[Update]: Cottrell told Ducks Territory that he is "not really sure how to feel" ($) about the offer from Texas and said that he does not currently have any plans to visit Austin. He is still committed to Oregon. --GoBR--
[Update]: There are now multiple reports that Cottrell will indeed visit Texas, but there does not yet appear to be confirmation of that from the player or his high school coaches. Expect Oregon to try to keep him from visiting. --GoBR--
Even with a recent offer going out to Van linebacker and Tennessee commit Dalton Santos, as well as the renewed interest in TCU commit Daje Johnson, it appears that the Longhorns aren't finished pursuing prospects in the 2012 class.
On Tuesday, the news broke on Orangebloods (subsequently confirmed by Hookem.com), that Texas has offered a scholarship to Oregon commit Bryce Cottrell, a 6-3, 230-pound linebacker/defensive end from Plano West.
Recruited as a linebacker by the Ducks, the position at which the Longhorns choose to offer Cottrell could make an impact on his eventual decision, though it's not clear at this time whether Texas sees him as a linebacker or a defensive end or if Cottrell has a preference. The thought here is that since an edge rusher is a greater need at this time than another linebacker with the offer out to Santos, Manny Diaz and company probably see Cottrell as a defensive end.

Likewise, it's not immediately clear how Cottrell feels about the Longhorns and whether his commitment to Oregon is solid. As is the case with trying to get in on any prospect this late in the recruiting process, it's not going to be easy for Texas to give Cottrell the hard sell on just how much he's needed, as recruits often place a great emphasis on which schools identified their talent the earliest. It is likely that the staff is efforting to get Cottrell on campus for an official visit this weekend.
bryce cottrell senior highlight (via planowest12345)
As a prospect, Cottrell didn't receive a lot of high-quality national offers, but certainly drew more than regional interest -- he was offered by Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Arizona State, and Boston College, among others. A growth spurt following his sophomore season helped raise his profile in the recruiting world, momentum consolidated through a strong junior season.
The best projection seems to be for Cottrell to eventually play weakside defensive end in college, where he could also provide some scheme versatility to drop into coverage. In high school, Cottrell is dangerous to leave unblocked in the zone running game, as he used his speed to effectively chase down plays from the back side. As a pass rusher, the Plano West product doesn't have an elite first step, but his first two steps off the ball are pretty close to it.
On one play in the highlights above, Cottrell sheds the hands of an offensive lineman, quickly swims, runs the arc, and finishes the play with a sack. So while that play may not be particularly representative of a high level of technical proficiency by Cottrell, it is a flash of it that shows some understanding of how to play the defensive end position.
All in all, Cottrell would be a perfect fit in a 3-4 scheme as an outside linebacker -- which makes it seem rather odd that Texas A&M did not offer him -- but he does have the frame to eventually carry 250 pounds or more and become a pure defensive end, though it could take him some time in the weight room at the college level until he is ready to hold up against the running game.
Cottrell may not be an easy flip late in the process, but it is encouraging to see the Texas staff continue to evaluate and pursue prospects at need positions up until National Signing Day.
0 recs | 83 comments
I like the offer
This is what you’re going to get this late in the recruiting process, a project. I had Plano West’s homecoming the first week in November circled on my calendar. I wish I had made that game to see Cottrell and 2013 OLB / DE Mike Mitchell.
If Cottrell can hold up against the run and get after the QB, he’ll be valuable at Texas. If not, I’m sure he’ll move on. Pretty low risk offer.
I believe the 2013 DE class is better than most think. Lancaster DE Daeshon Hall looks like an elite DE, and Texas has invited Lawton, OK DE DJ Ward to the junior days. If Texas is able to land one to pair with Raulerson, 2013 could be a very good DE class for Texas.
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
I certainly agree Hall looks elite
But does he “play” elite. I was left a bit wanting after watching his film. Like Ward more. Would like to see how Hall progresses in his senior year. With that kind of frame, he should be dominant in high school.
