2014 (rivals)
Texas 15
A&M 13
Baylor 8
Tech 6
UH
Rice
TCU 6
SMU 2
UNT
UTEP
SFA
Navarro JC
Blinn JC
OU 5
OSU 8
KS 2
KSU 1
ISU
Neb
CU
Mo
LSU 5
Ark 1
Tulsa
La Tech
ND 3
Tennessee
Alabama 1
Florida
Mississippi 1
Vanderbilt 1
Kentucky 1
BYU
Michigan
Minnesota 1
Purdue 1
Ohio St. 1
Iowa
Northwestern 1
California 1
Arizona St. 1
Arizona
Oregon 2
Oregon St. 1
USC 1
UCLA 3
Stanford 2
Washington
Florida St. 1
Miami
Clemson
Boston College
Georgia Tech
Boise St. 1
Fresno
Undecided 4

100

2008
Texas 17
A&M 15
Baylor 5
Tech 2
UH
Rice 2
TCU 1
SMU
UNT 1
UTEP
SFA
Navarro JC
Blinn JC
OU 9
OSU 6
KS 1
KSU 1
ISU 2
Neb 4
CU 1
Mo 1
LSU 4
Ark
Tulsa 1
La Tech 1
ND 1
Tennessee
Alabama 1
Florida 2
Mississippi 1
Vanderbilt
Kentucky
BYU
Michigan 3
Minnesota 3
Purdue 1
Ohio St. 1
Iowa 1
Northwestern
California
Arizona St.
Arizona
Oregon 3
Oregon St. 1
USC 1
UCLA 1
Stanford 2
Washington
Florida St.
Miami 1
Clemson
Boston College 1
Georgia Tech 1
Boise St.
Fresno
Undecided 1

100

2007
Texas 22
A&M 12
Baylor 5
Tech 6
UH 1
Rice 0
TCU 4
SMU 0
UNT 0
UTEP 0
SFA
Navarro JC 2
Blinn JC 1
OU 6
OSU 8
KS 1
KSU 2
ISU 0
Neb 4
CU 0
Mo 2
LSU 5
Ark 3
Tulsa 1
La Tech
ND 0
Tennessee 2
Alabama 1
Florida
Mississippi
Vanderbilt
Kentucky
BYU 1
Michigan 3
Minnesota 1
Purdue
Ohio St.
Iowa
Northwestern
California 1
Arizona St. 1
Arizona 2
Oregon
Oregon St.
USC
UCLA
Stanford
Washington
Florida St.
Miami 2
Clemson
Boston College
Georgia Tech
Boise St.
Fresno
Undecided 1

100

To lend some perspective:
https://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruit.../rank-3536
Louisiana top 55:
LSU 16
Rest of SEC 13
Big 12 11
Other 15

And Texas, with #3, #34, #40 and #46 arguably did better than any school but LSU in the state. Arkansas was the only SEC school with 4-#8, #31, #50, #54. So is the SEC losing Louisiana?

(10-07-2016 12:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  Just remembered, Fox put UT-OU on FS1. I would be amazed if an FS1 game outdrew the CBS game anywhere but Austin and San Antonio. FS1 gets very poor ratings and it will probably be way down from last year's UT-OU game.

I think UT-OU on FS1 has more to do with FOX trying to promote FS1 than anything else. Could be the highest rated college football on FS1 ever. FS1 will see a nice uptick next year with B1G inventory joining the lineup.

But, yes, the ratings between CBS game and FS1 game this week will be pretty lopsided.

So the simple question to ask - and sorry if someone already did ask this - is which SEC teams are those SEC signed players on?

What I'm getting at: would Mississippi St, for example, now say "well, I guess with TA&M in the SEC now, we can recruit in E Texas" ?

(10-07-2016 12:37 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 12:03 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  How many of those recruits play(ed) for Texas A&M or MIZZOU?

Does it really matter? The Big12 lost HALF their top recruits. I doubt 2 teams took them all.

It matters a lot, and I bet a huge chunk of that was A&M.

Unless <insert B12 school here> lost recruits, why would they care?

(10-07-2016 12:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 10:38 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I suspect it is true that the SEC is recruiting Texas better with a team in the state. If it wasn't that would be a huge surprise. But if I'm being honest, I don't think your data is convincing. Seems kinda cherry picked. I'd want to see more data- all SEC schools before and after, as well as the Texas schools' data before an after. And not just select year's either. Also I'd be interested in how many recruits are going to Nebraska/ Colorado and even Missouri than there were when those teams were in the past.

I'm not asking you to do that leg work, of course. Just saying what I'd really want to have to be able to make conclusions.

