OU vs Marist on Dish?

[SoonerNorm]

I bet you could if you really had to.

If you know I wish you would tell us as no one else seems to know.

 

[hawks00]

If you know I wish you would tell us as no one else seems to know.

I played softball for OU from 2003-2007, so I know what it's like to be recruited and especially with Coach G and in the softball world. I played basketball in high school so I do have background with that. Softball is completely different than basketball in terms of recruiting. In softball, if you're gonna win championships, you have to recruit from texas or California end of story. Basketball you can recruit from just about anywhere in the u.s....another thing is softball doesn't have any ranking sites. Basketball has hoopgurlz and football has rivals but softball doesn't have anything. So I would definitley say that softball is harder to recruit just because you don't know as much about the player. Two completely different sports with two completely different recruiting aspects.

 

[SoonerNorm]

I played softball for OU from 2003-2007, so I know what it's like to be recruited and especially with Coach G and in the softball world. I played basketball in high school so I do have background with that. Softball is completely different than basketball in terms of recruiting. In softball, if you're gonna win championships, you have to recruit from texas or California end of story. Basketball you can recruit from just about anywhere in the u.s....another thing is softball doesn't have any ranking sites. Basketball has hoopgurlz and football has rivals but softball doesn't have anything. So I would definitley say that softball is harder to recruit just because you don't know as much about the player. Two completely different sports with two completely different recruiting aspects.

Good insight! Syb and Tango have indicated it is more difficult to recruit in basketball than softball but you have pointed out the reverse is true.

One thing Patty has said is she does her own recruiting rather than allow assistants to take charge. She said she wants to get to know each recruit personally and see if a recruit is the type player she wants in her program. I don't know if Patty's recruiting budget allows her to fly all recruits to Norman for a visit the way Sherri can. If not, that could hamper recruiting as well.

 

[35TangoTango]

A couple of differences come to my mind (and I'm sure Norm could think of them also). The first is that there are a lot fewer nationally competitive college softball programs than there are basketball programs. Therefore, the softball recruiter faces a lot less competition. Second, hawk points out that there are basically only two states to cover extensively in looking for recruits, so that seems to me it would make it easier.

The real point that Hawk makes is that softball and basketball recruiting are completely different. So maybe we should not be comparing apples and bananas.

 

[SoonerNorm]

A couple of differences come to my mind (and I'm sure Norm could think of them also). The first is that there are a lot fewer nationally competitive college softball programs than there are basketball programs. Therefore, the softball recruiter faces a lot less competition. Second, hawk points out that there are basically only two states to cover extensively in looking for recruits, so that seems to me it would make it easier.

The real point that Hawk makes is that softball and basketball recruiting are completely different. So maybe we should not be comparing apples and bananas.

Hawk didn't say recruiting is easier in softball.

 

[Mutron76]

I played softball for OU from 2003-2007, so I know what it's like to be recruited and especially with Coach G and in the softball world. I played basketball in high school so I do have background with that. Softball is completely different than basketball in terms of recruiting. In softball, if you're gonna win championships, you have to recruit from texas or California end of story. Basketball you can recruit from just about anywhere in the u.s....another thing is softball doesn't have any ranking sites. Basketball has hoopgurlz and football has rivals but softball doesn't have anything. So I would definitley say that softball is harder to recruit just because you don't know as much about the player. Two completely different sports with two completely different recruiting aspects.

Thanks for that post.

 

[SoonerNorm]

Thanks for that post.

+1

 

[sybarite]

I played softball for OU from 2003-2007, so I know what it's like to be recruited and especially with Coach G and in the softball world. I played basketball in high school so I do have background with that. Softball is completely different than basketball in terms of recruiting. In softball, if you're gonna win championships, you have to recruit from texas or California end of story. Basketball you can recruit from just about anywhere in the u.s....another thing is softball doesn't have any ranking sites. Basketball has hoopgurlz and football has rivals but softball doesn't have anything. So I would definitley say that softball is harder to recruit just because you don't know as much about the player. Two completely different sports with two completely different recruiting aspects.