GoHornsGo90 - January 25, 2012
We disagree here
I like Hall’s film better than Ward’s. Hall has a better burst and looks more refined.
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
I like Ward
but he’s gangly. He was stood up pretty easily against decent tackles. He was shut down in the last two rounds of playoffs (against Broken Arrow and Union) that I got to see him.
40A - January 25, 2012
Interesting
Thanks for the take.
GoHornsGo90 - January 25, 2012
No problem.
I wish I could watch as many Texas prospects in Texas as you guys get to watch. I’m jealous for sure.
40A - January 25, 2012
Haha
Me too. I’m primarily resigned to watching film of them up here in Missouri :)
GoHornsGo90 - January 25, 2012
Ah man.
That’s gotta be tough. I love it when we are in on Oklahoma players because I get to see a lot of them.
40A - January 25, 2012
We're in on the ultimate Missouri player this year
But he lives like 4 hours away unfortunately.
GoHornsGo90 - January 25, 2012 via mobile
No excuses
Haha this coming from the guy who wouldn’t drive 200 miles round trip to see Swoopes play.
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
:)
Springfield such an ugly city too, no offense to anybody who lives there or is from there.
GoHornsGo90 - January 25, 2012
My mother is from Springfield
Haha
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
That's why the gov't put a dome over it
Horncasting - January 25, 2012
Numbers
This almost feels like UT is just reaching out to fill up all available slots instead of just closing shop and carrying over some schollies into the next year or two. Either way it’s good to see talent is still being pursued.
pelon7900 - January 25, 2012
I agree
Reminds me of the Tevin Mims offer. But, low risk and potential reward as long as it isn’t taking a schollie from a better player.
I like the idea of running the program more like a business in that the succesful athletes stay and if you are not participating by sophomore year you are not worthy of a scholarship. The scholarship should not be a 4 years deal if you fail to put in the time and effort to get on the field. I really don’t like the 4 year scholarship proposals. The kids need to hold up their end of the bargain especially with a $30K a year benefit (or $100K a year at some schools).
Wrangler86 - January 25, 2012
I would worry less about the numbers with the new staff
The ships will be there guys. I’m not saying this staff is pushing players out the door, but they won’t coddle and they won’t let a lazy player occupy a scholarship.
I think Cottrell could effect what Texas does at DE in 2013, but it might not. If Texas likes a player enough, they’ll make him room from him.
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
i can not disagree more
I can not stand the fact that scholarships are binding for 1 yr on the University and 4 yrs on the kid. Imagine if your job had a contract like that. It is a joke of a system. If you offer it should be for 4 yrs, unless the kid has behavioral or academic issues. Coaches made the evaluation, not the kids fault. Now if I kid could walk away with no penalty after 1 yr than I could be convinced that is an acceptable system.
codaxx - January 25, 2012
I cannot rec this comment enough.
The whole saga of NCAA athletics has been making me very uneasy lately. (c.f. Saban cutting kids that committed to Alabama because.. they weren’t good enough).
More and more, these kids are being treated like employees of the universities they play for with one small distinction..
pleaseplaykindle - January 25, 2012
A better system
would be each player is guaranteed 5 years of their scholarship, as long as they don’t leave the team.
A coach could cut a player to regain the scholarship, but the player retains his free tuition (maybe room and board not covered?) at the school for up to 5 total years.
This avoids penalizing the program for taking players, and avoids penalizing players. Especially when a coach is fired and the players get cut but the old coach can move on.
ihavethemelody - January 25, 2012
honestly
I do not know why Big 12 does not change it. NCAA i believe is passing a rule or passed a rule that would allow 4 yr scholarships. How nice would it be to say “Come to Texas we will give you a 4 yr ride in writing or take your chances on a 1 yr ride in the SEC”. Plus the publicity would be huge if Big 12 moved first.
codaxx - January 25, 2012
It's called "unilateral disarmament"
and we don’t do that. The reason schools offer only one-year scholarships is because it offers a competitive advantage.
