(06-17-2020 03:48 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-17-2020 01:50 PM)texoma Wrote:  

(06-17-2020 12:26 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-17-2020 11:36 AM)texoma Wrote:  

(06-17-2020 10:30 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  I realize you know nothing about Tulsa, we've been over that but your name is Texoma and you don't know **** about OSU?

The roster is dominated by Texas and Oklahoma, little Cali, Louisiana, and Tennessee sprinkled in. A huge group of them come from Tulsa, many are tradition links, their program or family sends players to the school, that's where they are expected to go. Justice Hill who chimed in with Chubba is from the Tulsa area (Booker T Washington is top overall athletic program in Ok) and very well known. Many of those Texas kids are from power high school programs mostly in DFW and Houston. Gundy has gotten by through winning and an exciting offense. He has always been known as a goof, this isn't Nick Saban or Lane Kiffin being charismatic, which is why stoops and riley have stayed in front. This is being brought up to recruits already by opposing teams and apparently sometimes they don't have to bring it up, they are being asked about coaching attitudes. Moms seem particularly interested about it. What a surprise that a person with a young black son today would be concerned about such "little" things.

He might salvage this class with so much chaos, but the writing is on the wall, just look at his interaction with them in the apology, I can tell you for a fact many players are suspicious of him being honest with this. That includes players who are native, white, and black.

You are so determined to blast me personally, you miss the whole point of my post, which was about Gundy's unusual recruiting philosophy.

However, I am glad that you agree that Gundy's has had success by winning with an exciting offense that he specifically targets in his unusual recruiting philosophy.

Don't talk.out your behind and you won't have problems. Gundy hasn't been claiming weird people that fit his system. That you think so is hilarious and shows how out of the loop you are. He has altered his offense to fit his team and had he won at ISU a while back would have played for a national championship. He has been putting a bunch of skilled players into the draft. His recruiting isn't La Tech strategy


Here is an in depth description of OSU football recruiting including trends and performance:

For the record over the four years 2014-2018 Gundy and his recruiting were #36 in the country or basically top 25% of all football.

https://oklahoman.com/article/5599801/do...to-improve

Specifically mentioned is the pipe line of high level recruits from Dallas and Houston which are geographically close to OSU at 350 miles or less.

I don't have problems. Brilliant, linking an article no one can read without a subscription.

I don't have a subscription and it loaded just fine for me, twice, but here:

Quote:Is Oklahoma State football recruiting as well as can be expected?
Berry Tramel
by BERRY TRAMEL
Published: Fri, June 29, 2018 9:15 AM Updated: Fri, June 29, 2018 9:18 AM
0
shares
email
0

OSU's Chris Lacy makes a catch as Kansas' Kyle Mayberry defends in the Cowboys' 58-17 victory last November. (Photo by Nate Billings)
OSU's Chris Lacy makes a catch as Kansas' Kyle Mayberry defends in the Cowboys' 58-17 victory last November. (Photo by Nate Billings)
Oklahoma State football recruiting became a topic of discussion two weeks ago when athletic director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing podcast that football coach Mike Gundy needed to improve his recruiting efforts. I blogged about Gundy and Holder here.

A reader, Barry Walker, was intrigued by the question and researched a variety of recruiting questions as it pertains to OSU. I thought I would share of his findings.

Here was his introduction: “My name is Barry Walker and I've pulled together an OSU recruiting analysis that you may find interesting. I received my B.S. in Geography from OSU in 2001 and have spent the last 18 years building a career in spatial analytics -- primarily assisting retail and restaurant brands to develop their expansion strategies through data mining and statistical modeling. I typically keep up with all Cowboy related news and of course have seen the recent dust-up regarding football recruiting or more specifically the criticism toward Gundy's inability to land '4 and 5 star' recruits.

“With the recent trend of winning in Stillwater and high-quality facilities, it FEELS like OSU should be landing much higher in recruiting rankings. I set out to develop a perspective on the topic using a data-driven approach.

“I think everyone agrees that OSU's performance in the W column has consistently outperformed their recruiting ranking. But is that alone a predictor of a team's ability to recruit top-tier talent? It is impossible to analyze every factor that influences recruiting prowess, but I did take a look at several metrics to see what story the data tells in regard to recruiting for Power 5 teams.

“I've attached my analysis if you are interested to check it out. I came away with a different perspective versus what I had going in.

“While everyone wants more ‘4 and 5 star’ players, how realistic is it for a team to land them? What factors seem to influence a team’s ability to attract top talent and how does Oklahoma State compare to other teams in this regard?

“With this in mind, I’ve created a model to predict how many ESPN 300 recruits each Power 5 conference team should have landed in 2014-2018 based on several factors. This model is not perfect – there are factors not included such as a universal ranking of facilities, coaching fit, style of play, playing time, ‘closers’ on a coaching staff, climate, etc. Also, there are inputs in the model that are somewhat circular. As an example, the number of recent NFL draft picks are included. This seems like a logical thing to consider as many top recruits are looking for a path to the NFL – however, landing top recruits also leads to more draft picks. The intent here is to develop a directional viewpoint on the ability to land top-tier recruits by university and set realistic expectations on what may be possible.”


Well, I think this is going to be really interesting. I would issue one word of caution – using ESPN’s top 300, or any other recruiting ranking, is flawed from the outset. That’s why I used only NFL draft picks in my research. It is abundantly clear that ranking of high school football prospects is based more on which schools are recruiting a kid than on what kind of discernible potential the player actually has. For example, if a scout for one of these recruiting services gives a player a 3-star ranking, then that player gets scholarship offers from Alabama and Ohio State, he won’t be a 3-star long. If a player gets a 4-star rating, then his best offers are from Iowa State and North Texas, he won’t be a 4-star long.

Meanwhile, the NFL Draft is an equal-opportunity employer. The Patriots and Steelers don’t get to take whatever players they want. No one is researching the draft services to determine how NFL organizations have fared in scouting. They use the draft.

Anyway, that’s my only caveat. So let’s proceed with Walker’s research.

“COLLEGE FOOTBALL RECRUITING ANALYSIS METRICS”

“Historical Performance: How successful has each team been historically when looking at all-time AP rankings. This composite ranking was completed by the AP in 2016 and likely hasn’t seen a material shift in a single year. While not a direct measure of championships, this does speak to each team’s historical power, heritage and bragging rights.

“Stadium Capacity: While not a comprehensive viewpoint on facilities, this does provide a directional ‘wow-factor’ metric for recruiting.

“Total NFL Draft Picks 2013-2017: Excluding the most recent draft, how many players have been drafted from each school over the last five years.

“Winning Ways: Total wins by team over the five years from 2013 to 2017.

