Resetting The Board | The Ceiling

Image of Grayland Arnold via beaumontenterprise.com

In recent weeks OU fans have seen a number of Oklahoma’s top 2016 recruiting targets either commit elsewhere, or leave the Sooners out of their list of top schools entirely. I know this can be a cause for concern for fans and understandably so. After all, recruiting is the life blood of every program. But even in spite of recent events, I still believe there is still plenty of time for Oklahoma to put together a good class.

Now I obviously don’t sit in on meetings, nor am I an actual decision maker, so I can’t tell you exactly what the OU coaches will or won’t do going forward. What I’ll do, however, is offer up a few thoughts on how I look at building a class.

Overall Objective

Some will say the overall objective is to fill needs. And there’s no doubt there is some degree of truth to that. But that leaves me a little unexcited. That objective, on the surface, certainly doesn’t sound like a lofty goal for a team wanting to compete for national championships. “Needs” sounds like the bare minimum.

I would say the objective is to fill open positions with players who have high ceilings, guys willing to put in the effort, and fit the overall dynamic of the class. In an effort to try and cut down on the length of this post, I’ll break these into three separate stories addressing the ceiling, effort & the fit of the recruits.

High Ceiling

You hear these two words in recruiting a lot. And I suspect most of you understand what they mean, even if not everyone can recognize or project a player’s ceiling. It simply means that you’re looking for someone whose ability will exceed a coach’s teaching. In other words, assuming proper development is taught, there won’t be any physical or mental limitations to what the athlete can eventually accomplish.

Obviously people cannot fly but if you have a 6’3″ OT, you already know that no matter how much a coach gives him and no matter how bad the player wants it he’ll likely be limited by his lack of height and length.

Which brings me to one of my primary points. There are still plenty of high ceiling prospects available.

Let’s take the safety position for example. OU is in on some highly recruited targets like Chanse Sylvie and Shurod Thompson. Whether OU gets either, both, or neither, there are still targets available that have every bit the ceiling of those two. I’ve mentioned Arnold Azunna on here multiple times. In fact, I just mentioned him yesterday when I was talking about Thompson. Azunna is not a true safety prospect in that he doesn’t play the position for his h.s. team. He actually plays cornerback, but there are certain clues you can look for in a corner to help project whether they could play safety at the next level.

When you look at size with the safety position Azunna has plenty of it. He’s a solid 6’0″ and a very well proportioned young man. When you look at his speed, I think for a cornerback he’d fall on the slower side but for a safety, he gives you all the necessary speed for the position. His first downhill step is incredibly quick. In fact, all his transitions are clean. He’s ability to close space and destroy a ball carrier…second to none.

Azunna’s primary weakness is that he’s still learning the game of football. I’ve seen him at a couple of camps and watched him do both transition work and 1-on-1’s. He always looks great in transition, and you can see that on film. In 1-on-1’s, at times, he looked amazing while at others he can look more pedestrian. The question being what’s the reason for the difference?

As I observed Azunna over multiple reps, I noticed he was relying almost exclusively on reactive transition. Meaning it appeared to me that he had no idea what route was coming. I pulled him aside at one of the camps and specifically asked him, “are you gathering clues and reading the possible routes?” Clues like foot placement, body lean, release, etc. Arnold’s answer was, “no.” So while other onlookers may see a prospect who just lost a 1-on-1 rep, I’m thinking, “wow, he had no idea what was coming and still managed to be in the vicinity of a receiver who has nothing but green grass all around him!”

Azunna told me that he immigrated to the U.S. from Nigeria when he was nine. He only started playing the game of football two seasons ago. He’s never had private training. He’s built like a linebacker, hits like one as well, but has the speed and transitional ability of a defensive back. That’s a nice physical combination. All this young man needs is some additional skill development.

I can offer any number of examples of recruits at various positions that, like Azunna, are prospect with a high ceiling.

And if you don’t believe this strategy can work consistently, ask Michigan State how much competition they had when they were recruiting Darqueze Dennard or Trae Waynes. I’ll give you a clue. Not much. Both Dennard and Waynes were back-to-back first round draft picks. One time may be luck, but twice is skill.

A good friend of mine was out to dinner with one of the coaches from Missouri, and at some point they start talking about defensive linemen. As you all know Missouri seems to put out NFL defensive line prospects every year of late. I want to paraphrase some of the things this Missouri coach told my friend about their defensive line coach and his recruiting:

He (Craig Kuligowski) knows what he wants. He doesn’t want 4 and 5-star kids. He wants hungry kids. So he will take the 2’s and 3’s if he sees what he wants in them. I’ll bring him five defensive line prospects, and he’ll sit there quietly watching each one. He’ll pass on all of them then he’ll notice one thing about one particular player and he’ll look at me and say, “this guy…I want this guy.” I don’t know what he’s looking for, but he knows what he’s looking for. And the kind of environment he fosters for his players is intensely competitive. Those guys compete with each other constantly.

Like Michigan State, Missouri makes a living finding high ceiling guys (on the defensive line) that others don’t necessarily want, and they turn them into top draft picks.

I’ll be the first to admit, if this process was easy everyone would do it. It’s not, obviously. Not everyone has the nuanced eyes for talent, or the guts to stand on the table for the guy they want. A friend of mine who coaches FBS ball once told me, “recruiting is a copy cat game.” And I’ve seen exactly that time and time again.

I can tell you there are players in Texas right now that have stacked offer sheets that I personally don’t think can play in Norman, and yet I can almost guarantee you the fan base would clap and cheer if OU signed them. And whether you’d agree or not, I think everyone can agree there are plenty of examples of coaches who are making a living consistently finding truly high ceiling athletes and developing them into superstars.

Baylor picked up two of the top 2017 WR prospects in Texas yesterday in Jhamon Ausbon and Hezekiah Jones — As a side note, I know Jhamon. He and Hezekiah train together and are good friends, along with Donovan Stiner. So while it may seem like Baylor has suddenly become Alabama, those three all committing to the same school isn’t as surprising as you might think– and despite the fact the Bears are getting to a point where they can hand pick top rated wide receivers, I want you note the two wide receiver prospects in their 2016 class:

1. Jared Atkinson – only other P5 offers are Iowa State and Texas Tech

2. Denzel Mims – only other P5 offer is from Texas Tech. And Mims wasn’t even on Baylor’s board until early this summer. He showed up in June one day for a camp and at 6’4″ was destroying anyone they put in front of him. Add to the fact he won the Texas 3A 200m championship and you’re looking at the kind of wide receiver Baylor believes they can turn into a star.

Earlier this week Texas made an offer to a cornerback, who happens to be committed to Baylor, named Grayland Arnold. And this is a young man that doesn’t currently have the most impressive offer list, in fact prior to the Horns offering Arnold’s only other P5 offers were Baylor, Ok State (and they’re full at CB, so that offer likely didn’t stand anymore) and Miss. State.

