OU 3-star players

L

LonghornsWin

500+ Posts
Texas as of today has 17 4-star players and 3 3-star players.

OU has 13 3-star players our of 25 players.

My question is why do they have so many 3-star players. We have seen before that good recruits with high stars tend to be better teams and an OU with the numbers and quality is still going to be a challenge, but it seems to me that they have taken a step back.

What do you think?
 
I think the program is in a bit of a decline when it comes to recruiting against Texas. They have lost several potential commits to Texas and that thus begins to deplete the cupboard. The program itself has taken a bit of mud with years of failure in the bowl games but they have more conference championships and BCS title game appearances than Texas, so to say the program is down is false.

Recruiting is definitely down when it comes to the top Texas talent, the question is for how long? After Texas got the Title in 05... recruiting shifted to us. OU appeared last year when it should have been Texas and despite it, Texas beat out OU for the Texas top talent in recruiting again.

A 3 can be a diamond in the rough.... Look at Colt McCoy. If they are coached right... they may outperform a 5 star kid.
 
There's no doubt that some of those three star recruits are going to be absolute ballers but i think we'd all prefer a class filled with 4 and 5 stars.
 
Yeh I don't think it is a horrible class either. Not a great top 5 class like Texas, but a solid top 10 class. The 13 four star players he did get is pretty good considering how Texas is mopping up this year.l
 
Vasher was a 3 Star too, I think. Maybe 4 but at one point a 3. I forget what he came in as, however. But all those guys up there are not going to pan out like the exceptions listed.

If I were a parent I would realize they are on probation yet again and see that Bob is a douchebag. His snide behavior in interviews and his demeanor on the field would be enough. It is turning out that the world sees the Emperor does not have any clothes on after all.
 
ou will consistently get good players from texas--some years more than others. however, i don't think that they will have the kind of success that they had several years ago. as long as mack and co. are doing what they are doing, we will continue to get the bulk of the top talent. when you stop to think about where we were with recruiting before mack, it is truly amazing.
 
Pretty cool to see Texas nab the top player from Oklahoma this year. Wonder if we are seeing a new trend....OU losing its touch on its in-state guys?
 
I know of all the four star (6 or 7) players in Oklahoma, they only have a commitment from one (an OL)(all others have a verbal commitment elsewhere), but of course, OU fans say they didn't want any of the others.
wink.gif
 
OK, so it was a slow day and I went back to the Rivals stars ratings from 2002 to the partial 2010 class to look at the OU and UT signees. Seems like some interesting things emerged:

1. OU had 211 recruits compared to Texas' 189 which is 11.7% more which is due to more transfers, drop-outs, and JC players.

2. I looked at average star rating per class, not comparing the size of the classes and OU was higher in 3 years, UT was ahead in 4 years, and two years were essentially tied.

3. OU has only had a higher star rating one year in the last 5 years counting this year (we are much higher this year, won last year, 2007, and tied in 2006).

4. Our current trend of winning 4 out of 5 games started in 2005 when the average stars for OU was probably a little higher than ours.

5. The average rating for the last four classes including 2010's class is OU 3.54 vs. Texas at 3.76 which is probably the greatest advantage Texas has had in a four year period since 2002.

6. Given that our coaches seem to be doing a better job with recruits of the same star power, with lower turnover, and greater commitment to Texas (the "Mack" strategy), how much better will they do with better recruits consistently?

7. The future is bright!

8. OU sucks.

Qualifiers:

a. I realize that the star system is not a refined tool as a lot of 3 star recruits like Colt do well and 5 stars fail to do much, but other posters have done a great job of showing that overall the higher the stars, the association with higher number of wins.

b. You can have a superb recruit like Vince or AD who can really alter a game which sort of throws this star average off.

c. OU and UT have not completed their 2010 class. Both are still on a couple of 5 star recruits, but even if Texas got no more and OU got a couple it would not change the fact that our 2010 average would be higher.
 
One other point, the 2008 class is the only class in the last 5 years where OU has had a significantly higher average star rating. However, so far the 2008 class 5-stars seem to be disappointing. Calhoun and Washington have not played that much, and Goode played, but seemed not be ineffective. Of Course injuries and simply better players may be ahead of them.

