ADVERTISEMENT

In case you're wondering about the top recruiting classes and conference classes

Best part of recruiting so far has been the Texas recruiting class triggering other fanbases and players.

Even Heisman trophy winner Baker Mayfield joined in.



A&M signee Leon Slow’neal who ran a 4.9 40 is still mad cause Texas didn’t want him.
He is upset UT offered BJ Foster and not him last May.







Plus Alabama’s horrible class.
Alabama is finished. Saban cannot recruit anymore
 
I wonder how much UGA boosters had to pay for that class.

Also if you're a Meat Chicken fan, the recruiting is ranked 22nd and you've went 1-5 combined vs Urb and "Little Bro". That's Brady Hoke like except not as good and he managed to beat Ohio State once. Harbaugh is really the Lane Kiffin of the B1G.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tOSUGrad90
I wonder how much UGA boosters had to pay for that class.

Also if you're a Meat Chicken fan, the recruiting is ranked 22nd and you've went 1-5 combined vs Urb and "Little Bro". That's Brady Hoke like except not as good and he managed to beat Ohio State once. Harbaugh is really the Lane Kiffin of the B1G.

Bama supposedly just won their 8th in a row against LSwho but ran out of money buying Surtain Jr

At least LSWho is back. Not even top 15.

The Partition of Louisiana has already started.
 
Plus Alabama’s horrible class.
Alabama is finished. Saban cannot recruit anymore

Alabama only had 17 (edit: 18) players in this class. That's because they had a smaller senior class, meaning fewer scholarships freed up. Other schools got ranked ahead of them, primarily because they had larger classes, not because their players were better.
 
Alabama only had 17 (edit: 18) players in this class. That's because they had a smaller senior class, meaning fewer scholarships freed up. Other schools got ranked ahead of them, primarily because they had larger classes, not because their players were better.

Keep telling yourself that.
Their class is horrible.
USC and Clemson have the same amount of players and their rankings are higher than Alabama
 
Also if you're still envious of Michigan, who took Rod away from us, the recruiting is ranked 22nd.
22nd, with only a partial recruiting class that's still ranked well ahead of WVU's class. 18 starters returning, plus a stud transfer QB from Ole Miss, as well as a grad transfer safety from Utah. Perhaps you might remember him playing against WVU back in December.
 
UGA just blew the doors off of everyone on the way to recruiting title. They're averaging over four-stars per signee.

Full list: https://n.rivals.com/team_rankings/2018/all-teams/football

As for the conference Texas is currently third in the nation. Oklahoma is No. 8. Bayor is No. 25, TCU No. 27, WVU No. 30, Oklahoma State 33, Kansas 46, Iowa State 51, Kansas State 56 and Texas Tech 63.
Looks like the current Rivals rankings show a little movement from what you posted a little while ago.
 
Best part of recruiting so far has been the Texas recruiting class triggering other fanbases and players.

Even Heisman trophy winner Baker Mayfield joined in.



A&M signee Leon Slow’neal who ran a 4.9 40 is still mad cause Texas didn’t want him.
He is upset UT offered BJ Foster and not him last May.







Plus Alabama’s horrible class.
Alabama is finished. Saban cannot recruit anymore

Somehow, though, Brother will keep collecting national titles. WVU let the Monongah High genius get away.
 
Bama missed out on a lot of players they wanted.

Reason why Saban held onto his scholarship was because there was nothing but medium level 3 stars left.

Alabama doesn’t have many recruits.
A lot of great Alabama players come from Georgia and Florida.
Guess what. Georgia had the number 1 class and all Florida schools finished strong.

Not to mention three Texas schools are on the rise and so is OU.

The rope is now on Bama’s neck closing in on all sides.
 
22nd, with only a partial recruiting class that's still ranked well ahead of WVU's class. 18 starters returning, plus a stud transfer QB from Ole Miss, as well as a grad transfer safety from Utah. Perhaps you might remember him playing against WVU back in December.

Michigan is in a nightmare situation that Nebraska May find themselves in five years.

Either Harbaugh is the best they can get and they have to admit that their program is not as strong as they believe or they fire Harbaugh and move on.
That will show a lack of class because Harbaugh could have any job he wanted but he picked his Alma mater.

Out of the three programs that do not have much talent in state but have great histories I think Michigan has the best chance to win again though.

For two reasons. Michigan fans are not as reactionary as others and because Michigan does not play in the SEC.

Michigan has to rebuild a program.
As much as people celebrate Rich Rodriguez, some of his actions damaged Michigan long term.

I thought by now Michigan would have rebounded but they came close. That Michigan St game could have went either way a few years back.

If Michigan gives Harbaugh four-six more years they will see a difference.

Tennessee has more talent at their disposable but a tougher schedule.

Nebraska needs a miracle to reclaim their past glory.
Unless Scott Frost is given the patience he deserves.

Problem with Frost is that offense does not win championships and both Harbaugh and Pruitt are defensive minded coaches unlike Frost.

Nebraska would have had a better chance if they stayed in the Big XII. Give another three years and the players in Texas won’t ever remember who they are.

Do not forget Oklahoma was in the same position before they joined the Big XII.
Texas recruits brought back winning to Oklahoma.

Nebraska could not keep their false pride in check for that to happen.
 
Last edited:
Keep telling yourself that.
Their class is horrible.
USC and Clemson have the same amount of players and their rankings are higher than Alabama

Yeah, facts clearly aren't your thing.

Alabama's average rating (of individual recruits), is higher than Texas, Penn St., Miami, Oklahoma, Florida St, Notre Dame, and Auburn, all of whom were ranked ahead of Alabama yesterday.

Also note that today, after the signings have all been finalized, Alabama is ranked #7. But don't let facts get in the way of your story.
 
Do not forget Oklahoma was in the same position before they joined the Big XII.
Texas recruits brought back winning to Oklahoma.

Oklahoma never "joined" the Big 12. Oklahoma has always been in the same conference. Oklahoma was in the Big 8, which expanded with the Texas schools in 1996. Oklahoma also won 6 national championships before the "joined" the Big 12, so Oklahoma was never in the "same position."
 
This thread can get really good if we keep bumping and antagonizing. I want more proof that Greg and Colorado are one in the same. I know they like each others posts like tweens on facebook.
 
Oklahoma never "joined" the Big 12. Oklahoma has always been in the same conference. Oklahoma was in the Big 8, which expanded with the Texas schools in 1996. Oklahoma also won 6 national championships before the "joined" the Big 12, so Oklahoma was never in the "same position."

The Big 8 did not expand.
Reason why. The conference HQ was in Kansas City.
Once the Big XII was formed the HQ was in Dallas.

Oklahoma from about 88-98 had 10 years of horrible football.
From 94-98 they went 23-31

The ending of the Big 8 helped OU to increase their talent base because of better exposure in Texas.
 
The first recruiting class in the Big XII was 97.
The juniors of 99 and seniors in 00
The year that OU won a NC.
Since 99 OU has been a Top 25 Team after a decade of struggling so yes the Big XII saved OU’s football program.
As well as created a football program at K State and made Oklahoma St have their best 20 years of success in their history
 
The Big 8 did not expand.
Reason why. The conference HQ was in Kansas City.
Once the Big XII was formed the HQ was in Dallas.

Oklahoma from about 88-98 had 10 years of horrible football.
From 94-98 they went 23-31

The ending of the Big 8 helped OU to increase their talent base because of better exposure in Texas.

Moving the headquarters isn't a "reason why." The SWC broke up, and was absorbed by the Big 8, which then became the Big 12.

Oklahoma won 6 national championships in the Big 8. Oklahoma was bad for about 10 years because Barry Switzer got fired in 89, and then Oklahoma was put on probation.
 