When we talk about ceilings, we’re usually talking about speed, vision, agility, length, etc. So I’ll be the first to admit that Arnold doesn’t necessarily have ideal cornerback length. He’s right at 5’10”, but I know Arnold’s father a little bit. In fact, like myself, Arnold Sr was an amateur boxer. And what I know is that little Grayland’s father is nearly 6’0″ and his mother is 5’8″. 5’10” certainly isn’t short for a CB so even if that’s all Grayland gets, it’s enough (assuming the other elements are there). But in all likelihood Arnold isn’t done growing.

So as we continue to evaluate his ceiling, this is a kid who can two hand alley-oop dunk a basketball ball. I’ve seen it with my own eyes. He ran a 10.75 100m in the TX state finals and ran a 10.3 split in the 4×100. And he’s another kid that only recently started playing football. Point being he’s a phenomenal all around athlete and if you want guys that can keep up with the track sprinters that Baylor is rolling out there, Arnold is probably one of them.

I could go on and on but I’ll spare you all as this is already longer than I intended. But I know that recruiting has been on the minds of a lot of you, so I wanted to begin an organized discussion about it and the evaluation process. And really emphasize the importance of an evaluator knowing what they’re looking for and having the courage to either go get it, or the fortitude to pass on the kid everyone else wants.

Again, there are still plenty of quality prospects available. The ceiling is only the first part of the process. I’ll discuss the second two elements in later posts.

168 Comments

  • SamSooner says:

    Okay, Super K, this is awesome stuff. So awesome, that I believe you should gather all that you’ve posted, place it all into a single manual and call it “How to Recruit.” or “What to look for in a player to build a top-notch program.”

    Awesome! Awesome! Awesome!

  • Andy Sundborg says:

    Bob Stoops made a living off uncovering hidden gems early. Just look at the 2000 team. A lotta those guys weren’t looked at by P5:schools, in fact most of the Texas kids that year I don’t believe Texas gave the time of day to. I think Stoops got away from that for a while and started chasing the stars and now is trying to find his way back to the old ways.

    • SamSooner says:

      I can see that. Good point.

    • Ed Cotter says:

      Would be interesting to see how many of the main contributors in 2000 were Stoops guys, or holdovers from Blake. Now the 2002-2004 guys were all Stoops and did pretty well also.

      • Andy Sundborg says:

        I think that has some merit but I don’t think Blake woulda made those that were his into the players they were. I mean Brandon Daniels for instance had languished at 3 different positions and he was actually highly recruited for example. Look at Roger Steffan and Corey Heineke, 2 walk-ons from the OKC area. No one had a clue who they were, I believe Corey was brought in as a long snapper and while neither were stars, they started and ended up being solid players

        • Sooner 76 says:

          JT Thatcher is another example of a player who was moved to a position where he became a star.

          Roy was just an incredible player. Watched the 2000 K-State last week and was just wowed by him all over again. Probably should have won the HT in 2001.

          • SoonerfanTU says:

            That KSU team was pretty darn good, too. And we beat them twice that year.

          • Sooner 76 says:

            Yes, they were an excellent team. IMO, K-State would have won the NC in 1998 had Stoops not rated their staff right before the BXII CCG.

        • Bob Edwards says:

          There were a ton of players moved around in the early days by Stoops staff. We started running a Air Raid offense with players that totaled something like 28 total receptions. We scrounged receivers from everywhere. I seem to also remember guys moving for OL to DL and others moving from DL to OL.

      • Bob Edwards says:

        I actual did the analysis on this back in the day. I looked at points scored on offense and tackles on defense. 60% of the points came from Stoops guys and another 20% came from guys Stoops moved to other positions. On D it was 40% and another 20% for moved guys.

        One thing to consider when looking at those number is to consider that Stoops’ guys were FR and SO and Blake’s were JR and SR. You would expect a lot more production out of JR and SR.

        • SamSooner says:

          Right on time, Bob.

        • Ed Cotter says:

          Thanks for the numbers Bob. I wasn’t sure on how much the Stoops guys contributed since they were FR and SO. I expect the JR and SR to have contributed more though. Thanks again.

          • Bob Edwards says:

            No prob. I actually did it back in the day because there were a bunch of people on the message boards that were claiming that Stoops won because of Blake’s players. I just wanted to get some real numbers to evaluate the proposition on.

          • Sooner 76 says:

            Blake would never have been successful at OU, simply b/c he wasn’t HC material. It’s easy to say now, I know, but when I heard his first conference, I had to shake my head. He said something to the effect of, “When my third or fourth recruiting classes are juniors and seniors, we can contend for the conference title.” I knew then he was more interested in buying time and being the coach, moreso than accomplishing anything.

            Contrast Stoops’ introductory press conference, when he said that rebuilding wasn’t fair to the seniors. He wento to say that he wouldn’t predict that they would win 7 games or even 9 games, because that meant he was conceding games. “We concede nothing,” Stoops said. I knew then he was a winner.

            Certainly there was some talent on campus. But talent that was out of shape, demoralized, and not placed in a position to succeed. And to suggest that the team would have won without Josh Heupel at QB and Torrance Marshall at MLBer would be absurd. Both of them, of course, were JUCOs recruited by Stoops. And both of them always seemed to make the big play. They were winners. There’s a reason why Heupel was lifted into the air by his fellow players after the final gun in the OB.

          • Mysterio1 says:

            So True! I will say it until I’m dead. Josh gave everything he had that season, and he had an elbow the size of a grapefruit to show for it, he should also have had his Heisman Trophy.
            Bobby Bowden cried about how Sissy Weinke played with the flu, and it just wasn’t Bob’s style to say his QB had some serious tendinitis in his elbow.

        • SoonerGoneEast says:

          Good stuff here, Bob.

        • SoonerLove says:

          Here are the players that Blake recruited who started:

          OT Frank Romero. (Moved from DE and became All-Conference)
          OG Al Baysinger
          OG Matt Skinner
          OT Scott Kempinich
          HB Seth Littrell (A Sooner prodigy who was coming to OU regardless)
          WR Andre Woolfolk (Moved from Free safety to CB/WR after Stoops arrival)
          T.E. Trent Smith (Stated he was coming to OU anyway. Redshirted in ’98)
          D.T Ryan Fisher
          D.E. Corey Callens
          LB Rocky Calmus (Stated he came to OU becasue of Rex Ryan and Phil Bennett)
          SS Roy Williams (Moved from OLB after Stoops arrival)
          FS JT THatcher (Moved from running back after Stoops arrival)

          Other noteable players left over from John Blake that was on the 2000 team.
          DB/LB Ontei Jones
          WR Damian Mackey (Moved from DB after Stoops arrival)
          WR Curtis Fagan (moved from DB after Stoops arrival)
          TE Josh Norman (moved from RB after Stoops arrival)

          Stoops recruited starters on 200 teams
          QB Josh Heuple (there were no QBs on campus when Bob arrived)
          RB Quinten Griffin
          WR Antwone Savage
          LE Corey Heinecke
          DT Kory Klien (true freshman in 2000)
          LB Torrance Marshall
          CB Micheal Thompson (true fresman in 2000)
          CB Derek Strait

          Other noteables to play in 2000
          RB Renaldo Works (true Freshman in 2000)
          DE Jimmy Wilkerson (true Freshman in 2000)
          DE Dan Cody (true freshman in 2000)
          LB Teddy Lehman (True Freshman in 2000)

          • Bob Edwards says:

            Congratulations you can use Google, though not very well since you misspelled Heupel’s name. Do you have a point, since a list of players doesn’t respond to anything I said?

