|
|
Post by slxpress on Jun 11, 2022 17:43:11 GMT -5
What Positions Texas need for the 2024 class I don’t mean to speak for any other Texas fan, but they just finished adding Ewert, Bergmark, Akana, and Skinner as transfers. There are two more transfer years prior to the 2024 class setting foot on campus. How can one determine future rotation needs in an environment like that? My assumption is they’ll go after the most talented players available, but it feels like that every recruiting year anyway. I do know Texas is a tough program to recruit against. Elliott isn’t going to get every player he wants, but he’s not going to lose many recruiting battles, either. |
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on Jun 11, 2022 18:02:27 GMT -5
I was thinking along a similar line when trying to respond to that question…
My inner dialogue:
“What positions did we not pick up in 2022-2023?”
“Uhhhh… I wouldn’t say we need middles or opposites”
“Okay then we need setters and outsides…?”
“Hmmm not necessarily I mean we got Crownover & Swindle, then Byrd & Helmers & Miller…”
“Libs?”
“Possibly? Akana, Heinrich, and Halter…?”
So yes I would agree that Elliott would likely just go for talent? A good indicator is who Texas Volleyball follows on Instagram… but hard to place a positional need for 2024’s given the climate of NCAA VB
A few 2024’s I noticed Erik following include Ames, Anwanyu, and Zoë Gillen-Malveaux, another MB for Drive Nation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Longhorn20 on Jun 11, 2022 18:18:43 GMT -5
I would guess for sure libero - seems like we are recruiting liberos every 2 years.
Not sure about hitters, but having a ‘22 and a ‘23 setter with the latter being a top recruit, I expect we won’t crazy pursue a setter until at least ‘25.
|
|
|
|
Post by longhorn9214 on Jun 15, 2022 10:40:53 GMT -5
I have a feeling we'll probably get our first 2024 mid fall.
|
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Jun 15, 2022 16:05:07 GMT -5
I have a feeling we'll probably get our first 2024 mid fall. Last year the Stanford match had a huge impact on recruiting. My guess is look for the Minnesota match this year. It’s not just the match and the atmosphere at Gregory, although that’s huge. Players usually don’t know what to expect, and then they visit Austin, they see the facilities, they’re around their future teammates, and it’s just a really persuasive sales pitch. Add to that Elliott is really good at recruiting. Just look at his staff. Heck, look at his wife. I also continue to feel like the presence of Jordan Larson will pay dividends. Hard to measure how much given how high of a level Texas recruits at already, but she’s the most recognizable US volleyball player in the world. Add to all of that UT has one of the best NIL environments (I believe Nebraska is #1) in volleyball, and it’s just a tough sales pitch to match up with. The key one being a clear path to immediate playing time, but with two years before they’re on campus it’s not hard to show where they’d fit in if they decide they really want to come here. |
|
|
|
Post by texashorns on Jun 15, 2022 16:11:23 GMT -5
I have a feeling we'll probably get our first 2024 mid fall. Last year the Stanford match had a huge impact on recruiting. My guess is look for the Minnesota match this year. It’s not just the match and the atmosphere at Gregory, although that’s huge. Players usually don’t know what to expect, and then they visit Austin, they see the facilities, they’re around their future teammates, and it’s just a really persuasive sales pitch. Add to that Elliott is really good at recruiting. Just look at his staff. Heck, look at his wife. I also continue to feel like the presence of Jordan Larson will pay dividends. Hard to measure how much given how high of a level Texas recruits at already, but she’s the most recognizable US volleyball player in the world. Add to all of that UT has one of the best NIL environments (I believe Nebraska is #1) in volleyball, and it’s just a tough sales pitch to match up with. The key one being a clear path to immediate playing time, but with two years before they’re on campus it’s not hard to show where they’d fit in if they decide they really want to come here. that game definitely made a huge impact because all the recruits who were at the game committed to Texas |
|
|
|
Post by longhorn9214 on Jun 15, 2022 16:18:16 GMT -5
I do have a question. Doesn't the recruits kinda need to know who says yes first and all that?
