PonyFans.com

I figure I would start a thread with the following perspective, and to see what other people think as well:

Rivals: 74
247: 75
Scout: 83

RankByOffers does improve our position a little bit with a national ranking of 65 in both overall "offer points" (4,729) and average "offer points" (295.59). From a conference ranking, we are position at 5 out of 11 (Navy wasn't in the data pull), which again isn't super flattering given that ECU and UCF are higher than us.

From an overall G5 conference perspective, at least the American looks good as the top 10 teams are: Houston (1), USF (2), UCF (3), ECU (6), SMU (7), Memphis (8) in the average points and overall metric.

Lastly, from overall "offer points" perspective by conference, SEC leads (256k), ACC (172k), Big 10 (167k), PAC (100k), Big 12 (85.7k) next drop off American (52k) next drop off CUSA (25k).

Also as a disclosure, the data is updated as of 12/18/16, which the data still contained Cade Brewer who had 3 top 25 offers (598 points) and Charlie (211). So if anything we would go down closer to what the other websites were ranking us in the 70+ ranking spot.

Now from my own opinion, I think if you take the top recruits in our current class and fill them in the position we really need, I think SMU overall will do well next year (assuming 9-3 in regular season) given we have a weak out of conference schedule and favorable home match ups. I think, assuming Chad doesn't get poached that year, we will be looking at a chance for great recruitment year to make up for this year. However, if Chad does get poached, I think we still have a decent recruiting classes to work with and only take a slight decline but nevertheless go bowling in 2018, and then seeing how things play from there. Thoughts anyone?

Love the emphasis on defense

This is partially a result of the numbers. We only have 16 commits. With fewer commits due to fewer available scholarships, the lower your overall class score.

3rdGenPony wrote:This is partially a result of the numbers. We only have 16 commits. With fewer commits due to fewer available scholarships, the lower your overall class score.

Agreed but that's why I included rankings by average points as well and the results didn't change much. The main holes in the stats above are the following: older data (will be updated in 2 days on the website) and not including transfers.

I think this class is stuck in the limbo.

When coaches first come on board, there is often momentum. In Chad's case, amplified because of his reputation and his great relationships within Texas.

That momentum combined with a promise of immediate playing time gets you some really good recruits, and a boost for a couple of classes.

At some point, where we are now, you get enough depth to where you can't promise immediate playing time. Everyone, including potential recruits, can see the upward movement of the program, and know there is competition for playing time.

At that point, you have to sell the program, the coaches, and results - record wise as well as sending players to the NFL.

IMHO, that is why this class has taken a little step back in ranking. We can't promise playing time, and Chad and the staff haven't proven the ability to win or send players to the next level. This next year is critical - a 10 win season and the program will be established and everything will tick back up.

Regardless, Chad and the staff have shown excellent talent evaluation to this point, and their connections help point them in the right directions with less heralded players. I'm really not worried about the recruiting class ranking.

JasonB wrote:I think this class is stuck in the limbo.

When coaches first come on board, there is often momentum. In Chad's case, amplified because of his reputation and his great relationships within Texas.

That momentum combined with a promise of immediate playing time gets you some really good recruits, and a boost for a couple of classes.

At some point, where we are now, you get enough depth to where you can't promise immediate playing time. Everyone, including potential recruits, can see the upward movement of the program, and know there is competition for playing time.

At that point, you have to sell the program, the coaches, and results - record wise as well as sending players to the NFL.

IMHO, that is why this class has taken a little step back in ranking. We can't promise playing time, and Chad and the staff haven't proven the ability to win or send players to the next level. This next year is critical - a 10 win season and the program will be established and everything will tick back up.

Regardless, Chad and the staff have shown excellent talent evaluation to this point, and their connections help point them in the right directions with less heralded players. I'm really not worried about the recruiting class ranking.

I think it's a pretty good class. I don't think one can make blanket statements as these classes are now more strategic with less available offers to give. As you can see, we need help protecting the QB and getting after the QB (and always need more speed) and we got that in this class (2 big time OT gets with one more possibly coming along with Toby and Noah Jones on defense along with some sub 4.5 speed in Kayce Medlock and the CB . . . plus Tyler Page who could end up being a big time player for us . . . sure, it hurts losing the Brewers no doubt, but this is a solid class based on NEED . . . and it's not complete yet - land Huhn and possibly one more big ugly and I'm very happy with this class).

