Leach And Recruiting

Donate To GopherHole
D

Duluthguy

Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
330
Reaction score
0
Points
16
I've asked this question probably four or five different times in some of the other 2,000 threads about Leach, but everyone has pretty much ignored it. So, I'll make it thread 2001.

My question is very simple: Even if Leach is totally blameless in the James incident (and there are about 2001 different stories about what actually happened), the undisputed fact, fair or not, is that Leach's name will be forever linked to the words "alleged player abuse." My simple question is how do you know that this will not harm recruiting, perhaps greatly harm recruiting? You can say, as some have, "I don't think it will," but can you honestly say it does not present a risk - possibly a big one?

What will recruits think? What will their parents think? How might other schools use this in recruiting against us? I can't see how we can know the answers to these questions, and I believe we ignore them at our own risk. Four years from now, do we want to be saying this obvious risk is what made him fail here?

Leach is by far my emotional choice. However, my brain says that this is not just something we can ignore and it will go away. Please, anybody, give me some factual reasons why this should not be a concern.
 

It is a legit concern. Probably the only Leach concern that I can not easily dismiss with fact. The only thing I can say is that if you weather it for the first 1 or 2 recruiting cycles, it will be old news and will become less and less of an issue with each passing year.
 

I think part of the reason that people shrug it off is because it seems like the general opinion of the matter is that the entire situation got overblown by a spoiled kid that had a dad with media connections. I'm not saying that is what happened because I have no idea. I'm just saying that the public perception of the incident makes the James family look worse than Mike Leach.

Now, I do agree that it might make an impact on a player or two, but there are a ton of things that will help him recruiting, but I don't see the incident black balling his efforts of bringing in quality athletes.
 

Bobby Knight was still able to recruit players to Indiana and Later Texas Tech after various incidents. You may miss out on a couple of players due to the incident. But winning and recruiting in college football is about finding players who are the right fit for you and the players seeing your school and coach as the right fit for them. Maybe you miss out on RB because leach allegedly locked a guy in the shed, but if you hire someone else maybe you lose out on a different player for a different reason. He will still be able to sign players. If hired he would be a risk, but anyone who is hired would be a risk. The question is, is Leach's history with the James incident a bigger risk than hiring a guy like Sumlin (who is young) or a guy like Belotti (who is West Coast) or a guy like Trestman (who is completely unqualified).
 

While I believe we will lose some recruits for this reason...the truth is that many coaches over the years have had a reputation for being a crazy SOB and a hard ass and they were rewarded with recruits from families that wanted that kind of tough love.

Knight at Indiana and TT is an easy example...go back some years and Bear Bryant was considered the harshest badest MFer on the football gridiron and he had his pick of recruits...Fathers would send their sons to these Men to make them Men.
 


See "Bobby Knight".

Seemed to work out for him just fine. Leach would be more attractive to some recruits based on his edginess, and less attractive to some. Zero sum game.
 

When we are winning 9+ games a year, it won't matter. Besides, Leach can always use his current players to vouch for him.
 

I believe that recruiting would be hurt for at least two cycles, which could be the entire time Leach would stay at the U. I also believe that some younger players would rather transfer than play for Leach. The players have discussed Leach in the lockeroom, and they are divided on supporting him. Not helpful.
 

Big Difference between Leach and Knight-Coach Knight has won a bunch of Big ten titles and the NCAA Championship.
 



GopherinPhilly said:
While I believe we will lose some recruits for this reason...the truth is that many coaches over the years have had a reputation for being a crazy SOB and a hard ass and they were rewarded with recruits from families that wanted that kind of tough love.

Knight at Indiana and TT is an easy example...go back some years and Bear Bryant was considered the harshest badest MFer on the football gridiron and he had his pick of recruits...Fathers would send their sons to these Men to make them Men.
Click to expand...

It's been almost 30 years since Bear Bryant coached and I don't think the example you give holds water in the current era. There's a whole herd of Craig James-esque parental units out there and they give less of a crap about having their kid grow up than they do about that kid getting the PT the coach promised when the kid was recruited.

Further, Mike Leach would need a step ladder to get on Bear Bryant's big toe in terms of coaching prowess.
 

I'd say I'm not that worried because he wasn't winning major recruiting wars at Texas Tech. He was getting 2nd or 3rd tier recruits--guys that otherwise would have ended up at non-AQ schools--and he was winning with them.

In other words, I can't say it won't have an impact on his ability to recruit. However, it won't matter as much for a guy like Leach who wins because he has a good system as it would for a coach like Mack Brown or Les Miles who win because they have better players and they are good enough coaches.
 

Trestman

I see some Trestman bashers here. What are his detractors saying are his flaws?
 





FanSinceTheFifties said:
I see some Trestman bashers here. What are his detractors saying are his flaws?
Click to expand...

Has coached 2 years of college football in the past 25 years, with less-than-spectacular results. That is to say, his offenses while at NC State were WORSE than Jedd Fisch's offense here last year. He would not be considered for any other major college position. The list goes on, but I'll let others tackle it.
 

