Nate Cox

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geaux

A former Coach on Bustle's staff once shared with me...."Every now and then you take one or two local player and develop them even if he doesn't necessarily want that kid....even if it may take 3 years to get a return on the investment from the athlete.

He also shared good reasons to do so.

1. He said if this particular player goes on and has a great career at ULM,Tulane or McNeese....that would be an indictment on our coaching staff.

2. It keeps the doors open in the local high schools and continues to foster good relationships with local coaches.

3. It keeps busts in the seats as compared to a kid from another state.

After 3 years if it doesn't work out, cut the kid and the university was not at a total loss.

This is where HUD may have missed in his first two years. I know he's a Mississippi guy, but we let a lot of local kids go because of his unwillingness to develop players.

---

For the most part, I agree with those statements. Where the problem may arise and eventually did so during their tenure is when you are not winning. So, if you are not competing at the top of your conference and you've missed out on signing several athletes that could have pushed your program over that win plateau, how do you justify taking an athlete that can't make a contribution on the field for a few years while you are not winning?

Second, if you are winning why does it matter if an athlete goes on to have a great career at McNeese State of any other FCS? If you aren't winning, then it does become an embarrassment because the local athlete may indeed be better than the athlete you signed. It all comes down to winning because it's much easier to second guess decisions of a staff if they are losing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bicky Rustle

I thought Jake was offered by duke?

---

From what I understand Jake was offered by us and Tulane. But then Tulane backed out. Jake was never supposed to be a starter for UL his freshman year cause he had the skinnys.

Jake went on to beat Tulane every time he played them.

The universe is talking my friends. We shouldn't ignore it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geaux

He was talking about Caleb Rubin. The running back from Lafayette High. He was a smaller back, but not a back that fit UL's profile at the time. The kid had a great career at Lafayette High and the staff was on the fence about bringing him in, but as stated before if he went on and had a great career at ULM, Tulane or McNeesee it would be egg on the face of the coaching staff. So they took him and it all worked out. I must give credit to Bustle staff to have the foresight to say let's see what the kid gives us in three to four years. There's nothing wrong with doing this for a local kid. If they were doing this for a kid from Houston or Mississippi I would question it.

I think there is more upside to giving Cox a scholarship as compared to not giving him a scholarship.


Think about a kid like Quinten Lawrence. That kid killed it at McNeese. No one can tell me that kid would not have made the receiver rotation at UL.

Some call it "Seeing the forest in the in spite of the trees"

---

I liked Caleb Rubin, good kid, solid contributor and good student. But if you are winning, Torrie Pierce is equal to Caleb Rubin, but you don't have to give him a scholarship. It you aren't winning, then it is imperative you keep kids like Rubin in Lafayette.

According to them, Quinten Lawrence was academic risk and Rickey Bustle didn't want to take the risk. There were several others from Carencro that could have helped his program that he passed on during his tenure. Had that staff been able to pull a few more top athletes like him and the ones signed in their last two classes like Bernard Smith, they would still have a job.