCO transfers which were the foundation of Osborne's success.

They had a good chunk of them in their Big 12 years.

(12-03-2013 01:15 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I didn't think CU heavily recruited Texas and I'm pretty sure UNL demise stems from losing access to JUCO transfers which were the foundation of Osborne's success.

In 2012, one out of three Colorado verbals were from the state of Texas. Six of the 7 Texas verbals were 3-Star.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/colorado/footbal...olorado-18

A lot of the Missouri recruits are staying home now to play in the SEC. It's a no-brainer for them.

Going back to Nebraska, when the B12 was formed, Texas insisted that the proposed B12 did not allow "partial qualifiers" which the old B8 allowed. This really ticked off Osborne and started his angst against Texas U.

I always thought that recruiting factors were totally ignored in some of these expansion decisions, and that this would eventually bite a few people in the arse. I don't care what their history is. Without Texas, recruiting to Nebraska is like recruiting to Afghanistan. In ten years, they will be competing more with Iowa and Minnesota than with Michigan and Ohio State. Hell, they already are.

(12-03-2013 01:38 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  I always thought that recruiting factors were totally ignored in some of these expansion decisions, and that this would eventually bite a few people in the arse. I don't care what their history is. Without Texas, recruiting to Nebraska is like recruiting to Afghanistan. In ten years, they will be competing more with Iowa and Minnesota than with Michigan and Ohio State. Hell, they already are.

Word

I tend to think Nebraska will be fine. Most of their history was in a league w/out Texas, and the same applies for Colorado. How many recruits does Colorado have from Cali? That may make this look like a wash. And why has it taken Arkansas almost 20 years to pay for leaving the SWC?

What am I missing here?

(12-03-2013 01:36 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  A lot of the Missouri recruits are staying home now to play in the SEC. It's a no-brainer for them.

I think winning trumps everything and winning Nebraska was able to recruit Mizzouri in a strong fashion.

But you are correct as Missouri's entry into SEC has closed off Texas recruiting but opened recruiting for the Tigers in SEC states. As shown in the link, the Tigers are getting recruits out of the state of Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, etc.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/missouri/footbal...issouri-22

(12-03-2013 01:38 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  I always thought that recruiting factors were totally ignored in some of these expansion decisions, and that this would eventually bite a few people in the arse. I don't care what their history is. Without Texas, recruiting to Nebraska is like recruiting to Afghanistan. In ten years, they will be competing more with Iowa and Minnesota than with Michigan and Ohio State. Hell, they already are.

And that's why I find it unfathomable that Oklahoma would go to the Big 10 with or without Texas. And why I find it equally unlikely that Texas would land in a conference in an alien region of the country to their fans just to surrender more recruits to A&M.

(12-03-2013 01:35 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:15 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I didn't think CU heavily recruited Texas and I'm pretty sure UNL demise stems from losing access to JUCO transfers which were the foundation of Osborne's success.

In 2012, one out of three Colorado verbals were from the state of Texas. Six of the 7 Texas verbals were 3-Star.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/colorado/footbal...olorado-18

CU never heavily recruited Texas. In 2011, they had 4 Texas recruits, in 2010 only 2. Even in 2012 CU still had more recruits from California than Texas. California is also where CU's current head coach has ties. I can't speak about the other schools but this is a non-issue for CU. This is what moving to the Pac12 was about for Colorado.

(12-03-2013 01:45 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  I tend to think Nebraska will be fine. Most of their history was in a league w/out Texas, and the same applies for Colorado. How many recruits does Colorado have from Cali? That may make this look like a wash. And why has it taken Arkansas almost 20 years to pay for leaving the SWC?

What am I missing here?

What you say is true but the dynamics were shifted. As soon as the B12 was formed, the recruiting factor shifted to schools like Oklahoma State, Baylor, TCU, TT. In the old B8, powerhouse schools like OU and Nebraska could recruit the state of Texas without being in a conference located in Texas. In addition, the old SWC was not viewed favorably by many Texas recruits.

Good coaching at Arizona and Arizona State has put them into the California recruiting in a big way. So it appears Colorado is struggling in both Texas and California. 2012 shows what Colorado gave up

And Arkansas has not been the same for 20 years since leaving the state of Texas via dropping SWC. Arkansas being down in not a recent thing, it is a 20 year thing.

(12-03-2013 01:49 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:35 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:15 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I didn't think CU heavily recruited Texas and I'm pretty sure UNL demise stems from losing access to JUCO transfers which were the foundation of Osborne's success.

In 2012, one out of three Colorado verbals were from the state of Texas. Six of the 7 Texas verbals were 3-Star.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/colorado/footbal...olorado-18

CU never heavily recruited Texas. In 2011, they had 4 Texas recruits, in 2010 only 2. Even in 2012 CU still had more recruits from California than Texas. California is also where CU's current head coach has ties. I can't speak about the other schools but this is a non-issue for CU. This is what moving to the Pac12 was about for Colorado.

