Mateer vs. Wood

[Brent H.]

Mateer this year was 173/277 2443 yards, 23/7 ave 244/game, rushed for 847 and 15 TDs, Total offense over 3200 yards and 38 TDS. He did this 10 games.

Wood this year was 151/212 for 2222 yards, 31/5 ave 181/ game, rushed for 535 and 10 TDS. Total offense over 2700 yards and 41 TDs. He did this in 14 games.

Pretty much the same stats, but Mateer did it in 10 games, not 14. Now my questions is who came against better talent? Little Elm is 6A there, which is 4A here. Mateer teammate is a top 50 recruit, heading to Texas. Personally, I think that Mateer put up better numbers than Wood against tougher competition. Washington football is not in the same universe as Texas football. If Wood was some high school QB in California, we probably wouldn't pay any attention to him, but since he's a located kid everybody thinks we should offer him, when in the end, his stats are no better than a dude from Little Elm, Texas who went 5-5 in 6A football. If Mateer was Wood height, 6'3" dude would probably have offers all over the place. His height is his issue, barely 6'.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Mateer this year was 173/277 2443 yards, 23/7 ave 244/game, rushed for 847 and 15 TDs, Total offense over 3200 yards and 38 TDS. He did this 10 games.

Wood this year was 151/212 for 2222 yards, 31/5 ave 181/ game, rushed for 535 and 10 TDS. Total offense over 2700 yards and 41 TDs. He did this in 14 games.

Pretty much the same stats, but Mateer did it in 10 games, not 14. Now my questions is who came against better talent? Little Elm is 6A there, which is 4A here. Mateer teammate is a top 50 recruit, heading to Texas. Personally, I think that Mateer put up better numbers than Wood against tougher competition. Washington football is not in the same universe as Texas football. If Wood was some high school QB in California, we probably wouldn't pay any attention to him, but since he's a located kid everybody thinks we should offer him, when in the end, his stats are no better than a dude from Little Elm, Texas who went 5-5 in 6A football. If Mateer was Wood height, 6'3" dude would probably have offers all over the place. His height is his issue, barely 6'.

6A football in Texas starts with enrollments around 2200 and climbs all the way to around 6500 at Allen HS.

In Washington, the top enrollment numbers for 4A are usually around 2100 kids. I’d have to look at the WIAA website to be certain.

Are they both playing in the top classification in their states? Yes. But Texas starts where WA ends.

It is a different world down there. Washington is essentially JV football compared to Texas. The culture is ridiculously different.

Austin has a Friday morning talk radio show for HS games similar to what you’d hear for the NFL. Player stats, coaches calling in, who is recruiting who, it was like nothing I had ever heard in WA.

 

[Fab5Coug]

I'm sure Tracey Ford and his band of local media mouth pieces are just beside themselves that WSU would dare to look outside the state for talent.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

I'm sure Tracey Ford and his band of local media mouth pieces are just beside themselves that WSU would dare to look outside the state for talent.

well, hopefully this is just a one-off due to bringing over some UIW folks. Historically, making TX a recruiting priority has not worked out great for the Cougs.

 

[CougEd]

well, hopefully this is just a one-off due to bringing over some UIW folks. Historically, making TX a recruiting priority has not worked out great for the Cougs.

They tend to transfer out very quickly. Too far from home maybe .

 

[Brent H.]

well, hopefully this is just a one-off due to bringing over some UIW folks. Historically, making TX a recruiting priority has not worked out great for the Cougs.

We also never had a staff that has so much connection to Texas. The entire offensive staff has deep roots to Texas and I believe that Kaligis also recruited Texas hard at Wyoming.

 

[TrumpCoug]

We also never had a staff that has so much connection to Texas. The entire offensive staff has deep roots to Texas and I believe that Kaligis also recruited Texas hard at Wyoming.

THIS!!

 

[Fab5Coug]

well, hopefully this is just a one-off due to bringing over some UIW folks. Historically, making TX a recruiting priority has not worked out great for the Cougs.

Doba's staff recruited Texas about as well as they recruited anywhere else. I'll criticize the effort, not so much the concept.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Doba's staff recruited Texas about as well as they recruited anywhere else. I'll criticize the effort, not so much the concept.

