Story Poster
Photo by Cleveland 19

Editorial: Let NIL and Pokes with a Purpose Go Stagnant then Prepare to Suffer

September 28, 2023
13,092

The other day I had Oklahoma State associate athletic director and director of NIL Barry Hinson on my radio porgram out of Triple Play Sports Radio in Stillwater. Understand that as a member of the Oklahoma State Cowboys Radio Network and an insider to the football program that has been a friend with Cowboys football head coach Mike Gundy since he was in high school that I’ve been a marked man. Oklahoma State fans are spoiled. The younger ones, ages 12-to-30 something, are extremely spoiled as they have never known anything other than winning seasons and bowl games at the end of each season. Six of those have been New Year’s Six games since 2000. Older fans seem to have forgot the depressing seasons of the late 80s and 90s. Even older fans should remember that the program was only occasionally strong leading up to Pat Jones as head coach in 1984 and the advent of Thurman Thomas, Barry Sanders, Mike Gundy (as quarterback), Leslie O’Neal, Mark Moore, and Hart Lee Dykes. 

Many of Oklahoma State’s successful football seasons before the Les Miles and Mike Gundy eras beginning in the 2000s were because of cheating and were followed by NCAA probations. It’s a fact. Waht is interesting now is that all of those probations and what Oklahoma State did to earn the punishment from the NCAA is now legal.

“NIL, name, image, and likeness is what I’m involved with,” Hinson told me. “We had a gathering last night (Sept. 26) of about 125 of our athletes and representatives of businesses. It was kind of like a speed dating where athletes and business people could get to know each other and find out if they could help each other out.”

© BRYAN TERRY/THE OKLAHOMAN / USA TODAY NETWORK
Softball has been awesome in the NIL era.

Hinson explained further that the Cowgirls softball team is working to help the local cable company. That same team has a deal with the Seth Wadley car dealerships in Perry and has done big work promoting that business. The women’s basketball team has a deal with Aspen Coffee that has been profitable. A multitude of athletes in all sports, especially football and basketball, have deals with business people. I’m paying quarterback Alan Bowman for an exclusive NIL Journal each week. I can tell you that he gets a salary and a 10 percent of all new subscriptions. He is doing well. NIL works and it is athletes being paid for name-image-and-likeness.

Hinson has helped put together, along with the OSU NIL Brand Squad, the shirjeys, a t-shirt replica jersey for every Oklahoma State athlete. Soon, every Oklahoma State athlete will have their own trading card. Those have been done professionally with Panini, the leading trading car company in the United States.

Pokes with a Purpose
The Oklahoma State collective.

“Then we have Pokes wth a Purpose, the collective,” Hinson said. “We have to support Pokes with a Purpose and I tell our booster and supporter that we have to keep them going.”

Hinson is so right. Pokes with a Purpose falls under NIL with the NCAA, but it’s different.

Pokes with a Purpose is a collective, similar to what every school has like the 12th Man at Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Kansas State, Kansas, West Virginia, you name a school and they have a collective or what back in the old days was called a slush fund. These collectives are out of the darkness and into the wide open. Many, like Oklahoma State’s Pokes with a Purpose are tied to businesses and/or charitable entities. Athletes do appearances, but not all and these collectives are responsible for payments made across the board on teams. Did you know every Cowboy basketball player drives a new vehicle? Every Oklahoma State football player gets a stipend, a check? 

If you have any extra money and want to use it to support Oklahoma State athletics, all teams, but certainly football then give to Pokes with a Purpose. There will be a QR code on the Boone Pickens Stadium jumbo tron at the Kansas State game on Oct. 6 and all remaining home football games. I will be aiming my phone at that code for a $100 gift. If 50,000 people would do the same over the rest of the football season that adds up to $5 million and that would fund Pokes with a Purpose for this next school year and beyond. 

Bruce Waterfield/OSU Athletics
Cowboys Nathan Latu rushes Rashada in the win at Arizona State.

When you hear stories like the one about current Arizona State quarterback Jaden Rashada being offered a $13.85 million NIL deal at Florida, I call BS to that. Now, a million? maybe. Honestly, I think most schools have around $3-5 million as total budgets in their collectives. There maybe some like Texas, Michigan, Ohio State, Alabama, LSU that go beyond that number. Stay in the $3-5 million range and I believe you can compete favorably.

Now, for those of you that bitch and moan about not getting enough four and five-star recruits in football or in any sport, here is your chance to step up. As the saying goes, money talks and BS walks. 

I can’t give millions, but I can give along with my season tickets in two different sports and my personal NIL deal with this website. It’s time to sit down and decide what you can do. Because for the immediate future if enough people join you and me in this age where what was once illegal is now not only legal, but necessary for success; then Oklahoma State will have that success. If not, when you are all of a sudden frustrated with on the field and on the court results, then look in the mirror. 