Good stuff, hawk. Being a softball fan, I wish I knew who you were.

I think you are quite accurate in your observations, except that I would question one evaluation. You assume that it is easier to recruit basketball because of the rankings. At least, I think that is your assumption. I would suggest that it is much more difficult to recruit basketball because you have to look at people from so many different types of backgrounds and so many more locations. There is also more competition from other schools, as Tango suggests. I think you are correct if you are assuming that evaluation is perhaps more difficult in softball. I think the differences in prospects and their backgrounds make basketball more difficult. I don't know that the evaluations are really all that good in basketball, especially in women's. These are new. As you stated, what you really need in softball are good inroads into the talent in California, especially southern California, and Texas. Our stars tend to be from California.

I assume that you are aware of the softball sites that are springing up, like The Bucket. These seem to be at about the same place that basketball was about five years ago. At this time, they are more a listing of known prospects, much like the early women's hoop sites. That is Gasso country.

Stick around and post more, especially when softball season hits. I wouldn't mind seeing an evaluation of this team now that we have lost four outstanding seniors.

 

[SoonerNorm]

From what I read (if accurate), there are 335 D-1 schools that play softball compared to 351 that play D-1 basketball. So, the number of schools in each sport appear to be closer than some seem to think which means that top recruits get plenty of attention from college coaches just as they do in basketball.

In softball, most of the scholarships are partial whereas in basketball the girls get a full ride. I would think that would benefit basketball recruiting.

In softball, they get 12 scholarships. In basketball they get 15. Patty cannot afford to gamble on prospects. Sherri can.

As I previously said, I very much doubt that Patty has as much in her recruiting budget as Sherri does.

 

[soonerstar]

Excellent post, Norm.

 

[sybarite]

Norm, don't all softball coaches have the same scholarship limitations and problems?

Does Sherri have easier rules than other basketball coaches?

This is an apple. That is an orange.

But, you are still not looking at the situation from the outside, from the perspective of someone with no loyalties to OU.

 

[sybarite]

Let's address and issue that is relevant to basketball recruiting at every school. I stated clearly that gymnastics and softball are different from basketball. Different problems are involved.

I will touch very lightly on one issue. OU has 17 women gymnasts. All 17 are caucasian. Gymnastics is quite a different recruiting situation. Parents spend thousands of dollars on private coaches and gyms for their sons and daughters. Not a lot of gymnasts come from inner city schools. Not all colleges have gymnastics programs. Some have equestrian instead. Is this not a very different situation from which to recruit than basketball?

I'm not sure how much this affects softball. It appears to be somewhat in between.

 

[SoonerNorm]

Partial scholarships are a real problem in this regard...assume you have a recruit Patty really likes although the recruit is not at the very top of her wish list. The best Patty might be able to offer that recruit is a half-scholarship. That same recruit might be at the top of another coach's wish list because that coach knows that recruiting the absolute best recruits is out of her/his league (for any number of possible reasons) and this girl would be a feather in his/her hat. So, that coach offers that girl a full scholarship. Therefore, you have Patty offering the recruit a partial ship and the other coach offers her a full ride. Patty then has to convince that girl to come to OU even though some of her expenses will have to come out of her own pocket while all expense will be paid at the other school. Sherri would never be put in that same situation as she can offer the same financial package any other coach can. Advantage Sherri.

One argument some keep making is that Sherri has to recruit against schools that are ranked higher academically which puts her at a disadvantage. Patty is doing the exact same thing and winning more than her fair share of those battles.

 

[BigT14]

At least the kids get scholarship opportunities. Most of them full rides.

