It's definitely a positive to be able to hold on to guys and also to attract outside coaches. Money well spent IMO. Just comes with higher expectations, nature of the beast.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
You can't stop recruiting arguments, you can only hope to contain them
- Thread starter buffs233
- Start date
It's definitely a positive to be able to hold on to guys and also to attract outside coaches. Money well spent IMO. Just comes with higher expectations, nature of the beast.
Where?
| Year | Class Rank | RR | W | L | Head Coach |
| 2005 | 41 | 2.81 | 5 | 6 | Harris |
| 2006 | 54 | 2.44 | 1 | 11 | Harris |
| 2007 | 41 | 2.63 | 4 | 8 | Harbaugh |
| 2008 | 50 | 2.71 | 5 | 7 | Harbaugh |
| 2009 | 20 | 3.27 | 8 | 5 | Harbaugh |
| 2010 | 26 | 3.13 | 12 | 1 | Harbaugh |
| 2011 | 22 | 3.32 | 11 | 2 | Shaw |
| 2012 | 5 | 3.73 | 12 | 2 | Shaw |
Harbaugh's didn't improve recruiting one iota over Harris until his third class.... He got Andrew Luck (#4 rated QB) in 2008, his second class. Still, his 2nd class (2008) was not as good as Harris' first one, even with Luck.
Start of the 2nd season and on. If we weren't in complete rebuilding mode and had the talent to win big I think you can judge the assistants and there salaries but in a rebuild I expect to see big improvements in year 2, and at that point I think you can make a fair judgement on their salaries.
If we were Stanford's fans, our guys would be absolutely going ballistic that Harbaugh can't recruit, didn't hire any top notch recruiters, etc.
Harbaugh's first two classes were awful on paper, until those players developed into STUDS. After that, the ratings gurus started to give him some benefit of the doubt, me thinks.
Those numbers don't lie.
Harbaugh's first two classes were awful on paper, until those players developed into STUDS. After that, the ratings gurus started to give him some benefit of the doubt, me thinks.
Those numbers don't lie.
Like I said above Holic, those lower rated players in Harbaugh's first couple classes had pretty good offer lists. I can safely say if we were signing players of the caliber in those classes, these threads don't exist.
And let's not gloss over the Andrew Luck commitment. Harbaugh landed him about six months on the job. Before he had coached a game at Stanford. That's impressive.
And let's not gloss over the Andrew Luck commitment. Harbaugh landed him about six months on the job. Before he had coached a game at Stanford. That's impressive.
Let's not pretend that Colorado in 2013 is where Stanford was when Harbaugh took over. Stanford is a bit unique.
The fact remains, his recruiting appeared to suck at the time, for a few years.
The fact remains, his recruiting appeared to suck at the time, for a few years.
41st ranked class in his first year coming off a 1 win season, and a blue chip QB committing in June before his 1st season? We'd be making statues for Mac if he was pulling that off now.
Well, yeah. I have no idea why anyone would want to bring up Harbaugh anyway. You can try and rationalize it, but he came in and immediately started winning recruiting battles over other BCS schools. I don't expect MacIntyre to be Harbaugh. Grossly unfair to even bring it up IMO.
BlackNGold
Club Member
You have got to be kidding me. You are so desperate that you have to manufacture things.
1. Why not go there - because it does not match your arguement. Coach Mac was a great recruiter...he will tell you he was a much greater recruiter than a coach ( he was also a great motivator.)
2. Barnett was a good recruiter. Once again ask coach Mac, he will tell you that Barnett was one of his best recruiters ever. It seems that Barnetts early classes were ranked in the Top 20 so I don't think that is slipping.
3. You argue that MacIntyre is a great coach because he has good assistants, but Les Miles is a horrible coach with good assistants. Miles does not get the record he has by being a horrible coach. And a few nut case message board posters are not going to change my opinion.
Ok, I feel like I have to weigh in. Mac was a great recruiter. Great. One of the best ever. He was Bo's go to guy at Michigan.
He wasn't a great game day coach. He was way more of a high level guy. But he could motivate like no one else. And he knew strategically how to improve the program-- it takes balls and vision to go to the bone when neither you nor assistants have ever coached option football. And then he took us to a one back passing offense. More giant balls.
Barnett could recruit. He was more of a system guy than Mac but with the right athletes, Barnett could beat anyone. And he was much better on game day than Mac in terms of X's and O's.
Les miles is not an X's and O's guy. He is a great recruiter and motivator.
You need greatness at all skills to succeed. Saban is a great recruiter and a great coach. Sure, he trends conservative but if you had his athletes you would too. You'll win a ton of games that way.
fatbuff
Member
They went to the Rose Bowl in year 2. Look what Mark Stoops is doing at Kentucky. We will have to wait and see what the results are,but he is recruiting the **** out of it. The point is-it is not unheard of to dramatically improve recruiting for a program that has been down for a while. CU has a better history to draw from than either program.