Discussion from...

Editorial: Let NIL and Pokes with a Purpose Go Stagnant then Prepare to Suffer

12,399 Views | 61 Replies | Last: 7 mo ago by NJAggie
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LS1Z28 said:

RodeoPoke said:

LS1Z28 said:



The point I was trying to make is that you can't blame our poor football recruiting on NIL when basketball is tearing things up in recruiting.



yeah, I get it.... all those lowly recruits that we had, that are now starting at blue-blood and other P5 teams sure were over rated.

stop looking at recruiting rankings.
Two notes about recruiting rankings:
1. There has never been a team in the modern era win a national championship without signing a top 10 class in the four years prior. We'll never go further than we have in the past if we don't start caring more about the level of raw talent we bring to campus.
2. I once did a study of the first 10 recruiting classes Coach Gundy signed. The 4-star players got drafted at more than 5X the rate of the 3 and 2 star players.

Recruiting rankings don't mean everything, but they matter more than some think. IMO, they matter more on an aggregate level than an individual level though.


We offer the athletes that would result in a Top 10 class every year. But not only do we not get everyone we offer, we'll never get a top 10 class - ever. There's a reason we've never had, nor will ever have a top-10 class. It's freakin Stillwater, and we're recruiting head-to-head (for the 4 and 5 stars) with OU, UT, aTm, and the like. If we don't lose the "eye" test for the 4s and 5s, we're now gonna lose the NIL $$ battle.

Suggest you adjust your expectations if you think the only way to compete at the highest levels is to sign top-10 classes.
True wisdom is knowing what you don't know.
- Confucius
LS1Z28
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:


We offer the athletes that would result in a Top 10 class every year. But not only do we not get everyone we offer, we'll never get a top 10 class - ever. There's a reason we've never had, nor will ever have a top-10 class. It's freakin Stillwater, and we're recruiting head-to-head (for the 4 and 5 stars) with OU, UT, aTm, and the like. If we don't lose the "eye" test for the 4s and 5s, we're now gonna lose the NIL $$ battle.

Suggest you adjust your expectations if you think the only way to compete at the highest levels is to sign top-10 classes.
I don't really expect OSU to compete with blue blood programs for top 10 classes. I do expect them to win their fair share of recruiting battles against non-blue blood programs to sign top 25 classes though.

Coach Gundy signed top 25 classes in two of his first three seasons here. He didn't even have facilities in place to recruit to yet. He did it by working his tail off and hiring aggressive assistants that would do the same.

We have much better facilities now, and nearly two straight decades of consistent success. There's no valid reason why we shouldn't be recruiting at a higher level.

Coach Gundy needs to find the fire he had when he was younger, and he needs to hire some assistants that are better recruiters. He doesn't seem to like change, but this season could be bad enough to force it.
Pokes4158
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Something I've thought about is many coaches that have come to osu mention the time Gundy gives his coaches to spend with family. Like the work life balance is great. Now I love that for them but my guess is that it eats into recruiting time. The hungry driven ones are gonna recruit all the time and get out on the road as much as possible as opposed to just phone time and waiting for them to visit after seeing them in camps. This is just a guess but I'd be willing to bet osu coaches probably spend less time on the road than staffs that are indeed signing top classes. Plus Gundy has mentioned recruiting money and how he tries to save money and even if we had more he may not even use it. He wants the kids from Kansas no one has ever heard of. Keeps the coaches close to home and travel expenses low. Like he mentioned the cost of jet fuel etc etc. we need the extra money and nil and all that but we also gotta have an old school approach and get them back out face to face with kids. I know they do go on the road and someone will argue they do but I'm confident of there was a way to show it we would see our coaches are a little more comfy and get to stay at home or close to home very often
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Pokes4158 said:

Something I've thought about is many coaches that have come to osu mention the time Gundy gives his coaches to spend with family. Like the work life balance is great. Now I love that for them but my guess is that it eats into recruiting time. The hungry driven ones are gonna recruit all the time and get out on the road as much as possible as opposed to just phone time and waiting for them to visit after seeing them in camps. This is just a guess but I'd be willing to bet osu coaches probably spend less time on the road than staffs that are indeed signing top classes. Plus Gundy has mentioned recruiting money and how he tries to save money and even if we had more he may not even use it. He wants the kids from Kansas no one has ever heard of. Keeps the coaches close to home and travel expenses low. Like he mentioned the cost of jet fuel etc etc. we need the extra money and nil and all that but we also gotta have an old school approach and get them back out face to face with kids. I know they do go on the road and someone will argue they do but I'm confident of there was a way to show it we would see our coaches are a little more comfy and get to stay at home or close to home very often


Ridiculous. I'm pretty sure Gundy and his coaches use all their available in person visits.

