Cyclone Recruiting History 101

Aclone

Well-Known Member
Dec 14, 2007
24,576
16,689
113
Des Moines, Ia.
I figured I should make this it’s own thread. I saw this post on Twitter, and I’m still laughing!




For those of you who are young whippersnappers, that 2002 class was an utter disaster. At the time, Dan McCarney was riding the crest of the 2000 season and Insight.com Bowl win.

He said at the time that he had to decide between taking California high school kids—they were getting great reception from that quarter at the time—or going for the quick fix with junior college kids.

He chose…poorly.

Yep, they signed a bunch of gaudy JC players (nine of the 21), many of whom either never made it to campus, or didn’t stick.

This was one of about three major gaffes that led to McCarney’s downfall.

Even more, it’s the reason I’m absoluteluly tickled that CMC has recruited minimal JC players.

 

cyclonenation5

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jul 12, 2013
2,730
1,856
113
Ames
How many of the 21 commits contributed even a little bit? Leaders and Hicks were good players, but none of the other names ring a bell for me whatsoever. Granted I was pretty young at the time, but the ‘01 and ‘03 classes both have several more names that I can remember watching.
 

ISUguy

Prime Сasual Dating - Authentic Ladies
Jun 27, 2006
387
346
63
I figured I should make this it’s own thread. I saw this post on Twitter, and I’m still laughing!




For those of you who are young whippersnappers, that 2002 class was an utter disaster. At the time, Dan McCarney was riding the crest of the 2000 season and Insight.com Bowl win.

He said at the time that he had to decide between taking California high school kids—they were getting great reception from that quarter at the time—or going for the quick fix with junior college kids.

He chose…poorly.

Yep, they signed a bunch of gaudy JC players (nine of the 21), many of whom either never made it to campus, or didn’t stick.

This was one of about three major gaffes that led to McCarney’s downfall.

Even more, it’s the reason I’m absoluteluly tickled that CMC has recruited minimal JC players.


9 of the 21 were two stars....yikes!
 

Aclone

Well-Known Member
Dec 14, 2007
24,576
16,689
113
Des Moines, Ia.
How many of the 21 commits contributed even a little bit? Leaders and Hicks were good players, but none of the other names ring a bell for me whatsoever. Granted I was pretty young at the time, but the ‘01 and ‘03 classes both have several more names that I can remember watching.
The OL should have been a huge help, but Colin Menard, iirc, was the only one who played.

Stevie Hicks, Ryan Kock and Nick Leaders were all contributors, as were JC’s Amecus Daniels and Waye Terry.

I don’t remember how all the high school OL developed. I think I’m blocking that out.
 

convoluteme

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jul 29, 2019
379
969
93
Here are some recruiting charts I've been updating since the 2018 class.

raOj09l.png


DB4POjW.png
 

DurangoCy

Well-Known Member
Jul 5, 2010
6,387
4,289
113
Durango, CO
I think we need to be in the range of 0.8600 average every year to continue the success that Campbell has started. We're definitely improving, but so are many of the teams we're battling against.

Average recruit ranking by year.
ISUBaylorOklahoma StTexas TechKSUTCUWVUIowa
2015​
0.8237​
0.8520​
0.8486​
0.8579​
0.8339​
0.8563​
0.8475​
0.8326​
2016​
0.8249​
0.8603​
0.8467​
0.8400​
0.8208​
0.8825​
0.8308​
0.8425​
2017​
0.8390​
0.8460​
0.8495​
0.8484​
0.8333​
0.8518​
0.8418​
0.8452​
2018​
0.8481​
0.8677​
0.8652​
0.8376​
0.8375​
0.8713​
0.8640​
0.8561​
2019​
0.8533​
0.8595​
0.8601​
0.8426​
0.8397​
0.8653​
0.8574​
0.8594​
2020​
0.8511​
0.8553​
0.8546​
0.8516​
0.8439​
0.8849​
0.8644​
0.8644​
2021​
0.8494​
0.8647​
0.8661​
0.8644​
0.8549​
0.8698​
0.8721​
0.8777​
2022​
0.8571​
0.8590​
0.8818​
0.8562​
0.8378​
0.8579​
0.8579​
0.8764​
 