Also, the NCAA considered instituting a 4-year scholarship rule and then backed away at the last minute, most likely under pressure from powerful member schools.
I am firmly in the 4-year camp: if you make a commitment to a recruit, it should be binding. Perhaps if they didn’t work out on the field, you should still pay for the kid’s education even if he isn’t on the roster.
I also think these players deserve a cut of the money that everyone is making off their likenesses (jersey sales, video games, etc.). My idea (which no one asked for) is for that money to be set aside and redeemable upon graduation, or after 4 years. The vast majority of NCAA football players will never have professional athletic careers; when they’re 22 and looking for a job, that cash could come in quite handy.
windycityhorn - January 25, 2012
Don't agree.
Perhaps it shouldn’t be 1 year schollies but to take it to the extreme of making it 4 years I think would be a mistake. I would vote to make it 2 year schollies. Lot’s of kids stop putting in the work once they’re on campus. They don’t care if they’re not playing or playing minimally.
I saw this first hand when I played JUCO basketball about 10 years ago. I still remember the day when one of our 2nd team players got out of his end of year meeting with coach and was informed he wouldn’t be coming back for his sophomore year. But was the kid coming in early to lift more than what was required? Was he staying after practice to work on his shot or one-on-one moves? No and I can’t blame coach for not renewing his ship when he can possibly get the same player talent wise but with a better work ethic.
2Cor12:9 - January 25, 2012
maybe
You asked if he did more than what was required. The question should be did he make the meetings and required work-outs? If he skipped those I understand, but if he fulfilled the requirements it is on the coach. Do you think it is fair policy that school can yank a scholarship after one yr with no penalties and a kid wants to leave it is 1 yr suspension from playing?
codaxx - January 25, 2012
No I don't think its fair that a coach can go to another school without penalty while the player has to sit
but how would your prevent other schools from actively recruiting your back-ups?
2Cor12:9 - January 25, 2012
I'm sorry my reading skills are a little lacking.
Yes I do think it’s fair that a scholarship can be yanked after a year and that a kid has a one year suspension. My reason: as I pointed out above because some players stop working hard and I don’t know how you would prevent other schools from recruiting your roster if the 1 yr suspension was not in place.
2Cor12:9 - January 25, 2012
You said it yourself....
1 year with 0 sit time if they xfer. It’s a win win using your logic. They are recruiting your backup? Maybe he should have gotten more playing time…. and vice versa, if the kid is not puttting in the extra 10%, let him be recruited. New scholly for next year.
Really, the problem here is that we are using a capitalist philosophy to tackle a social issue. The two will never meet.
e1 kabong - January 25, 2012
Maybe a certain number of 2 & 4 year schollies....
The rest are 1 year "trial’ scholarships for the “iffy” kids. You could use the 1 year on an existing player or a new player (in case you run out of 4&2 schollies), but the catch would be that the 1 year scholly kids don’t have to sit if they xfer. 2 and 4 do. That way you could still pick up the iffy kids….they would have an incentive to compete (2 or 4 year schollies), but wouldn’t be screwed if say we recruited 4 top 150 rbs and one of them is a junior or senior that may or may not see the field. Put him on a 1 year scholly and then he can transfer if the new recruits blow him out of the water. Like, say….Hales.
Also…I agree 100% that the kid gets a % of HIS LIKENESS. If a kid is in music class and writes a song, performs it, and gets a contract, it doesn’t go to the school. This is an easy decision.
Though, I would assume that EVERYONE would have to do it, or it would be a “competitive edge”. I would also assume that UT would not fight to have to pay money. So it’s a win-win for the big-money college sports world and the small schools all at once. The only one that loses is the athlete… which is sad.
e1 kabong - January 25, 2012
the problem
is these are kids and not simple assets. Coaches change. Now there is a new scheme in place, should a hard working kid get a scholly yanked for that? All I am asking is for the terms to be equal. The leverage is all on the side of the schools.
codaxx - January 25, 2012
do a lot
of coaches come in and cut hard working players for no reason? Seems like even if they don’t fit your scheme perfectly if it’s a hard working guy you can find a way to utilize them
cade21 - January 25, 2012
I agree
You shouldn’t have to go above and beyond. Coaches should be tasked with finding the players that want to do that when they recruit.
If you go to a school and meet the requirements (staying after practice and coming in early to lift extra can’t be considered this), the scholarship shouldn’t be yanked…
Just so long as that player isn’t loafing around during scheduled practice.
TxHorns989 - January 25, 2012
Mack has been abundantly clear on Texas' policy
He will sign a release at any time to any school. Not all schools do that, but we do.
Also, I am not trying to condone the Saban trap door policy. Kids that commit to Texas are smart. We will honor their schollie on a medical if they get hurt. Whereas, Saban just pulls their offer and then pretends he will give them a gray shirt.
I do not want kids thrown out after 1 year if they are working toward playing time.
I do not think it is fair to the schools taht they should have to keep a kid on the 85 man schollie roster for 4 years even if that kid has no chance to play or contribute. It shouldn’t be a 4 year free ride locked in without any contribution from the kid imo.
Wrangler86 - January 25, 2012
Terrible story
I wish ESPN picks it up (not sure if they have). Looked like he still like Alabama from the AJC article I read, which just blows my mind.
Saban claimed he was the 26th recruit or something, and they could only take 25. Yet he committed in February and was like the 7th commit of their class.
Just absolutely disgusting.
TxHorns989 - January 25, 2012
kid from Georgia
signed in Feb or March. Got hut in September. Bama was monitoring progress.Than yanked the scholly in Jan.
codaxx - January 25, 2012
Damn. That's another thing. Schollies should be BINDING for both parties for the duration...
Or penalties are accrued. If someone just screws a kid by yanking his scholly in Jan after he accepted it, they should lose that scholly for a year. An incentive for them to keep the player…let him heal…hit the field…then re-evaluate. Also, kids should have a grace period of 30 days (schools too) with a right to rescind (the scholarship). After that, you either play there, or wait a year.
e1 kabong - January 25, 2012
Agreed
Looks like a 3-4 guy to me, like Roy said. Confused that A&M wasn’t interested.
GoHornsGo90 - January 25, 2012
Texas really likes Hollins Jr. also
It could be a sign that Texas prefers strong pass rushers at OLB. I think Hicks could push 8 sacks in 2012.
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
any thoughts
that Diaz might me moving towards a 3-4 scheme?
UTLawGrad - January 25, 2012
Multiple fronts, flexibility yes, 3-4 no
Texas will have Edmond and possibly Santos at MLB. Both sledgehammers in the middle. Additionally, the DT depth will be outstanding with the addition of Brandon Moore. Texas will be stout up the middle. This will funnel the run defense to the edges where the very capable Jeffcoat and Okafor are waiting. You’d rather have offense moving laterally than gashing Texas up the middle.
It’s all about stopping the run. When Texas has been able to do that, Manny has unleashed the full assortment of blitzes.
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
With willing and able corners
and fast linebackers, I love the idea of offenses running toward the sidelines.
40A - January 25, 2012
Greg Davis
approves of this offense
jtdoes - January 25, 2012
this
is the first comment that has truly made me laugh. well done
cade21 - January 25, 2012
Vols boards blowing up. Frogs boards blowing up. Oregon boards kind of blowing up.
I love seeing other schools go into meltdown mode. On an aside, Tebow made ESPN’s any era NFL top 20 football player list…. ahead of Peyton Manning. They just lost all their credibility with me.
spinmonkey - January 25, 2012
Vol boards have been in meltdown mode since Sunday
What do they expect with all the turnover of their defensive staff?