As an update: Rankbyoffers has updated their database as of 1/8/2017 and also include other recruiting sites

SMU
Scout: t84 (dropped from 83)
Rivals: 74 (no change)
247: 74 (up from 75)
Total offer points: 4,167 (#69) (Dropped from #65)
Average offer points: 278 (#67) (Dropped from #65)

G5 perspective (total points):
1) UCF: 9,699 (#36 overall)
2) USF: 7,831 (#47 overall)
3) ECU: 6,369 (#56 overall)
4) Houston: 5,690 (#61 overall)
5) Memphis: 5,553 (#62 overall)
6) Boise State: 5,027 (# 65 overall)
7) SMU: 4,167 (# 69 overall)

G5 perspective (average offer points)

1) USF: 489 (# 41 overall)
2) UCF: 485 (# 43 overall)
3) San Jose State: 458 (# 45 overall)
4) Houston: 406 (# 54 overall)
5) Boise State: 314 (#65 overall)
6) ECU: 303 (# 66 overall)
7) SMU: 278 (# 67 overall)

Overall Conference perspective (Overall offer points)

1) SEC: 273k
2) ACC: 179.3k
3) Big 10: 178.9k
4) PAC12: 108.6k
5) Big 12: 94k
6) AAC: 49.7k
7) CUSA: 27k
MW: 23k

Honest question. On the day Chad was hired, if we had known his third class would have had these rankings, would you have been satisfied?

Nope. not at all. No reason to be out recruited by ECU and the directional Floridas. We should be right there with Houston.

Year three is time to win. He had two really good recruiting classes and one that was okay. We are set up to win a lot next year. I won't be disappointed unless that doesn't happen.

Despite the rankings, I think we should see a real bump next year given the cupcake OOC. If Chad can put a 9-3 season plus a bowl win and be competitive on its losses, I think we will be recruiting in the top of the G5 and somewhere in the 50s. I think this group had a few really good and needed fill ins but most will trickle out after (hopefully) the next recruiting classes.

I think we will have a great start in the next class given the publicity from Watson/Chad to potential recruits.

Lastly, I really really wish we took the opportunity to beat USF because that should have been a win. Sadly, it wasn't but had we gone bowling, I think we could of picked up 1 or 2 really good recruits.

Am I wrong to say CM is the highest paid non-P5 HC.

Probably ranks 50th among all HC's?

SoCal_Pony wrote:Am I wrong to say CM is the highest paid non-P5 HC.

Probably ranks 50th among all HC's?

Looks like Houston ranked the highest with Herman (obviously changed) but was #35 at $3m.
Cincy (Tuberville) is at #51 with $2.2m.
Navy (Niumatalolo) at #56 with $2m.

SMU is at blank probably due to our ability of not having to disclose as a private university.

Source: http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries

SMU_Alum11 wrote:

SoCal_Pony wrote:Am I wrong to say CM is the highest paid non-P5 HC.

Probably ranks 50th among all HC's?

Looks like Houston ranked the highest with Herman (obviously changed) but was #35 at $3m.
Cincy (Tuberville) is at #51 with $2.2m.
Navy (Niumatalolo) at #56 with $2m.

SMU is at blank probably due to our ability of not having to disclose as a private university.

Source: http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries

Well, Herman & Tuberville are gone and CM makes over $2M, so he might just be the highest paid HC at around #50.

[quote="SMU_Alum11"]As an update: Rankbyoffers has updated their database as of 1/8/2017 and also include other recruiting sites

SMU
Scout: t84 (dropped from 83)
Rivals: 74 (no change)
247: 74 (up from 75)
Total offer points: 4,167 (#69) (Dropped from #65)
Average offer points: 278 (#67) (Dropped from #65)

G5 perspective (total points):
1) UCF: 9,699 (#36 overall)
2) USF: 7,831 (#47 overall)
3) ECU: 6,369 (#56 overall)
4) Houston: 5,690 (#61 overall)
5) Memphis: 5,553 (#62 overall)
6) Boise State: 5,027 (# 65 overall)
7) SMU: 4,167 (# 69 overall)

G5 perspective (average offer points)

1) USF: 489 (# 41 overall)
2) UCF: 485 (# 43 overall)
3) San Jose State: 458 (# 45 overall)
4) Houston: 406 (# 54 overall)
5) Boise State: 314 (#65 overall)
6) ECU: 303 (# 66 overall)
7) SMU: 278 (# 67 overall)



Only small private school among that group