          • SoonerLove says:

            I just copied and pasted it from a different board I found on Google search. No need to be underminding….I think everyone on here knows how to use Google, so that’s rude. I’m not trying to fight with you, so please be nice. You were comparing Stoops guys to John Blake’s guys yesterday and today, so I figured I’d find out which guys were actual Blake recruits and which one’s were Stoops recruits. It looks like out of the 22 starters, 8 were Stoops recruits if I’m not mistaken. I’m just going off the above list. I think yesterday you threw out some numbers that said the majority of the players were Stoops recruits…Well according to the above list 36% were Stoops recruits and 63% were Blake’s recruits. I’m not trying to argue with you, so don’t get mad. I’m just trying to see if our number match up. I’m giving Stoops full credit for winning the 2000 title too. Just not, sure if Blake shouldn’t get a little credit here too for finding some of that talent.

          • Bob Edwards says:

            The post you are responding to says very specifically “points” and “tackles”. I never said anything about numbers of players. So posting a list of players without any explanation is a total change of subject. If you want to change the subject that’s fine. I will take that as an admission that you have no argument to what was said and move on. But don’t expect others to read your mind as to what your real argument is when all you do is post a list of names.

            You will get a lot more respect around here if you actually show that you have read and understood what the other person is saying. That’s called respect for the other person. You won’t gain much respect around here by replying to people and ignoring what they actually said. That is disrespectful.

            To date that is what you have done. Add that to getting in fights with some of the more respected posters around here and your crude language and your on pretty thin ice as far as I am concerned.

          • D Hunter Sanchez says:

            Right on Bob.

          • SoonerLove says:

            Okay Bob, I went back and read yesterday’s post and realized your numbers were more about PRODUCTION than actual players on the field. That’s a valid point, but you can’t just completely take out the fact that John Blake’s players were a part of that team. Guy’s like Rocky Calmus, Roy Williams, JT Thatcher, and Curtis Fagan for example had key plays that boosted OU into the championship. Without those guys, we never even sniff the national title. It was a team effort. Everyone came together. Both Stoops and Blakes players were all contributors. As for the respect/ disrespect thing…I will try to be a little more careful when reading people’s posts, however, there is still no need for the name calling and attacks I’ve received from people on here. I have gotten rude too, but it’s been in response to those that attacked me first. Please don’t be one of those. Lets have good, healthy talks and discuss football. Isn’t that what we’re on here to do?

          • Bob Edwards says:

            In respect to the Blake issue. It has never been my argument that Blake’s players did not contribute. My argument is always that the people who claim it was Stoops winning with Blake’s players are wrong. Given that Stoops players were mostly FR and SO you would expect most of the production to come from Blake’s players anyway. And yet, production wise, they were about even assuming you don’t give Stoops any credit for putting Blake’s players in the right positions. If you do, then Stoops players were actually the majority producers.

            As for the other topic, let me give you the benefit of the doubt for a second. You seem very unaware of your own responsibility in the fights you have gotten into. Every board has its own culture. It also has its respected posters. You don’t seem to have any respect for that. My suggestion to you is to listen more and talk less.

            This board has a number of people on it that will engage you if you speak respectfully but you actually have to pay attention to what their saying. If you just spout “your opinion” and aren’t able to back it up with some facts you aren’t going to earn much respect here. A lot of the main posters here don’t have much patience for trolls and you tripped all the alarms. Making crude comments just added to the problem.

            Try not starting so many discussions and actually engaging the ones going on. And stop whining about how everyone treats you. If you think this is bad, you clearly have not been on many message boards..

          • SoonerLove says:

            Bob, I’ll admit that I haven’t been on many message boards and am fairly new to this. I agree that after a few days of seeing this that is does indeed have a culture. I, personally don’t see anything wrong, however with spouting an opinion and even if that opinion is disagreed with, it should be respected and people shouldn’t react rudely over a disagreement. I don’t like to argue. I do indeed read a lot of people’s posts on here and that is how I became involved in the first place. It just seems like a lot of this board gets very upset if someone questions Stoops or the recruiting. Just because someone questions that, it doesn’t need to turn into a huge attack on that person or a major blow up like what happened over the last few days. It can be a discussion without it turning ugly. That’s just how I feel about it.

          • Boom says:

            SL, your like a politician. I’ve read all of your opinions, agendas, & insults. You take what others say and then put your own spin on it and turn it into something different. Politician. When someone calls you out, you get defensive and insult them, then you need a tissue. Afterwords, you try to hide behind some nice post talking about different opinions and how they should be respected. I agree with Bob, there are a lot of folks who have been on here for a long time who respectfully discuss all aspects of OU football, share receipts, and say funny things. You have not fit in from the beginning which was clear to me as I don’t want to speak for the others.
            I wanted to share my opinion and I’m sure others feel the same way. I will not respond to you moving forward.

          • SoonerLove says:

            Boom, are the people that fit in, just people that say positive things all the time and never question the coaching?

          • boomersooner says:

            I think you might need a new site. This one’s not working well for you. Byebye

          • EasTex says:

            His not fitting in is most likely a chronic condition.

          • boomersooner says:

            Haha. He probably fits nicely in the palm of his hand

          • EasTex says:

            Or tweezers.
            /*snort*

          • Mysterio1 says:

            Love, People do question coaching, or this would be another site that I belong to.

          • EasTex says:

            Mysterio1, you are a good person and applaud your effort in being reasonable. Sadly, this one doesn’t fit the model of rational man.

          • SoonerLove says:

            Well Mysterio, why is it that every post regarding a negative comment, a Stoops dis, or a recruiting dis, has had a mean, disrespectful, slandering response with name calling included? That’s what has caused people like me to say ugly things in response. I’m not a mean person and I have respect for others, but the second I get crapped on after I just express an opinion…I do lose my cool

          • brainpimp says:

            NO, and if you bothered to actually read this sight you would know that.

          • SoonerLove says:

            Brainpimp, I have been reading this site for the last 6 months. Most people on here is cool with each other until someone questions Bob Stoops or makes a critical comment regarding the program. Then they get treated like dog meat. It’s persecuting to say anything negative. You do fine and make buddies on here if you all think alike and all agree, but the minute someone else has another opinion that isn’t sunshine pumping and homer talk, they get treated really meanly. That’s why people like me that don’t put up with it, trash talk and blow up. I’m a nice guy, but I retaliate when I get crapped on.

          • brainpimp says:

            BULL@#$%. Lots of people , question second guess and criticize Stoops. It’s you, you don’t get it.

            Now go take your Midol and get back to bed.

          • SoonerLove says:

            Do you use Kotex or Tampex this time of the month? My girl just wants to know which one is more effective so I thought I would ask you?