The first recruiting class in the Big XII was 97.
The juniors of 99 and seniors in 00
The year that OU won a NC.
Since 99 OU has been a Top 25 Team after a decade of struggling so yes the Big XII saved OU’s football program.
As well as created a football program at K State and made Oklahoma St have their best 20 years of success in their history


Oklahoma St didn't have a single 10-win season from 1996-2009. It took a long time for that Big 12 magic to kick in.

Plus Nebraska got worse after formation of the Big 12.
 
Oklahoma St didn't have a single 10-win season from 1996-2009. It took a long time for that Big 12 magic to kick in.

Plus Nebraska got worse after formation of the Big 12.

Why do you think Nebraska started to suck?

Because they wouldn’t admit the obvious.

SWC especially after integration was 100 times better than the Big 8

I can attempt to explain the entire situation but this is the best explanation of what happened.

Texas and A&M were about to leave the SWC.
Oklahoma was afraid the if Texas went elsewhere Texas was going to replace OU with someone else especially if they went to the SEC
Oklahoma and the other schools schools in Texas crafted the Big XII along with K State
Luckily UT’s AD at the time was a K State grad

Read for yourself

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.si.c...ig-12-expansion-oral-history-big-8-swc-merger
 
22nd, with only a partial recruiting class that's still ranked well ahead of WVU's class. 18 starters returning, plus a stud transfer QB from Ole Miss, as well as a grad transfer safety from Utah. Perhaps you might remember him playing against WVU back in December.
"A stud transfer qb from Ole Miss"? I'm betting you did not see him play much? I did, and he's not Eli or Archie Manning or not even Chad Kelly for that matter. And there's not a guarantee that his transfer and immediate play is approved from the NCAA.

As for the Utah qb, no I didn't watch him. Bowl games before New Years eve aren't watchable especially when WVU is playing their 2nd string offense.

And Maybe you didn't watch the outback bowl on Jan 1 cause Jimmy and Big Blue got their 8-5 season ended by the other USC-the one that doesn't play offense. Blue can't be happy with 4th place finish in the B1G whatever division they're in at $9 MILLION ANNUALLY for the Lane Kiffin of An Arbor. The guy has the mouth of Lane Kiffin and the Big Wins to match, i.e. NONE.

Through 3 seasons, the records vs the same competition between Hoke and Harbaugh are 2 wins different overall-advantage Harbaugh. Harbaugh is 1-5 vs Urb and Little Bro, where Hoke went an unacceptable 2-4. Big Difference is Hoke didn't cost $9 MILLION ANNUALLY to average 9 wins. Hoke also did at least win a Sugar Bowl.

You telling me with a straight face that the Mouth is doing a good job at Blue? I say his agent is cause the Mouth makes more than Saban and a few other coaches wearing rings.
 
Why do you think Nebraska started to suck?

Because they wouldn’t admit the obvious.

SWC especially after integration was 100 times better than the Big 8

I can attempt to explain the entire situation but this is the best explanation of what happened.

Texas and A&M were about to leave the SWC.
Oklahoma was afraid the if Texas went elsewhere Texas was going to replace OU with someone else especially if they went to the SEC
Oklahoma and the other schools schools in Texas crafted the Big XII along with K State
Luckily UT’s AD at the time was a K State grad

Read for yourself

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.si.c...ig-12-expansion-oral-history-big-8-swc-merger

Nebraska "wouldn't admit the obvious." That's not an explanation. Nebraska was winning national championships in the Big 8. When the Big 12 formed, they fell off around 2001 and have been fairly mediocre since. According to your theory, Nebraska should have gotten better in the Big 12, since then they played teams from Texas (which they didn't even do in the Big 8). However, Nebraska got worse. Much worse. It's not because they "wouldn't admit the obvious."

The SWC was not 100 times better than the Big 8. The only nationally relevant team from the SWC was Texas. Nebraska and Oklahoma won multiple national championships out of the Big 8. Hell, even Colorado did once. Outside of Texas, you have to go back to the 30s to find an SWC team that won a national championship.
 
Nebraska "wouldn't admit the obvious." That's not an explanation. Nebraska was winning national championships in the Big 8. When the Big 12 formed, they fell off around 2001 and have been fairly mediocre since. According to your theory, Nebraska should have gotten better in the Big 12, since then they played teams from Texas (which they didn't even do in the Big 8). However, Nebraska got worse. Much worse. It's not because they "wouldn't admit the obvious."

The SWC was not 100 times better than the Big 8. The only nationally relevant team from the SWC was Texas. Nebraska and Oklahoma won multiple national championships out of the Big 8. Hell, even Colorado did once. Outside of Texas, you have to go back to the 30s to find an SWC team that won a national championship.

Nationally relevant teams do not matter in Texas.

The issue really was in the 1980’s the Texas economy because of oil took a hit. By 1993-95 the economy was at rock bottom.
Reason why George W Bush won the governor’s election in 1994.
Texas changed certain tax codes for businesses and businesses started moving their HQ to Texas.
The most important thing was the boom in the tech industry. Texas had some tech companies in the 1980’s but by 1998 Texas had numerous companies centered around Austin and Houston.


Before then Texas was a boom and bust economy based on oil and agriculture futures.

Since 1995 Texas’ economy has been in a boom.
Now going on 25 years.

I can go on and on.
Arkansas won a NC in 1963. You are wrong again.
Arkansas played Texas for the 1969 NC.
SMU claims a few NC in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s.


Most important thing was Nebraska could not compete with Texas.
 
What upsets you more?...UM taking Rod from you, or UM taking Beilein from you? What kind of engineer are you?...the kind that drives the train, or the kind that calls a drafting table his office?
Beilein of course! He was a great coach and a better man. I will buy him a dinner and a cold one if I ever dine at the same establishment. Rooted for him when he lost to that cheating asshole Pitino in the NCAA finals.

As for the other Dick, I was tickled shitless and walking on clouds when the Dick left the 26505 for the other Mo Town. WVU got $2 million more than he's ever been worth on his best day from that coaching move.

Oh and I'm the type of Professional Engineer who has a paid for house/farm, good career, fully funded retirement and healthy ROTH (or it has been til bout 2 weeks ago Haha) with a lot of thanks to the WVU COE/CEMR for the 3 sheep skins that are somewhere still in "do not fold" white envelops that will be one day be framed by the time I retire or die.

And regardless of my profession Jimmy is all talk with no good results. I'm betting by the end of year 4 Amani Toomers opinion will be the part of the majority for Blue if not already. Another beat down from Urb and Little Bro should get him interested in even that Indianapolis Colt job.
 
Last edited:
Anybody on here who claims Alabama is in trouble has just outed themselves as a clickbait artist. They just won their 5th National Championship in 9 years.

They signed the sixth or ninth rated class depending on which site you read.
 
Anybody on here who claims Alabama is in trouble has just outed themselves as a clickbait artist. They just won their 5th National Championship in 9 years.

They signed the sixth or ninth rated class depending on which site you read.

They are in trouble.

If you understand recruiting and what is happening in many states.

Let’s take the four most important states for recruiting

.
Florida- New coaches at both Florida St and Florida and a rejuvenated Miami.
Bama successfully took players out of S Florida.
They did again this year with Surtain. It is not multiple players.

All three Florida schools are on the upswing.

California- Clay Helton is an excellent recruiter and SC has finally recovered from their probation.

Last year was the first time they had all their scholarships for every class.

Chip Kelly is at UCLA

Bama unlike last year did not get a single player out of the West Coast
Struck out on every single on of them

Georgia- UGA

Texas- Herman, Riley and Jimbo.
Even with Herman fails Jimbo and Riley will prevent Bama from stealing Texas players

Bama went one for six on Texas players.
The one they got is vastly overrated according to Texas and OU.
 
