Tech's class

by Tech92 on Feb 12, 2008 10:51 AM CST

Here's what the collegefootballnews.com boys had to say about the Tech class of 2008...

Texas Tech
The class is heavy on ... Instant help for the defensive line. Three terrific JUCO transfers, DT Broderick Marshall and ends Brandon Sesay and McKinner Dixon, give the Red Raiders instant depth and options to rotate up front. JUCO CB Jarell Rout could end up being a key nickel back or third corner from day one. High school prospects Joey Fowler and Ryan Haliburton are the future on the ends.
The player who'll someday be a really big deal ... RB Harrison Jeffers
The player you might care about this year ... DT Broderick Marshall
What it all means to the real world of college football ... Where's the buzz? Considering the success the program has had, top quarterbacks and receivers should be beating down the door to get to Lubbock, and they're still not. Mike Leach rarely brings in top-notch recruiting classes, but this one is light even by Red Raider standards. If the JUCO transfers don't pan out, the potential is there for this to be a lost year with no real stars for the offense, outside of possibly RB Harrison Jeffers, and not standards. If the JUCO transfers don't pan out, the potential is there for this to be a lost year with no real stars for the offense, outside of possibly RB Harrison Jeffers, and not enough overall numbers to sustain a hit if some of the top high schoolers bust.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Double-T Nations's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Double-T Nation's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

I agree

I think everyone will look back on this recruitig class and wonder what the hell Leach was thinking!

Tech92 brings up a good point...why aren't top QB's and WR's beating down our doors to be apart of this offense year in and year out? I do not want to hear about the limited amount of scholarships because that is simply a lame excuse

I am just starting to wonder what else this program has to do to turn the corner or has the football program already peaked?

by walker72 on Feb 14, 2008 2:34 PM CST 0 recs

I will kindly disagree

with you guys.

I don't know what would have made you all happy in a recruiting class! Yes, we whiffed on a couple of big-time players, but so did everyone else that didn't get them.

Look at what we DID get:
A QB who was regarded as one of the top players in Texas before he suffered back-to-back knee injuries. He was a sure-thing 4 star recruit before he injured his knee the 2nd time. Florida was heavily recruiting this kid before he told them he was solid to Tech.

A RB who is the most talented and highly regarded since Leach has been here. Probably the most highly regarded since Hanspard.

3 great O-Line prospects. One had offers from LSU and OU. One had an offer from Bama, and didn't want to wait on Florida, so he commmitted to us.

We had the #4 overall class of DE's in the country according to Rivals.com. The two JUCO DE's will be immediate starters.

We picked up 2 Athletes that will be really solid players. Douglas runs a 4.45 and will most likely play inside receiver and Zuozalik runs a 4.37 forty and projects at receiver or safety.

When you look at just a few of the positives of the class, you cannot say that the guys we picked up are scrubs. The whole point why we didn't take more players is because the staff didn't want to fill the class with scrubs! And YES there was a limit on scholarships. I have said this before, but we had the 2nd youngest team in the NCAA last year. With not many seniors on last years team, how can we bring in alot of young guys??? Oh, that's right, we just cant.

liquidsmoke

by liquidsmoke on Feb 15, 2008 10:48 PM CST 0 recs

You said it

...duh, back to back knee injuries. That's why we got him, smoke. Florida didn't even sniff this kid in 2007. Nobody did. He had offers in 2006, but he didn't "turn anyone down" to come to Tech. That's why he enrolled early - to keep his spot.

Bro, it's not quantity it's quality. We got crap for playmakers and impact players. Who was the last juco player to come in and make an immediate positive impact? Robert Johnson? Yeah, he wasn't a team cancer at ALL, was he.

Clearly, the entire online recruiting world disagrees with you based on our slightly better than 50th percentile ranking.

You're missing the point that we're trying to make. We should be able to at LEAST get a class that ranks somewhere NEAR top 30.

I applaud your support and positivity...but this class was not impressive in quality OR quantity.

by Tech92 on Feb 16, 2008 12:12 AM CST 0 recs

Well,

everyone has their opinion. Obviously there is no way to resolve this until all these kids get on the field and prove that they are either awesome or that they suck.