The risk/reward is too great to take the time and effort to recruit TX, especially when we have CA so close.

If we have inroads and can successfully cash in on them, of course go get TX. I just don't think it'll ever be a long term path to successful recruiting for us.

 

[froropmkr72]

The risk/reward is too great to take the time and effort to recruit TX, especially when we have CA so close.

If we have inroads and can successfully cash in on them, of course go get TX. I just don't think it'll ever be a long term path to successful recruiting for us.

They seem to being OK in Texas, but who's the inroad into California?

 

[425cougfan]

We also never had a staff that has so much connection to Texas. The entire offensive staff has deep roots to Texas and I believe that Kaligis also recruited Texas hard at Wyoming.

It makes a lot of sense for us to recruit Texas due to this, as well as the deep pool of talent and WSU having a better reputation down there than in some other areas. Kids there, to the extent they have heard anything about WSU (other than recently with the Rolo thing), just see it as a fairly successful program that came down and won the Alamo Bowl recently and that had Mike Leach do well there. Better talent that isn't tainted by the Seattle media. The small town aspect of Pullman can play pretty well there, too. Kids from big cities in Texas, or their moms, are quite happy with the kid going to a small, pretty safe small city for college. Kids from rural areas can appreciate the relative familiarity.

The tricky thing with Texas (and the south), though, is that most kids don't really want to leave those areas, and they tend to get homesick. I don't want to get into which culture or aspects of quality of life are better, as that veers into social / political issues that get way too much play here, but while there are aspects of the northwest that are great, there are things about Texas and the south that are pretty nice, too, and that necessitate a fairly major adjustment when going elsewhere. These kids don't really want to leave. I think we'll have better results with the current recruiting efforts down there than some past efforts as long as our staff members with the ties down there stick around, though.

 

[etowncoug]

The risk/reward is too great to take the time and effort to recruit TX, especially when we have CA so close.

If we have inroads and can successfully cash in on them, of course go get TX. I just don't think it'll ever be a long term path to successful recruiting for us.

I hear you, but the reality is no staff has ever made Texas a priority. We've spot recruited the state. Even when Doba made a big show of Leon Burnett starting a Texas pipeline the reality was that we were looking for low hanging fruit that could be picked up mostly because they lacked other options.

Dickert seems to be addressing this differently. He seems to be trying to figure out what would happen if the Cougs actually recruited Texas. Evaluating a couple hundred Texas HS recruits, offering 50-75 kids from the Loan Star State, trying to grab a minimum of 5 kids from the state each year, and most importantly battle for these kids against other schools. Building a recruiting class around the idea that Pullman is a great place for a Texan hasn't been tried before. We haven't sent half our staff to barnstorm Texas before either. This might be a fools errand, but it's not like we've tried this before only to have it fail. I'm curious to see how this plays out.

 

[Coug1990]

Mateer gave his verbal to WSU, and Wood is headed to Fresno State. Mateer is the QB that Morris wanted.

 

[moxeecoug]

I am pleased we got Mateer. I think he will be a good one for us.

 

[ShockandAweWSU]

Good thing we have Morris on staff.

 

[Coug1990]

Good thing we have Morris on staff.

I agree. Morris appears to be a good recruiter. It is fun to watch Mateer's highlights. Hopefully, the three other official visitor's this weekend, Eakin, and the brother's Roaten follow suit and commit to WSU.

 

[etowncoug]

Glad we got the right QB.

 

[Fab5Coug]

Mateer gave his verbal to WSU, and Wood is headed to Fresno State. Mateer is the QB that Morris wanted.

I bet TFord is PISSED.

 

[etowncoug]

I bet TFord is PISSED.

The Cult of Wood is pissed. Not sure why they couldn't figure out TFord was passing out the Kool-Aid.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

One more quick thought re: recruiting TX. Back when CO was in that league, they got a lot of kids from TX year in and year out. Boulder and Pullman have more in common than they have that is different, and TX kids had no difficulty adapting to snow, distance, and the other obvious issues. The difference that is most obvious is that CO made a consistent effort in TX, with staff that knew the area and had relationships; it was not just Leon Burnett swooping by to grab the borderline kids that he had been told about by friends (Leon had a lot of friends). Today, now that pretty much all P5 games are on TV or streamed, the importance of being in a league with some TX teams is not quite as great. My only problem with recruiting TX is that it shifts focus from SoCal. That is OK if it gets results. It is a bad move if it does not get results, because a SoCal recruiting focus will always get results for WSU. If our staff has some roots in TX and we will make a consistent effort, then fine...because if a kid will go to Boulder and not get homesick, then they can come to Pullman and not get homesick. But to be successful it has to be a long term strategy, not a short term tactic.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

One more quick thought re: recruiting TX. Back when CO was in that league, they got a lot of kids from TX year in and year out. Boulder and Pullman have more in common than they have that is different, and TX kids had no difficulty adapting to snow, distance, and the other obvious issues. The difference that is most obvious is that CO made a consistent effort in TX, with staff that knew the area and had relationships; it was not just Leon Burnett swooping by to grab the borderline kids that he had been told about by friends (Leon had a lot of friends). Today, now that pretty much all P5 games are on TV or streamed, the importance of being in a league with some TX teams is not quite as great. My only problem with recruiting TX is that it shifts focus from SoCal. That is OK if it gets results. It is a bad move if it does not get results, because a SoCal recruiting focus will always get results for WSU. If our staff has some roots in TX and we will make a consistent effort, then fine...because if a kid will go to Boulder and not get homesick, then they can come to Pullman and not get homesick. But to be successful it has to be a long term strategy, not a short term tactic.

I just don't see it being sustainable long term - the minute we turn over the staff that is dug in in TX, we are having to start over in CA. Would it be great if we could give them both the time they deserve? Of course, but in dealing with the reality of our resources (cash, time, and people), we just can't do both, imho. And as I've mentioned before, CA is 3 hours away, TX is usually around 6, meaning you could make visits in CA and return the same day (or move on), but TX requires 2 days because of travel.

But hey, I'm for whatever works and is going to build the program, so if it recruiting TX is the way than I'm happy to be proven wrong.

 

[triscuit one]

One more quick thought re: recruiting TX. Back when CO was in that league, they got a lot of kids from TX year in and year out. Boulder and Pullman have more in common than they have that is different, and TX kids had no difficulty adapting to snow, distance, and the other obvious issues. The difference that is most obvious is that CO made a consistent effort in TX, with staff that knew the area and had relationships; it was not just Leon Burnett swooping by to grab the borderline kids that he had been told about by friends (Leon had a lot of friends). Today, now that pretty much all P5 games are on TV or streamed, the importance of being in a league with some TX teams is not quite as great. My only problem with recruiting TX is that it shifts focus from SoCal. That is OK if it gets results. It is a bad move if it does not get results, because a SoCal recruiting focus will always get results for WSU. If our staff has some roots in TX and we will make a consistent effort, then fine...because if a kid will go to Boulder and not get homesick, then they can come to Pullman and not get homesick. But to be successful it has to be a long term strategy, not a short term tactic.

Good thought. I have wondered if these coaches are of the option you "get a bigger bang for you buck" in Texas?

Found a couple of short articles that are related to this topic. Nothing mind blowing but most are a quick read.

Best producer of NFL talent? If you guessed Mississippi, you are right.

Texas vs. California, which state produces the NFL's best quarterbacks

Which states have produced the most 5-star football recruits over the past 10 years?

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Good thought. I have wondered if these coaches are of the option you "get a bigger bang for you buck" in Texas?

Found a couple of short articles that are related to this topic. Nothing mind blowing but most are a quick read.

Best producer of NFL talent? If you guessed Mississippi, you are right.

Texas vs. California, which state produces the NFL's best quarterbacks

Which states have produced the most 5-star football recruits over the past 10 years?

I'm not sure that NFL talent is a good metric for if a college team will be successful, especially one like WSU. No doubt Bama et al put a ton of kids in the NFL, but again, we're not competing against those schools for recruit.

I would argue that the biggest thing that WSU could do to move the needle on the talent base in Pullman is to build solid depth of 3 star players as opposed to getting more 4 and 5 star kids (which we won't get anyway.) Keep those kids on campus, coach them up, build a solid team.

 

[triscuit one]

I just don't see it being sustainable long term - the minute we turn over the staff that is dug in in TX, we are having to start over in CA. Would it be great if we could give them both the time they deserve? Of course, but in dealing with the reality of our resources (cash, time, and people), we just can't do both, imho. And as I've mentioned before, CA is 3 hours away, TX is usually around 6, meaning you could make visits in CA and return the same day (or move on), but TX requires 2 days because of travel.

But hey, I'm for whatever works and is going to build the program, so if it recruiting TX is the way than I'm happy to be proven wrong.

I think unless there is a radical change to the transfer portal school like WSU are going to see less and less high school recruiting. The time and expense to recruit a player only to see him leave for a greener pasture or sit on the bench will loose its value to a player who has film starting and exceling at college (no matter the level) and who also spent his free portal pass will be too big of a gap. I'm not saying 50-50, but a much larger portion or the roster being transfer. Especially if the make signing year round to help with the dilemma the transfer portal has created.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

I think unless there is a radical change to the transfer portal school like WSU are going to see less and less high school recruiting. The time and expense to recruit a player only to see him leave for a greener pasture or sit on the bench will loose its value to a player who has film starting and exceling at college (no matter the level) and who also spent his free portal pass will be too big of a gap. I'm not saying 50-50, but a much larger portion or the roster being transfer. Especially if the make signing year round to help with the dilemma the transfer portal has created.

So much to figure out if that turns out to be the truth.

How do you make a cohesive team when 25% of it is turned over every year? How long did it take MBB to adjust to the "pro farm league" model, or has it? I feel like the best MBB coaches are convincing their kids to stay an extra year or two.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

I think unless there is a radical change to the transfer portal school like WSU are going to see less and less high school recruiting. The time and expense to recruit a player only to see him leave for a greener pasture or sit on the bench will loose its value to a player who has film starting and exceling at college (no matter the level) and who also spent his free portal pass will be too big of a gap. I'm not saying 50-50, but a much larger portion or the roster being transfer. Especially if the make signing year round to help with the dilemma the transfer portal has created.

One additional dynamic. The football factory schools usually lie to every kid about his chances of playing. After a year or two, they know the score. So they are going to be cycling through kids a lot faster than they used to. That will make some decent talent available in the portal. Will never completely take the place of HS recruiting, but it will be one more thumb on the scale.

 

[TrumpCoug]

One more quick thought re: recruiting TX. Back when CO was in that league, they got a lot of kids from TX year in and year out. Boulder and Pullman have more in common than they have that is different, and TX kids had no difficulty adapting to snow, distance, and the other obvious issues. The difference that is most obvious is that CO made a consistent effort in TX, with staff that knew the area and had relationships; it was not just Leon Burnett swooping by to grab the borderline kids that he had been told about by friends (Leon had a lot of friends). Today, now that pretty much all P5 games are on TV or streamed, the importance of being in a league with some TX teams is not quite as great. My only problem with recruiting TX is that it shifts focus from SoCal. That is OK if it gets results. It is a bad move if it does not get results, because a SoCal recruiting focus will always get results for WSU. If our staff has some roots in TX and we will make a consistent effort, then fine...because if a kid will go to Boulder and not get homesick, then they can come to Pullman and not get homesick. But to be successful it has to be a long term strategy, not a short term tactic.

In sales when you change jobs and find yourself selling a similar product to what you pitched in your previous job, you typically go to you current base of clients (farming) as you have an established relationship and the product will be easier to sell in the short term. It' is NOT a winning strategy (as your are getting your legs under you) to reach out to those you do NOT have a relationship with....it is a waste of time and energy. This is the current strategy (emphasis on current). The staff in place does NOT have deep ties to the SoCal market, they had a month to put together a staff, their strategy is to mine TX for HS talent and utilize the portal.

Once the staff settles in you will see them start focusing (hunting) on SoCal as well. Right now it doesn't make sense as we have a week until LOI day. Play the cards you are dealt, reshuffle the deck as soon as we get this class in the barn then fan out into SoCal. Clay already has relationships in SoCal others coaches on the staff will recruit there as well. Don't doubt me, they will NOT turn a blind eye to all the talent in SoCal. Why can't we make both Texas and CA a priority, pick off a few kids in Utah, WA, CO etc and continue to benefit from talent entering the portal who have been riding the pine and would like to see the field in their final 2-3 years of eligibility?

Answer: we can....and we will.

 

[froropmkr72]

In sales when you change jobs and find yourself selling a similar product to what you pitched in your previous job, you typically go to you current base of clients (farming) as you have an established relationship and the product will be easier to sell in the short term. It' is NOT a winning strategy (as your are getting your legs under you) to reach out to those you do NOT have a relationship with....it is a waste of time and energy. This is the current strategy (emphasis on current). The staff in place does NOT have deep ties to the SoCal market, they had a month to put together a staff, their strategy is to mine TX for HS talent and utilize the portal.

Once the staff settles in you will see them start focusing (hunting) on SoCal as well. Right now it doesn't make sense as we have a week until LOI day. Play the cards you are dealt, reshuffle the deck as soon as we get this class in the barn then fan out into SoCal. Clay already has relationships in SoCal others coaches on the staff will recruit there as well. Don't doubt me, they will NOT turn a blind eye to all the talent in SoCal. Why can't we make both Texas and CA a priority, pick off a few kids in Utah, WA, CO etc and continue to benefit from talent entering the portal who have been riding the pine and would like to see the field in their final 2-3 years of eligibility?

Answer: we can....and we will.

My thoughts exactly. Etc....may be Hawaii.

 

[BiggsCoug]

I think unless there is a radical change to the transfer portal school like WSU are going to see less and less high school recruiting. The time and expense to recruit a player only to see him leave for a greener pasture or sit on the bench will loose its value to a player who has film starting and exceling at college (no matter the level) and who also spent his free portal pass will be too big of a gap. I'm not saying 50-50, but a much larger portion or the roster being transfer. Especially if the make signing year round to help with the dilemma the transfer portal has created.

Kids arent going to sit the bench at some schools. Is WSU one of them?

Kids aren’t going to blow up as a frosh or a soph and not shop their market value if they aren’t in love with the school.

How many times will WSU recruit, develop and play a kid ~ only to watch him leave for NIL $$$ ~ before they are portal only?

 

[mikalalas]

I'm not sure that NFL talent is a good metric for if a college team will be successful, especially one like WSU. No doubt Bama et al put a ton of kids in the NFL, but again, we're not competing against those schools for recruit.

I would argue that the biggest thing that WSU could do to move the needle on the talent base in Pullman is to build solid depth of 3 star players as opposed to getting more 4 and 5 star kids (which we won't get anyway.) Keep those kids on campus, coach them up, build a solid team.

The biggest thing is to not go for high end 2 star(2.5 star) to low end to average 3 star.

WSU can EASILY, and should get and should try to get a solid depth of high end 3 star to lowest ended 4 star(3,4,3.5 star)(Example Rivals RR 5.75(RR 5.8+ is 4 star on Rivals)(WSU can easily, has easily, gotten RR 5.7(3.5 star), in past, and can easily do in present and future), players

WSU won't consistently get a lot of 4 star players. But WSU can, will, does, get about 1/2, to 1 to 2 to 3, 4 stars every year or 2 under a good coach like Leach, Price, etc.

WSU typically gets about 5 to 10 to 13 3.5 stars(RR 5.6,5.65,5.7) every year or every other year under a Price, Leach, good coach.

WSU typically gets about 7 to 10 to 13 semi high end 3 star(RR 5.5,5.55) every year to every other year, under a good coach

And only 3 to 5 to 7, 2,:2.5 stars per year, every other year, under good coach

And only 1,2,3,4 NR per every other year under a good coach.

And those type of WSU recruiting classes that a mx of all the above, is a pretty good class, and can, and does easily be gotten by a good coach, and does build solid depth.

So no, WSU doesnt have to focus on getting 2: stars, 2.5 stars, low end 3 stars.

WSU should focus on 3.5 stars

 

[kougkurt]

 

[TrumpCoug]

View embedded media

Thanks for posting. Kids a good athlete, however his high school baseball team is awful, no supporting cast whatsoever.

 

[roses04]

In recruiting CA versus Texas, Ideally you'd like to get more players from CA, since it's closer, and they are familiar with the West Coast. On the other hand, kids from Texas will come to Pullman and appreciate all the beauty, at least compared to Texas, many come from small towns and fit right in. You bring up CA kids, and they ask "where the hell am I".

 

[Flatlandcoug]

Kids arent going to sit the bench at some schools. Is WSU one of them?