          • Mysterio1 says:

            Love you need to calm yourself. Try other boards, you would get killed. Here at least you get a chance to explain yourself.

          • SoonerLove says:

            How? How do I have a chance here when the majority of the people on here either make fun of me or call me names when I say anything negative or anything critical about the coaching staff? If that’s not trying to kill a blogger, I don’t know what is?

          • SoonerMGB56 says:

            They may have been Blake’s players, but they didn’t play like that for him. Fact is, Bob got more out of them than Blake did. Look at how many were moved to other positions. Frank Romero was not likely to ever have been a productive TE. But he was an all-conference OT.
            And Stoops has done that a lot. Lane Johnson, Gabe Ikard. Andre Woolfolk changed from DB to WR and back to DB, where he ultimately was drafted. Lendy Holmes. The list is long. And most of the changes ultimately ended up productive.
            I give Blake NO credit. We wouldn’t have won 7 games in ’99 or 13 in ’00 with Blake as HC.

          • SoonerLove says:

            I completely agree with all of what you said, except for zero credit. They wouldn’t have won jack under John Blake completely agree. Stoops got the best out of them completely agree. However, Blake’s been a really nice recruiter everywhere he’s gone. He had an eye for seeing raw talent, just didn’t know how to coach them. Stoops is a great coach. Everyone knows that. I just wish we could have kept Blake and Leach for recruiting purposes.

          • Mysterio1 says:

            Blake has a very bad reputation, this all came out after his days at North Carolina under Butch Davis. I always found that as very funny. because Butch Davis wanted the OU job, and Barry endorsing Blake pretty much sealed that deal.
            Mark May pretty much called Blake a pimp for NFL agents!

          • boomersooner says:

            You and Bob nailed it through here. These new clowns need to find somewhere else to post their agenda driven nonsense. I think it was you who said they want facts given but never offer any in response. Sums these idiots up pretty well

          • Mergatroid Skittle says:

            Wow! I rarely comment on the site, but this frustrated me enough to say something.

            One of the reasons I really love this site is because 99% of the time there are great fan to fan discussions in the comments. They can get heated or shall we say passionate but very rarely do they get hateful like other message boards. It seems like you are the one here that is being crude and as far as respect goes maybe if you would engage in a healthy debate and display some of your “respected” knowledge you would earn SoonerLove’s respect. But no, you are coming off extremely hostile because someone posted a comment that was a counter to your original statement.

            Also SonnerLove doesn’t know you or anything about you, why should he respect you? Respect should be earned, not given.This awesome site is 100% free so how should he know how long you have been a “member” of this community? What if he just joined yesterday? I am sure Jordan, K, and all the other guys would be thrilled if you started chasing away new visitors.

          • boomersooner says:

            Bob has earned respect. You people who rarely comment and agree with trolls should just stay silent

          • EasTex says:

            Have you noticed that a certain poster that had a pic of a blonde wearing a OU tee shirt has disappeared while these troll sock-puppets are swarming?
            I have.

          • boomersooner says:

            I don’t know what it takes to kick em off here. I’m trying my best to bait em into running their mouths and even then they get to stay. I would think a half dozen mom comments would be enough. Apparently the Nellie in charge doesn’t

          • EasTex says:

            In the absence of admin actions, mocking and shunning remain a powerful tool.

          • EasTex says:

            Now the trolls are using sock-puppets.

          • EasTex says:

            Sock-puppet.

          • Kelly Gurbcock says:

            Bob, you said “respected posters”….really? that’s a joke, there are not respected posters, only posters and trolls and the world needs both to make me laugh.

            Anyhow, on to the subject. Stoops did get Blake’s guys to perform and placed them successfully, however, he has shown the inability to win with his own recruits. There has been a lack of talent eval and development at OU. Stoops needs a guy like Blake to find the right guys for the program so Stoops can get them to succeed. I thought Monty was that guy, unfortunately we’ll never know. in the mean time, let me quote Bob Edwards circa 1982, “You kids get off my lawn!” Don’t be such a curmudgeon.

          • SoonerMGB56 says:

            What a crock! So are you saying that the only time Stoops “won” was 2000?
            It seems to me that OU had a TON of success and WINNING through 2008, even per the most extreme, the sky-is-falling posters. And those weren’t with Blake’s recruits.
            Two of Stoops recruits won Heisman’s. His recruits won too many other awards to add up.
            Sam Bradford, Trent Williams, Ikard, and Colvin were all 3 star recruits that Stoops evaluated, signed, and developed into stars and NFL players.
            What in the heck are you talking about?!?!?!

          • SoonerLove says:

            Kelly, I couldn’t agree more. That’s exactly what my whole point was, but you said it best:
            Stoops did get Blake’s guys to perform and placed them successfully, however, he has shown the inability to win with his own recruits. There has been a lack of talent eval and development at OU. Stoops needs a guy like Blake to find the right guys for the program so Stoops can get them to succeed.

            Perfect.

          • SoonerMGB56 says:

            So as time goes on, your agenda becomes clearer and clearer. You just completely endorsed everything Kelly said.

            Quote: “he has shown the inability to win with his own recruits” – this clearly states that in Kelly’s opinion, Stoops has not won without someone else’s recruits. Since all of Blake’s recruits would have graduated in 2001 (or 2002 with a redshirt), the clear implication here is that if you don’t win a NC, you’re not winning. The implication is that making the NCG in 2003, 2004, and 2008 means nothing, since we lost all three.

            Quote: “There has been a lack of talent eval and development at OU” – Under Stoops, OU has two Heismans, and too many other awards to mention. But per Kelly, No development, so they all did it on raw talent. However Jason White, Sam Bradford, Trent Williams, Gabe Ikard, and Aaron Colvin, to name a few, were three star recruits who went on to awards. Stoops either evaluated well, developed well or both.
            So, SoonerLove, you’re on here agreeing with Kelly Gurbuck, that Stoops has done nothing. Only won NC because of Blake’s recruits, and has done nothing since.
            Talk about agendas and exaggeration.

          • SoonerLove says:

            I think Stoops is a great coach and has had a lot of success at Oklahoma. My personal opinion is that the 2000 year was a combination of all the right coaches, including Stoops, bringing in and falling into a team with all the right players. The guys we got after that like Sam and Jason, were coming in from the aftermath of the 2000 championship. Yes, Stoops developed them and they went on to be great players, but they did not have the mental focus to win a National Title. Almost every team except the 2000 team has fell short of their expectations. My whole point is since 2000 Stoops teams have had a trend. They fall short of expectations, key players get injured every year, and every year there’s at least one terrible loss. Those are facts and they’re not coincidence. Yes he has a good system, yes he brings in good players, but has he been able to win a national title or be dominant with his own system and 100% his own players that he recruited?

          • SoonerMGB56 says:

            So expectations are NC every year? That’s essentially what you’ve just said. I’ve got news for you, that’s an unattainable expectation.