I'll never understand why half of us don't get hired to recruit (cause we know whats up) while the other half doesn't get hired to call plays (cause we know whats up)
Joe Theismann's Leg
Well-Known Member
I don't understand how anyone would care that this class is bad on paper. HCMM has a history if success in finding players and everyone knows that recruits get a boost when they're recruited by programs with an eye for talent. When these guys start to develop into studs they'll get the "CU bump". Look at Fales, Gillam, Adkins etc lightly recruited, and became studs. Why should I care at all what rivals thinks of our class if the Buffaloes win?
Did great recruiting by the new staff get them to the Rose Bowl in year 2? You got to look further out than that.
Mark Stoops (on paper) is getting it done as far as ratings go. If he has them winning a lot and sustainably better when these recruits start to hit their prime (3 years from now), then he will be a great example of how to rebuild thru recruiting. For now, the results are NOT in.
Barnett's classes slipped each and every year. Even before the Lisa Simpson episode, the classes he was bringing in were a steep drop off from what Neuheisel was bringing in.
Barnett turned Northwestern around by recruiting good players but not stealing them from Ohio State, Michigan or Penn State. Nope, his recruiting classes were big yawners at Northwestern.
Barnett turned Northwestern around by recruiting good players but not stealing them from Ohio State, Michigan or Penn State. Nope, his recruiting classes were big yawners at Northwestern.
I will give you guys this point:
Les Miles and Bill Mac were both good recruiters, and probably not great coaches.
Did Les Miles turn around Oklahoma State in a big way? I think Les made his mark there as a recruiter. There is a lot of lore of the methods he's used throughout his career at each and every stop.
Of the programs that I can think of that truly had to rebuild in this century (13 years is a good sample size, no?) - who did it by turning heads in their first few years of recruiting?
Is there one good example?
Les Miles and Bill Mac were both good recruiters, and probably not great coaches.
Did Les Miles turn around Oklahoma State in a big way? I think Les made his mark there as a recruiter. There is a lot of lore of the methods he's used throughout his career at each and every stop.
Of the programs that I can think of that truly had to rebuild in this century (13 years is a good sample size, no?) - who did it by turning heads in their first few years of recruiting?
Is there one good example?
Well because the coach they fired had them at #41 and then #54 and they fired his ass after 1 win.
Harbaugh came in and revamped that program, but his first two classes were #41 and #50. Luck was added after his first season btw, and helped boost that class to #50.
Did he build Stanford by hiring ace recruiters and immediately setting the world on fire? Nope.
The point being is Harbaugh hired football men and improved their play more measurably than their recruiting rankings from the get go. The numbers support that and there's no arguing that he pulled off one of the most stunning "builds" in college football recent history.
Luck committed to Stanford before Harbaugh had coached a game. Again, not really relevant to CU, but to act like Harbaugh wasn't winning several recruiting battles from the get go is simply false. In the end, it's not a case study that is applicable to present-day CU, so it doesn't really matter.
fatbuff
Member
What led them to the Rose Bowl? Great coaching? What do I need to look further out for? Results are already in. Talent wins coaching almost every time in D1. Im not going to base my opinion on a faith that this staff can see something the rest of the coaches in the BCS are missing.
You win, Harbaugh was not a great recruiter. :rolling_eyes:
What's your point anyway, that recruiting isn't a recipe for improvement? Fine, agree to disagree I guess.
No one is saying Mac should be more like Harbaugh or that we should be recruiting lights out right now - what I'm saying is that recruiting the weakest class in our conference is going to make Mac's job that much harder and is unacceptable IMO (Addison Gillam notwithstanding).
10 pages later, Buffs233 wins
It's a simple concept really. Show me a program that improved from the dregs by making a splash of any sort in recruiting.
Harbaugh IS relevant as his first two years, his recruiting did not improve one bit over the previous two years before he got there, as measured by the ratings boys. His recruiting was IN FACT much improved, but the fans and the ratings services didn't know it until 3 years or so later. I've provided you with the numbers.
Harbaugh's recruiting prowess didn't emerge until he had a team already winning a lot of games. Check my numbers.
Many of you on this board are saying that our recruiting is so poor that we have no chance to dig ourselves out of this hole. I've provided everyone with program example after example where programs were vastly improved without the recruiting improvements you all seem to believe are imperative.
The facts are that none of us can find one good example of a program being turned around with a "SPLASH" on LOI day. By splash, I'd accept any sort of major improvement.
The best anyone can do is Illinois, who got to the Rose Bowl in year 2? Can you attribute any success to Zook's super-recruiting? They peaked in year 2? They were getting worse as time went on. His recruits made them worse is a conclusion I can easily reach.
If we are going to constantly be bitching and complaining about the poor recruiting, let's at least put it in perspective.
I can't find any examples of programs doing it by making the sort of splash that Kentucky is currently making. In fact, I find the opposite. Tosh Lupoi's recruits seemed to have made Cal worse. His recruits at UW led to them winning exactly one more conference game this year than in Sark's first year there.
I have looked at all the programs in the P5 conferences that are going bowling. Look at the ones that have improved a bunch in the last few years and try to correlate that with improved recruiting rankings. I see no real correlation.
The recruiting rankings correlate well with success in the top 15 programs. I don't see that same correlation when looking at "turnaround stories".