“Proximity to ESPN 300 Talent: Based on the distance to each ESPN 300 recruit’s hometown, over five years, how many ESPN 300 players live within 180 miles or 360 miles of each university. The objective with these metrics is to assess how ‘fertile’ local recruiting grounds are near each university. Recruits typically like to play closer to home as they are familiar with schools and remain close to family.

“Social Scene: Total population within 20 miles of each university is used as a basis to comparing the level of ‘things to do’ when attending a particular school. Directionally, schools in higher population density areas likely have more appealing social scenes versus remote college towns.

“RECRUITING & WINNING

“There has been no shortage of analysis highlighting the relationship between top tier college football talent and winning championships. The trends are clear; teams winning championships typically have the greatest number of high-caliber recruits. Of course, recruiting prowess and winning are not always correlated with a sample of teams breaking the trend in both directions.”

Walker lists the number of ESPN 300 recruits for each school the last five years, plus their average wins per year.

Here’s a sampling. The top 15 in ESPN 300 recruits, with their average wins per year, are:

1. Alabama 89: 12.8

2. Georgia 76: 9.8

3. LSU 72: 8.8

4. Ohio State 71: 12.2

5. Southern Cal 64: 9.6

6. Florida State 62: 10.8

7. Texas 61: 6.2

8. Auburn 55: 9.0

9. Clemson 54: 12.2

10. Michigan 51: 8.0

10. Miami 51: 8.4

12. Oklahoma 46: 10.6

13. Florida 45: 6.8

14. Notre Dame 45: 8.2

15. Texas A&M 43: 8.0

16. Tennessee 41: 6.8

17. Penn State 41: 8.6

18. UCLA 34: 7.6

19. Stanford 33: 10.0

20. South Carolina 32: 7.2

Others of note:

23. Baylor 21: 8.0

26. Nebraska 17: 7.4

28. Arkansas 16: 5.8

30. TCU 15: 8.8

31. Michigan State 14: 9.8

34. West Virginia 12: 7.2

36. Oklahoma State 11: 9.4

37. Louisville 11: 9.2

44. Texas Tech 6: 6.0

56. Kansas 2: 1.8

60. Iowa State 1: 3.8

65. Kansas State 0: 8.0

Walker lists the most under-performing programs as LSU, Texas, Michigan, Florida, Tennessee and Arkansas. No great quibble there.

Walker lists the most over-performing programs as Michigan State, Oklahoma State, Louisville, Wisconsin (six top 300 recruits; 10.8 wins per year), Utah (four top 300 recruits; 8.0 wins per year); Iowa (three top 300 recruits; 8.6 wins per year) and Kansas State. Again, rock-solid list.

But compare those two lists. Among the under-performing, only one program is not in the Texas/South region. That’s Michigan. Among the over-performing, none of the programs is in the Texas/South region. There’s a clear tendency to over-value recruits in the southern U.S. Since the 2013 NFL Draft, 20 Wisconsin Badgers have been selected. Recruiting rankings are a dangerous thing to embrace.

But let’s get back to Walker’s research.

“CONFERENCE RECRUITING SUPREMACY

“Using the ESPN 300 as the basis for measuring the ability to capture top College Football talent, the SEC has been dominant for the past five years (2014-2018 recruiting classes). Of the 1,463 ESPN 300 recruits signed by Power 5 teams, more than one in three signed to an SEC team. On a per-team basis, the SEC is lapping the nearest conference with 7.7 ESPN 300 signees per SEC team per year, with the Pac-12 coming in second with 3.8 ESPN 300 signees per team per year. With only 10 teams, the Big 12 is clearly trailing the other conferences with a total of only 175 ESPN 300 recruits signed over the five-year period. However, on a per-team basis, the Big 12 is in the middle of the pack, tied with the ACC, with each conference averaging 3.5 ESPN 300 recruits per team, per year.”

Here are the per team annual average among the conferences:

SEC 7.7

Pac-12 3.8

Big 12 3.5

ACC 3.5

Big Ten 3.3

“CHARACTERISTICS BY RECRUITING TIER

“Using a clustering algorithm, all 65 Power 5 teams were placed into one of five ‘Recruiting Tiers’ based on the total number of ESPN 300 recruits signed between 2014 and 2018.

“Between 2014 and 2018, 1,463 ESPN 300 recruits were signed by the 65 Power 5 schools; 1,125 of the 1,463, 77% were signed by the 22 teams classified at Tier 1 and Tier 2 recruiting teams over this time period; 91% of the 1,463 were signed to teams classified at Tier 1-3 3 recruiting teams over this time period.

“Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams are true blue-bloods with long histories of success as measured by all-time AP poll points. These teams are also typically located in very ‘fertile’ recruiting grounds. The vast majority of teams in Tier 1 and Tier 2 see high numbers of ESPN 300 prospects living within 180 and 360 miles from the university.

“WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR OKLAHOMA STATE?

“The upper echelon of recruiting schools acquire the majority of top talent in college football. Even with its run of success, Oregon barely squeaks into Tier 2. There is a finite number of elite recruits and it will be very difficult to consistently wrestle top talent away from the top recruiting schools.

“OSU definitely has the recent pedigree and facilities, but will continued to be hampered by a lack of long-term cache and being somewhat isolated geographically from the deepest pools of talent.

“Texas provides the pipeline, but that is a highly competitive source for talent.”

The geographic argument is a little circular. Every fertile recruiting ground is highly-competitive. OSU in recent years has cashed in on geography. It’s 267 miles from Stillwater to Dallas. It’s 505 miles from Stillwater to Houston. The former mileage is to OSU’s advantage. And the latter mileage is no killer. That 350-mile range is a little arbitrary. The most fertile recruiting ground in college football is southern California. There are only two Power 5 schools located within 350 miles of downtown Los Angeles. UCLA and USC.

But Walker’s assessment is hard to debate. The blueblood schools do tend to get the best recruits. The Texas/OSU comparison shows that. The Longhorns clearly sign more ballyhooed talent. And for 10 years, OSU has done much more with that talent than has Texas. And don’t even get me started on Kansas State.

“OKLAHOMA STATE FOOTBALL RECRUITING AND KEY METRIC RANKINGS

“OSU is No. 36 in the number of ESPN 300 recruits signed in recent years but No. 11 in terms of total wins – clearly outperforming the perceived talent level on the roster. When we look across the other rankings, the Cowboys generally hover around the bottom third of most metric rankings – No. 41 of 65 in all-time AP poll points (through 2016), No. 54 of 65 NFL draft picks 2013-17, No. 45 of 65 in ESPN 300 signees within 180 miles 2013-17, No. 37 of 65 in ESPN 300 signees within 360 miles 2013-17, No. 62 of 65 of total population within 20 miles of campus.”

I think Walker has stumbled upon something vitally important. As I’ve said, the recruiting rankings are problematic to start. And geography, as it pertains to Texas, has actually become an OSU strength. But local geography can be a difficult sell. Stillwater is not some outpost in the middle of nowhere. But it is a college town at least an hour from a big city, whether you want to go East to Tulsa or south to Oklahoma City.