            That’s the thing with the “Fire Stoops” group. You are intentionally vague on what should be ecpected of Stoops, and/or why you think he should ne fired. You ask those who disagree for detailed fact based support for why he shouldn’t be and then counter with vague “he hasn’t gotten it done since 2xxx”. But when you drill down, your expectations exceed what has ever been done.

          • SoonerLove says:

            My expectations are not for a National Title each year, which I know is unattainable. SoonerMGB56, you don’t have to tell me that to know that’s the truth. What team is college football has won more than 3 in a row???? No one that I can think……Would I love that? yes…Is it realistic no!!!!! What is my expectations is what we had from 2000-2004. Being in the running and top 5-10 each year, unless it is a rebuiliding year like 2005. We even competed for it in 2006 and 2007. Was I mad at the end of the year? No….Disappointed a little yes, but I knew those teams were in the mix. Have we had a team in the mix for the last 6 years? NO……Is that excusable in OU standards?????????????????? Should OU be a top 5-10 team in a 6 year period at least sniffing the 4 team playoff. My dude…That is my expectations….Being in the mix…..We are not in the mix and haven’t been in 6 years. That is where the frustration and the questoning of a coaching change comes from. That is why Mack Brown got booted out of Texas and he won a NT a lot sooner than Bob has. This arguement hasn nothing to do with national titles. It’s more of where is the directions of the football program going. If you and everyone else on here thinks the football team is competing the way it should be than I think it’s ignorance. Can we all just admit that the football program is not a national 1-15 team at tiis point and teams like Oregon, Bama, Ohio St., Florida St., Baylor…have the upper hand right now???? It’s the truth and I’m not gonna sugar coat or lie. Now if we go out there this season and sniff the 4 team playoff or make the playoff, I’ll shut my mouth. Until then, the program is not where it needs to be. Period…..

          • SoonerMGB56 says:

            Here’s the issue with your expectations espoused above: No specific enough to be measurable, therefore subject to subjective interpretation. I have years of experience in performance goal setting in a business environment, and performance goals, standards, whatever you want to refer to them as, must be clear, specific, and measurable. This allows for subjective application of the standards, and application of rewards or penalties.
            You refer to 2000 – 2004 as examples, with specifics of top 5-10 rankings to end each year. You imply we haven’t met the standard of performance since 2004.
            The EOY rankings are fine standards. But you throw in “being in the running” and “sniffing the NC” as standards. Not clear, and not measurable. Totally subjective. And on top of that, you seem to have contradictory standards. Probably one or both (maybe they’re the same?; I’m going to assume them to be a single standard, to which you’ve applied two different labels) of the “In the running” and “sniffing a NC” standards contradict the EOY rankings standard in several years..
            E.g., In 2007 and 2008 OU finished 8th and 5th in the EOY rankings, and played in the NCG in 2008, yet you seemed to assess those years as failures, ostensibly because of the application of your subjective standard?
            And you clearly have assessed 2009 through 2014 as failures to perform to standard. Yet OU finished in the top 10 two of those years.
            This whole sniffing NC’s, in the running, in the discussion, as standards are problematic to me. Even if I make assumptions to try and make them more objective. Like “in the top 5 in late November”, which could possibly be “in the discussion” or “sniffing”? But even with application in that fashion, that’s a pretty arbitrary, and more about timing of the losses, than EOY losses and rankings. Using the 2013 season as an example, we lost in early October, which dropped us “out of the discussion” for NCG berth. Then after fighting our way back into “the discussion” we lose again in early November. Effectively we were out of “the running”, “the discussion” at that point. However, if that second loss was in our last game, would that meet your standard? Or are two losses failure to meet expectations. Just too unclear for me.
            I agree that the program is not where it needs to be. But not to the level of removal of the HC.
            And to me, vagueness, like you often put out there, as do many of those with an agenda to have Stoops removed, is a tool used to ward off people constructing logical, valid cases against your point of view. Because if someone constructs a compelling argument against your point of view, vagueness allows you to shift your argument, “that’s not what I meant”.

          • SoonerLove says:

            SoonerMGB56, I respect you the most on this site so far. You bring facts, real counter facts, and real analytical responses that make sense. I’m sorry mine have been vague responses. It’s unintentional on my behalf to bring vague responses. I think it’s your analytical personality that can’t understand what I’m trying to say however. When I say “sniff a national title”, I mean that OU did not provide a team that particular season that had a snowballs chance to beat the team that won it. OU’s talent level, drive, or motivation was not present to compete with even the top caliber teams those seasons. I hope this isn’t being vague. I’m trying my best to explain here. Those seasons, OU would have gotten beat by the teams in the top 5. Therefore, OU was in a different category than those those teams. It’s like A&M last year. They were good, but could they have beaten Ohio St? No. There’s only been 4-5 teams finishing in the top 5 the last few years and Ou is not one of them. OU is not an elite program right now and almost everyone in the country outside of Oklahoma can tell you that. We are average right now. As of the last 6 years it’s been average football.

          • Mysterio1 says:

            Bob had a guy like Blake, that was Montgomery. I don’t think he was solid as a D-line coach, but he could have grown into one.
            But that guy opened doors when it came to recruiting!

          • SoonerLove says:

            I completely agree Mysterio…Mongomery gave me all the feeling that Leach and Mangino gave me. A great assistant that could get the recruits needed to be on championship level. Other than Montgomery…It’s been Cale Gundy bringing the talent in.

          • boomersooner says:

            50 comments so shut your mouth about respect. Bob’s been here a long time and is respected. You haven’t and aren’t. You agree with a troll as well. Says a lot about your character

          • SoonerLove says:

            I thought you were done commenting on my posts…you said uncle bro. You obviously can’t help yourself. Your sick in the head. Please get some counseling

          • boomersooner says:

            This wasn’t even a response to you dumbass. If you use the English language properly, you will notice this is a response to one Kelly something or other. If you’re gonna run your mouth at least do it properly

          • SoonerLove says:

            Ta

          • EasTex says:

            Sock-puppet.

          • SoonerLove says:

            Ya

          • Mysterio1 says:

            You must remember too, when Stoops got here Blake took all of the present recruiting paperwork with him when he left, or deleted it.
            Bob had to start from scratch.

          • EasTex says:

            What? “Underminding?”
            /oh my

          • boomersooner says:

            I love this “guys” martyrdom. Joan of arc has nothing on “him”

          • Sooner 76 says:

            Michael Thompson was a 1999 recruit (3 star S ranked # 42 on Rivals). One of only 3 3-star players in that class (DT Jon Hawk, who quit, and TE John Tucker, who played on the OL, were the other ones).

            Thompson was 2nd team as a true freshman in 1999 at CB, and therefore was a sophomore in 2000. He literally never came off the field on D in 2000. Great CB until the auto accident. Derek Strait redshirted in 1999.

            B Everage, a 2-star QB in 1999, was the dime back in 2000. He played a lot and came on in the Nebraska game for Thatcher after the latter blew his assignment twice, allowing the two early Nebraska TDs.

          • Mysterio1 says:

            That’s an impressive list for John Blake, but Bob brought in JH, and that is what made it work.
            Stoops brought in a structure that he wanted. Blake would switch offenses during mid season?