[censored] said:
Actually, yeah it kind of is. Leach never was big on recruiting. He just usually got the leftovers and kids that fit his system and he did pretty well with them.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. Whether he was "big on recruiting" or not is irrelevant. The fact is that a majority of the players signed during his tenure had multiple offers from other BCS schools. He was certainly not playing with "leftovers". Sure, he signed some kids here and there who didn't have any other offers, but so does everyone outside of the major helmet schools.

Did you even read my linked post?
 


dpodoll68 said:
No, it isn't. Whether he was "big on recruiting" or not is irrelevant. The fact is that a majority of the players signed during his tenure had multiple offers from other BCS schools. He was certainly not playing with "leftovers". Sure, he signed some kids here and there who didn't have any other offers, but so does everyone outside of the major helmet schools.

Did you even read my linked post?
Click to expand...


Yeah, I did read your linked post and it doesn't change my opinion. Leach was playing with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas A&M's leftovers during much of his time at Tech. Follow your own link and see for yourself. He got commits over Baylor, K-State, and Colorado. Whoopty freakin doo! He never really did compete with the better options in the Big XII and Texas. Hell, even toward the end of his stay TCU was outrecruiting him. He was playing with leftovers and he was able to do so only because he was in the state of Texas where the leftovers happen to have OOS offers from other BCS schools. His strategy will not work as well in Minnesota, but the point made above about his system being more important rings true.

I'm sorry dpodoll, but you really can't "educate" me on Mike Leach and his recruiting since I followed it for several years.
 

[censored] said:
He got commits over Baylor, K-State, and Colorado.
Click to expand...

I notice how you conveniently left out USC, Florida, West Virginia, Iowa, Missouri, and Arkansas. Selection bias is fun!

[censored] said:
He never really did compete with the better options in the Big XII and Texas.
Click to expand...

So the standard is, "outrecruit Texas, or you're playing with leftovers"?? Good god, man. If that's the case, 95% of the teams in the country are playing with "leftovers".

[censored] said:
He was playing with leftovers
Click to expand...

I'd really love to know your precise definition of "leftovers". Not being recruited by Texas, Oklahoma, or A&M does not make you a "leftover". Last time I checked, USC and Florida don't recruit "leftovers".

[censored] said:
and he was able to do so only because he was in the state of Texas...His strategy will not work as well in Minnesota, but the point made above about his system being more important rings true.
Click to expand...

If you actually did read my post, you would've noticed that I fear his ability to recruit to Minnesota because he won't have the selling point of "playing in your home state" to Texas recruits.

[censored] said:
I'm sorry dpodoll, but you really can't "educate" me on Mike Leach and his recruiting since I followed it for several years.
Click to expand...

I work for several doctors, but I don't understand medicine. You can say you followed it, but you don't really understand how recruiting works for schools not named Texas if you think that Mike Leach was playing with "leftovers".
 

You aren't nearly as bright as you think you are. For someone that apparently knows so much about recruiting and how it works, you are forgetting or at the very least unable to pick up on the point I was making about proximity. Some kids from Texas don't want to go all the way to Cali or Florida to play ball. I garauntee you that if they didn't mind not being close to home, they would have gone. It is a major factor in recruiting. One of which you are ignoring with your posts on this thread.

And no, I never said outrecruit Texas or you are playing with leftovers. God, I hate it when people like you take a statement, twist it up, and then try to make some counterpoint with a manipulated point. That just shows how out of touch you are with regard to how Leach recruited while at Tech. The point I was making was that he RARELY competed with the big dogs in the area for a recruit.

And yeah, if you are from Texas and you don't get offers from Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas A&M... you are most certainly a "leftover" Texas recruit IMO.

And finally, just give it up. I've been following recruits from the state of Texas for quite a while now. I'm very knowledgeable on the subject. You on the other hand are taking a list of offers and pointing at it saying "see! look, this one guy got a USC offer!" which any idiot with the internet can do.

Leach used Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas A&M's leftovers a VAST majority of the time. This can not be disputed. Sorry.
 

[censored] said:
at the very least unable to pick up on the point I was making about proximity
Click to expand...

In fact, I brought up that point and agreed with that in each of the posts. Do you just see what you want to see?

[censored] said:
Some kids from Texas don't want to go all the way to Cali or Florida to play ball. I garauntee you that if they didn't mind not being close to home, they would have gone. It is a major factor in recruiting. One of which you are ignoring with your posts on this thread.
Click to expand...

Again, I am aware of it and have acknowledged it. However, just because a kid would rather stay home and play for Tech than go to USC, West Virginia, or Florida doesn't make him a "leftover". By that logic, every Florida kid who doesn't go to Florida, Florida St., or Miami is a "leftover".

[censored] said:
The point I was making was that he RARELY competed with the big dogs in the area for a recruit.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But, again, "not recruited by Texas, Oklahoma, or A&M" does not equal "leftover". I don't care how many different ways I have to say it - multiple BCS offers in no way constitute "leftovers".

