2018 Recruiting Recap and notes (with a rant)

[Buffnik]

I just finished updating the 2018 Recruit Profile Index and all the recruit threads. Big h/t to @WasianCU , who was a huge help with this and also got all of our Futures Indexes & Profiles reformatted & updated.

Going through the database, here are a few observations:

1. CU definitely attacked the JUCO ranks to fill some roster gaps this year more heavily than in previous years. Success at TE, OLB, CB, S and DT. Didn't find the guy at OT or RB, but may still be looking. There's also a chance that CU is still looking for more JUCO or transfer help at DT and OLB/DE (edge rusher).

2. There are some holes in the freshman class that will cause depth chart imbalance down the road if they aren't addressed. Buffs didn't sign a HS player at TE or CB and maybe not at OLB if Ray Robinson ends up at S in college. There are still some options out there if CU has room. Could also use another prep OT.

3. The GA/FL experiment absolutely blew up in CU's face this year and taught a valuable lesson that I hope Coach MacIntyre takes to heart -- CU'S HS RECRUITING MUST BE 100% FOCUSED ON THE FOOTPRINT.

That CU Recruiting Footprint: California, Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Utah, Oklahoma, Nevada, Washington and Oregon. Unless it's to visit JUCOs - which can be in Kansas, Georgia, Mississippi or New York - our coaches should not leave the Footprint states. It's a waste of time and resources that could be better devoted to the Footprint.

(As an aside - I know that I left Louisiana and Hawaii off that list, but those states have been a losing cause for years and should be dropped. Money and time are better spent in the Footprint. HCMM realized/accepted that about HI a year ago, which is good.)

This boondoggle was almost entirely driven by Tumpkin, Clark and Leavitt being GA/FL recruiters. When they left, all the recruiting they were doing was wasted because no one left on staff was going to visit those states and it would have been beyond stupid for HCMM to hire new assistants and assign those areas. It looks at least like the new coaches were told to recruit almost entirely in the Footprint even if they had some connects in other places. I credit Chev here with being a better Recruiting Coordinator who understands CU versus what we started with under Troy Walters.

The only - ONLY - exceptions to 100% recruiting focus on the Footprint must be limited to: 1) if a recruit from an outlier state happens to be at a camp CU is coaching in the summer and he ends up getting an offer from that; and, 2) if someone from an outlier state moved there from the Footprint after CU had already started recruiting him; and, 3) if someone from an outlier state is a legacy with CU parents and interest is established before visiting. That's it. Otherwise, to reiterate, recruiting outside the Footprint is a waste of resources.

Here is how it shook out in 2018 with high school prospects CU offered from outside the Footprint:

Alabama - 2 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 1 unsigned
Florida - 13 offers, 0 signed to CU, 7 signed/committed elsewhere, 6 unsigned
Georgia - 8 offers, 0 signed to CU, 8 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
Illinois - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
Louisiana - 5 offers, 0 signed to CU, 4 signed/committed elsewhere, 1 unsigned
Michigan - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
New Jersey - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
Ohio - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 0 signed/committed elsewhere, 1 unsigned
South Carolina - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
Tennessee - 4 offers, 0 signed to CU, 4 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned

That's 37 offers with NOTHING to show for it. CU only offers about 200 guys a year. That's pushing 20% of the recruiting effort completely wasted. Imagine if those resources are put into the Footprint in 2019 and into the future. That's where we need to be. Particularly because CU is underperforming within the Footprint, especially within certain states and within certain areas of the larger states of CA and TX where CU must make sure it is strong everywhere.

Footprint performance (high school recruiting):

CA - 6 signees
TX - 5 signees
CO - 3 signees
WA - 1 signee
OK - 1 signee

CU should not be shut out in a year from the high school recruits in AZ or UT. Those are border states with solid talent and they must produce results in CU recruiting.

[2018 JUCO signees were from CA (2), AZ (1), KS (1) and MS (1).]

 

[Buffalo Brad]

Great insight and reinforces the need to be hyper competitive in the footprint. CU is not a national brand at this point and needs to live, breath and die in the footprint.

 

[OkieBuffster]

Good post Buffnik. Thanks for all the hard work!

 

[Sykobuff]

Great read, thanks nik.