Here are Walker’s findings for the 10 smallest populations within 20 miles of a Power 5 campus in the Power 5: 1. Ole Miss; 2. Washington State; 3. Mississippi State; 4. Oklahoma State; 5. Kansas State; 6. Auburn; 7. Iowa State; 8. Penn State; 9. Virginia Tech; 10. Oregon State.

Interesting list. Penn State is an historic blueblood. Auburn is a 21st-century college football power. OSU, Kansas State and Virginia Tech have become quality football schools. Ole Miss and Mississippi State are more competitive in recent years than they were for decades after integration.

But still. Eddie Sutton used to always talk about how tough it was to recruit to Stillwater. And this is what he’s talking about. Being closer to a big city is a big selling point, and heck, the campus town itself can matter. College towns like Norman, Lawrence and Waco are twice as big as Stillwater, Manhattan and Ames.

“WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR OKLAHOMA STATE?

“A consistent ability to attract big-time recruits may not be a realistic expectation at OSU. Prolonged success and continued winning will help increase the chances of getting the occasional blue-chipper, but the financial and emotional return on investment may not be there if the goal is to consistently crack the top 15 to 20 in recruiting rankings.

“The program is at an all-time high … if OSU continues on the current track and finds a way to win its fair share against OU, championships will come to Stillwater regardless of recruiting ranking.”

Well, that’s true. If OSU finds a way to win its fair share of Bedlams, the whole world changes. Of course, that was sort of Holder’s point in the first place. You win your fair share of Bedlams by increasing the talent level. The Sooners have had a clear talent advantage.

“PROJECTING ESPN 300 RECRUITING RESULTS BY TEAM “The metrics that have been presented thus far for each team were used as inputs for a linear regression calculation to project the number of ESPN 300 recruits each team SHOULD have landed 2014-2018. The idea is to understand how these factors come together to influence recruiting results. This model may not be fully comprehensive but does show a strong relationship to actual recruiting results over this time period.

“All-time AP points is the strongest predictor of recruiting prowess (no surprise) with NFL picks a close #2 in importance. (There is of course a chicken-egg issue with the NFL draft pick metric).

“Shockingly, the number of wins 2013-2017 carries much less importance in projecting recruiting potential as one would expect (No. 5 in variable importance).”

I would say it’s not shocking. That’s my point about recruiting. The name of your school, more than the names on your signing list, carries more weight in determining your recruiting ranking.

And much of the bewilderment goes back to the SEC. Absolutely, Alabama recruits great players. But the spillover effect is that all SEC recruits get a bump in status. TCU is a better example to use than is OSU, since my original point – and Holder’s – is that the Cowboys haven’t recruited as well as they need to. From 2013-17, Walker found that TCU signed 15 ESPN 300 players and Ole Miss signed 30. But over the same time span, TCU and Ole Miss each had 11 NFL draft picks. So either the Horned Frogs are doing a much better job coaching than are the Rebels, or the ESPN 300 rankings were skewed. And probably both are true.

“ACTUAL VERSUS MODEL PREDICTED ESPN 300 SIGNEES”

“Based on the data, many of the top teams outperform the model with Texas and Georgia being prime examples – they should be landing strong numbers of ESPN 300 recruits but maybe not to the recent level observed. On the flip-side, there are examples of recruiting underperformance over the last five years with Oklahoma and Florida being examples.

“It may be hard for OSU fans to swallow, but based on this study, OSU has actually outperformed the analytical projections landing 11 ESPN 300 recruits 2014-2018 versus a model projection of seven recruits.

“Example: Tennessee has won 34 games, 2013-2017, vs. OSU’s 47 wins but has significantly outrecruited the Cowboys due to a longer history of winning and geographic proximity to top recruits, all-time AP point rank (Tennessee 14, OSU 41) and 180-mile ESPN recruits (Tennessee 164, OSU 29).”

Well, Tennessee is a really interesting example. For one thing, the Volunteers do NOT have a geographic edge on the Cowboys. Tennessee is not a great talent-producing state. Knoxville is 213 miles to Atlanta and then, of course, farther to the Deep South recruiting hotbeds, which is akin to Stillwater’s distance to Dallas and on into Texas.

Tennessee produced 13 NFL draft picks in the time studied, to OSU’s six. So the Volunteers have been out-recruiting the Cowboys. And Tennessee has some advantages over OSU. Tradition, iconic brands like Neyland Stadium and, most notably, the SEC affiliation.

But should Tennessee be out-recruiting OSU? Tradition means less than it ever has. The Cowboys have built some cachet with the younger crowd, notably on the uniforms. It would seem that the SEC brand is the most pivotal marketing ploy for Tennessee, compared to an Oklahoma State.

“DON’T UNDERESTIMATE THE IMPORTANCE OF GEOGRAPHY

“Many factors layer into a team’s ability to land top recruits, but geographic proximity to recruits cannot be overlooked. Closer proximity to recruits not only provides access to ‘home’ but also has a built -in brand awareness.

“It’s only logical to assume that recruits grow up with an affinity for local teams which has an influence on what schools they view as potential landing spots.”

Walker provides a U.S. map with dots showing the hometowns of all the ESPN 300 recruits from 2014-18.

“It is impossible to ignore how ‘out-positioned’ OSU is geographically in the context of proximity to talent. From the perspective of geographic recruiting ‘friction,’ OSU has to convince a recruit from the Houston area to bypass A&M, Texas, Baylor, TCU and OU on their way to Stillwater. The 180-mile radius for OSU provides access to Oklahoma and southern Kansas. The 180-mile radius for Baylor provides access to DFW, West Texas, Austin, San Antonio and Houston. To put this in Oklahoma terminology, OSU’s pond is not nearly as stocked as other teams’, so of course the Cowboy’s don’t catch as many fish.”

This is where I disagree with Walker. The 180-mile radius is arbitrary. And yes, recruiting in Texas means OSU has to beat other Texas schools. But TCU and Baylor are not comprehensive state universities, so they have other disadvantages when competing against OSU. And the same geographic situation applies in the South. A recruit in Georgia or Alabama or north Florida must bypass a bunch of SEC schools to arrive at Tennessee.

I would argue that OSU’s geography is a plus, not a minus, as it pertains to proximity to recruiting grounds. As Walker well-noted, OSU’s geographic problem is not the distance to Dallas and Houston; it’s the distance to Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

In the end, both Walker and I agree that OSU football has been outperforming its recruiting levels. Walker’s thesis is that OSU shouldn’t be expected to be recruiting much better, while I disagree. But his information is excellent and this is exactly the kind of research that is needed to further understand why things have happened.