|
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Jun 15, 2022 16:22:53 GMT -5
I do have a question. Doesn't the recruits kinda need to know who says yes first and all that? I don’t understand the question. The recruits need to know who says yes first to what? |
|
|
|
Post by texashorns on Jun 15, 2022 16:24:22 GMT -5
I do have a question. Doesn't the recruits kinda need to know who says yes first and all that? I don’t understand the question. The recruits need to know who says yes first to what? he asking if someone committed before them they need to know I’m guessing |
|
|
|
Post by longhorn9214 on Jun 15, 2022 16:25:27 GMT -5
I do have a question. Doesn't the recruits kinda need to know who says yes first and all that? I don’t understand the question. The recruits need to know who says yes first to what? Like the recruits need to know if other recruits have said yes as well. They have to be strategic to which recruits they have to compete against while at Texas. We've had transfers due to this issue, right? |
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Jun 15, 2022 16:44:52 GMT -5
I don’t understand the question. The recruits need to know who says yes first to what? Like the recruits need to know if other recruits have said yes as well. They have to be strategic to which recruits they have to compete against while at Texas. We've had transfers due to this issue, right? Well, what you’re talking about is managing the recruiting process. For any top recruiting school it’s a delicate dance, which often leads to behavior that’s not entirely transparent. You have a program like Alabama in football, who extends an “offer” but it’s not committable. In other words, the program won’t recognize a commitment if made, even when an “offer” has been extended. You and I can argue how it can be termed an offer then, but it’s become central to how football recruiting is conducted, primarily because of Alabama’s success with it. Then you have players slow played, where the coach shows interest, but keeps wanting the recruit to delay their decision, mostly because they’re waiting on the decision of players higher on the program’s chart. Then you have programs who flat out pull offers that have already been accepted because they’ve recruited over that player, or the player in question has not developed in the way it was anticipated when the offer was made. My observations on Texas volleyball recruiting is that they tend to have an extremely focused recruiting effort compared to most programs, mostly because they hit on such a high rate of their top targets. There doesn’t seem to be a big rush to get their top kids to commit until they’re ready, and the staff doesn’t seem to go after plan Bs for the most part. Transfers are always going to occur when a program recruits at a high level. It’s part of collegiate sports. There have been big transfers in nearly all the sports in which Texas fields a team. Volleyball is not even close to being alone in this regard. It pretty much comes with the territory and is unavoidable, especially when the transfer portal makes it so easy and the player can compete immediately at their new school. IMO, I don’t think you can field a highly successful program without experiencing some transfers. In programming parlance, I don’t think of it as a bug. I think of it as a feature. When the sales pitch is good, and you’re recruiting ambitious, competitive players, they all feel like they’re going to earn playing time. And if they’re too concerned about the level of competition they’ll face to get into the lineup, then Texas is not a good spot for them in the first place. Not sure if any of that answered your question, but that’s my best attempt at it. |
|
|
|
Post by jwvolley on Jun 15, 2022 16:46:17 GMT -5
Like the recruits need to know if other recruits have said yes as well. They have to be strategic to which recruits they have to compete against while at Texas. We've had transfers due to this issue, right? Well, what you’re talking about is managing the recruiting process. For any top recruiting school it’s a delicate dance, which often leads to behavior that’s not entirely transparent. You have a program like Alabama in football, who extends an “offer” but it’s not committable. In other words, the program won’t recognize a commitment if made, even when an “offer” has been extended. You and I can argue how it can be termed an offer then, but it’s become central to how football recruiting is conducted, primarily because of Alabama’s success with it. Then you have players slow played, where the coach shows interest, but keeps wanting the recruit to delay their decision, mostly because they’re waiting on the decision of players higher on the program’s chart. Then you have programs who flat out pull offers that have already been accepted because they’ve recruited over that player, or the player in question has not developed in the way it was anticipated when the offer was made. My observations on Texas volleyball recruiting is that they tend to have an extremely focused recruiting effort compared to most programs, mostly because they hit on such a high rate of their top targets. There doesn’t seem to be a big rush to get their top kids to commit until they’re ready, and the staff doesn’t seem to go after plan Bs for the most part. Transfers are always going to occur when a program recruits at a high level. It’s part of collegiate sports. There have been big transfers in nearly all the sports in which Texas fields a team. Volleyball is not even close to being alone in this regard. It pretty much comes with the territory and is unavoidable, especially when the transfer portal makes it so easy and the player can compete immediately at their new school. IMO, I don’t think you can field a highly successful program without experiencing some transfers. In programming parlance, I don’t think of it as a bug. I think of it as a feature. When the sales pitch is good, and you’re recruiting ambitious, competitive players, they all feel like they’re going to earn playing time. And if they’re too concerned about the level of competition they’ll face to get into the lineup, then Texas is not a good spot for them in the first place. Not sure if any of that answered your question, but that’s my best attempt at it. Nobody can ever accuse you of not having a lot to say lol |
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Jun 15, 2022 16:50:48 GMT -5
