Scholarship Offer Philosophy

[HornSwoggler]

Over the last few years, I have noticed a distinct difference between the number of offers Texas has made to football recruits and the number of offers made by many "comparable" or competing schools. UT's philosophy appears to be to select a group of players that fits its definition of a model recruit (good grades, desire to be a Horn, extracurricular activities, personality, willingness to commit and stay committed, etc). Other schools seem to prefer carpet bombing the high school landscape with offers to every hotshot out there hoping some superior talents will sign up. These programs seem more willing to wait for late signers and don't seem too bothered by decommits.

I finally took the time to research this impression I had concerning numbers of offers extended by various programs. I included top programs, rising programs, declining programs and a few that should never be UT's "equal" on the field considering their assets (location, revenues, stadiums, facilities, recruiting advantages).

Here are the results:

2013 Football Scholarship Offers (per Rivals website)

Alabama 151 (170 for 2012)
Arkansas 211
Arizona 198
Arizona St 217
Baylor 123
Boise St 109 (101 for 2012)
Boston Coll 206
Clemson 150
Florida 164 (162 for 2012)
Florida St 148 (130 for 2012)
Georgia 122
Georgia Tech 99
Houston 173
Iowa 112
Kansas St 96 (162 for 2012)
LSU 104 (97 for 2012)
Michigan 125
Nebraska 220
No Carolina 163
Northwestern 93
Notre Dame 176 (159 for 2012)
Ohio St 132 (111 for 2012)
Oklahoma 158 (103 for 2012)
Oklahoma St 108
Oregon 68 (89 for 2012)
So Carolina 184
Stanford 63 (126 for 2012)
Tennessee 287
TCU 84

TEXAS 36 (49 for 2012)

Texas A&M 152 (103 for 2012)
Texas Tech 163 (138 for 2012)
UCLA 151
USC 100 (104 for 2012)
Vanderbilt 241
West Virginia 279 (225 for 2012)

As can be seen, Texas is the outlier as far as offer quantity is concerned. I included a few 2012 offer stats to see if there was a drastic change year to year which might be attributed to available scholarship numbers. It appears the method of making many offers is part of the plan and not an anomaly. I must admit that I was a little surprised that Alabama and ND make so many offers and Oregon and TCU make relatively few.


Texas "under" offers by a wide margin.

Do you like Texas current method of being very selective? Has Texas suffered from this lack of offers? Should Texas offer more of the marginal players (grade risks, personal problems, attitude problems)?

A look at 2014 offers indicates a possible change in progress. Rivals reports 30 offers have been extended already to 2014 recruits.

 

[dthree36]

Yeah.. A&M is up to 30 plus at the moment on commitments. Clearly they are over the limit but it is the SEC and they do this sort of thing.

 

[HornSwoggler]

It is possible to sign 30 to scholarships and be within the rules if some of the scholarships are ones vacated by players who left the program with eligibility left. For instance, if some guys left when Sherman left, their scholarships might be available for use in this recruiting year. Or possibly, TAMU is expecting some players to leave early to the NFL which would have the same effect.

Texas did this exact thing last year when they signed 28 players. Three counted against the 2011 scholarship max of 25 per year. Those opened up when players left the program early for whatever reason. As long as you don't exceed the 25 per year and 85 total limits, all is good.

Now, signing kids and then not giving them scholarships or trying to force them to greyshirt or letting them know very late in the recruiting game that their promised scholarship will not be available is very unethical. But it happens.

 

[Horns11]

I don't think Rivals and Scout are very accurate about reporting the "offers," either. Some kids think that a letter from a school counts as an offer.

"UT's philosophy appears to be to select a group of players that fits its definition of a model recruit (good grades, desire to be a Horn, extracurricular activities, personality, willingness to commit and stay committed, etc)."

Couldn't disagree more, but maybe that's just me.
UT's philosophy has always been to let Bruce Chambers call up the guys who run the websites and ask which Texas kids are the highest-ranked. Then they schedule visits with those kids, regardless of the good grades, desire to be a Horn, extracurricular activities, personality, willingness to commit, etc. There's no way in hell we recruit kids like Tyrell Gatewood, Erik Hardeman, and Ben Wells if the criteria you listed was actually used to recruit players.

