Started By
Message
Top 10 list for money spent on recruiting (2012-13)
Posted on 5/3/14 at 11:08 pm
Posted on 5/3/14 at 11:08 pm
It really is incredible to see how much money Tennessee spends on recruiting and how futile their seasons have been the past few years.
1. Auburn ($2,796,184)
2. Tennessee ($2,387,201)
3. Oklahoma ($2,002,692)
4. Michigan ($1,987,719)
5. Notre Dame ($1,855,778)
6. Nebraska ($1,794,747)
7. Alabama ($1,785,254)
8. Kentucky ($1,775,424)
9. Ohio State ($1,738,633)
10. Penn State ($1,694,982)
LINK
1. Auburn ($2,796,184)
2. Tennessee ($2,387,201)
3. Oklahoma ($2,002,692)
4. Michigan ($1,987,719)
5. Notre Dame ($1,855,778)
6. Nebraska ($1,794,747)
7. Alabama ($1,785,254)
8. Kentucky ($1,775,424)
9. Ohio State ($1,738,633)
10. Penn State ($1,694,982)
LINK
This post was edited on 5/3/14 at 11:09 pm
10
Posted on 5/3/14 at 11:09 pm to RollTide1987
Is there a link or whatnot?
Posted on 5/3/14 at 11:15 pm to RollTide1987
Take a look at this thread buddy.
Posted on 5/3/14 at 11:16 pm to LBC
quote:
LBC
I'm sorry. But is this the SEC Rant or the SEC Recruiting Board? I believe I posted on the latter.
Posted on 5/3/14 at 11:25 pm to RollTide1987
OU has had the 15th ranked class or lower since AM joined the SEC (and signed top 10 classes). OU and Texas neither signed top 10's and had every year since 02.
Makes you wonder with A&M recruiting better and other SEC schools getting Texas players (Plus Baylor,Texas Tech and Okie St are on the rise in recruiting) what this does for OU's recruiting in the future. They have always been the number 2 team in that state and they have to go out of state to build a roster.
Makes you wonder with A&M recruiting better and other SEC schools getting Texas players (Plus Baylor,Texas Tech and Okie St are on the rise in recruiting) what this does for OU's recruiting in the future. They have always been the number 2 team in that state and they have to go out of state to build a roster.
Posted on 5/3/14 at 11:45 pm to RollTide1987
Alabama number 7 in spending but stays at number 1 in class rankings 
Posted on 5/4/14 at 12:10 am to RollTide1987
I looked back at the 2013 class and noticed that Auburn had recruits from 9 states whereas Bama had recruits from 13 states. How does Auburn have a greater recruiting budget? I assume that the staffs are similar size. What gives?
And it is pretty sad that UT is spending that kind of money on recruiting to get those results on the field. Butch seems to have brought in a few good classes. Maybe they will see some results soon.
And it is pretty sad that UT is spending that kind of money on recruiting to get those results on the field. Butch seems to have brought in a few good classes. Maybe they will see some results soon.
Posted on 5/4/14 at 12:18 am to chattabama
Dooley was a pathetic recruiter.
Posted on 5/4/14 at 2:15 am to RollTide1987
That is for all sports, right?
Posted on 5/4/14 at 7:56 am to chattabama
quote:
I looked back at the 2013 class and noticed that Auburn had recruits from 9 states whereas Bama had recruits from 13 states. How does Auburn have a greater recruiting budget? I assume that the staffs are similar size. What gives?
I would think that a new staff would have to do more road work than an established staff with most of their board ranked. This is probably why Auburn and Tennessee were top 2.
Posted on 5/4/14 at 8:27 am to chattabama
quote:
I looked back at the 2013 class and noticed that Auburn had recruits from 9 states whereas Bama had recruits from 13 states. How does Auburn have a greater recruiting budget? I assume that the staffs are similar size. What gives?
Laundering bag man money
Posted on 5/4/14 at 8:38 am to Gravitiger
quote:
That is for all sports, right?
Yes. Thus, swimming, golf, basketball, soccer, lacrosse, etc.
Posted on 5/4/14 at 8:59 am to tbonebrah
quote:
OU has had the 15th ranked class or lower since AM joined the SEC (and signed top 10 classes). OU and Texas neither signed top 10's and had every year since 02. Makes you wonder with A&M recruiting better and other SEC schools getting Texas players (Plus Baylor,Texas Tech and Okie St are on the rise in recruiting) what this does for OU's recruiting in the future. They have always been the number 2 team in that state and they have to go out of state to build a roster.
OU is taking a more national approach now instead of basically pulling from TX like they were an in state school. They've had varied success but it will be interesting to watch play out.
Posted on 5/4/14 at 9:11 am to Warfarer
That's not really the case Tennessee historically has always been in the top 3 in money spent recruiting due to poor instate talent.
Posted on 5/4/14 at 10:31 am to MID_TN_VOL
quote:
I looked back at the 2013 class and noticed that Auburn had recruits from 9 states whereas Bama had recruits from 13 states. How does Auburn have a greater recruiting budget? I assume that the staffs are similar size. What gives?
That is a testament to how strong Bama's staff is on the recruiting trail. Less visits but more impact per visit
Posted on 5/4/14 at 10:48 am to chattabama
quote:
I looked back at the 2013 class and noticed that Auburn had recruits from 9 states whereas Bama had recruits from 13 states. How does Auburn have a greater recruiting budget? I assume that the staffs are similar size. What gives?
The name practically recruits itself. Auburn has to spend all that money because they are Auburn.
Posted on 5/4/14 at 10:55 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Auburn has to spend all that money because they are Auburn
Posted on 5/4/14 at 11:01 am to RollTide1987
Yea, it has nothing to do with their historic success or that they're a destination program.
Posted on 5/4/14 at 11:47 am to RollTide1987
We spend a lot more than that...
Posted on 5/4/14 at 12:02 pm to tbonebrah
quote:
OU has had the 15th ranked class or lower since AM joined the SEC (and signed top 10 classes). OU and Texas neither signed top 10's and had every year since 02. Makes you wonder with A&M recruiting better and other SEC schools getting Texas players (Plus Baylor,Texas Tech and Okie St are on the rise in recruiting) what this does for OU's recruiting in the future. They have always been the number 2 team in that state and they have to go out of state to build a roster.
I dont think you did your research. That, or you're trying to give aTm entirely too much credit.
Oklahoma According to rivals
2004: #11
2007: #14
2009: #13
2011: #14
2012: #11
2013: #15
2014: #16
Texas according to rivals
2003: #16
2004: #18
2005: #20
2008: #18
2013: #24
2014: #20
This post was edited on 5/4/14 at 6:58 pm
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News