Originally Posted by duncan_idaho
I think part of the lack of true "diamonds" in recent years is that Missouri's name is given a lot of respect by the scouting agencies. So guys are pretty much automatic 3-stars when they have a Missouri offer.
A guy like EJ Gaines would have been a two-star without a Missouri offer, for example.
Lack of cutthroat recruiters on staff definitely kept them bogged in the same recruiting plan:
1) Hope Missouri has good talent and get as many MO players as possible
2) Mine secondary recruiting areas based on connections and targeting second-tier kids that don't get immediate offers from the big schools in those regions.
I don't think TCU is a very good example. This year is the first year they've been ranked higher than Mizzou in recruiting rankings, and it's not a lead that is guaranteed to hold up (for example: IF Missouri flips EE OR lands Outlaw + Singleton). Other than that, they've been staring up at Mizzou in Rivals rankings.
Boise is also not a great example. That team is stuck in the 50s and has been for years.
But that's beside the point. I agree that they didn't do a good job of expanding the recruiting base. Part of that is that guys like Walker, Jones, Eberfllus, etc. just aren't good at recruiting
The point wasn't to compare Boise to Missouri as a 1:1, but to make the comparison of how programs are built. Unless you get a guy who is a tremendous recruiter and can sell pork to a Shi'ite you will need to find undervalued players to build your program. Missouri used to do that. They no longer do. Perhaps some of that is due to the prestige given by a Missouri offer, it's definitely something I hadn't considered. However, even if we assume that to be true, where are all these undervalued 3* recruits who would have been 2* that are producing at an elite level?
Josey, pre-injury, I guess. Gaines. And....??