RELATED PHOTOS
Oklahoma State's Chris Lacy (15) makes a catch as Kansas' Kyle Mayberry (16) defends during a college football game between the Oklahoma State Cowboys (OSU) and the Kansas Jayhawks (KU) at Boone Pickens Stadium in Stillwater, Okla., Saturday, Nov. 25, 2017. OSU won 58-17. Photo by Nate Billings, The Oklahoman

BERRY TRAMEL
Berry Tramel, a lifelong Oklahoman, sports fan and newspaper reader, joined The Oklahoman in 1991 and has served as beat writer, assistant sports editor, sports editor and columnist. Tramel grew up reading four daily newspapers — The Oklahoman,...
Read more ›

Thank you for proving what I have been saying about Gundy's recruiting in my OP, which is that he does not recruit a lot of 4 and 5 star athletes, but instead likes to find lesser ranked players that fit his system.

That is a lot of verbiage to go through, however I will point out the main thoughts.

1 - Mike Holder the AD says Gundy needs to improve his recruiting.
2 - The article says it feels like OSU should be landing much higher in recent recruiting rankings.
3 - OSU's performance in the win column has consistently outperformed their recruiting rankings.
4 - Lists the most over performing programs as Michigan State, OSU, Louisville, Wisconsin, Utah, Iowa and Kansas State.
5 - That OSU football has been out performing its recruiting levels.

Again, thanks for proving my original post that you might want to read again, since you missed the main points the first time.

(06-18-2020 11:16 AM)texoma Wrote:  

(06-17-2020 03:48 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-17-2020 01:50 PM)texoma Wrote:  

(06-17-2020 12:26 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-17-2020 11:36 AM)texoma Wrote:  You are so determined to blast me personally, you miss the whole point of my post, which was about Gundy's unusual recruiting philosophy.

However, I am glad that you agree that Gundy's has had success by winning with an exciting offense that he specifically targets in his unusual recruiting philosophy.

Don't talk.out your behind and you won't have problems. Gundy hasn't been claiming weird people that fit his system. That you think so is hilarious and shows how out of the loop you are. He has altered his offense to fit his team and had he won at ISU a while back would have played for a national championship. He has been putting a bunch of skilled players into the draft. His recruiting isn't La Tech strategy


Here is an in depth description of OSU football recruiting including trends and performance:

For the record over the four years 2014-2018 Gundy and his recruiting were #36 in the country or basically top 25% of all football.

https://oklahoman.com/article/5599801/do...to-improve

Specifically mentioned is the pipe line of high level recruits from Dallas and Houston which are geographically close to OSU at 350 miles or less.

I don't have problems. Brilliant, linking an article no one can read without a subscription.

I don't have a subscription and it loaded just fine for me, twice, but here:

Quote:Is Oklahoma State football recruiting as well as can be expected?
Berry Tramel
by BERRY TRAMEL
Published: Fri, June 29, 2018 9:15 AM Updated: Fri, June 29, 2018 9:18 AM
0
shares
email
0

OSU's Chris Lacy makes a catch as Kansas' Kyle Mayberry defends in the Cowboys' 58-17 victory last November. (Photo by Nate Billings)
OSU's Chris Lacy makes a catch as Kansas' Kyle Mayberry defends in the Cowboys' 58-17 victory last November. (Photo by Nate Billings)
Oklahoma State football recruiting became a topic of discussion two weeks ago when athletic director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing podcast that football coach Mike Gundy needed to improve his recruiting efforts. I blogged about Gundy and Holder here.

A reader, Barry Walker, was intrigued by the question and researched a variety of recruiting questions as it pertains to OSU. I thought I would share of his findings.

Here was his introduction: “My name is Barry Walker and I've pulled together an OSU recruiting analysis that you may find interesting. I received my B.S. in Geography from OSU in 2001 and have spent the last 18 years building a career in spatial analytics -- primarily assisting retail and restaurant brands to develop their expansion strategies through data mining and statistical modeling. I typically keep up with all Cowboy related news and of course have seen the recent dust-up regarding football recruiting or more specifically the criticism toward Gundy's inability to land '4 and 5 star' recruits.

“With the recent trend of winning in Stillwater and high-quality facilities, it FEELS like OSU should be landing much higher in recruiting rankings. I set out to develop a perspective on the topic using a data-driven approach.

“I think everyone agrees that OSU's performance in the W column has consistently outperformed their recruiting ranking. But is that alone a predictor of a team's ability to recruit top-tier talent? It is impossible to analyze every factor that influences recruiting prowess, but I did take a look at several metrics to see what story the data tells in regard to recruiting for Power 5 teams.

“I've attached my analysis if you are interested to check it out. I came away with a different perspective versus what I had going in.

“While everyone wants more ‘4 and 5 star’ players, how realistic is it for a team to land them? What factors seem to influence a team’s ability to attract top talent and how does Oklahoma State compare to other teams in this regard?

“With this in mind, I’ve created a model to predict how many ESPN 300 recruits each Power 5 conference team should have landed in 2014-2018 based on several factors. This model is not perfect – there are factors not included such as a universal ranking of facilities, coaching fit, style of play, playing time, ‘closers’ on a coaching staff, climate, etc. Also, there are inputs in the model that are somewhat circular. As an example, the number of recent NFL draft picks are included. This seems like a logical thing to consider as many top recruits are looking for a path to the NFL – however, landing top recruits also leads to more draft picks. The intent here is to develop a directional viewpoint on the ability to land top-tier recruits by university and set realistic expectations on what may be possible.”


Well, I think this is going to be really interesting. I would issue one word of caution – using ESPN’s top 300, or any other recruiting ranking, is flawed from the outset. That’s why I used only NFL draft picks in my research. It is abundantly clear that ranking of high school football prospects is based more on which schools are recruiting a kid than on what kind of discernible potential the player actually has. For example, if a scout for one of these recruiting services gives a player a 3-star ranking, then that player gets scholarship offers from Alabama and Ohio State, he won’t be a 3-star long. If a player gets a 4-star rating, then his best offers are from Iowa State and North Texas, he won’t be a 4-star long.

Meanwhile, the NFL Draft is an equal-opportunity employer. The Patriots and Steelers don’t get to take whatever players they want. No one is researching the draft services to determine how NFL organizations have fared in scouting. They use the draft.

Anyway, that’s my only caveat. So let’s proceed with Walker’s research.

“COLLEGE FOOTBALL RECRUITING ANALYSIS METRICS”

“Historical Performance: How successful has each team been historically when looking at all-time AP rankings. This composite ranking was completed by the AP in 2016 and likely hasn’t seen a material shift in a single year. While not a direct measure of championships, this does speak to each team’s historical power, heritage and bragging rights.

“Stadium Capacity: While not a comprehensive viewpoint on facilities, this does provide a directional ‘wow-factor’ metric for recruiting.

“Total NFL Draft Picks 2013-2017: Excluding the most recent draft, how many players have been drafted from each school over the last five years.