DurangoCy

Well-Known Member
Jul 5, 2010
6,387
4,289
113
Durango, CO
Here are some recruiting charts I've been updating since the 2018 class.

raOj09l.png


DB4POjW.png

It's interesting to see Chizik's two classes so low. I was always under the impression he got talent, but couldn't coach; then Rhoads road his recruiting coat tails for a couple years.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Cycsk

theshadow

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2006
17,497
15,760
113
The OL should have been a huge help, but Colin Menard, iirc, was the only one who played.

Stevie Hicks, Ryan Kock and Nick Leaders were all contributors, as were JC’s Amecus Daniels and Waye Terry.

Of the 9 JUCOs in that class:
Collin Menard (OL) and Waye Terry (QB) were the only real contributors.

Amecus Daniels (DB) only played in a couple of games and had no stats.
Mo Hmoud (OL) never made it to campus; quit football.
Curtis James (OL) and Federico Samuel (DL) were academic casualties before they arrived.
Max Steward (LB) may have been, too. Either way, he never saw the field.
Shaheed Richardson (DL) had 1 tackle in 6 games.
Emmanuel Valcourt (OL) played in the early blowouts in 2002, but that was it.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: CyberJJJ and Aclone

knowlesjam

Well-Known Member
Oct 21, 2012
4,281
4,697
113
Papillion, NE
I think we need to be in the range of 0.8600 average every year to continue the success that Campbell has started. We're definitely improving, but so are many of the teams we're battling against.

Average recruit ranking by year.
ISUBaylorOklahoma StTexas TechKSUTCUWVUIowa
2015​
0.8237​
0.8520​
0.8486​
0.8579​
0.8339​
0.8563​
0.8475​
0.8326​
2016​
0.8249​
0.8603​
0.8467​
0.8400​
0.8208​
0.8825​
0.8308​
0.8425​
2017​
0.8390​
0.8460​
0.8495​
0.8484​
0.8333​
0.8518​
0.8418​
0.8452​
2018​
0.8481​
0.8677​
0.8652​
0.8376​
0.8375​
0.8713​
0.8640​
0.8561​
2019​
0.8533​
0.8595​
0.8601​
0.8426​
0.8397​
0.8653​
0.8574​
0.8594​
2020​
0.8511​
0.8553​
0.8546​
0.8516​
0.8439​
0.8849​
0.8644​
0.8644​
2021​
0.8494​
0.8647​
0.8661​
0.8644​
0.8549​
0.8698​
0.8721​
0.8777​
2022​
0.8571​
0.8590​
0.8818​
0.8562​
0.8378​
0.8579​
0.8579​
0.8764​
That's true, but what team(s) have shown improvement on the field that tracks with or above these recruiting numbers...Baylor...above, then same, then below, OSU...same, TTech...below, KSU...same, then below, TCU...same, then below, WV...same, then below, Iowa...same, ISU...same, then above.

Shows again the obvious trend that good coaching overcomes lower numbers...while crappy coaching gives you sub-standard results...see Texas.
 

zcecsch

Active Member
Feb 6, 2021
118
161
43
That's true, but what team(s) have shown improvement on the field that tracks with or above these recruiting numbers...Baylor...above, then same, then below, OSU...same, TTech...below, KSU...same, then below, TCU...same, then below, WV...same, then below, Iowa...same, ISU...same, then above.

Shows again the obvious trend that good coaching overcomes lower numbers...while crappy coaching gives you sub-standard results...see Texas.

