Deep Purple
Full Member
Is the old RaiderPower.com board dead? Looking for new business opportunities? If this was posted here previously, I missed it, Anybody got the story?
RaiderPower.com
RaiderPower.com
Now this is interesting... RaiderPower.com dead?
- Thread starter Deep Purple
- Start date
Chongo94
Active Member
Not sure how you got to that Deep but here's a link to their forum. They're currently aggravated by the news that their number 1 receiver from last year announced he is transferring tonight...
http://www.scout.com/college/texas-tech/forums/1650-football
Deep Purple
Full Member
Yes, that's the Scout forum "Inside the Red Raiders," which is a leading Tech fan board. But RaiderPower.com was previously another leading Tech fan site -- I think an independent board, like KillerFrogs -- that has been linked here often in past seasons. Unless I'm missing something, it's now apparently out of business and looking for new backing.
Chongo94
Active Member
Well that scout forum has always been known as RaiderPower to me for years...it's the only one I've ever used. If they somehow changed names I guess I never really noticed it. In fact if you google Raiderpower i believe it comes up as the scout site. It could be that scout indeed bought raiderpower then and just migrated accounts over or something. Sorry I couldn't help more.
Deep Purple
Full Member
No, that was helpful. You obviously know more about the Raider boards than me. In the past, I just googled RaiderPower and clicked on it. Never noticed whether it was a Scout board. But the current Scout board is titled Inside the Red Raiders and makes no mention of RaiderPower.com. And when you click on RaiderPower.com from Google, you get that "available for possible new business opportunities" message. If Inside the Red Raiders was in the past called RaiderPower.com, maybe there's been a legal change in brand names?
Very confusing.
Chongo94
Active Member
Well you have actually shed some light on things that I've wondered for a while and perhaps this sheds some back. I quit posting over there for a long time because most of the Tech posters there are just not based in reality it seems and when I started lurking again and posting ever so often it seemed as if the board was far less populated than before.
I mean there used to be constant new threads and busy threads and now, you're lucky to see maybe 5 new threads over 1-2 days. It just seemed very depopulated and slow to me. So maybe there was some sort of business turnover or mishap of some sort that led to changes or the original site finally being put up for sale.
Very confusing and odd indeed but your questioning actually helps me understand now why that site seems far more inactive than what I remembered.
Chongo94
Active Member
Found this for you Deep. Apparently they did change names and what you saw is the old domain name that is up for sale...
http://www.scout.com/college/texas-tech/forums/1650-football/15462383-please-read-new-name-same-team
http://www.scout.com/college/texas-tech/forums/1650-football/15462383-please-read-new-name-same-team
jack the frog
Full Member
Yeah, that is a big deal. A few are playing it down over there as Giles suffered a spring demotion and they can claim he was not a starter but this guy had 1100 receiving yards and 13 touchdowns last year. Far and away their best production. Huge loss. No telling how many players have quit that team over the last year. Unless they have a QB that can carry the team they could be terrible.
Frog-in-law1995
Active Member
The announcement letter Giles tweeted out was basically a cut-and-paste of Fehoko's from January. Some weird ish going on in Lubbock. Two of their best players, both lifelong Tech fans, choosing to leave the program abruptly.
Bob
Active Member
Too much rectum in the techdom.
I had exactly the same experience. Thought I made a mistake, tried again, same thing. Finally went to scout site.
Chongo94
Active Member
It truly is astounding the number of players/recruits that have left under Kingsbury's tenure. Some can say the kids are quitters all they want but at the end of the day you have to wonder if the coaches are helping this somehow.
FrogCop19
Active Member
How ironic that the school that brags most about alumni numbers and fans and such can't even fill up their own forum...
They just weren't prepared for the week-in-week-out of a big URL site, I guess...
jack the frog
Full Member
Happen to see to see this at raiderpowerscouttech.com or whatever it is now. Credit to some tech poster.
Below is a look at retention rates and numbers around the Big 12 for players signed in 2014 and 2015, Kingsbury's first two full recruiting classes as he joined Tech in December of the 2013 cycle.
The attrition rate is alarming to say the least . For example Texas, who is down and recently went through a coaching change, has more guys still on the roster from the 2015 class (21) than Tech has from the 2014 and 2015 classes combined (17).
My method is simple; I am cross referencing each team's signing class with their spring roster. If a guy on the commit list isn't on the roster a simple search usually explains why in a minute or so.
Here's a list of percentages representing how much each program has retained from their respective 2014 and 2015 classes:
1. Texas
2014: Signed 23, 16 still on the roster
2015: Signed 28, 21 still on the roster
+/-: UT has 20 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
2. TCU
2014: Signed 25, 14 still on the roster
2015: Signed 23, 20 still on the roster
+/-: TCU has 17 more players (double the amount) on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
3. Baylor
2014: Signed 25, 15 still on the roster
2015: Signed 19, 15 still on the roster
+/-: BU has 13 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
4. (tie) Oklahoma State
2014: Signed 28, 15 still on the roster
2015: Signed 21, 13 still on the roster
+/-: OSU has 11 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
4. (tie) Kansas State
2014: Signed 25, 11 still on the roster
2015: Signed 24, 17 still on the roster
+/-: K-State has 11 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
6. West Virginia
2014: Signed 23, 7 still on the roster
2015: Signed 21, 18 still on the roster
+/-: WVU has 8 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
7. Oklahoma
2014: Signed 27, 12 still on the roster
2015: Signed 28, 19 still on the roster
+/-: OU has 14 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
8. Kansas
2014: Signed 23, 9 still on the roster
2015: Signed 29, 18 still on the roster
+/-: KU has 10 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
9. Iowa State
2014: Signed 25, 14 still on the roster
2015: Signed 26, 11 still on the roster
+/-: ISU has 8 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
10. Texas Tech
2014: Signed 26, 5 still on the roster
2015: Signed 20, 12 still on the roster
+/-: The rest of the Big 12 has retained an average of 12.4 more players than Texas Tech from the 2014-15 classes.
Below is a look at retention rates and numbers around the Big 12 for players signed in 2014 and 2015, Kingsbury's first two full recruiting classes as he joined Tech in December of the 2013 cycle.
The attrition rate is alarming to say the least . For example Texas, who is down and recently went through a coaching change, has more guys still on the roster from the 2015 class (21) than Tech has from the 2014 and 2015 classes combined (17).
My method is simple; I am cross referencing each team's signing class with their spring roster. If a guy on the commit list isn't on the roster a simple search usually explains why in a minute or so.
Here's a list of percentages representing how much each program has retained from their respective 2014 and 2015 classes:
- UT: 73%
- TCU: 71%
- BU: 68%
- WVU: 57%
- OKST: 57%
- K-State: 57%
- OU: 56%
- KU: 52%
- ISU: 49%
- Tech: 37%
1. Texas
2014: Signed 23, 16 still on the roster
2015: Signed 28, 21 still on the roster
+/-: UT has 20 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
2. TCU
2014: Signed 25, 14 still on the roster
2015: Signed 23, 20 still on the roster
+/-: TCU has 17 more players (double the amount) on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
3. Baylor
2014: Signed 25, 15 still on the roster
2015: Signed 19, 15 still on the roster
+/-: BU has 13 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
4. (tie) Oklahoma State
2014: Signed 28, 15 still on the roster
2015: Signed 21, 13 still on the roster
+/-: OSU has 11 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
4. (tie) Kansas State
2014: Signed 25, 11 still on the roster
2015: Signed 24, 17 still on the roster
+/-: K-State has 11 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
6. West Virginia
2014: Signed 23, 7 still on the roster
2015: Signed 21, 18 still on the roster
+/-: WVU has 8 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
7. Oklahoma
2014: Signed 27, 12 still on the roster
2015: Signed 28, 19 still on the roster
+/-: OU has 14 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
8. Kansas
2014: Signed 23, 9 still on the roster
2015: Signed 29, 18 still on the roster
+/-: KU has 10 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
9. Iowa State
2014: Signed 25, 14 still on the roster
2015: Signed 26, 11 still on the roster
+/-: ISU has 8 more players on the roster from the 2014-15 classes than Tech.
10. Texas Tech
2014: Signed 26, 5 still on the roster
2015: Signed 20, 12 still on the roster
+/-: The rest of the Big 12 has retained an average of 12.4 more players than Texas Tech from the 2014-15 classes.
Chongo94
Active Member
Those numbers easily make clear that it's not just location or a few quitters among the ranks. Coach DudeBro has to be at least somewhat part of this issue. And apparently they must not be vetting the recruits that well I guess if they are so quickly leaving and/or getting into trouble that necessitates their leaving.
Boonescabanaboy
Active Member
Not challenging your #'s but surprised Baylor's turnover isn't higher. What am I missing?
jack the frog
Full Member
I did not do much except cut and paste some Raiderpower info and then went and took a nap so I don't know for sure, although I think the big Baylor hits to personnel were the 2016 recruiting class that fell from 5th to 45th overall (guys that never signed so are not considered attribution), and the 2017 class that was primarily composed of spares with roughly only half having multiple D 1 offers. All the transfers never materialized.
Last edited:
