FB RECRUITING MTSU picks up THREE commitments
- Thread starter Matt Dossett
- Start date
Seems like we have a lot of commitments already - I counted 14. I like the size of Logan...6'4" 212, please lets keep him at LB...put on 20 lbs and he will be ready to go.
You know they won't. They'll stick him right at DE even if he only gains 5 lbs.
2 of the 3 look like solid CUSA level prospects. One of them has a bunch of FCS offers (but that was Byard too, so we can hope for the best).
Jaylin Lane can play. Some Richie James'esque qualities on his high school film. Doesn't quite have the twitch James has but he sure reminds me a bit of him watching his film. Hopefully he can develop into something special. Of the 3 recruits he's the most exciting. Looks like a natural football player.
Evian Irving seems wildly undersized. Doesn't even look anywhere near the 180lb's he's listed at. Maybe 170 at best, drippin' wet. He's gonna have to do some serious work in the weight room if he plans on seeing the field. I understand the staff has become obsessed with the smaller, quicker LB to play in space but they are such a liability when you face physical teams. A project for sure.
Tramel Logan Jr - Respectable size and speed combination for a low level FBS program like ours. Absolutely nothing special on film. At this juncture you just sign a kid like this and hope they develop into a man that can dominate up front. A certain redshirt. Looks way too slow to play LB to me and destined for defensive end. A glorified tweener. Simple as that.
Evian Irving seems wildly undersized. Doesn't even look anywhere near the 180lb's he's listed at. Maybe 170 at best, drippin' wet. He's gonna have to do some serious work in the weight room if he plans on seeing the field. I understand the staff has become obsessed with the smaller, quicker LB to play in space but they are such a liability when you face physical teams. A project for sure.
Tramel Logan Jr - Respectable size and speed combination for a low level FBS program like ours. Absolutely nothing special on film. At this juncture you just sign a kid like this and hope they develop into a man that can dominate up front. A certain redshirt. Looks way too slow to play LB to me and destined for defensive end. A glorified tweener. Simple as that.
If memory serves me, and that is a stretch, Kevin was set to go to Kentucky but they pulled his offer. That's how he ended up here.
I really wish we would take more risks on projects and academically risky players. We need some power 5 talent on this team, any way we can get it. Who cares if the APR takes a small hit, we can afford it.
You can get it all day long, just got to recruit the area's that have those kids. Talent level dropped when they stopped recruiting south Florida, Tampa, Orlando and South Fulton, Dekalb, metro Atlanta. There are all kinds of kids on the Southside of Atlanta with G5 and Low end P5 offers rarely see one from MT anymore. WKU just lost a kid to South Carolina last week.
The bigger question is do you have a staff full of assistants that can actually relate to these kids and close the deal? Think about it for a minute.
I admittedly don’t follow recruiting close, so forgive my ignorance.
Do we have a recognizable recruiting strategy, outside of loading up on WR?
I just went through all the offers for the Mr. Tennessee winners this year. Unless I missed it, we didn’t offer a scholarship to any of them. While I know winning the award doesn’t translate to D1 talent, these kids are getting offers from other D1 schools, are proven winners and are in state.
For example, we recruit 900 WR, but we don’t offer a 6’4” WR that Tulane and others offer? When it comes down to our last scholarship, I don’t get why we go after a 2* from Florida with a 2* in state is right down the road.
And in My area of Georgia, tons of recruits at football powerhouse programs - no MT offers. I see other G5 schools and FCS schools offering all these kids, as much to build relationships with the program. MT, nothing.
I just don’t understand our strategy, at all.
Do we have a recognizable recruiting strategy, outside of loading up on WR?
I just went through all the offers for the Mr. Tennessee winners this year. Unless I missed it, we didn’t offer a scholarship to any of them. While I know winning the award doesn’t translate to D1 talent, these kids are getting offers from other D1 schools, are proven winners and are in state.
For example, we recruit 900 WR, but we don’t offer a 6’4” WR that Tulane and others offer? When it comes down to our last scholarship, I don’t get why we go after a 2* from Florida with a 2* in state is right down the road.
And in My area of Georgia, tons of recruits at football powerhouse programs - no MT offers. I see other G5 schools and FCS schools offering all these kids, as much to build relationships with the program. MT, nothing.
I just don’t understand our strategy, at all.
RaiderDawg78: Unless we are part of the reported "among others" MT almost never offers players on any all-area, all Mid-State, or All State lists, even if the lists include numerous players.
It has long been my contention that MT must sign a portion of the D-1 in-state prospects to be seen as a serious D-1 program. (what % I don't know - 10%, 5%, 2%? - enough to make the program relevant) I also believe in what I term "complementary recruiting" where in going for a local player you probably won't get may open doors for future players you can get. I also believe that in many years there are enough low-high major and high mid-major prospects in Tennessee that if we could sew up a large percent of them complemented with players from talent-rich areas we could have a good G-5 program.
Like you, I have no idea what our recruiting strategy is but it sure isn't working locally. One has to wonder just how many Mid-State high schools any member of our staff has visited during the last year, if only to establish a relationship. I recently heard of a mid-state player who just received his first offer and it was from a $EC school. Why wasn't his first offer from MT?
It has long been my contention that MT must sign a portion of the D-1 in-state prospects to be seen as a serious D-1 program. (what % I don't know - 10%, 5%, 2%? - enough to make the program relevant) I also believe in what I term "complementary recruiting" where in going for a local player you probably won't get may open doors for future players you can get. I also believe that in many years there are enough low-high major and high mid-major prospects in Tennessee that if we could sew up a large percent of them complemented with players from talent-rich areas we could have a good G-5 program.
Like you, I have no idea what our recruiting strategy is but it sure isn't working locally. One has to wonder just how many Mid-State high schools any member of our staff has visited during the last year, if only to establish a relationship. I recently heard of a mid-state player who just received his first offer and it was from a $EC school. Why wasn't his first offer from MT?
In state recruiting has been a big focus since Neal Brown came to WVU. No we aren’t a blue chip rich state. But he stated the WV players should stay in WV. Simple as that.
So what if the local guy in Henderson or Shelbyville or even Chattanooga says no. Like said above, it opens the door to other players to see hey, MT cares about my high school. About me.
I don’t see that in Tenn or any where. I said in another thread it’s like they throw a dart at a map and say “yeah. Let’s go sign a guy in that town”.
So what if the local guy in Henderson or Shelbyville or even Chattanooga says no. Like said above, it opens the door to other players to see hey, MT cares about my high school. About me.
I don’t see that in Tenn or any where. I said in another thread it’s like they throw a dart at a map and say “yeah. Let’s go sign a guy in that town”.
