2002 in Review

[Horseshoe]

I found this on <A HREF="http://www.usatoday.com:" TARGET=_blank>www.usatoday.com:</A>

INSIDE SLANT— SMU finished with a 3-9 record and 3-5 finish in the WAC in Phil Bennett's first year at the helm.

Not exactly Hall of Fame credentials to be sure. But considering how things started out, it could have been a whole lot worse.

The only two quarterbacks in the program with any experience, David Page and Kalen Luker, both quit the team before the season started. Page took a job with Ernst & Young while Luker, a bass player with the band "Submerged", moved to Orlando after the group got a recording contract.

So Bennett was forced to break in two redshirt freshmen, Tate Wallis and Richard Bartel, at quarterback. He also lost two of his top offensive players in running back ShanDerrick Charles (back) and wide receiver Chris Cunningham (foot) to injury.

But after a dreadful 0-7 start that including a 38-7 pounding by Navy of all teams, the Mustangs rebounded to win three of their last five games. And with 19 starters returning, there's reason for optimism in 2003 in Dallas.

NOTES AND QUOTES— GAME OF THE YEAR: After struggling to an 0-7 start, the Mustangs upset defending WAC champ Louisiana Tech, 37-34, at Ford Stadium to present Phil Bennett with his first Division I-A coaching victory.

PLAYER OF THE YEAR: Junior tailback Keylon Kincade defined the term "workhorse" with 327 carries for 1,279 yards and seven touchdowns. It was the third best single-season rushing total in school history behind only NFL Hall of Famer Eric Dickerson (1981 and 1982).

RAPID REVIEW: Without an experienced quarterback on the roster, the Ponies sputtered badly on offense the first half of the season while starting 0-7. SMU scored just 83 points in its first seven games. But freshman Richard Bartel, who started the season as a backup, took over midway through the season and led SMU to three wins. SMU scored 124 points in its last five games, including 42 in a win over UTEP.

FAST FORWARD: The Mustangs lose just one offensive starter and two on defense. Plus two offensive stars who redshirted with injuries, running back ShanDerrick Charles and wide receiver Chris Cunningham, both return and figure to be key contributors.

STRATEGY AND PERSONNEL— PLAYERS TO WATCH IN 2003: Junior RB Keylon Kincade — Finished second in the WAC in rushing with an average of 106.6 yards per game, including eight 100-yard games.

Freshman QB Richard Bartel — Took over in mid-season and led the Mustangs to three victories in their final last five games.

INJURY IMPACT: Star tailback ShanDerrick Charles, arguably the top running back in the WAC the last half of the 2001 season, returns after redshirting in 2002 with two stress fractures in his back. And wide receiver Chris Cunningham, a three-year starter who sat out the season with a broken foot, also returns.

[PerunaPunch]

Yup.

I was havon

[PerunaPunch]

O.K., that was weird.

As I was saying...

I was having this very same conversation with PonyPride and Whatasteve yesterday.

I think we're one large, experienced, run-stuffing (maybe JUCO) DT and a Safety who can tackle away from having a pretty decent year in '03... Assuming of course that someone is going to step up for JD on the O-line.

My thought is to take one of these tall, fast frosh linebackers (e.g. Cory Muse or Zach Hall) we've recruited and move them to safety. Right now, they're probably too light to play linebacker, but at safety...

So all we need is for Bennett & Co. to find us a big gnarly DT who can play immediately. Hmmmm....

[Ikus]

I gather that Muse can fly, but can Hall run fast enough to play safety?

And wasn't there some talk that Hall was going to be worked into the LB rotation next year - without redshirting? I thought he's supposed to be pretty big.

[PX]

The article says we lose just one offensive starter..... would that one be Cody Cardwell, John Hampton, Johnny Freeman, Kris Briggs, or Judson Davis? Who wrote this?

[Nacho]

That is a pretty bad article PX. As much as I like Bartel he only played the first series of the 3rd win before he went out with an injury. I wouldn't list Briggs as a starter. Freeman started most of the games. Cardwell, Hampton and Davis were definitely starters.

[PK]

Perhaps it depends on your definition of is...oops, I mean starter. If you go with the definition that there are only 11 starters on offense, then that would be JD...right? However, you are more correct, PX, in that all of the guys you mentioned will be missed big time. Hopefully we have some kids ready to fill their shoes who can reach the same level of play those departing seniors provided.