Perhaps, sleazy Bob realizes he is falling behind and is willing to take players with "minor" issues like kidnapping and threatening a teenage girl. May he never win another game!
 
Yes and Florida, Alabama, and LSU, and Texas have higher star players and TCU has not won a MNC since the Thirties.

TCU has been impressive for their conference and their players, but if Texas, Florida, Alabama, or Texas play them in the MNC game, they will lose by at least 2 touchdowns.

This has been looked at before earlier in the decade. The most consistent determinant of finishing high in the national rankings is the stars of the players. It still takes good coaching, but we have that as well.
 
"when" TCU gets these 4 star players you're talking about -- who do they get them from? I don't remember losing a recruit to TCU in the Mack era.
 
Agree that it is too early to know on Washington and Good.

I know that at least the OU fans have not been impressed with Calhoun and have another player in the same class who has looked much better. Good has obviously played and has some injuries, buit has been disappointing when he has played.
 
By the way, I am hoping that our play and OU's now with 4 losses will increase our chances with Jeffcoat and maybe White (I can hope).

Also, tOSU has not had an impressive year compared to Texas and hope Hicks takes those things into account.
 
I agree with most all this post. Anybody would rather have players that are ranked higher by the so called gurus. That said, in many cases the higher rankings are a result of a number of factors: 1) success of the HS team, 2) individual statistics (not obvious for all positions), 3) an earlier maturation for that specific athlete, and worst of all 4)size of school/class of competittion. These factors benefit players from the "football factories". e.g. Southlake, Katy, Plano, etc. These schools start players on weights earlier, they see the same systems for several years, play against the better competition in practice routinely, etc. Many very solid players come out of the smaller schools. None greater, probably, that Eric Dickerson from Sealy or Billy Sims from Hawkins. Or maybe better said for an orangeblood, Colt McCoy from Jim Ned!! Steve Worster from Bridge City, Leo Brooks from Kermit, and on and on.
I did a quick llittle analysis of our current starters/key contriubutors that came to UT as 3-star recruits. Here's what I noticed:
'05- McCoy, Muckleroy, Hall, Tanner
'06-Alexander, Smith, Cobb (a terror on kickoffs)
'07-Acho
'08-Acho, Newton

Clearly, these guys were penalized in the grading process because of lesser competiton (SC-Alexander), smaller schools (McCoy) and private schools (Achos). Thank God Mack and the coaches can recognize talent and upgrade potential better than the gurus.
 
I know this is counter-intuitive, and maybe it's not backed up by fact, but OU seems to do better with the less heralded recruits. For example, Bomar = 5 star, Bradford = 3 star. They kicked the **** out of us in the early 2000s when we were bringing in one high profile recruit after another. Simms, Big 3, etc. They had tougher, better-coached, more disciplined teams than we did.

We've clearly gone away from that, and for the better. I think Mack has this thing figured out pretty well now. We are going to miss out on some big time players (Seastrunk, etc), but his teams are going to compete like mfers on Saturdays.
 
Agree about the variations that make the smaller schools often not receive the higher ranking.

My son wrestled in high school and the west Texas kids always seemed to do better than their state ranking in part because no one saw them until state.

Mitch,

If you go back and look at star ratings 2002 was a tie, 2003 and 2004 the Sooners had higher average rankings than we did.

Stoops basically won with the kids from Blake and transfers and Leach's offense in 2000 (also very low rate of injuries) and parlayed that into higher rankings for the next few years on average stars.

The whole Mack wins in Feb and not anytime else was always an urban myth based on one class with Simms and a lot of high classes. But Stoops was higher or tied in a lot of the earlier years of this decade.

My whole point is that analysis of AVERAGE stars is better now for Texas and trending upward, our coaches are better, and OU fans who say everything will be made right without significant changes are whistling past the graveyard. I hope Stoops is doing the same.
biggrin.gif
 
re: TCU, to me the question is, can TCU take A & M's place as #2 in recruiting in state?

It might be a tough sell right now, but if TCU can win a BCS bowl game, that means undefeated, then 4 star recruits have got to give TCU a look, I would think.
 
Aundre Dean transferred to TCU, & will be eligible next season. I think he will be a badass there.

HOOK 'EM,
Texdoc
smile.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top