I'd actually prefer the SEC-style over-signing at this point. I know it's unethical to take scholarships away from decent kids (although it's doubtful we'd have to with all of the attrition). But in case anyone hasn't noticed, our talent pool isn't exactly where it was in 2005. If the plan is to "under" offer to make Texas seem more attractive and desirable, then it's backfiring. Alabama is the girl who is clearly a 10 and can be pickier about which guys she calls. Texas (right now at least) is a 6 and can't afford to sit around and let guys come to her.

 

[dthree36]

As far as the discussion of recruiting philosophy is being analyzed.... I wonder what the coaching carousel will do to all the early offers that as of this year been a new philosophy. We have already see de-commitments from several recruits and the stability of the program is constantly being scrutinized.

I often wonder if it is just us die hard fans who follow message boards and talk radio that are over reacting. Before I crossed the line to a semi-fanatic, after the final game of the year, I just let things be. I didn't follow recruiting, I didn't know who was being looked at as the next star RB or WR or QB.

I look at programs like Florida State that have been down for years and they still are able to pull in top talent. That's not to say that they have produces A MNC but they have fielded decent teams. I see Texas in that top talent minimal results window. Texas is Texas and recruits will want to come here to be part of a winning team or to be part of rebuilding what was once a winning team.

I guess my question is how many recruits will de-commit after committing as juniors or hell even sophomores if that ever happens. 2 years is a long time to wait for a signature.

It's one of those days and for some reason all the coaching changes have me pondering the future of our recruits.

 

[HornSwoggler]

I have often wondered about the accuracy of the offers claimed by the websites but I don't have a way to prove anything one way or the other so I assumed that if inaccuracy exists, it exists equally for all schools' offers. I know that is not a scientific way to evaluate the issue but the difference in claimed offers between UT and most other school's is so striking that I feel there is a difference in recruiting philosophy.

I find it hard to believe Chambers gets recruiting recommendations solely from website guys or recruiting gurus. From what I hear and read, the various coaches spend a ton of time out on the road watching potential recruits playing and talking with HS coaches. During that time, they are also discovering talent that they were unaware of. I have no inside information concerning how the process works but I can't imagine doing business that way.

Although I have been a UT fans for 5 decades, I didn't start paying much attention to recruiting until the last five years. I don't know much about the examples given - Hardeman, Gatewood, Wells. I don't recall if they were academic risks or just attitude problems. I do think that MB changed his recruiting tactics somewhat after a rash of academic dropouts and legally challenged players created problems during his first decade in Austin. Maybe that is why so few offers are currently extended. Maybe MB is more selective on the personal side and has relaxed his targeting of the most athletically talented. It does seem to me that academic issues are fewer these days and the players on the roster act more mature than many in the past.

Regarding "over" offering, I actually feel Texas puts itself at a disadvantage by not offering more top line kids. I don't have a problem with the strategy of offering more athletes as long as the athletes know the offer can cease to exist if they wait too long to commit. I don't believe the teams that make tons of offers make them all at the same time. I am sure many are retracted if an athlete does not show adequate interest and the school moves on. I believe that the websites like Rivals report when they get info that an offer is extended but rarely remove that offer from the list so it appears all the offers are currently active.

 

[Horns11]

While it's nice to think that coaches are actively scouting out there (especially in the state of Texas), it's hard to fathom that there would be enough hours in the day to do so. I know that Colt and Blake Gideon and a few others were great finds, but outside of them we've taken umpteen-hundred 4-star-or-better guys under Mack's watch and witnessed the attrition swell beyond repair. You rarely see a "diamond in the rough" commit to Texas because we're Texas. That's why is surprising to see RG3 succeed at the highest level, and not expected.