[PX]

The first 11 guys on the field for us on offense always included Davis, Hampton, Cardwell and usually Freeman. Briggs was listed as the starting fullback, but we didnt often start in a formation that used a fullback. If we wanted to pick nits, Thornton Chandler was a part-time starter as well.
The article also says we only lost 2 starters on defense, so I guess the writer somehow found another year of eligibility for Lute Croy, or perhaps Peterson or Beard? That is assuming that Viloria and Garrett are the 2 starters this guy could actually remember.

[This message has been edited by PX (edited 01-07-2003).]

[Stallion]

BTW at least one source - the editor of the OSU Rivals Network has stated that Muse switched from OSU to SMU because SMU promised him the opportunity to play TE although he ain't that big 6-2,208. I'm not sure if that is accurate-just reporting.

[OldPony]

I'm not quite following. Are you guys saying that we lost 10+starters from last years team? The article reminded me of the old good news-bad news story. The good news is that all our starters are back; the bad news is that all our starters are back.

[PerunaPunch]

To some degree PX is right concerning the fact that we lost more than one starter on offense and 2 on defense... but not by much.

On offense, the full time starters lost would be 2: Hampton and Davis. I saw Morris in at FB more than Briggs, and weren't most of Brigg's carries when he was spelling KK in a single back formation? Despite whatever the media guide might say, Freeman wasn't a starter (what'd he have, 5, maybe 10 catches all year?). And I assume Cardwell was behind Comet on the depth chart prior to his injury.

On defense we lost more than the 2 starters quoted. We lost 3: Croy, Villoria and Garrett.

Garrett wasn't playing well, Villoria (although great) will be replaced by some pretty serious talent in DD Lee. Losing Croy, as I maintain, is going to hurt unless we can sign an experienced, BIG DT.

So IMHO, I think the message of the USA Today article is true, albeit their facts aren't 100% accurate.

Next year's older, more experienced team should be an upgrade in every single position except possibly 1 o-line spot, NT, MLB and 1 CB.

We shouldn't be ecstatic or anything, but we certainly have cause to believe our team should be improved over last year. In addition to 18 out of 22 position improvements, we also have a veteran head coach and our players have experience in his system, which should also mean improvement. I thinks that's the message of the USA Today article.

[PerunaPunch]

Oh yes, Peterson and Beard were most definitely NOT 'starters' as meant by this article. I know Beard played a lot in prior years, and was co-starting with Williams this year, but since Williams is still #1 on the depth chart, you can't say we lost our starter there. Peterson lost his starting job to Stansbury, so you can't say we lost our other staring DE either.

[PX]

I'm looking at the depth chart from the Tulsa game, and it says Beard is the starting defensive end, and Williams is 2nd.
You're going to have to explain to me why Cardwell and Freeman werent our starting wide recievers? Who were the starters at wideout, if not those 2?

I was going to reply to Old Pony earlier, but didnt have time. 9-10 starters is about right. Some of them didnt start every game, Viloria, Garrett and Freeman all missed games with injuries, and Stansbury had moved past Peterson by the end of the year. But if you look at our 2-deep roster from this past year and start crossing out the names of the seniors, you'll see all the holes.

The rest of this is nonsense. Was I hallucinating at the start of every game? Who went out onto the field to play wideout at the beginning of every game if it wasnt Cardwell and Freeman? Who were the 2 starters if it wasnt them? After everything he did this year you're seriously suggesting that Cardwell shouldnt be considered a starter?

Everyone seems to be forgetting DD Johnson, as well. Do you know for certain that he's coming back? I dont see any mention of a medical redshirt his junior year in his bio. He played in 3 complete games, thats more than 25% of the season.

You're assuming an awful lot here, with all this talk about upgrading every position, etc. And you're discounting an awful lot as well, when you just wave away all the players we're losing.


[This message has been edited by PX (edited 01-07-2003).]

[Stallion]

PX didn't Beard start against Tulsa because he was a senior-Williams started many more games. I agree that we have some holes to fill and any upgrade in talent will generally be from the redshirt freshman and talented true freshman. We got a long way to go to even consider a .500 season although anything is possible in the WAC. It might be attainable though if Charles and Cunningham as well as the S Nfuibuie(sp)come thru big-time. A word of caution to those who think a freshman class is going to turn it around in one year-IT AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. I truly believe that one of the smartest things Ron Meyer ever said was that for every freshman you count on in a key position you will probably lose one game. But SMU should plan to build for the future and get these guys some experience because the prospects for a huge year in 2003 aren't that great.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 01-07-2003).]

[d_pony]

pk - dd johnson was given a hardship medical and will be back this year