          • Mysterio1 says:

            I’m pretty much sure in my mind that it’s time for Bob to retire, but OU does owe him at least two more years to try and pull the rabbit out of that hat.
            Mike Stoops has got to produce on the defensive side of the football. Or Bob will lose a lot of creditability.

          • SoonerLove says:

            Blakes a terrible coach, but good-great recruiter.

        • boomersooner says:

          You hit a troll trifecta in this conversation. Congrats. 3 more that need to go

      • Mysterio1 says:

        I would also have to add that OU’s coaching was much better. Bobby Bowden was totally out coached in the OB, if a FSU WR made a catch he was tackled immediately.
        Mike Stoops and BV were an incredible team.

    • MoJoOkie says:

      Almost posted a similar comment. OU went through a period with Stoops when we would offer someone and their stars would go up nearly overnight. I sometimes think the national recruiting is a little overrated.

    • Sooner 76 says:

      His first two recruiting classes were ranked 43rd and 13th by Rivals.

  • Ed Cotter says:

    Thanks for the informative article Super K. Can’t wait for the next two installments. TFB Rules!

  • ohiosoonerdevildog says:

    Great article K. What petition do we have to sign to get you onto the recruiting staff at OU?

    • Exiled In Ohio says:

      No, we don’t want him on the staff! He couldn’t give out info if he’s on staff.

      • Super K says:

        lol y’all don’t want me on any staff. Besides Esco would crucify me every time the Sooners lost ;). Those coaches are in a tough business!

        • ohiosoonerdevildog says:

          We would handle Esco. Don’t you worry about that. And we’d blame everyone but you. See you can’t lose.

        • Bob Edwards says:

          If Esco is bothering you, just let us know. We can always “talk” to him, out back, where there are no cameras. 🙂

          • ohiosoonerdevildog says:

            Do I sense a mafia style meeting? Or possibly a military style blanket party?

      • ohiosoonerdevildog says:

        Haha he could be our mole. I’m sure we could all keep a secret.

  • Big Tiddays says:

    This article made feel like

  • Bob Edwards says:

    Good stuff K. I am hoping that Bob’s recent hires are more focused on finding talent and making it better than chasing stars. Seems like that was what he did early and got away from it.

    • Super K says:

      Some of the “stars” are studs so they’ve got to chase some them but it they strike out on them it doesn’t mean all is lost or the class has to be a bust.

      • Andy Sundborg says:

        Great article by the way.

      • Zack says:

        What are your thoughts on quillen. I thought you had a lengthy post about him a few months back. I’m just curious if you think he’s a guy OU should pursue, if so how soon and would he be open to hearing from OU later.

        • Super K says:

          I haven’t written about Austin myself Zack. I think Brandon might have. Haven’t seen much of him. But I can say definitively that the first player I’d pursue on a Jenks team would be Stoner.

          • Zack says:

            And stoner is the safety committed to osu right?

          • Super K says:

            Yeah but they offered him as a wr…Arkansas offered him as a safety…I’d offer him as an ATH and give him a shot at CB first.

      • Bob Edwards says:

        I understand. Stars are a measure of ability, but not a perfectly reliable one. There is a sense in which stars = ability + coaching + exposure. Lots of guys out there with ability that for one reason or another haven’t had the coaching or the exposure. The trick is finding them.

        • Sooner 76 says:

          Stars are also a measure of potential at the next level.

          • Super K says:

            If the evaluator has a sound process and good eyes

          • Bob Edwards says:

            There was an old site called TulsaSooner. They had a rating system that gave points for measurable like 40 time, etc. and added in points for the offers they had. It was amazing how closely it tracked the ratings sites.

          • SoonerMGB56 says:

            Based on my observations, their evaluations and ratings are mediocre. Just looking at OU, They are so/so. I looked at the recruiting ratings from 2003 thru 2012. And 33% of the 2* and 3* players OU signed became starters/key contributiors. This compared to 42% for 4*/5* players. So statistically, of OU’s recruits, 2 and 3 star players were 75% as likely to be key contributors as the 4 and 5 stars.
            What was even more telling to me, was those players I’d call superstars, e.g. A.D., or Sammy B. If the rating services were as they profess to be at evaluating, you would expect a really high percentage of their 5 star prospects to end up superstars. Say 50% or higher for 5 stars, 20% or so for 4 stars, down to maybe 5% of the three star players? Sounds reasonable, if the services evals are what they’re cracked up to be. However, based on OU’s history, the 3 star % ending up superstars was about right on. But only 17% of our 5 stars turned out superstars. And only 11% of the 4 star recruits did so.
            And the ratio of studs to duds in each grouping was telling. Studs are key contributors, duds did little to nothing. 58% of the five stars were duds. 56% of the 4 stars were duds. For all the hype, comfortably over 50% of the rating service darlings were duds.
            And considering the attrition rates of all the P5 schools are in the same neighborhood, I would deduce that they’re having similar failures of the rating darlings.
            So in summary, it’s more about our coaches success evaluating, and/or coaching ’em up, than the recruiting rankings, in my estimation. E.g., either Norvell wasn’t evaluating them very well, or not coaching very well, or both. Because based on the star power of our receiver classes over the years, we should have among the best WR units going. But most of Norvell’s “studs” were transfers. And those he recruited/coached, well even a blind squirrel…..

          • SoonerLove says:

            In my opinion, I think a lot of the recruiting stumbled when we stopped targeting the kids out of Oklahoma. I think regardless of the star Rivals, ESPN, Scout, etc. give these kids…A lot of them play with a level of passion because they have a lot of pride, since they grew up watching and loving the Sooners. If we just look back at some of our best guys out of this state, a lot of them weren’t big names before getting on campus. It sounds like from a recent article that the Oklahoman put out that OU is going back to heavy recruiting in this state. That is great to hear, just think it’s about 6 years over due, but at least they’re realizing it and doing it.

          • SoonerMGB56 says:

            I strongly agree we’ve under-recruited Oklahoma kids. I don’t know if the stars had anything to do with it. But…
            I do know that the 2000 roster was right at 50% Oklahomans. And same for key contributors. And all of Barry’s championship rosters were over 50% Oklahomans.
            And like you, I think there is greater commitment, drive, and leadership from the Oklahoma kids, that factors into better performance on the field.
            I thought part of last years problem was lack of player leadership. We quit at half of the Baylor game, we quit late in the OSU game, and we pretty much quit in the first quarter of the Clemson game. Result, three losses. One to a team there was no way we should lost to. And two blowout losses, to opponents we should have played even with (IMO).
            There certainly were other issues, but that one is critical, IMO.