Kids aren’t going to blow up as a frosh or a soph and not shop their market value if they aren’t in love with the school.

How many times will WSU recruit, develop and play a kid ~ only to watch him leave for NIL $$$ ~ before they are portal only?

So much of our future depends on how we do on the field. If WSU is winning games and getting to decent bowls every year, I believe that we can get enough NIL money to keep most of our guys that want to be at WSU. If we consistently finish in the 4-7 win range.....I think it means a dark future for WSU. If we are more in the 7-9 win range with an occasional better year, I think we'll be fine. Dickert definitely has his work cut out for him. Of course, the bigger problem for us is that if Dickert does well, when does he leave? So, pretty much nothing has changed and the fears that we are feeling are pretty much the same ones that we've always had.

 

[mikalalas]

So much of our future depends on how we do on the field. If WSU is winning games and getting to decent bowls every year, I believe that we can get enough NIL money to keep most of our guys that want to be at WSU. If we consistently finish in the 4-7 win range.....I think it means a dark future for WSU. If we are more in the 7-9 win range with an occasional better year, I think we'll be fine. Dickert definitely has his work cut out for him. Of course, the bigger problem for us is that if Dickert does well, when does he leave? So, pretty much nothing has changed and the fears that we are feeling are pretty much the same ones that we've always had.

If, when, if Dickert is successful at WSU, he will stay for a semi long time, say about 5,6,7,8,9 years, before he goes elsewhere, because he and his wife and kids love Pullman, and he would have Job security, and he would have proven that he could have long term success here, and he is from small towns, even smaller then Pullman.

I don't see him doing a lateral move, and don't see him going to a USC, BIG city college.

Candidates would be Nebraska(Smaller town), K State, Texas Tech, etc.

If he turns WSU into a 9 year consistent winner, Chun should have a easier time replacing Dickert.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

So much of our future depends on how we do on the field. If WSU is winning games and getting to decent bowls every year, I believe that we can get enough NIL money to keep most of our guys that want to be at WSU. If we consistently finish in the 4-7 win range.....I think it means a dark future for WSU. If we are more in the 7-9 win range with an occasional better year, I think we'll be fine. Dickert definitely has his work cut out for him. Of course, the bigger problem for us is that if Dickert does well, when does he leave? So, pretty much nothing has changed and the fears that we are feeling are pretty much the same ones that we've always had.

You may have seen the article over on Brand X about how far ahead the SEC and Big 10 are, and will continue to be, in terms of dollars per team. The gulf is wide and getting worse.

This does not bode well for the Pac12 and the best coaches and players will get poached to wealthier programs.

This is a cultural thing, a geography issue, and a population issue. There is no practical way to overcome those issues either. College athletics is all about money and the disparity will get worse. WSU is in a very difficult place.

 

[roses04]

If, when, if Dickert is successful at WSU, he will stay for a semi long time, say about 5,6,7,8,9 years, before he goes elsewhere, because he and his wife and kids love Pullman, and he would have Job security, and he would have proven that he could have long term success here, and he is from small towns, even smaller then Pullman.

I don't see him doing a lateral move, and don't see him going to a USC, BIG city college.

Candidates would be Nebraska(Smaller town), K State, Texas Tech, etc.

If he turns WSU into a 9 year consistent winner, Chun should have a easier time replacing Dickert.

I hope Dickert has success here, and I do believe he will be here a long time if he does. A big 10 program in Wisconsin, Minnesota, or Iowa might lure him away to be closer to home and that's about it. I don't see him going to a USC, SEC, or ACC for that matter, Dickert is making more money now than he ever dreamed of at this age, his goals and values in life don't appear to be the biggest contract under the brightest lights, his goal and message in life is deeper. I think he said he had moved 8 times in the last 9 years, I am sure he'd like to raise his kids on one place, and stay put for a while if possible. As long as WSU takes care of him, I think he will be here 10 years if he wins. Leach was here for 8 years, which is far longer than most predicted. I'd like to think with success Dickert would be here for a while, provided WSU can keep up with NIL money and all the other challenges. He could beat Mike Price's tenure of 14 years, and there were years in there where Price almost didn't make it. He's only 38 now, 14 years and he's 52, and still has options.