 

[Agent Dave Kujan]

Great info and I absolutely agree with everything you said. However, after the Pac 12’s performance this bowl season I’m very concerned that our “footprint” is overrated when it comes to talent production.

If you think, as I do, that USC gets the very best talent from our footprint, then it has to scare you that Ohio State was more athletic at virtually every position on the field.

You can say that Ohio State is in a class by itself and I might accept that, but to me Kansas State looked more athletic than fUCLA and TCU was way more athletic than Stanford. WSU wasn’t even close to MSU in terms of just pure athletic ability.

I’m not sure I know what the solution is or if it is really a problem at all but I’m very concerned that trying to squeeze a bunch of tier 2 and 3 kids out of our footprint won’t be enough.

Thoughts??

 

[MtnBuff]

Agree with much of this.

We have a history of success in Hawaii and there is a lot of talent there but we need to hire a coach with ties there who is a recruiter.

Also agree on AZ and UT, disagree completely on Nevada. We have put in effort there only to have our hopes dashed way to many times. Yes there is talent in NV but it rarely comes to CU.

We currently have more players on the roster from Finland and from Australia than we do from Nevada. It is hard to ignore the talent in Las Vegas but in the end that talent ignores us, move on.

 

[Duff Man]

Something overlooked a lot in the rush to embrace JUCOs: 15 of 21 JUCO signees since 2014 went to high schools outside the recruiting footprint. That cannot help overall high school recruiting.

Also, recruiting states like Hawaii and Utah only makes sense if you have an effective Poly recruiter. It is a glaring black hole on this staff and directly has led to deficiencies in recruiting the trenches.

 

[PAHIBuff]

Thanks Nik. And within the footprint I'd like to see CU torque up the emphasis on OK. Since we're going to be working the DFW area of TX pretty hard, doubling up the effort in OK makes sense IMO.

 

[buffaholic]

Bobo up North is finding some.solid talent in GA, the Carolina's, etc. I agree in general, but leave open the premise that one assistant with the right contact, changes that.

 

[Buffnik]

Great info and I absolutely agree with everything you said. However, after the Pac 12’s performance this bowl season I’m very concerned that our “footprint” is overrated when it comes to talent production.

If you think, as I do, that USC gets the very best talent from our footprint, then it has to scare you that Ohio State was more athletic at virtually every position on the field.

You can say that Ohio State is in a class by itself and I might accept that, but to me Kansas State looked more athletic than fUCLA and TCU was way more athletic than Stanford. WSU wasn’t even close to MSU in terms of just pure athletic ability.

I’m not sure I know what the solution is or if it is really a problem at all but I’m very concerned that trying to squeeze a bunch of tier 2 and 3 kids out of our footprint won’t be enough.

Thoughts??

There is no issue with the talent in Texas and California, supplemented with some guys from the rest of the footprint. Zero issue. Hell, I think you could win a national championship if you could simply pick which 20-25 guys you wanted from So Cal's 6 Trinity League schools every year (Serra, Mater Dei, Orange Lutheran, Santa Margherita, Servite & Bosco). There is a crazy amount of talent in this footprint.

 

[buffaholic]

Hard to support that and also say the conference sucks. I think CA talent is skipping and GA, TX and others are to rising.

 

[Buffnik]

Hard to support that and also say the conference sucks. I think CA talent is skipping and GA, TX and others are to rising.

Conference talent doesn't suck. Look at the NFL draft and the number of draft picks per conference, keeping in mind that the Pac-12 has 2 fewer schools than the ACC, Big Ten or SEC. We've been putting as many guys in the League as anyone.

I think the biggest issue is that we're on an island. The other conferences overlap for recruits, fans and viewers. Competition forces them to work harder and put a greater emphasis on maximizing things.

I'm at the point where I think the answer has to be expansion. If that's into Texas and/or Oklahoma, it forces a greater emphasis to match and accommodate their focus. That would be ideal for conference prestige, a much-needed culture change, expanding recruiting grounds, and raising the revenue.

And if the Pac-12 won't or can't do that, then it needs to look within the region and stop worrying so much about academic reputation when discussing potential members with which to affiliate for an athletic conference. BYU and Boise State care more about football than just about anyone in the Pac-12. UNLV and New Mexico have better basketball facilities than most of the Pac-12 with UNLV only behind UA & UCLA in hoops prestige and UNM getting better attendance for their women's team than some Pac-12 men's teams draw.