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
"Vol"canic eruption level on the UT boards...
i suck at this…
longhorn35 - January 25, 2012
There's only one "UT" and it ain't the Vols.
spinmonkey - January 25, 2012
oh and another thing...
since Tebow is the Lord of football he is the best QB ever of all decades… now and forever amen…
longhorn35 - January 25, 2012
Saying Oregon boards are blowing up might be overstating it a bit
ppilot - January 25, 2012
ESPN
I saw that too and it made me sick. I mean, come on.
But, 1) They never had any credibility.
And, 2) They’ve hitched their wagon to our longhorn. Not a lot of people agree with me on this but I believe being tied, editorially, to ESPN through the LHN is going to be one facet of this deal that we will come to regret. Big time.
windycityhorn - January 25, 2012
Cottrell speaks
He told the Oregon 247 site that he is considering Texas’ offer, but has no plans to visit Texas at this time.
Interesting. I wonder if Cottrell would commit to Texas without visiting.
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
Maybe he's trying to deflect the angst until signature day.
spinmonkey - January 25, 2012
maybe he puts on a metallic Longhorn helmet...
longhorn35 - January 25, 2012
News breaking now that Cottrell is expected to be in Austin this weekend
3 committed recruits on campus for official visits 3 days before Signing Day. Uncharted territory in the Mack Brown Era.
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
Per Orangebloods.
No confirmation yet from the coach or the recruit.
Wescott Eberts (GoBR) - January 25, 2012
Is there a cold war going on
right now between UT and Oregon?
Sure seems like it to me. Mack can’t be happy that Chip Kelly keeps pissing on his lawn. Calling the NCAA on their shady practices was, methinks, just one skirmish in what’s shaping up to be a long war.
windycityhorn - January 25, 2012
I don't think Cottrell is a payback move
Maybe Texas thinks he’s an easier get because of the distance involved from Plano to Oregon, but this feels like an evaluation move. There are other options out there, and the Texas coaches seem to like Cottrell the best.
billfromlaketravis - January 25, 2012
Small picture, no
I think Texas legitimately wants Cottrell, especially when you look at the DE position in 2013 and beyond.
Listen, I know everyone poaches recruits this time of year. But, big picture, I just get the feeling these two schools don’t like each other.
windycityhorn - January 25, 2012
I would love to see Texas go to war with Oregon
Suffocate their recruiting branches that have extended into the state, and when they get pissed and Phil Knight says he doesn’t want Texas wearing Nike anymore, I can buy more Texas stuff.
burntorangehorn - January 25, 2012
NO WAY Knight ever stops the Nike Train in Texas.
That’s college sports apparel suicide.
40A - January 25, 2012
True, but goddamn I hate Nike
burntorangehorn - January 25, 2012
Better Nike
than Under Armour or Adidas.
Not like they don’t push their own alternate uniforms.
CMDR - January 25, 2012
I suppose, but Adidas is generally better quality
The shoes we got on our team in college were Nike, and those things were just awful. I really don’t think I’ve seen such a shoddy product so popularized by good marketing since the days when Bose was still using paper cones, although Under Armour is getting there now.
Those pro combat uniforms might just be the worst thing since cancer, too.
burntorangehorn - January 25, 2012
Aren't they all made in China anyway?
Large moneygrubbing fists bumping in the night is what makes this sport financially feasible.
Always been partial to the 3 lines. I have a pair of shell-toes I wore in high-school that to this day are still kicking (get it…..sadface Yeah, I’m done) . They aren’t pretty….but they have tread left and no holes.
I have only worn 1 pair of Nike’s that lasted me all of 2 1/2 months.
No experience with UA. On a side note…are they outsourcing? They must be, to be able to compete.
e1 kabong - January 25, 2012
My experience with Nike basketball shoes
For my son and his teammates has been very, very good.
Horncasting - January 25, 2012
I have worn nearly nothing but nike
for all sports type stuff with nary a complaint shrug
dukeoforange - January 25, 2012
Had a pair of Nike crosstrainers that I hardly wore for three years
and after the 5th or 6th time I wore them while jogging, the right sole completely came apart. They weren’t top of the line but come on.
spinmonkey - January 25, 2012
Remember the Air Max?