As for recruiting budget, spending wisely just expands the available budget for the effort.
True wisdom is knowing what you don't know.
- Confucius
RodeoPoke
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LS1Z28 said:


Check out the numbers from this national study:
5-star players are drafted at a rate of 63%.
4-star players are drafted at a rate of 22.1%.
3-star players are drafted at a rate of 5.3%.

It's all about statistical probability. 4 & 5 star players have a much higher probability of success than 2 & 3 star players. We're never going to go further than we have in the past until we start recruiting at a higher level.
No they don't.

63% is horrible for "can't miss" prospects. Horrible. Should be 90% or better if the ratings were accurate.
Same with the 4's and 3's. (the 3-star number is also misleading because it's actually the "catch all" category, rather than an actual category). Like I said, use the .85+ rating if you want real comparisons, those would be roughly the C+ players, eliminating the C- players. (with A=5, B=4).

The whole system is corrupt because there is no way to measure the quality of the players from year to year. A 3+ star player one year, might be a 4-star quality kid in another class. You're averaging averages, which is a math no-no.

The star ratings are made up and voted on by journalists and "others". After the regional selections, they sit around and vote one which 4-star nominees get dropped because they have too many (whether they are worth merit or not). Meaning many of the so-called 3-stars should likely have been rated 4-stars, but they weren't by the "media voters", so our Coach gets penalized by the fans, because of bogus media votes.

And then we talk about the "class rank" which has a whole nother level of makebelieve to it, which has very little to do with player stars or rankings. (and CLASS RANKING is the gage that most use to measure our recruiting success)

Enjoy the bogus star ratings if that's what you like. There are much better measure of success.
RodeoPoke
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OT said:

Perhaps not entirely comprehensive NFL data without the undrafted, but at least he pulled the data together. Why not simply pull that data together to ADD to the discussion?

Whether you like what Gundy has said about NIL or not, many of us are of similar mind. I'm not sure I want to "enable" Bentleys cruising the Strip or G5's with strippers at Stillwater Airport welcoming teenagers aboard.

Regardless, OState was a season-late-dollar-short with it's NIL program(s). The programs that were already paying players (KU basketball comes to mind) hit the ground running, meanwhile OState's donor and alumni base is just now really getting NIL setup.

From what I've heard, it sounds as if Spencer's $400K NIL deal likely cost him an NFL shot and polluted our locker room, which was a big influence on players leaving. The money is a nice-to-have. Hell, Thomas Harper received $200K from ND and would have had to fight like hell to win a starting role.

Could the coaches have handled the "cultural impact" of NIL better, really in it's first year last year? Very likely.
Could OState mega donors have aggressively kicked off NIL in 2021 as soon as pay-for-play was legalized? Absolutely.
Is a single season a "trend" indicating destruction of the program? Few rational people would make this extrapolation.
Add bogus to bogus... no thanks, I'll pass on that exercise in futility. After all, he said, "significant contributors", and then he limited that to being in the NFL. This is college ball, many kids end up being significant contributors without getting an NFL invite because they don't match the NFL body profile.

And.. I am adding to the discussion, it's just not the direction that you want the discussion to go. Why not consider my point and add to the discussion, rather than simply dismissing it? (back at ya)

I never said anything about the NIL, except that I don't plan on participating, they get enough already, IMO, with the money from OSU, tuition, room, board, books.... a free ride, and they get paid for it on top of that, already.

Perhaps you meant the NIL arguments for someone other than me.
Pokes4158
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yeah we are both guessing.
LS1Z28
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RodeoPoke said:

LS1Z28 said:


Check out the numbers from this national study:
5-star players are drafted at a rate of 63%.
4-star players are drafted at a rate of 22.1%.
3-star players are drafted at a rate of 5.3%.

It's all about statistical probability. 4 & 5 star players have a much higher probability of success than 2 & 3 star players. We're never going to go further than we have in the past until we start recruiting at a higher level.
No they don't.

63% is horrible for "can't miss" prospects. Horrible. Should be 90% or better if the ratings were accurate.
Same with the 4's and 3's. (the 3-star number is also misleading because it's actually the "catch all" category, rather than an actual category). Like I said, use the .85+ rating if you want real comparisons, those would be roughly the C+ players, eliminating the C- players. (with A=5, B=4).

The whole system is corrupt because there is no way to measure the quality of the players from year to year. A 3+ star player one year, might be a 4-star quality kid in another class. You're averaging averages, which is a math no-no.

The star ratings are made up and voted on by journalists and "others". After the regional selections, they sit around and vote one which 4-star nominees get dropped because they have too many (whether they are worth merit or not). Meaning many of the so-called 3-stars should likely have been rated 4-stars, but they weren't by the "media voters", so our Coach gets penalized by the fans, because of bogus media votes.

And then we talk about the "class rank" which has a whole nother level of makebelieve to it, which has very little to do with player stars or rankings. (and CLASS RANKING is the gage that most use to measure our recruiting success)

Enjoy the bogus star ratings if that's what you like. There are much better measure of success.
An 85 man roster of 5-stars will have on average 54 players drafted.
An 85 man roster of 4-stars will have on average 19 players drafted.
An 85 man roster of 3-stars will have on average 5 players drafted.
Which of these rosters would you prefer to have?

Star ratings are far from perfect. They're essentially a measure of the potential players show in high school. Sometimes players have no work ethic and waste their potential. Sometimes they peak early and don't improve much in college. Sometimes they go to a college that doesn't develop their talent very well. (Texas would be a good example of this.) All that being said, potential definitely matters.

FWIW, I don't think that number ratings even existed when I did this study. I believe 247 has added them within the past few years. Our average player rating last year ranked 13th out of the current 14 Big 12 schools. Our class this year ranks 11th. So we aren't recruiting well by this metric either.
LS1Z28
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Pokes4158 said:

Something I've thought about is many coaches that have come to osu mention the time Gundy gives his coaches to spend with family. Like the work life balance is great. Now I love that for them but my guess is that it eats into recruiting time. The hungry driven ones are gonna recruit all the time and get out on the road as much as possible as opposed to just phone time and waiting for them to visit after seeing them in camps. This is just a guess but I'd be willing to bet osu coaches probably spend less time on the road than staffs that are indeed signing top classes. Plus Gundy has mentioned recruiting money and how he tries to save money and even if we had more he may not even use it. He wants the kids from Kansas no one has ever heard of. Keeps the coaches close to home and travel expenses low. Like he mentioned the cost of jet fuel etc etc. we need the extra money and nil and all that but we also gotta have an old school approach and get them back out face to face with kids. I know they do go on the road and someone will argue they do but I'm confident of there was a way to show it we would see our coaches are a little more comfy and get to stay at home or close to home very often
The Tulsa World recently did an interview with Danny Okoye after he committed to OU. He was asked if OSU was ever in the picture, and this was his response: "They were at first. They offered me and then they never talked to me again. I really want to go where I'm wanted and they didn't make me feel wanted so I just moved on."

Robert asked someone on our staff is this was true, and they said it wasn't. They said they recruited him hard.

This left me wondering if our coaches even know what "hard recruiting" really is in today's world. You have to stay engaged with kids consistently through talking, texting, and interacting on social media. It takes a great deal of time and effort.

Coaches are essentially social influences now, and they have to influence kids to come to their schools. Younger coaches like Mike Boynton are really good at this. Some of our older coaches in football don't really seem to be.
Pokes4158
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yeah this is a good reference. Also something I've noticed is the use of younger like assistants to recruit and find kids. Seems like each position coach has a young protege type and the recruits talk with them a lot. Which I think is smart but also limits the exposure of actual recruiting from the coaches. It feels like the whole recruiting system is molding to take the load off of the coaches as much as possible
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LS1Z28 said:

Pokes4158 said:

Something I've thought about is many coaches that have come to osu mention the time Gundy gives his coaches to spend with family. Like the work life balance is great. Now I love that for them but my guess is that it eats into recruiting time. The hungry driven ones are gonna recruit all the time and get out on the road as much as possible as opposed to just phone time and waiting for them to visit after seeing them in camps. This is just a guess but I'd be willing to bet osu coaches probably spend less time on the road than staffs that are indeed signing top classes. Plus Gundy has mentioned recruiting money and how he tries to save money and even if we had more he may not even use it. He wants the kids from Kansas no one has ever heard of. Keeps the coaches close to home and travel expenses low. Like he mentioned the cost of jet fuel etc etc. we need the extra money and nil and all that but we also gotta have an old school approach and get them back out face to face with kids. I know they do go on the road and someone will argue they do but I'm confident of there was a way to show it we would see our coaches are a little more comfy and get to stay at home or close to home very often
The Tulsa World recently did an interview with Danny Okoye after he committed to OU. He was asked if OSU was ever in the picture, and this was his response: "They were at first. They offered me and then they never talked to me again. I really want to go where I'm wanted and they didn't make me feel wanted so I just moved on."

Robert asked someone on our staff is this was true, and they said it wasn't. They said they recruited him hard.

This left me wondering if our coaches even know what "hard recruiting" really is in today's world. You have to stay engaged with kids consistently through talking, texting, and interacting on social media. It takes a great deal of time and effort.

Coaches are essentially social influences now, and they have to influence kids to come to their schools. Younger coaches like Mike Boynton are really good at this. Some of our older coaches in football don't really seem to be.


C'mon man. Todd Bradford told RA he was recruited hard. Bradford said the guy never returned calls or texts. He even attended 2 OSU camps. You know exactly what the OU coaches told Okoye to say.
True wisdom is knowing what you don't know.
- Confucius
LS1Z28
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:


C'mon man. Todd Bradford told RA he was recruited hard. Bradford said the guy never returned calls or texts. He even attended 2 OSU camps. You know exactly what the OU coaches told Okoye to say.
I don't think he said he never returned calls and texts. I think he said they felt like he didn't show as much interest in OSU after the bigger schools entered the picture. Sometimes it feels like we give up on recruits after they're offered by bigger schools because we just don't feel like we can win those battles. (This is essentially a self-fulfilling prophesy.)

I doubt that OU tells recruits to badmouth OSU. Why would they when we already concede most recruiting battles to them anyways?
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LS1Z28 said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:


C'mon man. Todd Bradford told RA he was recruited hard. Bradford said the guy never returned calls or texts. He even attended 2 OSU camps. You know exactly what the OU coaches told Okoye to say.
I don't think he said he never returned calls and texts. I think he said they felt like he didn't show as much interest in OSU after the bigger schools entered the picture. Sometimes it feels like we give up on recruits after they're offered by bigger schools because we just don't feel like we can win those battles. (This is essentially a self-fulfilling prophesy.)

I doubt that OU tells recruits to badmouth OSU. Why would they when we already concede most recruiting battles to them anyways?


No, RA said Bradford said Okoye did not return efforts to contact him after he was offered at an OSU camp.
True wisdom is knowing what you don't know.
- Confucius
RodeoPoke
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LS1Z28 said:


An 85 man roster of 5-stars will have on average 54 players drafted.
An 85 man roster of 4-stars will have on average 19 players drafted.
An 85 man roster of 3-stars will have on average 5 players drafted.
Which of these rosters would you prefer to have?



OMG dude.... stop already. there are only 30 kids designated as 5-star annually. It is IMPOSSIBLE to have an entire team of 85 five star players, so how in the heck can you "average that"? Nobody ever has brought in that many 5-star rated kids. My goodness.

On the 85 man roster of 5-star players 26 were NOT drafted!! Seriously? If the rating was legit, then all 85 should get drafted. ALL OF THEM.


The NCAA said in 2013 there were 310,000-some seniors playing football. Here's how long their odds are to reach various recruiting ratings, using class of 2018 data from Rivals, if we settle on 300,000 football-playing seniors as a fair estimate.

30 five-stars, or 0.01 percent of the class
380 four-stars, or 0.13 percent of the class
1,328 three-stars, or 0.44 percent of the class
1,859 two-stars, or 0.62 percent of the class
296,403 unrated, or 98.88 percent of the class

Players rated three-stars and up, who make up almost all of Power 5 recruiting classes, are roughly 0.6 percent of seniors playing high school football. No matter what the exact number of senior high school players nationwide is, not more than one in 100 gets any kind of star rating. Most who play in college are unrated recruits filling out lower-division rosters.

Please no more of your anecdote data (and fictitious).
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LS1Z28 said:

RodeoPoke said:

LS1Z28 said:


Check out the numbers from this national study:
5-star players are drafted at a rate of 63%.
4-star players are drafted at a rate of 22.1%.
3-star players are drafted at a rate of 5.3%.

It's all about statistical probability. 4 & 5 star players have a much higher probability of success than 2 & 3 star players. We're never going to go further than we have in the past until we start recruiting at a higher level.
No they don't.

63% is horrible for "can't miss" prospects. Horrible. Should be 90% or better if the ratings were accurate.
Same with the 4's and 3's. (the 3-star number is also misleading because it's actually the "catch all" category, rather than an actual category). Like I said, use the .85+ rating if you want real comparisons, those would be roughly the C+ players, eliminating the C- players. (with A=5, B=4).

The whole system is corrupt because there is no way to measure the quality of the players from year to year. A 3+ star player one year, might be a 4-star quality kid in another class. You're averaging averages, which is a math no-no.

The star ratings are made up and voted on by journalists and "others". After the regional selections, they sit around and vote one which 4-star nominees get dropped because they have too many (whether they are worth merit or not). Meaning many of the so-called 3-stars should likely have been rated 4-stars, but they weren't by the "media voters", so our Coach gets penalized by the fans, because of bogus media votes.

And then we talk about the "class rank" which has a whole nother level of makebelieve to it, which has very little to do with player stars or rankings. (and CLASS RANKING is the gage that most use to measure our recruiting success)

Enjoy the bogus star ratings if that's what you like. There are much better measure of success.
An 85 man roster of 5-stars will have on average 54 players drafted.
An 85 man roster of 4-stars will have on average 19 players drafted.
An 85 man roster of 3-stars will have on average 5 players drafted.
Which of these rosters would you prefer to have?

Star ratings are far from perfect. They're essentially a measure of the potential players show in high school. Sometimes players have no work ethic and waste their potential. Sometimes they peak early and don't improve much in college. Sometimes they go to a college that doesn't develop their talent very well. (Texas would be a good example of this.) All that being said, potential definitely matters.

FWIW, I don't think that number ratings even existed when I did this study. I believe 247 has added them within the past few years. Our average player rating last year ranked 13th out of the current 14 Big 12 schools. Our class this year ranks 11th. So we aren't recruiting well by this metric either.
What you fail to account for in this dream scale is that

2 schools could have a roster of mostly 5* players

20 schools could have a roster of mostly 4* players

But, 300 schools could have a rost of mostly 3* players.

So is it Alabama or Georgia that Gundy and staff are supposed to unseat in recruiting?
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LS1Z28 said:

Pokes4158 said:

Something I've thought about is many coaches that have come to osu mention the time Gundy gives his coaches to spend with family. Like the work life balance is great. Now I love that for them but my guess is that it eats into recruiting time. The hungry driven ones are gonna recruit all the time and get out on the road as much as possible as opposed to just phone time and waiting for them to visit after seeing them in camps. This is just a guess but I'd be willing to bet osu coaches probably spend less time on the road than staffs that are indeed signing top classes. Plus Gundy has mentioned recruiting money and how he tries to save money and even if we had more he may not even use it. He wants the kids from Kansas no one has ever heard of. Keeps the coaches close to home and travel expenses low. Like he mentioned the cost of jet fuel etc etc. we need the extra money and nil and all that but we also gotta have an old school approach and get them back out face to face with kids. I know they do go on the road and someone will argue they do but I'm confident of there was a way to show it we would see our coaches are a little more comfy and get to stay at home or close to home very often
The Tulsa World recently did an interview with Danny Okoye after he committed to OU. He was asked if OSU was ever in the picture, and this was his response: "They were at first. They offered me and then they never talked to me again. I really want to go where I'm wanted and they didn't make me feel wanted so I just moved on."

Robert asked someone on our staff is this was true, and they said it wasn't. They said they recruited him hard.

This left me wondering if our coaches even know what "hard recruiting" really is in today's world. You have to stay engaged with kids consistently through talking, texting, and interacting on social media. It takes a great deal of time and effort.

Coaches are essentially social influences now, and they have to influence kids to come to their schools. Younger coaches like Mike Boynton are really good at this. Some of our older coaches in football don't really seem to be.
OH gee lets take the "statements" of a kid that was dead set on signing with ou over our coaches, because said kid would never be untruthful about OSU.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:

LS1Z28 said:

RodeoPoke said:

LS1Z28 said:


Check out the numbers from this national study:
5-star players are drafted at a rate of 63%.
4-star players are drafted at a rate of 22.1%.
3-star players are drafted at a rate of 5.3%.

It's all about statistical probability. 4 & 5 star players have a much higher probability of success than 2 & 3 star players. We're never going to go further than we have in the past until we start recruiting at a higher level.
No they don't.

63% is horrible for "can't miss" prospects. Horrible. Should be 90% or better if the ratings were accurate.
Same with the 4's and 3's. (the 3-star number is also misleading because it's actually the "catch all" category, rather than an actual category). Like I said, use the .85+ rating if you want real comparisons, those would be roughly the C+ players, eliminating the C- players. (with A=5, B=4).

The whole system is corrupt because there is no way to measure the quality of the players from year to year. A 3+ star player one year, might be a 4-star quality kid in another class. You're averaging averages, which is a math no-no.

The star ratings are made up and voted on by journalists and "others". After the regional selections, they sit around and vote one which 4-star nominees get dropped because they have too many (whether they are worth merit or not). Meaning many of the so-called 3-stars should likely have been rated 4-stars, but they weren't by the "media voters", so our Coach gets penalized by the fans, because of bogus media votes.

And then we talk about the "class rank" which has a whole nother level of makebelieve to it, which has very little to do with player stars or rankings. (and CLASS RANKING is the gage that most use to measure our recruiting success)

Enjoy the bogus star ratings if that's what you like. There are much better measure of success.
An 85 man roster of 5-stars will have on average 54 players drafted.
An 85 man roster of 4-stars will have on average 19 players drafted.
An 85 man roster of 3-stars will have on average 5 players drafted.
Which of these rosters would you prefer to have?

Star ratings are far from perfect. They're essentially a measure of the potential players show in high school. Sometimes players have no work ethic and waste their potential. Sometimes they peak early and don't improve much in college. Sometimes they go to a college that doesn't develop their talent very well. (Texas would be a good example of this.) All that being said, potential definitely matters.

FWIW, I don't think that number ratings even existed when I did this study. I believe 247 has added them within the past few years. Our average player rating last year ranked 13th out of the current 14 Big 12 schools. Our class this year ranks 11th. So we aren't recruiting well by this metric either.
What you fail to account for in this dream scale is that

2 schools could have a roster of mostly 5* players

20 schools could have a roster of mostly 4* players

But, 300 schools could have a rost of mostly 3* players.

So is it Alabama or Georgia that Gundy and staff are supposed to unseat in recruiting?


Great perspective
True wisdom is knowing what you don't know.
- Confucius
LS1Z28
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:


What you fail to account for in this dream scale is that

2 schools could have a roster of mostly 5* players

20 schools could have a roster of mostly 4* players

But, 300 schools could have a most of mostly 3* players.

So is it Alabama or Georgia that Gundy and staff are supposed to unseat in recruiting?
My post was hypothetical in nature because Rodeo posted that the star ratings are "horrible" since 5-star prospects are drafted at a rate of 63%. I wanted to illustrate just how much NFL talent that would be on an 85 man roster.

I don't expect Coach Gundy to unseat any blue bloods in recruiting. In fact, I don't even expect him to win that many recruiting battles against them. Those would be unreasonable expectations.

What I do expect is for us to win our fair share of recruiting battles against non-blue bloods and sign top 25 classes. We did this early in Coach Gundy's career, and there's no real excuse for why we aren't doing it now with better facilities and nearly two decades of success.
eddy.mcdaniels
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We've been recruiting in the 50s when we should never be out of the 30s. We're not going to bring in top 10 classes, but its absurd to be in the 50s or 40s.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LS1Z28 said:

NJAggie said:


What you fail to account for in this dream scale is that

2 schools could have a roster of mostly 5* players

20 schools could have a roster of mostly 4* players

But, 300 schools could have a most of mostly 3* players.

So is it Alabama or Georgia that Gundy and staff are supposed to unseat in recruiting?
My post was hypothetical in nature because Rodeo posted that the star ratings are "horrible" since 5-star prospects are drafted at a rate of 63%. I wanted to illustrate just how much NFL talent that would be on an 85 man roster.

I don't expect Coach Gundy to unseat any blue bloods in recruiting. In fact, I don't even expect him to win that many recruiting battles against them. Those would be unreasonable expectations.

What I do expect is for us to win our fair share of recruiting battles against non-blue bloods and sign top 25 classes. We did this early in Coach Gundy's career, and there's no real excuse for why we aren't doing it now with better facilities and nearly two decades of success.


FYI - recruiting rankings are going to become even more irrelevant. Schools are increasingly going to utilize the portal to fill their rosters. For example, if a school only signs 10 HS recruits but 26 portal guys, regardless of the number of stars in your signing class, your class ranking is gonna suck.
True wisdom is knowing what you don't know.
- Confucius
LS1Z28
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:


FYI - recruiting rankings are going to become even more irrelevant. Schools are increasingly going to utilize the portal to fill their rosters. For example, if a school only signs 10 HS recruits but 26 portal guys, regardless of the number of stars in your signing class, your class ranking is gonna suck.
That's true. Colorado's current class is ranked 74th, but they only have eight players committed, and three of them are 4-stars. Deion is doing well in recruiting, but his class probably won't be ranked that high since he plans to go transfer portal heavy again this year.

I think we're going to have to look at three things every year moving forward:
1. How much talent did you lose to the portal?
2. How much talent did you gain from the portal?
3. What is the average rating of the players you signed in your recruiting class?

Last year we lost a lot more talent to the portal than we brought in, and our average player rating in our recruiting class ranked 11th in the current 14 team conference. I'm worried that we aren't doing a good enough job of bringing in talent and retaining it once it's on campus.

Go back and compare our roster in 2021 to our roster today. The only position group that's on par is WR. Every other position group has less talent. That's troublesome.
Joe Khatib
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

LS1Z28 said:

NJAggie said:


What you fail to account for in this dream scale is that

2 schools could have a roster of mostly 5* players

20 schools could have a roster of mostly 4* players

But, 300 schools could have a most of mostly 3* players.

So is it Alabama or Georgia that Gundy and staff are supposed to unseat in recruiting?
My post was hypothetical in nature because Rodeo posted that the star ratings are "horrible" since 5-star prospects are drafted at a rate of 63%. I wanted to illustrate just how much NFL talent that would be on an 85 man roster.

I don't expect Coach Gundy to unseat any blue bloods in recruiting. In fact, I don't even expect him to win that many recruiting battles against them. Those would be unreasonable expectations.

What I do expect is for us to win our fair share of recruiting battles against non-blue bloods and sign top 25 classes. We did this early in Coach Gundy's career, and there's no real excuse for why we aren't doing it now with better facilities and nearly two decades of success.


FYI - recruiting rankings are going to become even more irrelevant. Schools are increasingly going to utilize the portal to fill their rosters. For example, if a school only signs 10 HS recruits but 26 portal guys, regardless of the number of stars in your signing class, your class ranking is gonna suck.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This, Gumby right on target!
RodeoPoke
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LS1Z28 said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:


FYI - recruiting rankings are going to become even more irrelevant. Schools are increasingly going to utilize the portal to fill their rosters. For example, if a school only signs 10 HS recruits but 26 portal guys, regardless of the number of stars in your signing class, your class ranking is gonna suck.

2. How much talent did you gain from the portal?
3. What is the average rating of the players you signed in your recruiting class?

Last year we lost a lot more talent to the portal than we brought in, and our average player rating in our recruiting class ranked 11th in the current 14 team conference.

Our transfer in portal rank was 22... FWIW

https://247sports.com/season/2023-football/transferteamrankings/

NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The reality is that 5* & 4* rankings are skewed to the programs designated as top programs by the media. There is a lot of media pressure on the kids to go to those schools and social media doubles down on that. Now add in NIL and the chances of these kids going somewhere else becomes even more unlikely. Then throw in the fact that much of what makes a 4 or 5 star is who they sign with.

OSU is not going to get that many 4* kids, we have to focus on the 3* kids that are going to sign with us.

This staff is not turning down any 5 or 4 star kids. They are also not wasting a lot of time and money to court a kid that is simply slow playing ou or Alabama.

So yes the pickings are getting thinner, and the focus is shifting to the portal. I'm sure most years the coaches have known the 1/2 of each class that was likely to stick with it and the 1/2 that would evaporate in years 1 & 2. So now it looks like they are just going after the 1/2 that will stick and then looking to the portal.

Also I'd say NIL is hurting us as schools like Tech and TCU have more to pay players than we do, and that helps them sign some of the bigger names. I wish it wasn't true, but it is. Still when Tech announced their $25k a year for all player initiative and I said we needed to match it I was called out on this board.

We've never done well in the ratings for recruits. We have done well in the ratings that do matter at the end of the season. We have consistently blown our recruiting number out of the water. Which sort of proves the inadequacy of hanging your hat on the made up things on recruiting sites.
Joe Khatib
How long do you want to ignore this user?
One thing that does help per say is that even though we look to have a down year, two of our main competitors may be in even worse shape this year than us in Baylor and Texas Tech! Most schools in the same category as us have roughly $ 20,000 to $ 25,000 per football player split up in NIL funds of course the STAR PLAYERS WILL GET MUCH MORE!!! That figure is what the people at Pokes with a Purpose were telling me ! It appears the collective amounts for most Big XII schools,not counting the soon to be SEC bunch in Texas and OU, are pretty much in the same ballpark numbers wise!
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Joe Khatib said:

One thing that does help per say is that even though we look to have a down year, two of our main competitors may be in even worse shape this year than us in Baylor and Texas Tech! Most schools in the same category as us have roughly $ 20,000 to $ 25,000 per football player split up in NIL funds of course the STAR PLAYERS WILL GET MUCH MORE!!! That figure is what the people at Pokes with a Purpose were telling me ! It appears the collective amounts for most Big XII schools,not counting the soon to be SEC bunch in Texas and OU, are pretty much in the same ballpark numbers wise!
Joe, thanks for sharing that. I'm glad to hear they've reached that level. That does seem to be the minimum level to play.

I agree our typical peers are also struggling, and our schedule doesn't include them. It's hard to read the new teams other than Houston who seems to be in bad shape.

While I'm not ready to write off 2023, I do think having a QB & OL for 2024 is crucial. I sure want to see what they're going to do in the portal to get there. Not wanting to rain on the Rangel parade, but I think it's too risky to wait and see. Lets find an experienced QB for next year and let Rangel sink or swim against him. As for OL bring in as many as we can afford to and lets see what develops.
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.