Many Colorado grads/fans always wanted the PAC. The CU regents voted twice no but yes on the third time. CU has paid a second price, home attendance. The old B8 brought fans to Boulder; the PAC does not.

(12-03-2013 01:57 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:49 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:35 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:15 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I didn't think CU heavily recruited Texas and I'm pretty sure UNL demise stems from losing access to JUCO transfers which were the foundation of Osborne's success.

In 2012, one out of three Colorado verbals were from the state of Texas. Six of the 7 Texas verbals were 3-Star.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/colorado/footbal...olorado-18

CU never heavily recruited Texas. In 2011, they had 4 Texas recruits, in 2010 only 2. Even in 2012 CU still had more recruits from California than Texas. California is also where CU's current head coach has ties. I can't speak about the other schools but this is a non-issue for CU. This is what moving to the Pac12 was about for Colorado.

Many Colorado grads/fans always wanted the PAC. The CU regents voted twice no but yes on the third time. CU has paid a second price, home attendance. The old B8 brought fans to Boulder; the PAC does not.

The change in conferences hasn't affect recruiting or attendance.

CU football being wretched/unwatchable has done that all by itself.

Dallas-Fort Worth produces 5% of all FBS players. If SMU can just keep some of them home, they'll be in the Top 25.

CU Buff's Home Football Attendance Dips to Lowest Since 1988
By John Henderson, Denver Post

"At 10:15 a.m. Saturday, an hour and 15 minutes before kickoff, the line of cars turning off 28th street and onto Colorado Avenue toward Folsom Field stretched all the way past....one car."

"The 1-10 Buffaloes (1-7 PAC-12) are careening toward their worst season in history, but not many are watching. They drew only a paid crowd of 43,148, the smallest since Dan Hawkins' last season in 2010."

"In reality, 53,613 seat Folsom Field isn't close to being filled. The school announced an "actual" attendance from Saturday's ticket takers of 38,600."

(12-03-2013 01:35 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:15 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I didn't think CU heavily recruited Texas and I'm pretty sure UNL demise stems from losing access to JUCO transfers which were the foundation of Osborne's success.

In 2012, one out of three Colorado verbals were from the state of Texas. Six of the 7 Texas verbals were 3-Star.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/colorado/footbal...olorado-18

Colorado was already in the PAC then.

In fact, if you go to that link and look back through the years, you see this:

2005 - 1 3-star from Texas, 5 3-stars from CA
2006 - 1 3-star from Texas, 5 3-stars from CA
2007 - 0 from Texas, 3 3-stars and 2 4-stars from CA
2008 - 2 3-stars from Texas, 2 3-stars, 3 4-stars, 1 5-star from CA
2009 - 3 3-stars from Texas, 2 3-stars and 1 4-star from CA
2010 - 2 3-stars from Texas, 8 3-stars and 1 4-star from CA

***announced joining of PAC-12***

2011 - 1 3-star from Texas, 5 3-stars from CA
2012 - 6 3-stars from Texas, 6 3-stars from CA
2013 - 3 3-stars from Texas, 7 3-stars from CA

California has been more important to Colorado recruiting than Texas for a while now. And Colorado's Texas recruiting is pretty much the same as it has always been. A couple of 3-stars a year. Except for 2012 when they were already in the Pac-12 and got an unusually large batch of Texas recruits.

(12-03-2013 02:04 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:57 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:49 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:35 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:15 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I didn't think CU heavily recruited Texas and I'm pretty sure UNL demise stems from losing access to JUCO transfers which were the foundation of Osborne's success.

In 2012, one out of three Colorado verbals were from the state of Texas. Six of the 7 Texas verbals were 3-Star.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/colorado/footbal...olorado-18

CU never heavily recruited Texas. In 2011, they had 4 Texas recruits, in 2010 only 2. Even in 2012 CU still had more recruits from California than Texas. California is also where CU's current head coach has ties. I can't speak about the other schools but this is a non-issue for CU. This is what moving to the Pac12 was about for Colorado.

Many Colorado grads/fans always wanted the PAC. The CU regents voted twice no but yes on the third time. CU has paid a second price, home attendance. The old B8 brought fans to Boulder; the PAC does not.

The change in conferences hasn't affect recruiting or attendance.

CU football being wretched/unwatchable has done that all by itself.

No, that is not correct. CU has always had an attendance problem, even when it had winning football teams. The many visiting fans from other B8/B12 schools masqued Colorado's attendance problems. Bad recruiting leads to poor attendance; poor attendance leads to poor recruiting. That is the downward spiral Colorado now finds itself in.

(12-03-2013 01:45 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  I tend to think Nebraska will be fine. Most of their history was in a league w/out Texas, and the same applies for Colorado. How many recruits does Colorado have from Cali? That may make this look like a wash. And why has it taken Arkansas almost 20 years to pay for leaving the SWC?

What am I missing here?

Agreed - Big 8 didn't get within 100 miles of Texas, further to main population areas.

Osborne won in a league with outposts in Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.