We have a three-deep at the OL right now (today!) yet no one would know that if you didn't have a roster handy. We literally alternate 7 guys on the OL every down of every game. Mack, Applewhite, and Searels don't trust the other 8 guys on the bench to have any meaningful reps, and our offensive rankings show that we're really just not very good in the trenches. Whose fault is that?

We have more LBs on the scholarship list than we need, even for special teams spots. But we had trouble finding 2 (TWO!!!) of them that could hold an assignment or make a tackle. Whose fault is that?

I honestly believe it goes back to what I called the original philosophy... getting the recruiting rankings, calling up the top kids in Texas, throwing **** against a wall and hoping it sticks. It's unfathomable that we have the resources that we do, but we can't throw a complete set of players out on the field any given play. I think that over-signing would help this phenomenon.

 

[where_are_my_8s]

Over-signing can go in two directions. By the way, this is the new version of working around scholarship limits and signing good kids away from another school. Look at what A&M is doing especially with the Griffin kid (if all academic indications are true).

Winning team = coach is an a-hole but wins so kids still want to commit there thinking they are the next way of talent (and if they are in the few that are bumped no one really listens).

Poor team = a big deal is made about it but the coach will probably be gone before long anyway so why does he care at that point.

Since very few kids ever see themselves as the ones getting "released" as the limit is reached they are willing to risk it. As a fan it sucks if your team screws a kid around (that kid's school/community will probably feel that way too). However, if winning continues and money rolls in who at the top of the program really cares.

I guess how good are you at double-talk and how much integrity to you plan on displaying.

 

[zinger]

Swoggler,

What exactly is a & m's recruiting advantage?

Location, Stadium, Cult Atmosphere, Vet School?
Could it be the corpse? Seems to me those are all disadvantages.

 

[HornSwoggler]

Zinger,

I don't see A&M having any advantage other than being in a new conference that is highly thought of with a new energetic coach that had a great year. A lot of new and exciting things are going on for what has been a 2nd tier program for a decade. The only other advantage TAMU has is if a player prefers a small, rural location as opposed to a larger one like Austin.

The disadvantage I referred to for UT and a few other schools (not necessarily or specifically compared to A&M) was solely in their offering strategy of not going after a ton of top ranked players in the hope of getting more than they do now. A lot of schools make many many offers hoping to sign a few top stars with hopes of turning their programs around. UT's choice of limiting offers to a relative few select players that meet its specific model prevents Texas from picking up a few VERY talented players that don't fit Mack's system but might have a tremendous impact on the field.

Based on early 2014 class activity, it seems like there are some changes in the Texas recruiting philosophy.... more early offers (which I dislike in general for all schools).

 

[bazbo]

The SEC oversigning ability, strategy, advantage or whatever you want to call it is a myth. They play by the same NCAA rules as everyone else. They may have an advantage on the academic side (as in lower standards for sports) and some conference rule tweaks vs. other conferences, but at the highest level of standards it's a level playing field.

If I'm wrong about this someone please educate me and other posters.

Another thread clearly outlines how aggy can (hypothetically) ligitimately matriculate 34 football players this signing period.

 

[HornSwoggler]

I agree, bazbo.

Any school can oversign if they want to. You hear about it almost exclusively inside the SEC but it may well occur in other conferences as well. The thing that amazes me is that recruits don't make a bigger deal out of being left out in the cold. Right now, it appears that is the only way oversigning will be reduced, through the bad publicity oversigning schools receive. The NCAA apparently does not think it is an issue worth correcting. The NCAA recently changed numerous rules making it easier for the coaches to recruit and did little to protect the athletes.

For the record, making a ton of offers to recruits does not equate to oversigning. Nor does accepting VERBAL commitments in excess of the expected number of scholarships.

Oversigning occurs when a school accepts Letters of Intent in excess of the scholarships available to new recruits. This results in the signed recruit being without the promised scholarship very late in the recruiting process or it forces the school to unexpectedly (to the roster player) drop someone's scholarship to make room for the more desirable new recruit. The lack of a scholarship may not be known to a new recruit or roster player until Fall practice starts and the player's options are much more limited.