Well, what you’re talking about is managing the recruiting process. For any top recruiting school it’s a delicate dance, which often leads to behavior that’s not entirely transparent. You have a program like Alabama in football, who extends an “offer” but it’s not committable. In other words, the program won’t recognize a commitment if made, even when an “offer” has been extended. You and I can argue how it can be termed an offer then, but it’s become central to how football recruiting is conducted, primarily because of Alabama’s success with it. Then you have players slow played, where the coach shows interest, but keeps wanting the recruit to delay their decision, mostly because they’re waiting on the decision of players higher on the program’s chart. Then you have programs who flat out pull offers that have already been accepted because they’ve recruited over that player, or the player in question has not developed in the way it was anticipated when the offer was made. My observations on Texas volleyball recruiting is that they tend to have an extremely focused recruiting effort compared to most programs, mostly because they hit on such a high rate of their top targets. There doesn’t seem to be a big rush to get their top kids to commit until they’re ready, and the staff doesn’t seem to go after plan Bs for the most part. Transfers are always going to occur when a program recruits at a high level. It’s part of collegiate sports. There have been big transfers in nearly all the sports in which Texas fields a team. Volleyball is not even close to being alone in this regard. It pretty much comes with the territory and is unavoidable, especially when the transfer portal makes it so easy and the player can compete immediately at their new school. IMO, I don’t think you can field a highly successful program without experiencing some transfers. In programming parlance, I don’t think of it as a bug. I think of it as a feature. When the sales pitch is good, and you’re recruiting ambitious, competitive players, they all feel like they’re going to earn playing time. And if they’re too concerned about the level of competition they’ll face to get into the lineup, then Texas is not a good spot for them in the first place. Not sure if any of that answered your question, but that’s my best attempt at it. Nobody can ever accuse you of not having a lot to say lol Yeah, I can’t tell you how many times that same observation has been made over the last 30 years of WWW Internet forum usage. It’s just as bad in person. My favorite is when people chastise me in some kind of effort to get me to change. |
|
|
|
Post by longhorn9214 on Jun 15, 2022 16:51:47 GMT -5
Like the recruits need to know if other recruits have said yes as well. They have to be strategic to which recruits they have to compete against while at Texas. We've had transfers due to this issue, right? Well, what you’re talking about is managing the recruiting process. For any top recruiting school it’s a delicate dance, which often leads to behavior that’s not entirely transparent. You have a program like Alabama in football, who extends an “offer” but it’s not committable. In other words, the program won’t recognize a commitment if made, even when an “offer” has been extended. You and I can argue how it can be termed an offer then, but it’s become central to how football recruiting is conducted, primarily because of Alabama’s success with it. Then you have players slow played, where the coach shows interest, but keeps wanting the recruit to delay their decision, mostly because they’re waiting on the decision of players higher on the program’s chart. Then you have programs who flat out pull offers that have already been accepted because they’ve recruited over that player, or the player in question has not developed in the way it was anticipated when the offer was made. My observations on Texas volleyball recruiting is that they tend to have an extremely focused recruiting effort compared to most programs, mostly because they hit on such a high rate of their top targets. There doesn’t seem to be a big rush to get their top kids to commit until they’re ready, and the staff doesn’t seem to go after plan Bs for the most part. Transfers are always going to occur when a program recruits at a high level. It’s part of collegiate sports. There have been big transfers in nearly all the sports in which Texas fields a team. Volleyball is not even close to being alone in this regard. It pretty much comes with the territory and is unavoidable, especially when the transfer portal makes it so easy and the player can compete immediately at their new school. IMO, I don’t think you can field a highly successful program without experiencing some transfers. In programming parlance, I don’t think of it as a bug. I think of it as a feature. When the sales pitch is good, and you’re recruiting ambitious, competitive players, they all feel like they’re going to earn playing time. And if they’re too concerned about the level of competition they’ll face to get into the lineup, then Texas is not a good spot for them in the first place. Not sure if any of that answered your question, but that’s my best attempt at it. This explains a lot and is very detailed. |
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Jun 15, 2022 16:58:12 GMT -5
Well, what you’re talking about is managing the recruiting process. For any top recruiting school it’s a delicate dance, which often leads to behavior that’s not entirely transparent. You have a program like Alabama in football, who extends an “offer” but it’s not committable. In other words, the program won’t recognize a commitment if made, even when an “offer” has been extended. You and I can argue how it can be termed an offer then, but it’s become central to how football recruiting is conducted, primarily because of Alabama’s success with it. Then you have players slow played, where the coach shows interest, but keeps wanting the recruit to delay their decision, mostly because they’re waiting on the decision of players higher on the program’s chart. Then you have programs who flat out pull offers that have already been accepted because they’ve recruited over that player, or the player in question has not developed in the way it was anticipated when the offer was made. My observations on Texas volleyball recruiting is that they tend to have an extremely focused recruiting effort compared to most programs, mostly because they hit on such a high rate of their top targets. There doesn’t seem to be a big rush to get their top kids to commit until they’re ready, and the staff doesn’t seem to go after plan Bs for the most part. Transfers are always going to occur when a program recruits at a high level. It’s part of collegiate sports. There have been big transfers in nearly all the sports in which Texas fields a team. Volleyball is not even close to being alone in this regard. It pretty much comes with the territory and is unavoidable, especially when the transfer portal makes it so easy and the player can compete immediately at their new school. IMO, I don’t think you can field a highly successful program without experiencing some transfers. In programming parlance, I don’t think of it as a bug. I think of it as a feature. When the sales pitch is good, and you’re recruiting ambitious, competitive players, they all feel like they’re going to earn playing time. And if they’re too concerned about the level of competition they’ll face to get into the lineup, then Texas is not a good spot for them in the first place. Not sure if any of that answered your question, but that’s my best attempt at it. This explains a lot and is very detailed. I’ll also say this. Of all the college sports I follow, volleyball recruiting is by far the least dramatic. I don’t know if that ever changes, but it’s refreshing for me. When a player makes a commitment, it tends to stick. Not every time, but the outliers are extremely rare. |
|