First step, though, is the Pac-12 getting its media house in order by fixing the Pac-12 Networks and making them as profitable as they should be.

 

[cowe6453]

Could it be that the same apathetic I don't give a **** attitude of Pac 12 fan bases reflects on the players??? Teams like Wisconsin, Penn State, OSU play inspired football and walloped their opponents. Pac 12 teams come out flat, no emotion, in front of either half empty stadiums or crowds dominated by the opposing team and who can blame them for getting punched in the mouth. UCLA and Josh Rosen is a perfect example. Is Kansas State more talented than UCLA? Hell no. But K State lives and breathes football and I'm sure their fans showed up in droves while the 20 UCLA fans who aren't really fans just kinda like the school were probably just happy to he there. Then you have Josh Rosen, who has been called out for his lack of passion and commitment. I knew Stanford playing in San Antonio would be bad but the TCU to Stanford ratio was laughable. People say Pac 12 doesn't have a culture problem, but it seems to be a huge problem when college football is all about passion, tradition, and all the things Colorado used to be about. Also relevant, Washington's stupid chrome helmets vs. Penn State's classic uniforms.

This post may be more relevant to the sky is falling bowl season thread, but I thinks its somewhat related to the question of why Pac 12 teams with similar talent are not performing at the same level of their other P5 conference peers

 

[DBT]

Agree with much of this.

We have a history of success in Hawaii and there is a lot of talent there but we need to hire a coach with ties there who is a recruiter.

Also agree on AZ and UT, disagree completely on Nevada. We have put in effort there only to have our hopes dashed way to many times. Yes there is talent in NV but it rarely comes to CU.

We currently have more players on the roster from Finland and from Australia than we do from Nevada. It is hard to ignore the talent in Las Vegas but in the end that talent ignores us, move on.

Disagree. Even though we haven’t had much luck there, that can be attributed to us struggling. Once we start rolling, recruiting Nevada should improve. Also, geographically, Nevada is an easy stop on the way to and from California. Don’t give up on recruiting Nevada!

 

[Buffnik]

To finish the 2018 class, here's a position breakdown:

QB - done
RB - done with HS recruits, but an established JUCO talent would be a big help for the 2018 season
WR - done
TE - maybe done, especially if Gustav plays TE, but could use a freshman to keep class balance into the future
OL - after losing Culver and not replacing + with some health questions among returnees I'd like to see 2 more guys brought in -- prep recruit would be fine for 1 of them if physically ready to compete but I wouldn't mind 2 JUCO or grad transfer guys brought in (top priority imo)
DL - maybe done, but another prep, JUCO or grad transfer would be a good thing
LB - maybe done, but not going to cry in my beer if the coaches can find a pass rushing OLB type
CB - maybe done, but I'd love to see a prep recruit added so we're not having to back fill with a JUCO next year
S - done
K/P - done (except for the walk on program where it would be great to find some punters to compete for the backup job & maybe earn a scholarship for 2019 instead of having to recruit Kinney's replacement next cycle)

At OLB, the need goes away if Falo returns but adding a prep would still be nice as a luxury add.

Likewise at DL, at least for the veteran option, if Umu returns.

At CB, would still be nice to sign a prep if Julmisse returns but it would be low priority.

TE makes me very nervous if Poplawski's injury keeps him out in 2019 and if Keeney can't return from his back problems and medically retires. Really could use a prep recruit here.

OL is what I'd consider the desperate situation that could be the difference between competing for the Pac-12 South versus hoping to make a bowl game. Buffs need to make shoring up the OL ahead of the 2018 season priority #1 and cannot stand pat here.

 

[buffaholic]

Nik - are you factoring Shutack in? A complete unknown to us.
Appears his only reported offer may have been Rutgers...

 

[WasianCU]

I just finished updating the 2018 Recruit Profile Index and all the recruit threads. Big h/t to @WasianCU , who was a huge help with this and also got all of our Futures Indexes & Profiles reformatted & updated.

Going through the database, here are a few observations:

1. CU definitely attacked the JUCO ranks to fill some roster gaps this year more heavily than in previous years. Success at TE, OLB, CB, S and DT. Didn't find the guy at OT or RB, but may still be looking. There's also a chance that CU is still looking for more JUCO or transfer help at DT and OLB/DE (edge rusher).