[censored] said:
And yeah, if you are from Texas and you don't get offers from Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas A&M... you are most certainly a "leftover" Texas recruit IMO.
Click to expand...

Really? So Robert Griffin? He's a "leftover"? LaMichael James? Jacquizz Rodgers? They're "leftovers" too?

[censored] said:
look, this one guy got a USC offer!" which any idiot with the internet can do
Click to expand...

You're right, it was just one guy. Not the majority of his 200+ recruits at Tech. Nope, just that one guy. Every other guy was looking at a Tech offer or walking on someplace else. You're right - how silly of me.

[censored] said:
Leach used Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas A&M's leftovers a VAST majority of the time. This can not be disputed. Sorry.
Click to expand...

"Not being recruited by a big TX/OK school" in no way equals "leftover". You are right in that he rarely (if ever) beat those schools for recruits, but that doesn't make players like LaMichael James "leftovers". It's pejorative and unnecessary. Here's a newsflash: even the big schools miss out on players from time to time. That doesn't make them "leftovers". It makes them underrecruited.

Lakesgopher, are you reading this? You said yesterday that I was crazy when I insisted that there are people out there who think that Leach was playing with a bunch of walk-on scrubs at Texas Tech.
 

Not walk-on scrubs. Leftovers.

You want to play semantics, that's fine. Go right on ahead. But no matter how much you want to believe it, it doesn't make you right. Sorry, pal.
 

[censored] said:
Not walk-on scrubs. Leftovers.

You want to play semantics, that's fine. Go right on ahead. But no matter how much you want to believe it, it doesn't make you right. Sorry, pal.
Click to expand...

So LaMichael James, Jacquizz Rodgers, Robert Griffin, Greg McElroy, Todd Reesing, Andy Dalton, and Jay Valai are "leftovers", huh?

Damn! I want a "leftover" that will QB my team to a national title!
 

For everyone's edification, here are some other "leftovers" currently playing in the NFL:

Bernard Scott
Ryan Mouton
Brice McCain
Danieal Manning
Daniel Loper
Johnny Knox
Domonique Johnson
Fred Jackson
Kenny Iwebema
Sam Hurd
Evander Hood
Johnnie Lee Higgins
David Hawthorne
Charles Godfrey

I could keep going ad nauseam, but my fingers are sore from typing the names of all these "leftovers" who currently are paid to play professional football.
 


ruralgopher said:
Don't forget the pride of South Dakota, Adam Vinatieri.
Click to expand...

He doesn't count. To be a "leftover", you have to be from a high school in TX and not have received an offer from Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, or Oklahoma St.

If you don't get an offer from one of those schools, you're probably lucky to play D-III football, let alone have the audacity to accept a paycheck for your services as a professional football player.
 

I'm taking offense to this thread. I was a D-III leftover.

Need to get those "control-freak" mods to start banning people.
 

dpodoll68 said:
For everyone's edification, here are some other "leftovers" currently playing in the NFL:

Bernard Scott
Ryan Mouton
Brice McCain
Danieal Manning
Daniel Loper
Johnny Knox
Domonique Johnson
Fred Jackson
Kenny Iwebema
Sam Hurd
Evander Hood
Johnnie Lee Higgins
David Hawthorne
Charles Godfrey

I could keep going ad nauseam, but my fingers are sore from typing the names of all these "leftovers" who currently are paid to play professional football.
Click to expand...

Awesome list of awesome players. Awesome job. I bolded some of the players to make it even more awesome.
 

dpodoll68 said:
If you don't get an offer from one of those schools, you're probably lucky to play D-III football, let alone have the audacity to accept a paycheck for your services as a professional football player.
Click to expand...


There you go again, putting words into people's mouth, looking like a fool. You sure are good at making crap up. You should consider a career in law.

Go ahead and point out all the leftovers that have become successes. To use a word you like, its irrelevant. That still doesn't change the fact that Leach never really went up against the big dogs when it came to recruiting the state of Texas.

Your use of sarcasm and blatant fabrication of statements just shows how upset you are that you're being called out as not knowing exactly what the hell you are posting about. I'm sorry I set you off. I promise a lot of posters here still think you know what you are talking about, even if you don't.
 

[censored] said:
There you go again, putting words into people's mouth, looking like a fool. You sure are good at making crap up. You should consider a career in law.

Go ahead and point out all the leftovers that have become successes. To use a word you like, its irrelevant. That still doesn't change the fact that Leach never really went up against the big dogs when it came to recruiting the state of Texas.

Your use of sarcasm and blatant fabrication of statements just shows how upset you are that you're being called out as not knowing exactly what the hell you are posting about. I'm sorry I set you off. I promise a lot of posters here still think you know what you are talking about, even if you don't.
Click to expand...

So LaMichael James, Jacquizz Rodgers, Robert Griffin, Greg McElroy, Todd Reesing, Andy Dalton, and Jay Valai are "leftovers", huh?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom