(02-12-2011 10:05 AM)MajorHoople Wrote: (02-11-2011 09:33 PM)gobaseline Wrote: Kudos to Cubit. I think this approach will pay huge dividends.
When?
I assume this has been his recruiting "approach" since becoming head coach and we have yet to win a MAC-West championship.
Is the recruiting plan faulty, or are we not coaching well enough?
By the revolving door of assistant coaches I'm guessing Cubit believes the latter. But eventually accountability must be laid at his feet for that also.
Time will tell.
In the M live article I read it indicated that the "shift" in waiting out for more talented kids started, in part with last years class.
Better athletes who know how to compete that honed into playing with discipline (scheme) and in a system will always beat lesser athletes doing the same. I know that is a duh statement but it is the jist of the change.
For most mid-majors and lower BCS types they hope to use their local/regional drawing power, individual contacts (that may be far a field) and hoping that by sifting through numbers you will find the kids to step up. The proverbial diamonds in the rough, the kid with "a heart" or the late bloomer.
This approach is more intentional and takes greater effort. It inherently has more risk but the upside is expotential greater.
Regarding the coaching, me thinks it is more related to the system. I have advocated for emphasis on an intentional running game. Cubit uses the passing game as his primary method of attack and uses it to set up the run. That implies different type of athletes with different skills at the same position as opposed to those used effectively in another system. That hasnt been lost on the staff or Cubit but the mediocre run the last couple years convinced him that he can't count on settling to fill slots early and try to develop them, or at least not make that the bulk of any one class. He has committed himself that he needs more game ready kids immediately. The very kids that the Indiana's, South Florida's, South Carolina's, Rutgers and Minnesota's are recruiting. These schools are recruiting talent that the Florida's, Wisconsin's, Pitt, Alabama and Va. Tech are recruiting.
With all the variables: academics, change in staffs or program direction, injuries and some kids "blooming" in real time right in the midst of all drive the recruiting landscape.
DK and Workman come to WMU because they were limping around. The #2 HS hoops player this year, Anthony Davis, didnt average double digits last year in HS nor did he play the AAU route prior to last spring. When he did and for all to see it was too late for the Illinois's, Purdue's and MSU's to "get ahead of the curve" and Calipari came in and said, "Son, do you know who Derek Rose is? Your the (my) next big NBA splash coming out of my tutledge." Now, the kid or kids that UK had targeted prior to Davis's debut were now dropping to the Illinois's and MSU's and Texas's. Their #1's were dropping to Butler, Clemson, Iowa because now the former UK target was available. And so on down the food chain. I cant imagine being much different in football.
So Cubit ID'ing the kids that will impact the MAC right now and that he has even an outside chance at are being wooed earlier, with the intention of being signed. Like any sales situation the more you fill your funnel with suspects on the top end the more likely they become prospects moving down toward the neck of the funnel to finally getting clients coming out the other end. The Difference is how you qualify the suspects and prospects. Do you want to sell 25 times at a $100 a pop or do you want to sell 5 times at $500 and another 6 at $250 and the balance of 14 at $100?
The $500 and $250 sales are more competitive, are made by selling value not just a commodity, involve more "buyers remorse" and frankly greater due diligence to better understand so you can meet the needs of the prospects. They have other choices at their disposal.
Regarding coaches: at this level it is more business than education. Windows of opportunity or perceived windows open and shut more quickly. More is to be made but more is at risk. "If I dont consider this opportunity now, will I get it again at a later time? Is this next move the step needed to get me to the step I really desire? Is being patient better at this point?" There are so many variables. But the one constant is that WMU and the MAC are not flush with cash. So even when you throw in personality differences with Cubit or philosphocal variances the $ are the factor that flips the switch to decide to stay or go.
Just my thinking.