 

[gosooner2]

Every school has its advantages and disadvantages. Almost everything in life involves selling. Preachers sell church, teachers sell schools, every business person regardless of their job at one time or another sells something to someone. Recruiting is selling and using all the tools you have to accomplish and finish the sale. IMHO OU has plenty of tools to accomplish a better job of selling than is being done. I don't think we have a top salesperson on our staff. Does OU have negatives of course, so does every other school. However I think we have plenty of positives to sell we just don't have right person who loves to sell and is really great at doing it. We attracted some pretty good players for a while. Maybe we need to think about how, and more importantly who was making that happen! We have a great head coach who I think needs to hire a really good salesperson.

 

[SoonerNorm]

Every school has its advantages and disadvantages. Almost everything in life involves selling. Preachers sell church, teachers sell schools, every business person regardless of their job at one time or another sells something to someone. Recruiting is selling and using all the tools you have to accomplish and finish the sale. IMHO OU has plenty of tools to accomplish a better job of selling than is being done. I don't think we have a top salesperson on our staff. Does OU have negatives of course, so does every other school. However I think we have plenty of positives to sell we just don't have right person who loves to sell and is really great at doing it. We attracted some pretty good players for a while. Maybe we need to think about how, and more importantly who was making that happen! We have a great head coach who I think needs to hire a really good salesperson.

Having a great salesman makes a huge difference. You can have 10 salesmen who all work for the same Mercedes car dealership. At the end of the year, one salesman will be the top salesman. The next year, that same person will likely be at or very near the top again. They are all selling the very same cars but the one with a great personality, is very believable, knows their product, possesses ambition and determination, has ability to improvise, is a great communicator, etc. has the greatest chance to succeed.

A fair salesman can be taught how to improve their skills and become a better salesman. There are college courses one can take if they intend to pursue a career that involves sales. There is no doubt that recruiting involves selling. I don't know if Sherri and her staff have ever taken any of those courses but, if not, it would be smart to do so.

 

[BanjoCharley]

Don't know about "courses" but, from personal experience, Sherri is a great salesperson.

 

[SoonerinNC]

I have seen some indications that Sherri does not like recruiting. I believe that one of her blogs indicated how she hates the AAU scene where a lot of the recruiting goes on. I'm with he on that. The AAU scene is like McD All-Star games where everything is one on one basketball and one of the ones is not trying very hard. If you really enjoy the game that is not what you want to see all day every day. If she really does not like recruiting it will be hard to do a great job at something she don't like. She seems to prefer teaching to recruiting. So if recruiting is not your strong suit, then a good leader needs to surround herself with good recruiters.

Now the hard part for me is I can't imagine that anyone who is not close to the program can have an idea of how good any of the OU assistants are at recruiting. It appears that a lot of people just assume that because an assistant had a past association with Sherri that they have to be a bad recruiter.

We get so little information on who follows who, who visits who and how the process works. The coaches can't comment so very little gets out.

It is also possible that Sherri has more stringent character standards than other schools. If this is true then that would eliminate some recruits. But certainly not all the blue chippers. There have been several players who seemed to be very interested in OU who we seem to cool on. Several have gone on to be good players for other teams.

I doubt that it is skills that are a factor. Sherri does such a good job of finding under the radar players that turn out to be better than their ratings I think we have to credit Sherri for having a good eye for talent.

 

[SoonerNorm]

We know that Pam has been on the road a lot in the last year watching and visiting recruits. Not sure that Jan or Chad have been nearly as active.

While I love to hear that we are recruiting top 10 players, the important thing is how many we sign. So far, whatever sales techniques are being used, they aren't working as far as the top recruits are concerned.

We have backed off recruiting some top recruits while other top programs continue to recruit them. That is hard to understand when you consider some we have signed.

I have said that I like Little, Dungee, and Ortiz and I certainly give Sherri credit for signing them. But, we have got to have some talent at the 4 and 5. I think our best chance of signing Cox is to sign Brooke Alexander. I have not yet seen any evidence we are making her a prime target in recruiting but I hope we are.

I think if we spent more time recruiting elite players and less time looking for diamonds in the rough, it would pay big dividends.