2. There are some holes in the freshman class that will cause depth chart imbalance down the road if they aren't addressed. Buffs didn't sign a HS player at TE or CB and maybe not at OLB if Ray Robinson ends up at S in college. There are still some options out there if CU has room. Could also use another prep OT.

3. The GA/FL experiment absolutely blew up in CU's face this year and taught a valuable lesson that I hope Coach MacIntyre takes to heart -- CU'S HS RECRUITING MUST BE 100% FOCUSED ON THE FOOTPRINT.

That CU Recruiting Footprint: California, Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Utah, Oklahoma, Nevada, Washington and Oregon. Unless it's to visit JUCOs - which can be in Kansas, Georgia, Mississippi or New York - our coaches should not leave the Footprint states. It's a waste of time and resources that could be better devoted to the Footprint.

(As an aside - I know that I left Louisiana and Hawaii off that list, but those states have been a losing cause for years and should be dropped. Money and time are better spent in the Footprint. HCMM realized/accepted that about HI a year ago, which is good.)

This boondoggle was almost entirely driven by Tumpkin, Clark and Leavitt being GA/FL recruiters. When they left, all the recruiting they were doing was wasted because no one left on staff was going to visit those states and it would have been beyond stupid for HCMM to hire new assistants and assign those areas. It looks at least like the new coaches were told to recruit almost entirely in the Footprint even if they had some connects in other places. I credit Chev here with being a better Recruiting Coordinator who understands CU versus what we started with under Troy Walters.

The only - ONLY - exceptions to 100% recruiting focus on the Footprint must be limited to: 1) if a recruit from an outlier state happens to be at a camp CU is coaching in the summer and he ends up getting an offer from that; and, 2) if someone from an outlier state moved there from the Footprint after CU had already started recruiting him; and, 3) if someone from an outlier state is a legacy with CU parents and interest is established before visiting. That's it. Otherwise, to reiterate, recruiting outside the Footprint is a waste of resources.

Here is how it shook out in 2018 with high school prospects CU offered from outside the Footprint:

Alabama - 2 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 1 unsigned
Florida - 13 offers, 0 signed to CU, 7 signed/committed elsewhere, 6 unsigned
Georgia - 8 offers, 0 signed to CU, 8 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
Illinois - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
Louisiana - 5 offers, 0 signed to CU, 4 signed/committed elsewhere, 1 unsigned
Michigan - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
New Jersey - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
Ohio - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 0 signed/committed elsewhere, 1 unsigned
South Carolina - 1 offers, 0 signed to CU, 1 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned
Tennessee - 4 offers, 0 signed to CU, 4 signed/committed elsewhere, 0 unsigned

That's 37 offers with NOTHING to show for it. CU only offers about 200 guys a year. That's pushing 20% of the recruiting effort completely wasted. Imagine if those resources are put into the Footprint in 2019 and into the future. That's where we need to be. Particularly because CU is underperforming within the Footprint, especially within certain states and within certain areas of the larger states of CA and TX where CU must make sure it is strong everywhere.

Footprint performance (high school recruiting):

CA - 6 signees
TX - 5 signees
CO - 3 signees
WA - 1 signee
OK - 1 signee

CU should not be shut out in a year from the high school recruits in AZ or UT. Those are border states with solid talent and they must produce results in CU recruiting.

[2018 JUCO signees were from CA (2), AZ (1), KS (1) and MS (1).]

Excellent post. Thanks for all the hard work, Nik.

 

[Duff Man]

Ideally I would like to see the coaches hammer California, Texas, Colorado, and Arizona. Every single year, those are the core four states. Then the secondary states of Utah, Hawaii, and Nevada.

From there, the coaches should decide if any other states are an efficient use of resources. I think there are scenarios where an effective recruiter with established ties could recruit the high volume states of Florida, Georgia, or Ohio. But there has to be a clear method to the madness, and it means picking one of those three, not all three. It becomes a problem when offers are being thrown out with no real regard for location.

 

[MtnBuff]

Disagree. Even though we haven’t had much luck there, that can be attributed to us struggling. Once we start rolling, recruiting Nevada should improve. Also, geographically, Nevada is an easy stop on the way to and from California. Don’t give up on recruiting Nevada!