They are in trouble.

If you understand recruiting and what is happening in many states.

Let’s take the four most important states for recruiting

.
Florida- New coaches at both Florida St and Florida and a rejuvenated Miami.
Bama successfully took players out of S Florida.
They did again this year with Surtain. It is not multiple players.

All three Florida schools are on the upswing.

California- Clay Helton is an excellent recruiter and SC has finally recovered from their probation.

Last year was the first time they had all their scholarships for every class.

Chip Kelly is at UCLA

Bama unlike last year did not get a single player out of the West Coast
Struck out on every single on of them

Georgia- UGA

Texas- Herman, Riley and Jimbo.
Even with Herman fails Jimbo and Riley will prevent Bama from stealing Texas players

Bama went one for six on Texas players.
The one they got is vastly overrated according to Texas and OU.
Recruiting does matter in the long run, no team has made the CFP with a three year recruiting cumulative number outside of 14 I believe. Washington or Oregon were close to that.

Until Saban leaves I will never doubt Alabama. They had seven straight number one classes and finished sixth or ninth this year. Until any of those Texas schools or Florida schools win a title I won't hold my breath. BTW I have a rooting interest for you to be right.(chomp chomp)
 
Recruiting does matter in the long run, no team has made the CFP with a three year recruiting cumulative number outside of 14 I believe. Washington or Oregon were close to that.

Until Saban leaves I will never doubt Alabama. They had seven straight number one classes and finished sixth or ninth this year. Until any of those Texas schools or Florida schools win a title I won't hold my breath. BTW I have a rooting interest for you to be right.(chomp chomp)


Next year’s class is looking to be similar to 2018 as well.
Bama will not finish in the Top 5 either next year.

It looks like it will be USC/UCLA, Texas, Texas A&M, Georgia and one of the Florida schools.

A&M is the question mark. Especially considering Texas still has more scholarships next year than they do.
OU and Ohio St are already trending above Bama.
 
Nationally relevant teams do not matter in Texas.

The issue really was in the 1980’s the Texas economy because of oil took a hit. By 1993-95 the economy was at rock bottom.
Reason why George W Bush won the governor’s election in 1994.
Texas changed certain tax codes for businesses and businesses started moving their HQ to Texas.
The most important thing was the boom in the tech industry. Texas had some tech companies in the 1980’s but by 1998 Texas had numerous companies centered around Austin and Houston.


Before then Texas was a boom and bust economy based on oil and agriculture futures.

Since 1995 Texas’ economy has been in a boom.
Now going on 25 years.

I can go on and on.
Arkansas won a NC in 1963. You are wrong again.
Arkansas played Texas for the 1969 NC.
SMU claims a few NC in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s.


Most important thing was Nebraska could not compete with Texas.

You are way off the rails here.

First off, national relevance of programs DOES matter. That's a measure of performance. There is not a single statistic you can provide that supports your claim that the SWC was "100x" better than the Big 8.

We are talking about football, and now you are into economics and politics. Way off the rails.

Arkansas has never won a national championship. The only title they "claim" is in 1964, not 1963. However, in 1964, Alabama was #1 in both the AP and UPI polls, which are the two recognized polls. Arkansas has never been #1 in either poll.

SMU claims three national titles. One was in 1935, before there was a recognized champion. (Again, back in the 30s). SMU also claims titles in 1981 and 1982. Well, the actual national champions in 1981 and 1982 were Clemson and Penn St, both of whom were consensus champions in those years.

Oklahoma sure had no problem competing with Texas, both before and during the Big 12. This also contradicts your point. If Nebraska couldn't compete with Texas, then they should have left the Big 12. Also, if being in the Big 12 is such a boon to Oklahoma, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, etc., the Nebraska should have also benefited accordingly. Your assertions are laughable and are easily refuted by logical analysis.
 
You are way off the rails here.