          • SoonerLove says:

            I’m right there with you SoonerMGB56….I completely agree, Leadership, drive, passion, and commitment are huge factors I believe our Oklahoma kids brought to the table. Yes, there’s probably better talent out in California somewhere or Florida, but you can add another star to a kids rating when they bring those intangibles we just mentioned. And as for the Clemson loss…I think they gave up as soon as they heard the words, “Russell Athletic Bowl” and “Clemson”….Had they have heard “Sugar Bowl” and “LSU” or “Rose Bowl” and “Wisconsin”….We would have come out at least swinging…

          • hOUligan says:

            I, too, think that this staff has gotten away from spending enough time truly evaluating OK kids as thoroughly as they once did. IMHO, many factors; ncaa limitations on numbers, contacts and active decisions to ‘go national’ among them. It is so different and complex and time consuming compared to just 15 years ago. And social media is both blessing and curse in ‘seeing’ prospects but having to feed into their ‘need’ for attention in this ‘selfie generation’. Just sheer time vs staff.

        • Kody K. says:

          You really cut through the fat and said it perfectly, Bob.

  • Shelby is a Patriot says:

    This is an awesome write-up. Ever since I started reading this site it’s really opened my eyes to looking past the stars next to a recruits name and watching tape on your own to really see their potential.

    • Soonerfandave84 says:

      these guys are the best, my favorite thing on this site is the play breakdowns during the season.

  • Soonerfandave84 says:

    I have never doubted Bob and cos ability to find guys no one else wanted and turn them into productive if not great players. Especially early in his tenure. Some of the no name guys are Lehman(OU was only D1 offer), Strait, Griffin, Sammy B. had only one offer before OU(TTU). If anything it seems more the 5* guys are the ones who haven’t panned out for whatever reason.

  • MrBigsby says:

    It’s July, why all the Chicken Little’s anyway? For you younger guys (and gals), Penn State started a trend back in the early 80s of making offers early and it really caught on across the country. But if you ask me, it was one of the causes of their downfall (this was before it was Pedo State). Problem with too many early offers is these kids are still developing and some are late bloomers. What happens if you fill your class with these offers and turns out the kids had already peaked? I have a feeling that’s why Draper was slow played. He’s still really young. Is he going to develop further, or has he peaked? I think that’s what they coaches want to know and why it took a while to offer. With the scholarship limits, you don’t have a large margin of error. During the days of unlimited scholly’s, you could get away with taking chances, but now days, you can’t have too many misses. I have a feeling we will end up in our normal spot in the top 15 (but really, who rates them anyway?).

  • EasTex says:

    Another excellent piece, Super K.
    Your story about the UM DL coach reminded of what Coach Montgomery said during an interview on Soonersports. He couldn’t stop gushing about Matt Romar and stated he wished he had a dozen Romars. He wasn’t talking about his size or playing time, either, but about his ability,desire and attitude.

  • soonerinks says:

    Can’t believe how lucky we are to have TFB!

  • roygbell says:

    It doesn’t bother me at all that OU is lagging on commits at this point in time. We are close to 50 days from the start of HS football and there are lots of kids out there who will blossom during their Senior year. If you get the right kids early in the process that is just great. But, that doesn’t mean there won’t be some super players that no one will see until the middle of their Senior year.

    I know it gets discouraging to see kids committing elsewhere, but it sure isn’t the end of the world.

    • Soonerfandave84 says:

      I’d like to see the % of kids who commit before NSD and change to a different school on NSD or prior.

    • Sooner 76 says:

      Charles Walker is a perfect example of a player exploding his senior year. He was hurt much of his junior and didn’t have much film.

  • L'Carpetron Dookmarriot says:

    All I’m saying is that you identify potential factors that may contribute to future success, rate each prospect on each of those factors, correlate those factors with a measure or measures of success and see which have the highest predictive value. Then start rating prospects more highly if they are high on the predictive factors. That’s it. Simple. Start doing it, coaches. Equations work better than you do.

    • SamSooner says:

      I see where you’re going with that. This way, you would have more 4* and 5* players, by position. Maybe, just maybe, the players with less stars should actually be rated higher.

      I think it’s all arbitrary: it’s self-serving for the recruiting services. If I think Devwah Whaley, for instance, is a 5* player, and I want him to be the best, then I’m not going to rate another player as a 5* because I’m in Devwah’s corner.

      Here’s another twist: award stars by the system/scheme the player fits into the best. I know they kind of do that now, for instance, pro-style QB vs. zone-read QB. Is a zone read QB the best zone-read QB in that class, and so forth? Do that for all positions.

  • DCinAZ says:

    I must admit I have tremendous respect for whatever Missouri’s coaches mojo is. He keeps rolling them in there like shark’s teeth.

  • BigJoeBrown says:

    Reading this makes me get pretty excited about the new coachs. I can’t wait to see what they do, can they help teach/develop? I hope so, then again I tend to be an optomist when it comes to Sooner Football.

  • Scott Hamilton says:

    we used to get the best players in america…….now we are reduced to looking under terds for gems…….wont catch baylor and tcu like that

  • L'Carpetron Dookmarriot says:

    Posts like this from Super K spark a lot of good thoughts.

    Some of the discussion below is about Stoops getting away from recruiting “gems” and focusing on “stars” and similar arguments. This may be true. I don’t know.

    Let’s keep in mind that there were different coaches “back then” and different offensive and defensive schemes (to some degree or another) “back then”, and so on.

    There are many ways to analyze the data on whether Stoops has switched recruiting strategies, lost his drive, is recruiting the wrong players, and so on.

    Here are some data and results: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/after-signing-day-wisconsin-makes-the-best-of-its-recruits/#ss-2

    According to the data and analyses performed in the link above, In 2014, OU underperformed in relation to their predicted performance on the basis of their recruiting rankings.

    Since 2005 and including 2014, OU has slightly overperformed, based on the statistical model predicting how they would have performed given their recruiting rankings.

    Can you guess which teams overperform? TCU. Baylor. Wisconsin. KSU. Georgia Tech. Oregon. Michigan State.

    These teams are not surprising. Perhaps these teams evaluate well. Perhaps these teams utilize their players well.

    Some teams that underperform. Miami. Tennessee. Michigan.
    I was actually surprised a bit by the results for USC. They routinely have very highly rated classes, but, recently, have not performed terribly well.

    What we would like to know is whether OU has drifted backwards since 1999-2004 in terms of their predicted performance based on the recruit rankings. That would get at the various debates going on.

    As a mathematician, there are many issues with the data and analysis I provided above. However, it may give us some kind of information about whether OU should “get highly rated players” or, as K is getting to, “get players with high levels of ability regardless of what their Rivals/24/7/ESPN rating is. It may also give us some information about what Stoops and co. can do with the players they have.

    • SamSooner says:

      L’Carpetron, good stuff and thanks for taking the time to dig this up. This is one of the things I like about this site. There’s substance added to the discussion.

      As for the data, I’ll check it out. For the over performing and underperforming schools, it would be interesting to know if there were coaching changes, which resulted in scheme changes, which leads to this question: is it just as important to get kids with less stars so long as they fit well with what you’re trying to do?

      Thanks for sharing?