Here is a cut and paste of the 4 years I have of the top 100 without formatting (since I usually have blanks in the spreadsheet when there were zeros it probably will be hard to read, but you can see the main schools).
2015 (rivals 2014 (rivals) 2008 2007
Texas 17 15 17 22
A&M 13 13 15 12
Baylor 13 8 5 5
Tech 4 6 2 6
UH 6 1
Rice 0 2 0
TCU 9 6 1 4
SMU 2 2 0
UNT 1 0
UTEP 0
SFA 1
Navarro JC 2
Blinn JC 1
OU 2 5 9 6
OSU 2 8 6 8
KS 2 1 1
KSU 1 1 2
ISU 2 0
Neb 4 4
CU 1 0
Mo 1 1 2
LSU 3 5 4 5
Ark 2 1 3
Tulsa 1 1
La Tech 1
ND 3 1 0
Tennessee 2
Alabama 4 1 1 1
Florida 1 2
Mississippi 4 1 1
Vanderbilt 1
Kentucky 1
BYU 1
Michigan 3 3
Minnesota 1 1 3 1
Purdue 1 1
Ohio St. 1 1
Iowa 1
Northwestern 1
California 1 1
Arizona St. 1 1 1
Arizona 2
Oregon 1 2 3
Oregon St. 1 1 1
USC 1 1
UCLA 2 3 1
Stanford 4 2 2
Washington 1
Florida St. 1 1
Miami 1 2
Clemson 1
Boston College 1
Georgia Tech 1 1
Boise St. 1
Fresno 1
Undecided 1 4 1 1

100 100 100 100

OK here's what I get:

comparing Texas Top 100 07-08 and 15-16

Current Big 12 teams in Texas
07-08- 62 players
15-16- 78 players

Current non-Texas Big 12
07-08- 36 players
15-16- 20 players

Non-A&M fomer Big 12 teams (Neb, CU, Mizzou)
07-08- 12 players
15-16- 1 players

SEC West
07-08- 15 players
15-16- 21 players

SEC East
07-08- 4 players
15-16- 3 players

My observations-
The things that stand out to me is the non-Texas schools not getting as many Texas top 100, especially OU (15 in 2 years before, 7 in 2 years after). The SEC is getting more players but not a ton, and LSU actually had 1 less in 15-16. Also, the departed non-Texas schools saw their Texas recruiting dry up, especially Nebraska.

Finally, the most glaring difference between the two periods is TCU and Baylor. Combined they had 15 before and 36 after.

Even two year comparisons is tough to make conclusions about, but it doesn't seem like in comparing Texas top 100 lists from 07-08 and 15-16 the SEC has dramatically increased Texas top 100 recruiting. And what gains they have made have come at the expense of the departing non-A&M Big 12 schools. The Big 12 is steady, although there has been a shift toward Big 12 Texas schools, likely because of the success of Baylor and TCU.

Frog,

Great work!! However, the OP was talking about the top 50. Granted, I don't think it's worth your time to re-do the list. Top 100 analysis is perfectly valid.

But just saying the OP was highlighting a huge shift in top 50 recruits.

(10-07-2016 12:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 10:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 09:47 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 09:39 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 09:12 AM)bullet Wrote:  Big 12 schools got 11 of the Big 55 in Louisiana last year.

There's simply no doubt that the last five years have marked a big improvement in SEC penetration of Texas in every way, including recruiting.

Heck, this weekend, the weekend of the Red River Shootout, is arguably the showcase Big 12 weekend of the regular season. And it's being upstaged in Texas by Tennessee vs A/M.

I take it you didn't read my post. There's considerable doubt about recruiting.

Your take is mistaken. I *did* read your posts, and my statement was my way of summarizing the situation with them taken into consideration.

E.g., taking TAMU out of the equation, the SEC had 3 Texas top 50 recruits in 2010, but 14 in 2016. That's a big jump.

As for TV ratings, yes, it will be interesting to see how UT-OK shapes up vs Tenn - A/M, with the caveat that the Shootout faces much weaker competition in its time slot.

I will note that last week, the Big 12 showcase game, Oklahoma vs TCU, which was on Big FOX, drew fewer viewers than Alabama vs ... Kentucky.

That's not good.

Just remembered, Fox put UT-OU on FS1.

Well, that speaks volumes, doesn't it?

(10-07-2016 03:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 12:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 10:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 09:47 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 09:39 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  There's simply no doubt that the last five years have marked a big improvement in SEC penetration of Texas in every way, including recruiting.

Heck, this weekend, the weekend of the Red River Shootout, is arguably the showcase Big 12 weekend of the regular season. And it's being upstaged in Texas by Tennessee vs A/M.

I take it you didn't read my post. There's considerable doubt about recruiting.

Your take is mistaken. I *did* read your posts, and my statement was my way of summarizing the situation with them taken into consideration.

E.g., taking TAMU out of the equation, the SEC had 3 Texas top 50 recruits in 2010, but 14 in 2016. That's a big jump.

As for TV ratings, yes, it will be interesting to see how UT-OK shapes up vs Tenn - A/M, with the caveat that the Shootout faces much weaker competition in its time slot.

I will note that last week, the Big 12 showcase game, Oklahoma vs TCU, which was on Big FOX, drew fewer viewers than Alabama vs ... Kentucky.

That's not good.

Just remembered, Fox put UT-OU on FS1.

Well, that speaks volumes, doesn't it?

Fox trying to bump up FS1 at the expense of short term viewership.
They are a long way behind ESPN but are trying to catch up with the Big 10 contract and games like this on FS1.

(10-07-2016 03:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 03:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 12:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 10:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 09:47 AM)bullet Wrote:  I take it you didn't read my post. There's considerable doubt about recruiting.

Your take is mistaken. I *did* read your posts, and my statement was my way of summarizing the situation with them taken into consideration.

E.g., taking TAMU out of the equation, the SEC had 3 Texas top 50 recruits in 2010, but 14 in 2016. That's a big jump.

As for TV ratings, yes, it will be interesting to see how UT-OK shapes up vs Tenn - A/M, with the caveat that the Shootout faces much weaker competition in its time slot.

I will note that last week, the Big 12 showcase game, Oklahoma vs TCU, which was on Big FOX, drew fewer viewers than Alabama vs ... Kentucky.

That's not good.

Just remembered, Fox put UT-OU on FS1.

Well, that speaks volumes, doesn't it?

Fox trying to bump up FS1 at the expense of short term viewership.
They are a long way behind ESPN but are trying to catch up with the Big 10 contract and games like this on FS1.

Maybe so, but the optics of it are bad, the impression is that the game has been "relegated" to FS1 (in the words of the Texas beat writer's article below) so fairly or not it feeds into the narrative of a struggling Big 12.

And really, that impression isn't unfair. If Texas-OU were truly a big game, no way would they put it on FS1. It's on FS1 because it's big enough to give that network a boost, but not big enough that taking it off of Big FOX costs them major advert revenue.

http://www.hookem.com/story/bucking-trad...gated-fs1/

(10-07-2016 03:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 03:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 03:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 12:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2016 10:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Your take is mistaken. I *did* read your posts, and my statement was my way of summarizing the situation with them taken into consideration.

E.g., taking TAMU out of the equation, the SEC had 3 Texas top 50 recruits in 2010, but 14 in 2016. That's a big jump.

As for TV ratings, yes, it will be interesting to see how UT-OK shapes up vs Tenn - A/M, with the caveat that the Shootout faces much weaker competition in its time slot.

I will note that last week, the Big 12 showcase game, Oklahoma vs TCU, which was on Big FOX, drew fewer viewers than Alabama vs ... Kentucky.

That's not good.

Just remembered, Fox put UT-OU on FS1.

Well, that speaks volumes, doesn't it?

Fox trying to bump up FS1 at the expense of short term viewership.
They are a long way behind ESPN but are trying to catch up with the Big 10 contract and games like this on FS1.

Maybe so, but the optics of it are bad, the impression is that the game has been "relegated" to FS1 (in the words of the Texas beat writer's article below) so fairly or not it feeds into the narrative of a struggling Big 12.

And really, that impression isn't unfair. If Texas-OU were truly a big game, no way would they put it on FS1. It's on FS1 because it's big enough to give that network a boost, but not big enough that taking it off of Big FOX costs them major advert revenue.

http://www.hookem.com/story/bucking-trad...gated-fs1/

Yes, the optics are bad. But nobody expected Texas to be particularly good this year. OU was expected to be good this year. They may still turn out to be. Or not.

So regarding the OP:

2010: 44 of the top 50 Texas players went to Big12+SEC, with SEC getting 3 (7%)
2016: 43 of the top 50 Texas players went to Big12+SEC, with SEC getting 21 (49%)


Based on Frog's analysis of the top 100 Texas players, I conclude that the difference falls as:

- Nebraska & Colorado no longer getting top 50 Texas players
- Texas AM & Mizzou getting top 50 Texas players now counting for SEC
- Other SEC schools landing more top 50 Texas players

(10-07-2016 04:50 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  So regarding the OP:

2010: 44 of the top 50 Texas players went to Big12+SEC, with SEC getting 3 (7%)
2016: 43 of the top 50 Texas players went to Big12+SEC, with SEC getting 21 (49%)


Based on Frog's analysis of the top 100 Texas players, I conclude that the difference falls as:

- Nebraska & Colorado no longer getting top 50 Texas players
- Texas AM & Mizzou getting top 50 Texas players now counting for SEC
- Other SEC schools landing more top 50 Texas players

Fair summary.

Colorado rarely got a top 50 Texas player.

I'm sure that's true, especially around the 2010 timeframe. But Nebraska might've gotten a few.

TA&M plus other SEC schools getting some, I'm sure is the bulk of the change.