 

[sybarite]

I have refrained from contributing to this thread and this discussion for a few days because I wanted to see what developed. I find the discussion of sales courses to be so far off base that it becomes amusing. Anyone who has actually ever been in sales knows that such courses work for about five or six days and have to be repeated over and over. They tend to be of consolation to management and of profit only to the providers. It is remarkable how well many people can sell if they relax, have a good product, and know how to make that product interesting to a prospect. You can't be successful if your product requires a flim-flam man. Want to go back and look at all the products of the past sixty years that were only sold by TV commercials that had no merit. You can't even find people who remember the names of many of these products, much less have a package. There was a time when every woman needed Poof, for perspiration.

Prospects are looking at two things that really haven't been discussed: 1. where they are going to spend the next four years, 2. how that will impact the rest of their lives. Males tend to be a little different since so many see themselves making millions in pro basketball or football. Often, they have little or no concern about the education available, although they may give lip service to it. If there were sports teams at internet colleges, they might be the best.

What attracts a prospect to a college. Some have dismissed academic reputation as being a part of it. It is interesting that some of the most long-standing programs have been at pretty solid academic institutions. Think again. It matters to a lot of prospects, although probably not all. Some want to remain close to home. Some want to escape home. Some want to go somewhere that is a lot more interesting than home, expand their horizons. For a young person, destination might be very exciting and very influential.

Then, there are reasons not to select a school, or that might work against a school. There are things that make a school less interesting to some.
At the same time, we have to look at who is making the decision. Not all prospects have the same history or circumstances.

A couple of years ago, we had some posters who wanted to hire an African-American assistant coach to help in recruiting. It is interesting that this was deemed relevant in basketball, but not so much in other sports. As I stated, our gymnastics roster is 100% white. Our softball roster is mostly white with some Hispanics. There are not so many African-Americans. Is there a difference in our ability to recruit these different backgrounds. A gymnast has probably spent over $100,000 in gyms and coaches by the time she is fifteen. Can the inner-city kid afford that?

It you look at OU's history in basketball, both men and women, we do not have a track record of bringing in the #1 prospect, male or female. Courtney was a huge exception, in more ways than one. We've had some pretty successful male coaches, but they haven't been able to bring in as many top prospects on a national basis as Sherri has. Sherri, at least, gets their attention. Kruger, Tubbs, and Sampson really didn't. Capel did, but it also got him in trouble.

Switzer was able to bring in the inner city kid from New Orleans, Houston, or Miami. But, he had a very unique background himself. He also had a little bit of an advantage. At that time, a lot of the schools near those inner cities didn't accept African-Americans into their schools or on their teams.

Now, we are in an environment in which there is more choice. In this situation, I don't see a lot of inner city kids who visit, either in men's or women's basketball. That is an important group to basketball, not so much in some other sports.

I don't see a lot of kids going from NYC to Ames or Manhattan, KS either. Texas even seems to lose most of its top prospects as they go to Stanford, Rutgers, USC, UCLA, or other places whose main attraction is that they aren't Texas. As the options and culture changes, there has been more of a tendency for some recruits to remain near home that might have exited. Florida State and Miami get recruits that would have left Florida. But, there is an attraction to go where people feel comfortable, where there are others like themselves. My best friend in the Army was an African-American, and he took me to all-black parties routinely just to show me what it was like to be the only white. I don't know that Oklahoma presents a negative situation. But, it no longer has that advantage that it had with Switzer.

I prospect has to like more than the school and coach. They have to feel comfortable in the environment, and there has to be some future that they can envision. I think prospects like Sherri. She attracts them. They would like to play for Sherri. But, it isn't just Sherri. It is the entire environment.

Courtney's presence enabled us to attract some players, but I wonder if it weren't Courtney more than the program. I think Sherri attracts a lot of prospects. What will make the difference? I don't think it will be the hiring of an African-American recruiter, nor do I think a salesman is the answer. The best thing makes a great salesman is having a product to sell, a product that someone wants. It's hard to sell uphill.