“Winning Ways: Total wins by team over the five years from 2013 to 2017.

“Proximity to ESPN 300 Talent: Based on the distance to each ESPN 300 recruit’s hometown, over five years, how many ESPN 300 players live within 180 miles or 360 miles of each university. The objective with these metrics is to assess how ‘fertile’ local recruiting grounds are near each university. Recruits typically like to play closer to home as they are familiar with schools and remain close to family.

“Social Scene: Total population within 20 miles of each university is used as a basis to comparing the level of ‘things to do’ when attending a particular school. Directionally, schools in higher population density areas likely have more appealing social scenes versus remote college towns.

“RECRUITING & WINNING

“There has been no shortage of analysis highlighting the relationship between top tier college football talent and winning championships. The trends are clear; teams winning championships typically have the greatest number of high-caliber recruits. Of course, recruiting prowess and winning are not always correlated with a sample of teams breaking the trend in both directions.”

Walker lists the number of ESPN 300 recruits for each school the last five years, plus their average wins per year.

Here’s a sampling. The top 15 in ESPN 300 recruits, with their average wins per year, are:

1. Alabama 89: 12.8

2. Georgia 76: 9.8

3. LSU 72: 8.8

4. Ohio State 71: 12.2

5. Southern Cal 64: 9.6

6. Florida State 62: 10.8

7. Texas 61: 6.2

8. Auburn 55: 9.0

9. Clemson 54: 12.2

10. Michigan 51: 8.0

10. Miami 51: 8.4

12. Oklahoma 46: 10.6

13. Florida 45: 6.8

14. Notre Dame 45: 8.2

15. Texas A&M 43: 8.0

16. Tennessee 41: 6.8

17. Penn State 41: 8.6

18. UCLA 34: 7.6

19. Stanford 33: 10.0

20. South Carolina 32: 7.2

Others of note:

23. Baylor 21: 8.0

26. Nebraska 17: 7.4

28. Arkansas 16: 5.8

30. TCU 15: 8.8

31. Michigan State 14: 9.8

34. West Virginia 12: 7.2

36. Oklahoma State 11: 9.4

37. Louisville 11: 9.2

44. Texas Tech 6: 6.0

56. Kansas 2: 1.8

60. Iowa State 1: 3.8

65. Kansas State 0: 8.0

Walker lists the most under-performing programs as LSU, Texas, Michigan, Florida, Tennessee and Arkansas. No great quibble there.

Walker lists the most over-performing programs as Michigan State, Oklahoma State, Louisville, Wisconsin (six top 300 recruits; 10.8 wins per year), Utah (four top 300 recruits; 8.0 wins per year); Iowa (three top 300 recruits; 8.6 wins per year) and Kansas State. Again, rock-solid list.

But compare those two lists. Among the under-performing, only one program is not in the Texas/South region. That’s Michigan. Among the over-performing, none of the programs is in the Texas/South region. There’s a clear tendency to over-value recruits in the southern U.S. Since the 2013 NFL Draft, 20 Wisconsin Badgers have been selected. Recruiting rankings are a dangerous thing to embrace.

But let’s get back to Walker’s research.

“CONFERENCE RECRUITING SUPREMACY

“Using the ESPN 300 as the basis for measuring the ability to capture top College Football talent, the SEC has been dominant for the past five years (2014-2018 recruiting classes). Of the 1,463 ESPN 300 recruits signed by Power 5 teams, more than one in three signed to an SEC team. On a per-team basis, the SEC is lapping the nearest conference with 7.7 ESPN 300 signees per SEC team per year, with the Pac-12 coming in second with 3.8 ESPN 300 signees per team per year. With only 10 teams, the Big 12 is clearly trailing the other conferences with a total of only 175 ESPN 300 recruits signed over the five-year period. However, on a per-team basis, the Big 12 is in the middle of the pack, tied with the ACC, with each conference averaging 3.5 ESPN 300 recruits per team, per year.”

Here are the per team annual average among the conferences:

SEC 7.7

Pac-12 3.8

Big 12 3.5

ACC 3.5

Big Ten 3.3

“CHARACTERISTICS BY RECRUITING TIER

“Using a clustering algorithm, all 65 Power 5 teams were placed into one of five ‘Recruiting Tiers’ based on the total number of ESPN 300 recruits signed between 2014 and 2018.

“Between 2014 and 2018, 1,463 ESPN 300 recruits were signed by the 65 Power 5 schools; 1,125 of the 1,463, 77% were signed by the 22 teams classified at Tier 1 and Tier 2 recruiting teams over this time period; 91% of the 1,463 were signed to teams classified at Tier 1-3 3 recruiting teams over this time period.

“Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams are true blue-bloods with long histories of success as measured by all-time AP poll points. These teams are also typically located in very ‘fertile’ recruiting grounds. The vast majority of teams in Tier 1 and Tier 2 see high numbers of ESPN 300 prospects living within 180 and 360 miles from the university.

“WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR OKLAHOMA STATE?

“The upper echelon of recruiting schools acquire the majority of top talent in college football. Even with its run of success, Oregon barely squeaks into Tier 2. There is a finite number of elite recruits and it will be very difficult to consistently wrestle top talent away from the top recruiting schools.

“OSU definitely has the recent pedigree and facilities, but will continued to be hampered by a lack of long-term cache and being somewhat isolated geographically from the deepest pools of talent.

“Texas provides the pipeline, but that is a highly competitive source for talent.”

The geographic argument is a little circular. Every fertile recruiting ground is highly-competitive. OSU in recent years has cashed in on geography. It’s 267 miles from Stillwater to Dallas. It’s 505 miles from Stillwater to Houston. The former mileage is to OSU’s advantage. And the latter mileage is no killer. That 350-mile range is a little arbitrary. The most fertile recruiting ground in college football is southern California. There are only two Power 5 schools located within 350 miles of downtown Los Angeles. UCLA and USC.

But Walker’s assessment is hard to debate. The blueblood schools do tend to get the best recruits. The Texas/OSU comparison shows that. The Longhorns clearly sign more ballyhooed talent. And for 10 years, OSU has done much more with that talent than has Texas. And don’t even get me started on Kansas State.

“OKLAHOMA STATE FOOTBALL RECRUITING AND KEY METRIC RANKINGS

“OSU is No. 36 in the number of ESPN 300 recruits signed in recent years but No. 11 in terms of total wins – clearly outperforming the perceived talent level on the roster. When we look across the other rankings, the Cowboys generally hover around the bottom third of most metric rankings – No. 41 of 65 in all-time AP poll points (through 2016), No. 54 of 65 NFL draft picks 2013-17, No. 45 of 65 in ESPN 300 signees within 180 miles 2013-17, No. 37 of 65 in ESPN 300 signees within 360 miles 2013-17, No. 62 of 65 of total population within 20 miles of campus.”