  • Indy_sooner says:

    I was just thinking about this while reading the story on the DL from MO who wont play in 2015, wondering how they are able to out linemen in the league every year. Just for giggles, I looked and the “star” lineman was a whopping 2 stars. Shane Ray was a 3 star

  • Cbusta says:

    Haha, just the other day you guys bash me how recruiting isn’t going well and here comes K with an article about it. When will you all learn this is what OU has become…STALE. Who wants to play here when we are getting whipped by BAYLOR, KSU, TCU and OSU. The changes that Bob made were NOT the ones he should have outside of Heupel(arguable as our D was the problem not O) and Norvell. OU is in a rut and will be until Mike and Kish leave. K, you stole my recruiting is the lifeline of a program but can’t acknowledge that OU is in trouble and has been/will be until Bob goes.

  • Randy says:

    Kahlil Haughton is the best safety prospect we have had since Brodney Pool and Tony Jefferson.

    • Sooner Ray says:

      I’m hoping.

    • JD says:

      He might end up being that, but Im pretty sure Parker was ranked a lot higher coming out of hs the year before…Byrd the year before that as well

    • Stephen says:

      Agreed

      • SamSooner says:

        How’s your Dad doing?

        • Stephen says:

          Actually really great considering everything he went through. He’s been pretty mobile and crushing physical therapy.

          • SamSooner says:

            That’s good news. We will keep praying for him.

            How’s your summer going?

          • Stephen says:

            It’s summer, job hunting and what not since I’m basically graduated from college with only 6 hours left.

            How’s yours?

          • SamSooner says:

            Me and the family are good. Traveling quite a bit. But all good, otherwise.
            The job will come but don’t play by their rules: find out who does the hiring and call them. Don’t wait for them to respond to your resume. It might not happen if you do.

  • Sooner Ray says:

    Thank you mods…..good quick move. 🙂

    • EasTex says:

      Who did what to whom, now?

      • Sooner Ray says:

        I’m not sure now if it was mod action or self imposed. A reply showed up to Cbusta, like 4 hours after the fact, and then was deleted. I thought at the moment that it was taken down to avoid starting a 100 post sh%t storm. Now I see more of it going on to posts that are hours old, it’s like sending out invitations for a troll fight. Just not my form of entertainment. I may just check out till tomorrow.

        • EasTex says:

          There seems to be a determined effort by a swarm of trolls or a troll with sock-puppets to undermine this site and turn it into a cess pool like so many other forums.
          If the mods have access to the ip addresses of us through their own site stats or disqus, they can do a quick ip search to tell where they are located. Say one person is using several different devices even with different ip’s it would show the same location, except for AOL.

          • Sooner Ray says:

            I would rather the contributors put their efforts into gathering recruiting info and team notes than background checking posters. I think not using the reply feature is the best tool to discourage those who don’t fit the culture. 🙂

          • EasTex says:

            I agree and try to follow it, then many don’t and they have succeeded with their “attention whore” goal and I feel compelled to step in.
            I have moderated/contributed to nearly six different blogs in the past ten years and it takes little time and effort to find where the troll stank was coming from and flush it. I was not one to spare the ban hammer with those who were playing the troll “blog swarm” tactic.

          • Sooner Ray says:

            I wouldn’t want that job but I can say that this is by far the best board I’ve been associated with, even with the occasional blow ups.

          • EasTex says:

            I agree this is the best board around. As for the dirty jobs of troll hunting and banning I enjoyed it and was quite good at it. The regulars appreciated it too, as they often didn’t realize they were being manipulated by one person pretending to be many.
            Sure would like to see the “fever swamp” kept out, though.

          • Sooner Ray says:

            You should ask if there is a job opening…:-)

          • EasTex says:

            I wish I had the time.
            I’m down to working on only one blog now.
            Between work and family my time just disappears.

          • JD says:

            I have nothing against free speech but imo this is like a home for sooner fans and I have no prob with guys being told or forced to leave if they are obviously trying to stir up manure

          • EasTex says:

            All it takes is one clown to start in and they sucker good folks into the discussion before they realize they are dealing with a clown.

          • JD says:

            Too bad its not like real life…we wouldn’t have to deal with it too much…on a side note…I have shoulder fatigue from throwing square bales…cant take the month off so Johnny Walker it is

          • paganpink says:

            Alternate sides pushing off! Almost everyone is dominate to one side or another so make a conscious effort to use your non dominant arm more and it will help the whole overuse syndrome thing. If one arm or one side is aching every night then that’s what it is.

          • JD says:

            Thx bud but Ill be fine…dont normally handle square bales…like going to workout when you haven’t been in awhile…Im still young (fairly) so I expect to be a million bucks in a few days (maybe a few dollars shy lol) …btw Im ambidextrous so I always mix it up

          • EasTex says:

            Well, if you get “Red” fatigue switch to “Black.”

          • JD says:

            Ive already done that…blue is my next option but if I can afford blue then I should hire some help

  • Sooner Ray says:

    I’m not getting bent out of shape about recruiting just yet, it’s still early. Many programs have shown that putting athlete’s in the correct position and having a system that fits your players can win a lot of ball games. This staff may not be perfect but I think there have been some good changes that have me expecting good things this season. I don’t need to tell anyone the number of times we have beat texsa when their class was ranked way higher than ours.

    • JrsySooner says:

      I agree Ray….recruiting is now wait and see and what have you done for me lately.
      I personally think this year we are a more complete team with better coaching.
      we have three guys that if they can play the entire season they will be the difference makers we lacked in the past. Mixon…Shannon…Sheppard . ..throw in Westbrook and Andrews
      plug the hulk in Stryker back to his natural.poition you have a dangerous team that is hungry
      only gray area is special teams and QB I even feel the D line will be improved and the secondary could be the Nations best….. put all this together in one package with a solid season…OU will be back on track recruiting wise…
      Brainiacs thanks for an outstanding post…as always

  • JD says:

    My heart goes out to the military families and friends in Chattanooga…Extremism has no place in our society

  • Stephen says:

    Really great post and really sparked some discussion that needed to be out there. I support the current system for the most part. I think as recruiting has become more and more popular, the accuracy of scouts and writers has risen with it (not always the case). I’m not happy with recruiting at the moment, it seems that we haven’t quite found our formula to grab the class we want. I’m also not too worried as there’s still some time to catch up. OU just needs to reinvent some magic to get their recruiting going, whatever that might entail (stadium construction, new uni’s, winning…winning by a lot, maybe you know, sneak into a new conference when the time comes). Who knows, I don’t get paid to figure that stuff out yet. I just need kickoff.

  • McLovin says:

    Saw where Tyler Brown has been selected as a Semper-Fi All American. Is this kid going to be considered a possible late insurance policy flip in the event that we miss out on other targets? This Oklahoma OL class is looking better and better all the time. Especially considering the rise of Tramonda Moore recently.

  • hOUligan says:

    Great article K…can hardly wait for the follow-up. Seems Stoops’ staffs early on had the reputation for finding those ‘gems’ and developing them. Stars are a ‘media/’scouting “service” invention. Sure, some kids stand out and odds are, they are going to be very good so get ‘stars’ and are highly recruited. But not the least bit interested in OU being awarded top recruiting class in Feb like texass and Notre Dame, so often in the past. I want that trophy that they hand out in January. Get these kids with something to prove and some physical tools to get it done and coach them.