There's more to recruiting than just just the ratings. Having players that fit your scheme and fit your culture is also very important.
 

dinger

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 20, 2006
4,113
706
113
Plano, TX
Zehr and Kock are names you should recognize for sure. Both started at times, Zehr all of his senior year sans a couple due to injury I believe. Korey Smith and Waye Terry played some also.
 

Jack Gladney

Active Member
Oct 31, 2017
59
164
33
51
There's more to recruiting than just just the ratings. Having players that fit your scheme and fit your culture is also very important.
I think that this staff has been really good at balancing classes as well. I remember one year Texas got like 5 DTs all 4 or 5 stars. That’s great for recruiting rankings, but it’s not a practical way to build a team. I also think it’s strange that there is no skew in the rankings for position. Obviously QB play has a huge impact on team performance. Offensive tackles and cornerbacks would be next most important. But other than kickers getting ranked really low, there doesn’t seem to be much consideration given to position in developing team rankings.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: zcecsch

JRE1975

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 12, 2006
1,867
1,675
113
Lakewood Ranch, FL
I noticed how low the individual ratings were in 2002 compared to today, and I noticed we had the #38 class and were 9th in the Big 12! Kind of like the SEC today.
 

RonBurgundy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Oct 5, 2017
3,189
4,378
113
41
I think we need to be in the range of 0.8600 average every year to continue the success that Campbell has started. We're definitely improving, but so are many of the teams we're battling against.

Average recruit ranking by year.
ISUBaylorOklahoma StTexas TechKSUTCUWVUIowa
2015​
0.8237​
0.8520​
0.8486​
0.8579​
0.8339​
0.8563​
0.8475​
0.8326​
2016​
0.8249​
0.8603​
0.8467​
0.8400​
0.8208​
0.8825​
0.8308​
0.8425​
2017​
0.8390​
0.8460​
0.8495​
0.8484​
0.8333​
0.8518​
0.8418​
0.8452​
2018​
0.8481​
0.8677​
0.8652​
0.8376​
0.8375​
0.8713​
0.8640​
0.8561​
2019​
0.8533​
0.8595​
0.8601​
0.8426​
0.8397​
0.8653​
0.8574​
0.8594​
2020​
0.8511​
0.8553​
0.8546​
0.8516​
0.8439​
0.8849​
0.8644​
0.8644​
2021​
0.8494​
0.8647​
0.8661​
0.8644​
0.8549​
0.8698​
0.8721​
0.8777​
2022​
0.8571​
0.8590​
0.8818​
0.8562​
0.8378​
0.8579​
0.8579​
0.8764​

I think my biggest take away from this chart is that there is very little difference in .85 - .88. We are literally talking three hundreths of a percent.

So the key is doing exactly what CMC is achieving. Recruiting players that fit, developing that talent and S&C over time, and maintaining one of the highest cultures in the country.
 

zcecsch

Active Member
Feb 6, 2021
118
161
43
I think that this staff has been really good at balancing classes as well. I remember one year Texas got like 5 DTs all 4 or 5 stars. That’s great for recruiting rankings, but it’s not a practical way to build a team. I also think it’s strange that there is no skew in the rankings for position. Obviously QB play has a huge impact on team performance. Offensive tackles and cornerbacks would be next most important. But other than kickers getting ranked really low, there doesn’t seem to be much consideration given to position in developing team rankings.

Yep, balancing out what position the recruits play is important too. Having a bunch of awesome WRs is good, but if you whiff on your QB recruits, it doesn't matter nearly as much how good the WRs are. Ideally your team synergizes well and the whole is better than the sum of the parts.
 

Aclone

Well-Known Member
Dec 14, 2007
24,576
16,689
113
Des Moines, Ia.
There's more to recruiting than just just the ratings. Having players that fit your scheme and fit your culture is also very important.
I mentioned somewhere that Texas had a problem the last couple of staffs in that they relied on the ratings, rather than doing their own evaluations. So they landed a good share of guys that were simply hyped, or peaked in high school.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: zcecsch