I think Walker has stumbled upon something vitally important. As I’ve said, the recruiting rankings are problematic to start. And geography, as it pertains to Texas, has actually become an OSU strength. But local geography can be a difficult sell. Stillwater is not some outpost in the middle of nowhere. But it is a college town at least an hour from a big city, whether you want to go East to Tulsa or south to Oklahoma City.

Here are Walker’s findings for the 10 smallest populations within 20 miles of a Power 5 campus in the Power 5: 1. Ole Miss; 2. Washington State; 3. Mississippi State; 4. Oklahoma State; 5. Kansas State; 6. Auburn; 7. Iowa State; 8. Penn State; 9. Virginia Tech; 10. Oregon State.

Interesting list. Penn State is an historic blueblood. Auburn is a 21st-century college football power. OSU, Kansas State and Virginia Tech have become quality football schools. Ole Miss and Mississippi State are more competitive in recent years than they were for decades after integration.

But still. Eddie Sutton used to always talk about how tough it was to recruit to Stillwater. And this is what he’s talking about. Being closer to a big city is a big selling point, and heck, the campus town itself can matter. College towns like Norman, Lawrence and Waco are twice as big as Stillwater, Manhattan and Ames.

“WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR OKLAHOMA STATE?

“A consistent ability to attract big-time recruits may not be a realistic expectation at OSU. Prolonged success and continued winning will help increase the chances of getting the occasional blue-chipper, but the financial and emotional return on investment may not be there if the goal is to consistently crack the top 15 to 20 in recruiting rankings.

“The program is at an all-time high … if OSU continues on the current track and finds a way to win its fair share against OU, championships will come to Stillwater regardless of recruiting ranking.”

Well, that’s true. If OSU finds a way to win its fair share of Bedlams, the whole world changes. Of course, that was sort of Holder’s point in the first place. You win your fair share of Bedlams by increasing the talent level. The Sooners have had a clear talent advantage.

“PROJECTING ESPN 300 RECRUITING RESULTS BY TEAM “The metrics that have been presented thus far for each team were used as inputs for a linear regression calculation to project the number of ESPN 300 recruits each team SHOULD have landed 2014-2018. The idea is to understand how these factors come together to influence recruiting results. This model may not be fully comprehensive but does show a strong relationship to actual recruiting results over this time period.

“All-time AP points is the strongest predictor of recruiting prowess (no surprise) with NFL picks a close #2 in importance. (There is of course a chicken-egg issue with the NFL draft pick metric).

“Shockingly, the number of wins 2013-2017 carries much less importance in projecting recruiting potential as one would expect (No. 5 in variable importance).”

I would say it’s not shocking. That’s my point about recruiting. The name of your school, more than the names on your signing list, carries more weight in determining your recruiting ranking.

And much of the bewilderment goes back to the SEC. Absolutely, Alabama recruits great players. But the spillover effect is that all SEC recruits get a bump in status. TCU is a better example to use than is OSU, since my original point – and Holder’s – is that the Cowboys haven’t recruited as well as they need to. From 2013-17, Walker found that TCU signed 15 ESPN 300 players and Ole Miss signed 30. But over the same time span, TCU and Ole Miss each had 11 NFL draft picks. So either the Horned Frogs are doing a much better job coaching than are the Rebels, or the ESPN 300 rankings were skewed. And probably both are true.

“ACTUAL VERSUS MODEL PREDICTED ESPN 300 SIGNEES”

“Based on the data, many of the top teams outperform the model with Texas and Georgia being prime examples – they should be landing strong numbers of ESPN 300 recruits but maybe not to the recent level observed. On the flip-side, there are examples of recruiting underperformance over the last five years with Oklahoma and Florida being examples.

“It may be hard for OSU fans to swallow, but based on this study, OSU has actually outperformed the analytical projections landing 11 ESPN 300 recruits 2014-2018 versus a model projection of seven recruits.

“Example: Tennessee has won 34 games, 2013-2017, vs. OSU’s 47 wins but has significantly outrecruited the Cowboys due to a longer history of winning and geographic proximity to top recruits, all-time AP point rank (Tennessee 14, OSU 41) and 180-mile ESPN recruits (Tennessee 164, OSU 29).”

Well, Tennessee is a really interesting example. For one thing, the Volunteers do NOT have a geographic edge on the Cowboys. Tennessee is not a great talent-producing state. Knoxville is 213 miles to Atlanta and then, of course, farther to the Deep South recruiting hotbeds, which is akin to Stillwater’s distance to Dallas and on into Texas.

Tennessee produced 13 NFL draft picks in the time studied, to OSU’s six. So the Volunteers have been out-recruiting the Cowboys. And Tennessee has some advantages over OSU. Tradition, iconic brands like Neyland Stadium and, most notably, the SEC affiliation.

But should Tennessee be out-recruiting OSU? Tradition means less than it ever has. The Cowboys have built some cachet with the younger crowd, notably on the uniforms. It would seem that the SEC brand is the most pivotal marketing ploy for Tennessee, compared to an Oklahoma State.

“DON’T UNDERESTIMATE THE IMPORTANCE OF GEOGRAPHY

“Many factors layer into a team’s ability to land top recruits, but geographic proximity to recruits cannot be overlooked. Closer proximity to recruits not only provides access to ‘home’ but also has a built -in brand awareness.

“It’s only logical to assume that recruits grow up with an affinity for local teams which has an influence on what schools they view as potential landing spots.”

Walker provides a U.S. map with dots showing the hometowns of all the ESPN 300 recruits from 2014-18.

“It is impossible to ignore how ‘out-positioned’ OSU is geographically in the context of proximity to talent. From the perspective of geographic recruiting ‘friction,’ OSU has to convince a recruit from the Houston area to bypass A&M, Texas, Baylor, TCU and OU on their way to Stillwater. The 180-mile radius for OSU provides access to Oklahoma and southern Kansas. The 180-mile radius for Baylor provides access to DFW, West Texas, Austin, San Antonio and Houston. To put this in Oklahoma terminology, OSU’s pond is not nearly as stocked as other teams’, so of course the Cowboy’s don’t catch as many fish.”

This is where I disagree with Walker. The 180-mile radius is arbitrary. And yes, recruiting in Texas means OSU has to beat other Texas schools. But TCU and Baylor are not comprehensive state universities, so they have other disadvantages when competing against OSU. And the same geographic situation applies in the South. A recruit in Georgia or Alabama or north Florida must bypass a bunch of SEC schools to arrive at Tennessee.

I would argue that OSU’s geography is a plus, not a minus, as it pertains to proximity to recruiting grounds. As Walker well-noted, OSU’s geographic problem is not the distance to Dallas and Houston; it’s the distance to Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

In the end, both Walker and I agree that OSU football has been outperforming its recruiting levels. Walker’s thesis is that OSU shouldn’t be expected to be recruiting much better, while I disagree. But his information is excellent and this is exactly the kind of research that is needed to further understand why things have happened.

RELATED PHOTOS
Oklahoma State's Chris Lacy (15) makes a catch as Kansas' Kyle Mayberry (16) defends during a college football game between the Oklahoma State Cowboys (OSU) and the Kansas Jayhawks (KU) at Boone Pickens Stadium in Stillwater, Okla., Saturday, Nov. 25, 2017. OSU won 58-17. Photo by Nate Billings, The Oklahoman

BERRY TRAMEL
Berry Tramel, a lifelong Oklahoman, sports fan and newspaper reader, joined The Oklahoman in 1991 and has served as beat writer, assistant sports editor, sports editor and columnist. Tramel grew up reading four daily newspapers — The Oklahoman,...
Read more ›

Thank you for proving what I have been saying about Gundy's recruiting in my OP, which is that he does not recruit a lot of 4 and 5 star athletes, but instead likes to find lesser ranked players that fit his system.

That is a lot of verbiage to go through, however I will point out the main thoughts.

1 - Mike Holder the AD says Gundy needs to improve his recruiting.
2 - The article says it feels like OSU should be landing much higher in recent recruiting rankings.
3 - OSU's performance in the win column has consistently outperformed their recruiting rankings.
4 - Lists the most over performing programs as Michigan State, OSU, Louisville, Wisconsin, Utah, Iowa and Kansas State.
5 - That OSU football has been out performing its recruiting levels.

Again, thanks for proving my original post that you might want to read again, since you missed the main points the first time.

Well now we know your reading comprehension sucks and that explains so much.

1. Where is this Mike Holder quote?
2. That's not unusual but how you feel is different than what actually is happening all the time. He is recruiting at a top 25% of all football.
3/4/5 They rank as a top 36 recruiting school and have been a border line top 25 that's not much of a jump, in fact looking at who over performs most of them are also ranked fairly high and finish as top 25 type teams.


First lets start with you trying to make two things peoples opinion (writer, researcher, Holder) and out performing their recruiting ranking as examples of why you are right into five. First opinions don't match facts when comparing the recruiting accomplishment to the drawbacks. Second if I have a top 30 class and perform at a top 25 level does that mean a top 30 class is no good? Of course not.

Now let's actually look at your arguement:

Gundy recruits to fit his system, not top talent.

Everyone in the ESPN 300 is 4 star or above, that's why I picked this specific article. He obviously does very well by his ranking.

Gundy has had crazy run heavy offenses and wide open pass happy offenses. He takes the best athletes he can get and works his offense around his stars. Blackmon, the Woods brothers, Justice Hill, etc were all top level recruits. Gundy isn't nebraska running the option picking up country boys who have played it option since pop Warner, or Leach pulling small town elite athletes with small size for slots and scat backs. His style is adaptive and predominately balanced.

You are the one with the reading problem and you claim I have one. Talk about being ridiculous.

The Mike Holder quote is not hard to find. It is in the FIRST sentence of the FIRST paragraph of the article you linked.

It reads: Oklahoma State recruiting became a topic of discussion two weeks ago when Athletic Director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing Podcast that Mike Gundy must improve his recruiting efforts.

If you cannot read that, I can't help you.

Then you start arguing against the article you linked.

As always you talk trash and post a lot of useless verbiage. Discussing anything with you is hopeless. Good bye.

(06-18-2020 01:59 PM)texoma Wrote:  You are the one with the reading problem and you claim I have one. Talk about being ridiculous.

The Mike Holder quote is not hard to find. It is in the FIRST sentence of the FIRST paragraph of the article you linked.

It reads: Oklahoma State recruiting became a topic of discussion two weeks ago when Athletic Director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing Podcast that Mike Gundy must improve his recruiting efforts.

If you cannot read that, I can't help you.

Then you start arguing against the article you linked.

As always you talk trash and post a lot of useless verbiage. Discussing anything with you is hopeless. Good bye.

Let me correct that for you, that's not a quote, it's a summary of what they talked about on a podcast, a quote come with quotation marks. Second you obviously can't read and/or are intentionally changing the "quote":

"athletic director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing podcast that football coach Mike Gundy needed to improve his recruiting efforts."

Where is must?

Lol tell me again about how I can't read.

What is it that I said? Oh yes Holder or fans opinions don't match the reality.

Holder made a side comment in what is basically a fan podcast and most of that was about OSU's ability to compete with OU/Texas. It's not even a quote in the story, it's just mentioned to bring up the cause for the evaluation.

I'm going to cut you a break because you probably don't have the reference, but basically Holder was asked if Gundy could do better in recruiting and he agreed. It's just passing fan talk, not Holder demanding anything, which is why there wasn't a follow up quote in this story. This basically was a printed story for people just like you who think Gundy isn't recruiting top talent.

It's not OU/Texas level which is what they talked about in the podcast, but it is top level.

But again your arguement was he recruits odds and ends that fit his system. Looking at the numbers in the article, those are some damn good odds and ends he is finding under rocks.

Also just so you know, social media feeds have had articles from when Gundy was in college getting brought up, mostly about his use of the n-word. Their have been other testimonies coming out about interactions with him. A few recruits have already eliminated OSU. Maybe OSU was backing off them, maybe it's an excuse to pick somewhere else, maybe opposing fans/coaches are getting to them. However this is hurting his recruiting. Boone is gone and Holder and Gundy's relationship has been strained for a bit.

3 years max. If stuff keeps coming up maybe not even that.

(06-19-2020 10:12 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-18-2020 01:59 PM)texoma Wrote:  You are the one with the reading problem and you claim I have one. Talk about being ridiculous.

The Mike Holder quote is not hard to find. It is in the FIRST sentence of the FIRST paragraph of the article you linked.

It reads: Oklahoma State recruiting became a topic of discussion two weeks ago when Athletic Director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing Podcast that Mike Gundy must improve his recruiting efforts.

If you cannot read that, I can't help you.

Then you start arguing against the article you linked.

As always you talk trash and post a lot of useless verbiage. Discussing anything with you is hopeless. Good bye.

Let me correct that for you, that's not a quote, it's a summary of what they talked about on a podcast, a quote come with quotation marks. Second you obviously can't read and/or are intentionally changing the "quote":

"athletic director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing podcast that football coach Mike Gundy needed to improve his recruiting efforts."

Where is must?

Lol tell me again about how I can't read.

What is it that I said? Oh yes Holder or fans opinions don't match the reality.

Holder made a side comment in what is basically a fan podcast and most of that was about OSU's ability to compete with OU/Texas. It's not even a quote in the story, it's just mentioned to bring up the cause for the evaluation.

I'm going to cut you a break because you probably don't have the reference, but basically Holder was asked if Gundy could do better in recruiting and he agreed. It's just passing fan talk, not Holder demanding anything, which is why there wasn't a follow up quote in this story. This basically was a printed story for people just like you who think Gundy isn't recruiting top talent.