First off, national relevance of programs DOES matter. That's a measure of performance. There is not a single statistic you can provide that supports your claim that the SWC was "100x" better than the Big 8.

We are talking about football, and now you are into economics and politics. Way off the rails.

Arkansas has never won a national championship. The only title they "claim" is in 1964, not 1963. However, in 1964, Alabama was #1 in both the AP and UPI polls, which are the two recognized polls. Arkansas has never been #1 in either poll.

SMU claims three national titles. One was in 1935, before there was a recognized champion. (Again, back in the 30s). SMU also claims titles in 1981 and 1982. Well, the actual national champions in 1981 and 1982 were Clemson and Penn St, both of whom were consensus champions in those years.

Oklahoma sure had no problem competing with Texas, both before and during the Big 12. This also contradicts your point. If Nebraska couldn't compete with Texas, then they should have left the Big 12. Also, if being in the Big 12 is such a boon to Oklahoma, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, etc., the Nebraska should have also benefited accordingly. Your assertions are laughable and are easily refuted by logical analysis.

Do you understand the Oklahoma is 61-46-5 against Texas while having winning record against Nebraska.
I can show you before and after the Big XII if you wish.
Big XII Oklahoma 13-9
Before the Big 8
Texas 52-33-5

Doesn’t sound like OU was competing real well in the Big 8 against Texas.
They even started to run a renegade program in the 70’s and 80’s to compete with Texas.
 
Do you understand the Oklahoma is 61-46-5 against Texas while having winning record against Nebraska.
I can show you before and after the Big XII if you wish.
Big XII Oklahoma 13-9
Before the Big 8
Texas 52-33-5

Doesn’t sound like OU was competing real well in the Big 8 against Texas.
They even started to run a renegade program in the 70’s and 80’s to compete with Texas.

You are including years when the Big 8 and SWC didn't exist.

You also haven't demonstrated HOW being in the Big 12 has somehow made Oklahoma better, since they already played Texas annually every year (and thus had exposure to Texas recruits).

You have also completely ignored my other points.

--If the Big 12 has helped Oklahoma, Kansas St, and Oklahoma St, why didn't it help Nebraska? It should have, according to your theory.

--If Nebraska couldn't compete with Texas, then how was the Big 12 beneficial to them? If Nebraska couldn't compete with Texas, then it actually would make sense for them to leave the conference.
 
You are including years when the Big 8 and SWC didn't exist.

You also haven't demonstrated HOW being in the Big 12 has somehow made Oklahoma better, since they already played Texas annually every year (and thus had exposure to Texas recruits).

You have also completely ignored my other points.

--If the Big 12 has helped Oklahoma, Kansas St, and Oklahoma St, why didn't it help Nebraska? It should have, according to your theory.

--If Nebraska couldn't compete with Texas, then how was the Big 12 beneficial to them? If Nebraska couldn't compete with Texas, then it actually would make sense for them to leave the conference.


It did help Nebraska.
We cannot get recruiting classes prior to 2001 but Nebraska under the Big XII brought in a Top 10 class that included Suh and 5 star RB Marlon Lucky.

Most of this class made up their 2009 team.

Problem for Nebraska was that they were too late to the party.

I can go on an on why Nebraska did not compete in the Big XII.
The best years of the Big XII were from 2006-2010.
Top to bottom.

Only team that was really hurt by the Big XII was CU.
The Big 8 survived off of California recruits especially Colorado.
Once these recruits started going other places in the late 90’s CU looked towards Texas
Colorado did well in Texas but Texas recruiting is a Gator pit.

Nebraska recruited Texas well but they never did get Top 15 players out of Texas like Oklahoma could.

What hurt Nebraska more than anything was that programs like Kansas St and Missouri grew.
Missouri took a little while longer because Larry Smith with his USC connections attempted to recruit California.


The Oklahoma schools were and still are the only former Big 8 schools to be able to recruit the top Texas players.

The biggest issue for Nebraska was their athletic spending in the early 2000’s
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT