Big 12 Football

[kcmetro]

Winning and losing is much more meaningful for coach, players, fans and the student body when there is a heavy dose of impact and supporting players from the home state.

Huh? Says who? Sounds like a very scientific study you have conducted there. I couldn't give a crap about where KU gets its players...whether it's football or basketball. Just as long as they win.

[StL_Dan]

Huh? Says who? Sounds like a very scientific study you have conducted there. I couldn't give a crap about where KU gets its players...whether it's football or basketball. Just as long as they win.

My point exactly. 

[kcmetro]

My point exactly. 

What's your point? That you have no real point?

[Maitre D]

He derives special pleasure from watching Missouri kids play for MU.   I have discovered over the years, that is an MU thing and not a KU thing.   


Nothing wrong with either opinion - but I do find it strange he'd say "Win or lose"   I have to believe he's lying when he suggests he'd rather lose games with a Missouri kid at the helm, rather than win with Texan Chase Daniel.  Ba-lo-ney.

[phxcat]

I think that most K-Staters would have Newman, Sproles and Nelson at the top of any list of favorite players.  The fact is that Kansas is a smallish state with two major schools and Missouri is a medium sized state (in the college football world) with one major program.  If I were a Mizzou alum, I would be loving the home state kids coming to MU, just as I would prefer Kansas kids coming to K-State.  That said, we can't survive on nothing but Kansans and I am happy with the quality recruits we are getting from anywhere in the country. 

[StL_Dan]

He derives special pleasure from watching Missouri kids play for MU.   I have discovered over the years, that is an MU thing and not a KU thing.   


Nothing wrong with either opinion - but I do find it strange he'd say "Win or lose"   I have to believe he's lying when he suggests he'd rather lose games with a Missouri kid at the helm, rather than win with Texan Chase Daniel.  Ba-lo-ney.

Why must I always hold your hand through these discussions?

[Maitre D]

Why must I always hold your hand through these discussions?

Because I think you lie in your posts.

[KCPowercat]

...and also your pants are on fire.

[StL_Dan]

Because I think you lie in your posts.

I can't help the fact you have stinkin' thinkin'.

I always shoot straight from the heart and mind when discussing my teams.  Folks like you try to muddy the waters.  If that's what entertains you, fine.

[Maitre D]

I can't help the fact you have stinkin' thinkin'.

I always shoot straight from the heart and mind when discussing my teams.  Folks like you try to muddy the waters.  If that's what entertains you, fine.

Hey, you said "win or lose".  I didn't force your fingers to type that.


I'd rather win with Californians than lose with Kansans but that must be a KU thang....

[StL_Dan]

Hey, you said "win or lose".    I didn't force your fingers to type that.


I'd rather win with Californians than lose with Kansans but that must be a KU thang....

You've failed to demonstrate that I've lied. 

[jlbomega]

I think that most K-Staters would have Newman, Sproles and Nelson at the top of any list of favorite players.  The fact is that Kansas is a smallish state with two major schools and Missouri is a medium sized state (in the college football world) with one major program.  If I were a Mizzou alum, I would be loving the home state kids coming to MU, just as I would prefer Kansas kids coming to K-State.  That said, we can't survive on nothing but Kansans and I am happy with the quality recruits we are getting from anywhere in the country. 

Well said.  I personally believe any football program must establish a foundation of instate talent to be successful year in and year out.  If you look at all of the programs that are good every year they have long list players from their home state.  The difference between a good and elite football program is to build that foundation in state and pick up top talent nationally as well.

This is why I don't think Kansas or KSU will ever be able to sustain success in football.  It is also why I don't think Nebraska will ever be the Nebraska of Tom Osbourne again (although the support of that program will help them compete for Conference Championships).  That is just my opinion though.

[Maitre D]

I don't think in-state recruiting matters much anymore.  It's all nationwide.  It's quite easy for a kid playing in Dallas to hop a flight to KC or Des Moines. 


Plus with scholarship restrictions on the big name schools, competitive balance is much better today than it was in the 1980s.  That Dallas kid will have to look out-of-state if the big 3 schools don't offer him.

[NDTeve]

Well said.  I personally believe any football program must establish a foundation of instate talent to be successful year in and year out.  If you look at all of the programs that are good every year they have long list players from their home state.  The difference between a good and elite football program is to build that foundation in state and pick up top talent nationally as well.

This is why I don't think Kansas or KSU will ever be able to sustain success in football.  It is also why I don't think Nebraska will ever be the Nebraska of Tom Osbourne again (although the support of that program will help them compete for Conference Championships).  That is just my opinion though.

Those states also have much better high school football players than MO.

[Maitre D]

Those states also have much better high school football players than MO.

KU will suffer on the field when Texas stops producing good players. 


Native Texans, who started last year:

QB  Reesing
WR Fields
WR Briscoe
OT Collins
OT Hatch

CB Talib
SS Resby

KR Hereford
PR Pendleton/Webb

[kcmetro]

KU will suffer on the field when Texas stops producing good players. 


Native Texans, who started last year:

QB  Reesing
WR Fields
WR Briscoe
OT Collins
OT Hatch

CB Talib
SS Resby

KR Hereford
PR Pendleton/Webb

= KU has nothing to worry about for the next century.

[jlbomega]

I don't think in-state recruiting matters much anymore.  It's all nationwide.   It's quite easy for a kid playing in Dallas to hop a flight to KC or Des Moines. 


Plus with scholarship restrictions on the big name schools, competitive balance is much better today than it was in the 1980s.   That Dallas kid will have to look out-of-state if the big 3 schools don't offer him.

I would agree in-state recruiting does not matter in basketball.  However with a sport that requires the depth of football you need to have a solid recruiting ground.  You can import a championship basketball team, but you can't import a championship football team.

Those states also have much better high school football players than MO.

By "those states" you mean California, Texas, Ohio, and Florida then I agree.  I'm not saying Missouri produces the best talent, but I would put the Missouri top 20 kids up against most states top 20 and it is definately the best state for recruiting in the Big 12 North. 

= KU has nothing to worry about for the next century.

LOL... I'll bet you said that during the Glen Mason years too!!!!  Make it to consecutive bowl games before you start making wild statements buddy.  Did you hear Max Falkenstein on 810 yesterday saying your schedule for the next two years is "unfair" LOL!.  The excuses are already starting.  I didn't hear any KU fans complain about last years schedule.

[NDTeve]

I would put Missouri behind:
1) California
2) Texas
3) Florida
4) Ohio
5) Pennsylvania
6) Georgia
7) North Carolina
Illinois
9) Louisiana
10) Virginia
11) Oklahoma

Off the top of my head. Not sure if Missouri has better players than Colorado either. In terms of top 20...Colorado always sends a couple kids to big schools like USC. When was the last time Missouri had a recruit that everyone wanted?

[Maitre D]

I would agree in-state recruiting does not matter in basketball.  However with a sport that requires the depth of football you need to have a solid recruiting ground.  You can import a championship basketball team, but you can't import a championship football team.

Well, it matters somewhat in both sports.  Sure doesn't hurt to have the homegrown hoops talent UCLA has down the street from them....UNC & Duke have great talent in that state as well. And look at Texas' rise, in large part due to Barnes success keeping in-staters.


That said - back to football.  KU had 28 guys from Texas and 29 from Kansas.  You're really ignoring the huge numbers coming from Texas, and why (even for KU), the in-state talent is less important than it was 20 years ago.

[jlbomega]

I would put Missouri behind:
1) California
2) Texas
3) Florida
4) Ohio
5) Pennsylvania
6) Georgia
7) North Carolina
Illinois
9) Louisiana
10) Virginia
11) Oklahoma

Off the top of my head. Not sure if Missouri has better players than Colorado either. In terms of top 20...Colorado always sends a couple kids to big schools like USC.  

Outside of the top four you can debate, but I don't know where Illinios or NC came from???  Alabama and Mississippi always produce talent and probably should be there.  Anyway, Missouri definately is a top 15 producer of D1 talent IMO and being the only D1 program in the state helps out quite a bit.

When was the last time Missouri had a recruit that everyone wanted?

I know you don't mean this... but since you just asked for the "last time" Blaine Gabbert out of the last class comes to mind.  I don't have the time MD does to make a long list.  Missouri has produced three Elite 11 QB's in the last few years alone (Chase Patton, Blaine Gabbert, Blaine Dalton) and recruited one from Texas (Chase Daniel).