Only time will tell, but I hope that you guys remember all that you have said here and admit it if you were wrong. I sure will if I turn out wrong.

liquidsmoke

by liquidsmoke on Feb 16, 2008 10:58 AM CST up 0 recs

Discussion is good

but all-out war is bad. Just mentioning this if you haven't seen this already, the "discussion" between Roll Bama Roll and MGoBlog. It's an interesting discussion, despite the meanness. And to bring this back to Texas Tech, PK did threaten the big men recently. PK: "They've got to pick it up or, honestly, we've got to release some guys and go get some other guys in the spring - that's the truth of it. They can't come to me and complain that they haven't gotten a shot. I've given them a shot in games to see what they can do. They're under evaluation from here on out for me. I've got two big kids coming in as freshman and there's no reason I can't find a junior-college big man right now that's better than what they gave me today."

Is it ethical to cut a player? Is it the athlete's job to perform?

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on Feb 16, 2008 7:11 AM CST 0 recs

I don't have one single

problem with coach Knight doing this. I probably wouldn't cut a guy who is going to be a senior who has been with the program for more than a year. However, if there is a guy that is riding the pine, and doing nothing to contribute, I don't have a problem with them being cut. I don't believe that it is an ethical issue. They have a scholarship to contribute to our basketball team, and if they can't hold up their end of that bargain, then they don't deserve to be here.

Two examples of guys who I thought would have been great for us that just apparently cannot get it done are Ricardo De Bem and Rodgerick Craig. De Bem has been playing more lately, but I hadn't seen him on the court until PK took over and some of our "bigs" got into foul trouble. Craig just seems to not have a true position. I think he is a power forward who is only 6'6". Also, Tyler Hoffmiester (the walk-on winner of "knight school") is pretty much just filling up room on our roster. I'm not trying to pick on these guys because I really like everyone on the team, but they just came to mind when I thought of people getting dropped and giving some new faces a chance.

liquidsmoke

by liquidsmoke on Feb 16, 2008 11:06 AM CST up 0 recs

Yes,

if this class turns out well for Leach, I'll be first in line admit I was wrong. I doubt I'll have to, but I will if it happens.

Keep in mind I am not saying these guys we signed are scrubs or suck a**. I'm saying that for a program supposedly on a large upswing, we still aren't landing more quality.

As for cutting players...happens frequently, but the school will usually let them keep the scholarship. Scholarships, contrary to popular belief, are NOT "full-rides for four years." They are one year contracts which the school holds exclusive renewal rights each season. It's VERY common in major college football for a lot of guys each year who are just journeymen to not have their scholarships renewed.

Crummy thing to do, but it happens.

by Tech92 on Feb 17, 2008 5:56 PM CST 0 recs

so are they

actually 4 one-year contracts or 4 one-year commitments? For instance does the staff make the athletes, or whoever it is, sign actual contracts at the beginning of the year, or is it more of a commitment? I'm truly curious about how this process works.

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on Feb 17, 2008 7:58 PM CST up 0 recs

First option

option. When you sign your letter of intent the following two things happen:

When Johnny signs a letter of intent, he is committed to either attend that school for four years (should he go), or petition the school for a release from the scholarship if he doesn't want to stay anymore.
The school is committed to providing him one school year's worth of scholarship money (depending on the sport it may be partial or full compensation).

A scholarship is a one-year commitment on the school's part - very one sided. The school needs no such petition to release an athlete from scholarship. Anything from team rules violation, school honor code violation, or crummy athlete who the school made a mistake on are grounds to sever ties.

At the beginning of each academic school year, athletes sign a new scholarship contract with the school - should the school decided to keep it's end (it usually does, but it's not rare for a school to beg out). What will often happen if things aren't working weel is the school will just cut the loss; continue to honor the scholarship, but keep the kid off the team.

You don't hear about this very much because when the decision is made to cut ties, it's usually a mutual decision and there are no hard feelings.

I can't recall if there are evergreen's listed in these contracts but I don't think there are.

by Tech92 on Feb 18, 2008 9:40 AM CST 0 recs