$150 shoes when I was in college, and I got two new pairs every couple of months from my team. After those things proved so terrible in terms of midsole breakdown, rapid loss of shock-absorption, stitching resilience, etc., they were relegated to casual wear, while I turned to Saucony, Asics, and Mizuno for athletic purposes. I was running anywhere from 8-16 miles per day in those days, and Nike definitely didn’t cut it.
burntorangehorn - January 26, 2012
I'm not sure what UA is doing now
They’re really big here in Maryland, as they’re a Baltimore-based company, and Kevin Plank was a UMD football player. Of course there’s also the whole Ray Lewis thing. I do know they’re incredibly overpriced and overrated, so it’s easier to turn a profit in that case.
burntorangehorn - January 26, 2012
Also, I have a friend who is a sponsored runner for Under Armour
She is actually required to wear their shoes for her races. She says the clothes work decently, but the shoes almost drive her away from the sponsorship. She trains in other brands.
I actually was a sponsored racer for a while, and my sponsor was one of those good shoe companies. Some of my competitors in college went on to run for Nike Central, and I probably would’ve gone that or a similar route if I hadn’t entered the army after school, but I wouldn’t have worn Nike gear except for competitions.
burntorangehorn - January 26, 2012
I really dislike adidas' football uniforms.
EX: Michigan, A&M, Nebraska. They just look old fashioned, dull, and poorly made (giant sleeves on QB jerseys, poor coloration, lots of mesh). Stick to soccer. If you are an elite school you wear Nike. Only thing worse than adidas is like Riddell or something.
owenh - January 25, 2012
what about Starter brand? *guffaw!*
dukeoforange - January 25, 2012
lol when you become a Walmart brand, all credilibity is lost
owenh - January 25, 2012
Yes.
Adidas jerseys are just terrible.
40A - January 25, 2012
Elite schools may wear Nike
But their products are generally inferior to Adidas. Maybe not in looks, but appearance is part of the marketing thing that gets Nike by on shoddy products.
burntorangehorn - January 26, 2012
I thought the same thing
And, we have the field position on them. They don’t want to go there with us.
Wrangler86 - January 25, 2012
Getting tired of Oregon
Man, i hope we get to play those bastards in a bowl game soon and put the hurt on them. It’d be great to see Manny scheme and go up against their spread offense
jtdoes - January 25, 2012
Good guys (clean) vs. bad guys (dirty)
burntorangehorn - January 26, 2012
6-3 230 lb. kid that can run
Any chance he is a TE?
I believe that description is exactly the one GOBR used a couple days ago in describing what we should be looking for in a TE recruit.
Horncasting - January 25, 2012
Little taller, ideally.
Not aware of Cottrell playing tight end. Could see Bluiett ending up there, as he moves well enough to potentially be a threat down the seam. Was impressed by his athleticism in 7on7.
Wescott Eberts (GoBR) - January 25, 2012
Filling scholies?
Sure hope this isn’t happening. if so, Mack is missing out on a WR from San Antonio who also happens to be a legacy.
Hook’em CLB
CLBHorn - January 25, 2012
Who would that be?
CMDR - January 26, 2012
I was wondering the same thing
I looked at the top 100 Texas players as rated by Rivals, and the Lone Star 100, and didn’t see any WR’s listed from the San Antonio area. Not that there aren’t kids who play WR there, but I don’t know who is (a) more than walk-on quality and (b) a legacy.
burntorangehorn - January 26, 2012
WIN
IT ALL SAID AND DONE HORNS SHOULD HAVE A GOOD CLASS
#GO LONG HORNS
LONGHORNS4EVER - January 26, 2012
I try not to be a grammar nazi on blogs
but this? Really? Come on.
GoHorns - January 26, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Burnt Orange Nation to post a comment.