With the recent turn of events, I have been thinking about whether or not we will now use all of our available scholarships this year. I am wondering if it might be better to hold a few scholarships for next years class. If we expect a better year on the field next year, we might have more momentum going into next years class. Plus it appears that next years class is getting off to a great start and is perhaps going to be a more unified group like the 2014 class. If it comes down to taking 3 or 4 marginal kids to round out this class versus saving those for next year, what would you do? I think I might gamble on next year being able to fill those with more talented players. I am assuming that if we sign the full 25 this year, we will not have enough scholarships to sign a full class next year. I'm not saying we will be in this position come signing day, but if we are, what do you think is the best strategy?
Recruiting Strategy
- Thread starter cat_in_the_hat
- Start date
Probably a mix. You don't want your classes to be to unbalanced but at the same time you don't want to waste scholarships on kids that you know will never succeed in the SEC.
First thought there's no way they not sign 25 this year. With the recent cluster I now feel they'll sign in the low 20s if they can find guys to take them. Meanwhile, we'll see what '16 looks like. There was a time '15 looked pretty good. Bottom line is UK has GOT to win games. Losing has consequences and those consequences cost you talent. 2016's class is the most important of the Stoops era. He has to bring in a top class. Got to.
Can't you only sign 25 per year? So how does saving a scholarship help? If a kid doesn't perform, you open up a scholarship for next year by moving a kid along out of the program. But I think you still sign the max number you can for this year. Am I off base?
Something that would be absolutely huge, would be to nail a higher profile recruit......Marcus Lewis......Messiah DeWeaver. A recruit or two of their notoriety would send a nice message.
But as far as taking "marginal kids." I don't think this the staff thinks this way. I think there are kids they want.....and they put them in order......and there are kids they don't want. Either the staff wants them or they don't.
But as far as taking "marginal kids." I don't think this the staff thinks this way. I think there are kids they want.....and they put them in order......and there are kids they don't want. Either the staff wants them or they don't.
I think if you operate under the assumption that you run off players that don't see the field much, you are correct. However, I'm not sure in reality that happens in any large scale way. I think it happens for players who don't appear to buy in and work hard, but I think if a player is giving good effort, coaches typically do not try and run them off. If players aren't being pushed out of the program that do not perform at an SEC level, then eventually you run up against the 85 scholarship limit. If we don't have much attrition, if we sign 25 this year, it doesn't appear that there is any way to sign 25 next year. So in my mind, it becomes a game of whether you think you can sign a better player next year with that scholarship than what you can get this year. I hope Stoops has some very good back up plans and it doesn't come down to that, but this program needs talent, not just marginal SEC players.
Does that mean you think that if they run out of players they really want, they will save those scholarships for next year. In other words, they would not look for the next best available recruit to fill those scholarships if that player wasn't someone they really wanted to begin with.
I addressed this in another thread. IMO if SEC type talent is not available then you save some extra SS for next year to back sign early signees rather than sign deep projects that likely will never help your program. Then load up on as many good JUCOs and early signers as possible that you think can help the team.
I don't think they use all of them. I believe they have said before they aren't going to take guys just to take guys, but after this week that may have changed..... However, gotta sign at least 20 I think, and right now that's five more players. I think if they can have a good signing day and get a couple of the bigger names left on our board like Lewis, and fill in with a few more needed position guys they like then it's all good. No it's not what we've had over the last two classes, but considering the circumstances many have listed with the seasons finish and what not I believe it's still solid.
This post was edited on 1/28 11:48 AM by KentUcKy-Kats
This post was edited on 1/28 11:48 AM by KentUcKy-Kats
Well, kinda. I think they go after "X" amount of guys they want. Let's say they really want Lewis and he chooses to go elsewhere. They then look at their recruiting board and go after whoever's next on the list of wants. They go down the list until it runs out. If it runs out, then so be it.....the result is a saved scholly. I think saving a scholly is a default option that occurs when they run out of options. I don't think they would scour the globe at the midnight hour to find a guy just to fill the spot.
The only 2016 recruits that could be counters in a small 2015 class would be players who can enroll in Dec 2015 for the 2016 spring semester. By and large, that is a pretty small group. IOW, a risky strategy since there is no guarantee you could use those "held" schollies to improve your class. However many coaches do hold back a scholarship to accommodate a transfer player or reward a walk on.
Peace
I think you missed the point I was making, because the scholarships you save from the 2015 class would not have to be kids that enroll early in 2016 if the 2016 class would not have enough scholarships to sign a full class to begin with. In other words, if by signing a full 25 this year means you can only sign 20 next year, then you could save up to 5 scholarships in 2015 and sign the full 25 in 2016 if you thought that class would produce better players for those 5 scholarships you did not use in 2015. None of them would have to enroll early.
Wildcard I disagree. UK has 3 early enrollees this year. You also must factor in early enrollee JUCOs and there has seemed to be a lot of those out there lately. I don't think anyone is advocating that 10 or more be reserved but five to eight might be workable. UK also has a few decent walk ons that I would consider giving SSs rather than giving them to deep projects.
I think we may see the coaches go after some higher rated players that are "close" on the academic side. Smoe of the power teams seems to hold onto these players until the last second to see if they are going to qualify, then dump them at the last minute. The power programs do not have to gamble. They can flip a kid late from a team like UK. With the larger classes we signed in the past two years, I think it is a pretty good gamble at this time. If the kid gets eligible, you get a high level player in your program. If not, you use the scholarship the next year. I think this is a better strategy than reachig to flip MAC level players.
Not sure if Serious Blue Raider. JR has said a few times that this staff may hold a few scholarship back to see if some late qualifiers make the grade at the last minute. This staff has shown a reluctance to "reach" just to fill a spot during their short tenure. Seems like every year there are a few very talented kids that had offers from power schools that make the grade well past NSD. If we could get 1 or 2 of these types, I think it would be well worth the gamble vs. scouring MAC commitment lists to flip kids.
Save the schollies for the guys who are left in the dark when UT or Bama takes 30 kids in their class and tell less talented ones to take a hike.
Also you might have some 5th year senior kids looking around or some Juco that can be available after the spring semester.
I've stated this approach. In many of my posts the last 2 weeks and I'm glad u posted this as it seems nobody cared or thought it was silly not to sign a whole class and did not post a response.
Could snag up some good players instead of inking guys who have 10% chance of making it in the sec.
Also you might have some 5th year senior kids looking around or some Juco that can be available after the spring semester.
I've stated this approach. In many of my posts the last 2 weeks and I'm glad u posted this as it seems nobody cared or thought it was silly not to sign a whole class and did not post a response.
Could snag up some good players instead of inking guys who have 10% chance of making it in the sec.
Blue Raider- No problem! So many posters on this board are a little too sarcastic most of the time. Too often UK fans are the most uncivil to other UK fans. Too few of us to fight amongst ourselves as much as we do. I'm with you on the talent search. I would rather get one really talented player than three projects. We are UK football. There are always going to be a few developmental project guys. We just have to limit the number of these as much as we can. I love what coach Stoops has done so far. If we cannot find suitable replacements for the decommits this late in the game, then don't fill them and go the non-traditional route.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
BB Recruiting Anthony Thompson to be in Rupp again on Saturday
- Latest: NewAlbanyAdam
-