It's not OU/Texas level which is what they talked about in the podcast, but it is top level.

But again your arguement was he recruits odds and ends that fit his system. Looking at the numbers in the article, those are some damn good odds and ends he is finding under rocks.

Also just so you know, social media feeds have had articles from when Gundy was in college getting brought up, mostly about his use of the n-word. Their have been other testimonies coming out about interactions with him. A few recruits have already eliminated OSU. Maybe OSU was backing off them, maybe it's an excuse to pick somewhere else, maybe opposing fans/coaches are getting to them. However this is hurting his recruiting. Boone is gone and Holder and Gundy's relationship has been strained for a bit.

3 years max. If stuff keeps coming up maybe not even that.

You could not even find the quote and now you are nit picking between "needs" vs "must". You want to nit pick, why don't you learn to spell argument.

You are a Tulsa fan and OSU has a series with TU on their future schedule, so you are hoping Gundy fails so TU might have a chance to win one.

(06-19-2020 11:33 AM)texoma Wrote:  

(06-19-2020 10:12 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-18-2020 01:59 PM)texoma Wrote:  You are the one with the reading problem and you claim I have one. Talk about being ridiculous.

The Mike Holder quote is not hard to find. It is in the FIRST sentence of the FIRST paragraph of the article you linked.

It reads: Oklahoma State recruiting became a topic of discussion two weeks ago when Athletic Director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing Podcast that Mike Gundy must improve his recruiting efforts.

If you cannot read that, I can't help you.

Then you start arguing against the article you linked.

As always you talk trash and post a lot of useless verbiage. Discussing anything with you is hopeless. Good bye.

Let me correct that for you, that's not a quote, it's a summary of what they talked about on a podcast, a quote come with quotation marks. Second you obviously can't read and/or are intentionally changing the "quote":

"athletic director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing podcast that football coach Mike Gundy needed to improve his recruiting efforts."

Where is must?

Lol tell me again about how I can't read.

What is it that I said? Oh yes Holder or fans opinions don't match the reality.

Holder made a side comment in what is basically a fan podcast and most of that was about OSU's ability to compete with OU/Texas. It's not even a quote in the story, it's just mentioned to bring up the cause for the evaluation.

I'm going to cut you a break because you probably don't have the reference, but basically Holder was asked if Gundy could do better in recruiting and he agreed. It's just passing fan talk, not Holder demanding anything, which is why there wasn't a follow up quote in this story. This basically was a printed story for people just like you who think Gundy isn't recruiting top talent.

It's not OU/Texas level which is what they talked about in the podcast, but it is top level.

But again your arguement was he recruits odds and ends that fit his system. Looking at the numbers in the article, those are some damn good odds and ends he is finding under rocks.

Also just so you know, social media feeds have had articles from when Gundy was in college getting brought up, mostly about his use of the n-word. Their have been other testimonies coming out about interactions with him. A few recruits have already eliminated OSU. Maybe OSU was backing off them, maybe it's an excuse to pick somewhere else, maybe opposing fans/coaches are getting to them. However this is hurting his recruiting. Boone is gone and Holder and Gundy's relationship has been strained for a bit.

3 years max. If stuff keeps coming up maybe not even that.

You could not even find the quote and now you are nit picking between "needs" vs "must". You want to nit pick, why don't you learn to spell argument.

You are a Tulsa fan and OSU has a series with TU on their future schedule, so you are hoping Gundy fails so TU might have a chance to win one.

I know I already explained this, but it wasn't a quote and you still got it wrong

Oh no a spelling/typo error

Tulsa isn't winning anything till we fire our HC, no matter who is in charge at OSU. But that series has a break coming up about the time he'll get fired anyway.

Despite all the stuff going on in Oklahoma right now, guess what is still getting plenty of attention? Negative recruiting is already hot and heavy.

(06-20-2020 02:03 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-19-2020 11:33 AM)texoma Wrote:  

(06-19-2020 10:12 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-18-2020 01:59 PM)texoma Wrote:  You are the one with the reading problem and you claim I have one. Talk about being ridiculous.

The Mike Holder quote is not hard to find. It is in the FIRST sentence of the FIRST paragraph of the article you linked.

It reads: Oklahoma State recruiting became a topic of discussion two weeks ago when Athletic Director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing Podcast that Mike Gundy must improve his recruiting efforts.

If you cannot read that, I can't help you.

Then you start arguing against the article you linked.

As always you talk trash and post a lot of useless verbiage. Discussing anything with you is hopeless. Good bye.

Let me correct that for you, that's not a quote, it's a summary of what they talked about on a podcast, a quote come with quotation marks. Second you obviously can't read and/or are intentionally changing the "quote":

"athletic director Mike Holder told Pistols Firing podcast that football coach Mike Gundy needed to improve his recruiting efforts."

Where is must?

Lol tell me again about how I can't read.

What is it that I said? Oh yes Holder or fans opinions don't match the reality.

Holder made a side comment in what is basically a fan podcast and most of that was about OSU's ability to compete with OU/Texas. It's not even a quote in the story, it's just mentioned to bring up the cause for the evaluation.

I'm going to cut you a break because you probably don't have the reference, but basically Holder was asked if Gundy could do better in recruiting and he agreed. It's just passing fan talk, not Holder demanding anything, which is why there wasn't a follow up quote in this story. This basically was a printed story for people just like you who think Gundy isn't recruiting top talent.

It's not OU/Texas level which is what they talked about in the podcast, but it is top level.

But again your arguement was he recruits odds and ends that fit his system. Looking at the numbers in the article, those are some damn good odds and ends he is finding under rocks.

Also just so you know, social media feeds have had articles from when Gundy was in college getting brought up, mostly about his use of the n-word. Their have been other testimonies coming out about interactions with him. A few recruits have already eliminated OSU. Maybe OSU was backing off them, maybe it's an excuse to pick somewhere else, maybe opposing fans/coaches are getting to them. However this is hurting his recruiting. Boone is gone and Holder and Gundy's relationship has been strained for a bit.

3 years max. If stuff keeps coming up maybe not even that.

You could not even find the quote and now you are nit picking between "needs" vs "must". You want to nit pick, why don't you learn to spell argument.

You are a Tulsa fan and OSU has a series with TU on their future schedule, so you are hoping Gundy fails so TU might have a chance to win one.

I know I already explained this, but it wasn't a quote and you still got it wrong

Oh no a spelling/typo error

Tulsa isn't winning anything till we fire our HC, no matter who is in charge at OSU. But that series has a break coming up about the time he'll get fired anyway.

Despite all the stuff going on in Oklahoma right now, guess what is still getting plenty of attention? Negative recruiting is already hot and heavy.

What a waste of time.