I'm not sure football recruits care how beautiful the campus is but I do know a lot of football players come from warm weather climates and they care about the temperature. I've always felt that is a disadvantage for the North schools. Nebraska gets away with it because of their stadium, fans, and trophies, but they even can't seem to recruit at the rate the other warmer football schools do.
I am happy with the way recruiting for ISU has gone so far. In the past ISU would have 3 or 4 guys committed by now, and maybe 12 by January. Then in Feb there would be 12 to 15 guys that the staff would fill in with, usually with JC guys or plan C, or D players. Sure CPR would like to sign 23 5 star guys and 5 4 stars, but ISU is not Texas, and it will never be Texas. The coaching staff has targetted guys early that they know can help, and that they think they have a great chance to hold on to through signing day.
A lot of what determines how good a team is in football is the coaching and player development. Do you think that TT had a worse class than ISU in the past 10 years? I doubt it, if so maybe once. Look at Iowa. Sure they have had better classes than ISU for the last 10 years, but not a lot better. Certainly not in the top 10 or 15 classes, yet they have been pretty darn good. Do you think the CPR and KF go out and check the stars on a player before they decide to recruit them?
You bring up an interesting point. I got to hear College Football Hall of Famer, Alfred Williams speak last week in Colorado. Ironically, he is from Houston, he said that one of the factors that decided where he would go to school was 'weather". Alfred mentioned that he didn't want to be hot. My guess is that he is more the exception than the rule. To each his own.
When I was in school at KU I know the Texas players were always complaining about winter and thought Lawrence was too cold.
Star rating and weather might have something to do with it................explain Boise State then?
2) Track record of success. BCS bowls and a history of winning attract better athletes to your program, due in no small part to...
3) Weak conference schedule. The BSU model is to schedule 2-3 strong out of conference opponents to gain national credibility, and then blow through the ridiculously easy WAC schedule
None of this is meant to take away from BSU's success, I'm glad they, along with TCU, Utah etc are getting their shot. But I don't think their model will work for ISU.
Boise State is very interesting. They have a lot of speed. Their lineman are bada**es. Yet, they never get any 4 star recruits, they're classes are similar to ours. My guess is the coaches play up their chip on the shoulder. They are fairly close to a recruiting hot bed in California, and are getting some players from Texas. They might be proof that you can find a diamonds in the rough every year.
I stand corrected. California has remained Colorado's recruiting base since the McCartney era, although the quality of California recruit that they are getting now surely isn't as high as it was in the '90's when they were beating out USC and UCLA for 4-and 5-star players. Early this decade Barnett made a strong push into Texas recruiting and the number of Texans pulled near even with Californians for a few years (2002-2004), but I didn't realize just how dramatically Texas recruiting had fallen off under Hawkins.
2000 10 Texans and 27 Californians
2001 11 Texans and 23 Californians
2002 19 Texans and 22 Californians
2003 22 Texans and 22 Californians
2004 19 Texans and 20 Californians
2005 16 Texans and 27 Californians
2006 13 Texans and 27 Californians
2007 8 Texans and 28 Californians
2008 5 Texans and 32 Californians
2009 6 Texans and 26 Californians
SMU recruiting under June Jones has improved to where it gets a majority of 3-star kids. UTEP, North Texas and Rice sign mostly 2-star players. We can beat out these schools for 3-star recruits from Texas, so certainly geography isn't everything. However compared to other Big12 schools, ISU football has as yet no major advantages in recruiting and geography is a huge disadvantage. Playing time is attractive, but a 4-star recruit will have playing time opportunities at Baylor and Texas Tech too. Improving our recruiting success in Texas will come as our coaches make more contacts and as our program starts winning consistently. But it's ridiculous for posters to expect us to be signing 4-star kids from Texas this year, with a first-time head coach with only 1.5 years in the job and took over a program with three straight losing seasons.
In the early part of the 2000's, TCU was signing mostly 2-star Texas kids like the other non-BCS conference Texas schools. They showed that they could win with mostly 2-star kids, then as they kept winning they improved recruiting to sign mostly 3-star players, and now that they've been to BCS games the last few years, they sign 2-4 4-star kids per class. Winning drives recruiting success more than recruiting success drives winning.