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
It is both recruiting and coaching to win the big dance. Great. We could not attract the already-big-name coaches with the dumpster fire here. The coach we did hire decided that he had a good crew that was in line with what he wants to teach and build, so he brought most of them. I still don't get Neinas, that still seems something foisted on MM by Bohn to me. I guess maybe MM is a stand up guy and told his coaches they had at least two years that he would keep them and that is why Toby is still here? I have no clue.
I still think MM is getting the TYPE of kids he feels will be best to build a solid foundation with. As he has done in the past at a few stops, Duke and San Jose State. Would he love to have a class of four and five stars if the met the type of players he likes? Sure. he ain't stupid. But you have to work with what you have, and my guess is MM doesn't give **** about taking chances on the higher rated but academically or mentally risky kids that other big programs are all to happy to pass on. He might just not care about impressing you with the average star levels, and be more concerned with getting some solid players that he feels will work out, and be contributors here for four years.
All I know is that I wasn't impressed that much with the last class, and MM had several guys who stepped up and was solid guys for us this year. I am hopefull that we had other good guys redshirt just because we had some depth at those positions and we were not forced to play them, but they will be solid guys this year for us. And since we have no choice, I will be hopeful that MM continues to put solid (if not spectacular) guys out there at more and more positions until we can be a middle of the road PAC team. At which point we go to bowl games and then I would think we can start to gather in the high 3 star and 4 star players and difference makers. I always thought this would take time. I didn't realize how weak and thin the OL and DL was when I had some Kool-aid induced dreams of a bowl game.
And that goes back to the strength coach. If we can get more depth on the OL and DL, and they are stronger and learn to use better leverage, if will make EVERYONE else on the team look better. Stopping pressure with a good OL and making pressure on the DL will change things quicker than anything.
I still think MM is getting the TYPE of kids he feels will be best to build a solid foundation with. As he has done in the past at a few stops, Duke and San Jose State. Would he love to have a class of four and five stars if the met the type of players he likes? Sure. he ain't stupid. But you have to work with what you have, and my guess is MM doesn't give **** about taking chances on the higher rated but academically or mentally risky kids that other big programs are all to happy to pass on. He might just not care about impressing you with the average star levels, and be more concerned with getting some solid players that he feels will work out, and be contributors here for four years.
All I know is that I wasn't impressed that much with the last class, and MM had several guys who stepped up and was solid guys for us this year. I am hopefull that we had other good guys redshirt just because we had some depth at those positions and we were not forced to play them, but they will be solid guys this year for us. And since we have no choice, I will be hopeful that MM continues to put solid (if not spectacular) guys out there at more and more positions until we can be a middle of the road PAC team. At which point we go to bowl games and then I would think we can start to gather in the high 3 star and 4 star players and difference makers. I always thought this would take time. I didn't realize how weak and thin the OL and DL was when I had some Kool-aid induced dreams of a bowl game.
And that goes back to the strength coach. If we can get more depth on the OL and DL, and they are stronger and learn to use better leverage, if will make EVERYONE else on the team look better. Stopping pressure with a good OL and making pressure on the DL will change things quicker than anything.
I'll give you one: Baylor. Art Briles is hired, gets a commitment from a blue chip QB (RGIII) less than a week later. 3 years down the road they're a bowl team and the following season the have a 10 win season, top 15 ranking, and a Heisman trophy...at f**king Baylor.
Now show me a coach who has brought in the worst class in his conference and went on to great success.
And you couldn't be more wrong about Harbaugh - it's laughable. Here are some names for you:
Andrew Luck
Doug Baldwin
Coby Fleener
Owen Marecic
David DeCastro
Chris Owusu
Chike Amajoyi
Delano Howell
All these players committed to Harbaugh before he had coached a single game at Stanford and all of them except Marecic are currently in the NFL.
Of the players who committed to Stanford between the time Harbaugh was hired and his first game, they had at least 38 BCS offers combined (not counting Stanford) and one of those players was one of the best college QBs in a decade. We have how many, 11 in our entire class after a year of improvement on the field?
Harbaughs early recruiting classes were pretty darn good for a 1 win team.
Last edited:
"Who knows only his own generation remains always a child".
Sometimes understanding others successes and failures can be helpful tini.
That is Stanford recruiting though. Those players didn't commit b/c Harbaugh did great things at USD, it wasn't seen as a big hire or anything. They committed to the education of Stanford. Hell, Walt Harris signed five 4* players in 2005- LINK. Better than Harbaugh's 1st class. Harbaugh was just a better coach than Teevens and Harris.
I feel like I've read that somewhere before...
BlackNGold
Club Member
I keep mentioning it but you want to ignore it - Charlie Strong at Louisville. 2010 class (transition) - he had Louisville ranked 44th up from 64th the year before. The 2011 class was ranked 33rd. He consistently has gone into Florida and pulled out a top recruit or two.
I don't expect Coach MacIntyre to bring in a load of blue chips but I do expect to be better that 70th.
Sure, but Harbaugh made Stanford relevant in the conference before he coached a game. He called out Pete Carroll and then beat him on the field that fall. It is in no way a case study on how to turn around CU. I don't expect MacIntyre to be Harbaugh and he doesn't have to be.