re: Why Texas A&M and Texas have 1 Nati in 55 years despite some top recruiting classes

But they have a lot of money

Looking back at the Texas top 10 from 2020 to 2022, there were way more busts and meh players than stars.

Ranked in order from 1-10 (original commitment)

2020:
Zach Evans (TCU)
Demond Demas (TAM)
Jaylon Jones (TAM)
Drew Sanders (AL)
Jaxon Smith Njigba (Ohio State)
Jase McClellan (AL)
Hudson Card (TX)
Alfred Collins (TX)
Quinton Johnston (TCU)
Ja’quindan Jackson (TX)

2021:

Quinn Ewers (TX)
Tommy Brockermeyer (AL)
Ja’tavion Sanders (TX)
Shemar Turner (TAM)
Donovan Jackson (Ohio State)
Clayton Smith (OU)
Camar Wheaton (AL)
Tunmise Adeleye (TAM)
JoJo Earle (AL)
Bryce Foster (TAM)

2022:

Evan Stewart (TAM)
Harold Perkins (LSU)
DJ Campbell (Texas)
Cade Klubnik (Clemson)
Kelvin Banks (TX)
Denver Harris (TAM)
Chris Marshall (TAM)
Connor Weigman (TAM)
Terrance Brooks (TX)
Bryce Anderson (TAM)

Is this an indictment of Texas high school football? Or Texas A&M?

Looking just at that list, Texas kids should consider getting out of Texas for college. And never, ever commit to Texas A&M.

quote:

---

While $100 handshakes happen everywhere, Texas didn't have massive systemic cheating at the institutional level like Bama, Georgia, Auburn, Texas A&M, USC, Ohio State, Michigan and other schools.

---

I have never found there to be any traction in the argument Texas didn't cheat when in conversations with fans whose programs were rife with cheating. They won't ever admit their school cheated, while at the same time falling back on the argument everyone cheated.

And the fact is Texas hasn't been as white as snow. Royal split Texas into geographic regions with boosters responsible for each region. They would host recruits at their home. Help with incidentals. To Royal and those boosters, this was simply how college football was run. It was also the days of unlimited scholarships, so Royal would often offer players he knew would likely never see the field simply to keep them from the competition.

But in the 70s after Royal retired the administration wanted to deemphasize football. Royal wasn't even allowed to be involved with football even though he was the athletic director. Lorene Rogers and Allan Shivers were bound and determined to make Texas a world class research institution, and they felt convicted being a football power was not conducive to that. They saw Royal as too powerful and so they maneuvered to have his influence limited.

This was also the time when the price for recruiting in terms of under the table payments was escalating. Switzer developed an extensive bag game at OU, with boosters giving wads of cash to players after games, and recruits getting paid to come to OU. He was also an amazing recruiter, so it wasn't all about the money. He was particuarly gifted in homes of talented black athletes who were part of the rural poor. Jimmy Johnson followed suit at Oklahoma State, which was inherited by Pat Jones. F.A. Dry, while a terrible coach, had one of the biggest bag games in the SWC. SMU elevated their bag game. Jackie Sherrill was hired at A&M specifically to bring the Aggies into the new era in terms of paying players.

But even in the 70s and 80s players were often paid for their football tickets by Texas boosters looking to contribute to the program. It might not have been as sophisticated or as institutionally blessed as it was at other places, and it certainly wasn't as lucrative, but it went on. It's certainly true that Texas fans prided ourselves as being as white as the virgin snow.

I'll also say that by the time Mack Brown got to campus, neither OU nor A&M were cheating the way they had during their heyday. None of the regional schools were. It was more about keeping the SEC out of Texas high schools at that point.

I also don't know how you can lump Michigan in with that group. They did form their General Studies major, which is truly a worthless degree even at a very prestigious public university, for the sole purpose of keeping talented athletes eligible, but they've never been a chronic cheating program. I also don't remember losing recruiting to Southern Cal over cheating.

Colorado under Bill McCartney certainly played the bag game, and he had success with it recruiting high school football players in Texas. Neuheisel did some of the same as his replacement. Neuheisel just coached really soft teams. And Barnett didn't have the bag game McCartney did.

I also don't agree it took VY's wunderkind qualities to overcome the bag game. Mack Brown was practically invincible (pun unintended) on the recruiting trail. He used to love to brag about how often players he offered commited to Texas. Yes, he massaged the numbers some, mostly by often not going after players if he felt like he was recruiting from behind, but regardless if he wanted a player, he tended to get them. He had other problems, but I do not agree that recruiting against bag games was one of them.

He did do a poor job of adjusting when Saban and others ratcheted up the bag game, specifically by compensating the new third parties that were emerging as influences in the recruiting process. I remember talking to Major Applewhite at one point when he was on the staff, and listening to Major's frustration that Texas wasn't even willing to give high school football assistants gas money to drive their players to come visit Texas. Mack Brown felt like they should do all of that on their own dime. It made Texas seem holier than thou and too good for that sort of thing, which hurt immensely on the recruiting trail by the late 2000s. Then Charlie Strong continued that practice, not wanting to have anything to do with trainers, 7 on 7 coaches that weren't high school coaches, or anyone else looking for compensation to influence kids to attend a specific school.

I remember telling fellow fans when Tom Herman was hired that things were going to change, and they did in that regard. It wasn't enough, but Herman absolutely played ball with third parties, and helped finance unofficial visits - the way the rest of college football had been doing for the past decade. My fellow Texas fans were apoplectic that we would even consider doing such a thing. I'm like, do you want to compete in football or not? This is what it takes.

It's been refreshing in the NIL era to see our financial advantages unleashed. But make no mistake, that hasn't been easy, either. That was a grassroots led effort started by non billionaires who saw an opportunity. Now it has some whales behind it, but NIL involvement at Texas didn't start that way. The administration in particular was neutral to openly hostile. They saw it as a threat to their control of the program and were reluctant to be supportive. Even now there are thoughts in the administration that a close eye needs to be kept on the NIL aspect. It's my feeling when I talk to people in the administration at Texas they'd much prefer to see the $20.5 million be more of a hard cap for every school than it is currenlty.

But my gosh. Things are so fluid right now. There is no telling where college athletics is going to go from here. At some point there needs to be some congressional legislation to address it, but there's no telling when that might occur, or what form it might take. All I'm certain of is that I'm not going to like a lot of it. In the mean time we'll all careen from one court settlement to another creating the rules, with a side dish of state legislation attempting to give in state schools a competitive advantage. In other words, a big mess.

quote:

---

This proves the OP's point, yes?

---

That fact that Sark recruits across the country instead of just regionally? Not really. That's just him going out and getting the best players.

As far as the OP's extra long and ultimately flawed analysis of high school kids....

He starts by using "% of US made up by Texas population", then switches to "players per million state residents", without adjusting his data.

Active NFL players (top 10 states)

You'll notice that there is a giant fall off from spot 4 to spot 5.

quote:

---

You don't have the sack to reach out to him to confirm

---

Or maybe taking directives from internet posters is below his pay grade.

SL bringing it as usual. Great post. We can argue all day about who cheated who and who paid more, etc.

It's all changed now. It's the wild west. No idea where this all lands but, like you, I probably won't like most of it.

The answer is simple. Oklahoma has pissed on them repeatedly.

quote:

---

Why Texas A&M and Texas have 1 Nati

---

TLDR. For Texas it’s OL

Truth hurts. I get it