We have wasted resources many year is Nevada for what? New Mexico is an easy stop, so is Wyoming. I don't know why but the Nevada kids with a slim few exceptions don't come to CU. They go to California and Arizona and even to South Bend but they don't come to CU.

If we have a quality kid who has legitimate connections to Colorado and expresses an interest then certain pay him a visit and work him but to spend resources on Nevada has been for a long time a waste of time.

 

[DBT]

We have wasted resources many year is Nevada for what? New Mexico is an easy stop, so is Wyoming. I don't know why but the Nevada kids with a slim few exceptions don't come to CU. They go to California and Arizona and even to South Bend but they don't come to CU.

If we have a quality kid who has legitimate connections to Colorado and expresses an interest then certain pay him a visit and work him but to spend resources on Nevada has been for a long time a waste of time.

Sometimes you need to keep knocking on the door. Recruiting Nevada doesn’t tax our staff much at all. Just admit you’re wrong and all will be forgiven.

 

[Duff Man]

Nevada is recruiting 3-4 high schools in Las Vegas for the most part. It is an easy stop over going to or coming back from So Cal. Phoenix too. The resources "diverted" are a drop in the bucket.

 

[Buffnik]

Nik - are you factoring Shutack in? A complete unknown to us.
Appears his only reported offer may have been Rutgers...

I am not. I consider him a complete unknown. If he can compete for game reps this season, it's a cherry on top but it's not something I am counting on.

 

[patebuff]

Nevada is recruiting 3-4 high schools in Las Vegas for the most part. It is an easy stop over going to or coming back from So Cal. Phoenix too. The resources "diverted" are a drop in the bucket.

Exactly. Easy area to recruit. We are talking about a couple of schools that produce all the talent. You could almost do all of that in a day.

 

[MtnBuff]

Sometimes you need to keep knocking on the door. Recruiting Nevada doesn’t tax our staff much at all. Just admit you’re wrong and all will be forgiven.

I'll admit I'm wrong when you give me the list of all the great talent that we have gotten out of Nevada in the past years. I know you lived there and like the place but the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Go back through the recruit profile post for the last few years and you will find that we had multiple players who we visited, offered, even had in on visits. Some we were even in their final grouping. And to what results? We can keep pissing down our legs in Nevada or go someplace where we get results.

 

[DBT]

I'll admit I'm wrong when you give me the list of all the great talent that we have gotten out of Nevada in the past years. I know you lived there and like the place but the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Go back through the recruit profile post for the last few years and you will find that we had multiple players who we visited, offered, even had in on visits. Some we were even in their final grouping. And to what results? We can keep pissing down our legs in Nevada or go someplace where we get results.

Oh, you stubborn bastard!

 

[Duff Man]

Exactly. Easy area to recruit. We are talking about a couple of schools that produce all the talent. You could almost do all of that in a day.

You can easily use 1-2 recruiters for both of their allotted days during the Spring Evaluation Period. Plus it is an easy spot to hit during bye weeks and for in-homes. Basically no down side.

 

[MtnBuff]

Oh, you stubborn bastard!

Just show me how the time already spent has gotten us anywhere. I've heard about why we should recruit Nevada for years but unless you get some results you are wasting time.

 

[patebuff]

We have wasted resources many year is Nevada for what? New Mexico is an easy stop, so is Wyoming. I don't know why but the Nevada kids with a slim few exceptions don't come to CU. They go to California and Arizona and even to South Bend but they don't come to CU.

If we have a quality kid who has legitimate connections to Colorado and expresses an interest then certain pay him a visit and work him but to spend resources on Nevada has been for a long time a waste of time.

Both those states produce absolutely no p5 talent

 

[MtnBuff]

Both those states produce absolutely no p5 talent

Which for the Buffs is exactly the point. We have been recruiting Nevada the past few years and have gotten virtually no talent out of it.

No argument that the players are there but so far despite our efforts they ain't comin' here. That is the point. I don't know why they aren't but we have made the efforts with close to zero results. There are other places our time would be better spent.

 

[Duff Man]

Which for the Buffs is exactly the point. We have been recruiting Nevada the past few years and have gotten virtually no talent out of it.

No argument that the players are there but so far despite our efforts they ain't comin' here. That is the point. I don't know why they aren't but we have made the efforts with close to zero results. There are other places our time would be better spent.

Where should this great effort being wasted in Las Vegas be put to use?