Coaching vs. level playing field

[EastStang]

I can give you several great examples. Phil Bennett was a great recruiter in Texas for Kansas State and other schools. He was as plugged into the DISD and North Texas high schools as any coach we've had in the last 20 years. Why then did he end up with 2 stars and 3 stars (formerly 2 stars) year after year. I guess he forgot how to recruit a football player. Jimmy Tubbs again the darling of DISD coaches, had more luck out of state than in state. John Shumate (under the old rules - was denied permission to recruit a player who ended up a player of the year at UNLV). Let's be honest here. You are asking players to come to a losing program. You are handicapping yourself in what you can offer players for majors and you are handicapping yourself in which players you can offer. Is Phil a great coach who can win despite having a talent gap? (And when I say a talent gap, I am speaking of an overall talent gap, not a specific position talent gap). The answer is no. He's proven in his career that he is a good coach, but clearly not a great coach. Paul Johnson of Navy would fall into the great coach category. Bobby Ross would not despite many successes, he couldn't turn Army around. Willingham is a good coach but not a great coach. Mac Brown is a good coach, but not a great coach. At the college level, Steve Spurrier is a great coach. Great coaches are few and far between. The easier path to victory is through improved talent because talent makes up for less than great coaching. I would love to get a great coach here, but I would settle for making it easier for whomever is the SMU coach to recruit athletes that will win. There are lots of good coaches out there (including Phil Bennett), but great ones are few and far between.

[SoCal_Pony]

Perhaps I just was not clear on the point I was making. Whereas I have long better a supporter of Bennett, and consistantly blamed the model for the problems, on Saturday, I witnessed glaring events that allow me to now state that I have also lost confidence in this coaching staff to be able to do a job capable of winning games that we should.

Mrydel, since the passing of Old Pony, you are probably the most beloved individual on this board, so please don't take my next comment too personal.

You follow SMU football rather closely.

I am genuinely surprised it took you this long to lose confidence in PB's coaching ability.

[SoCal_Pony]

On a more serious note...

I agree PB's lack of coaching has cost us some games, probably even a bowl last year.

Let's say we took a vote and the consensus is PB has cost us 10 games solely based on his lack of HC skills. That would seem a rather high number to me...but for the sake of argument, let's say a talented coach with our recruits could get 10 more victories.

That moves our record from 18-45 to 28-35. Given all the positives we have to offer, given our incredibly weak conference, that record is still unacceptable to me. Way too unacceptable.

WE ARE THE WORST...and it is more than coaching.

[mrydel]

:lol: I am genuinely surprised it took you this long to lose confidence in PB's coaching ability.

I know. But I think I was a little jaded by the "I do not want to have to start all over again syndrome". I still like Bennett, and it may even be a delegation problem, or a loyalty problem, but something has to change.

[jtstang]

Can we quit trying to fix the 1989 Plymouth Laser we are currently driving and get a new model?

Again, what's wrong with our current model? PLEASE TELL ME? Do you people just like saying "MODEL"?

If it's just getting a Kinesiology degree program, GREAT! But I wouldn't say that that implies that we have a broken model.

If it's something else that is wrong with the MODEL, please let me know what it is. Thanks.

If the schools that have PE and Kinesiology and Coaching and Hand Clapping degrees can get players that we would want but we cannot get because of a lack of those degree programs, or a loss of transfer credits, or whatever, then the recruiting playing field ain't level and it needs to be fixed. If we are not taking the best SAT grade for athletes and others are and that means they get players that we can't, that is not a level playing field and that needs to be fixed. If we are handicapped in any manner in recruiting against TCU, Tulsa and Rice, then IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED.

As I said in another thread, it is a mixture of causes:

1. Unlevel playing field when recruiting whcih is a remnant of Pye era. Solution: level it.

2. Coach with no credibility to recruits because of record. Solution: get rid of him and get somebody with some recrutiing pedigree to put us back on the map.

I am sure their are others but this is giving me a headache.

[BRStang]

If the schools that have PE and Kinesiology and Coaching and Hand Clapping degrees can get players that we would want but we cannot get because of a lack of those degree programs, or a loss of transfer credits, or whatever, then the recruiting playing field ain't level and it needs to be fixed. If we are not taking the best SAT grade for athletes and others are and that means they get players that we can't, that is not a level playing field and that needs to be fixed. If we are handicapped in any manner in recruiting against TCU, Tulsa and Rice, then IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED.

As I said in another thread, it is a mixture of causes:

1. Unlevel playing field when recruiting whcih is a remnant of Pye era. Solution: level it.

2. Coach with no credibility to recruits because of record. Solution: get rid of him and get somebody with some recrutiing pedigree to put us back on the map.

I am sure their are others but this is giving me a headache.

jt-

Sorry, not trying to give anyone a headache. But like others, I assumed over the last few years that "the model is broken" because so many espouse that view point. However, after looking into it a bit more, I cannot find anything to substantiate it, really.

Oh, and apparently SMU, too, DOES TAKE THE HIGHER SAT SCORE. Also, regarding the p.e./basketweaving/hand clapping issue, apparently Tulsa does not compete on a level playing field either, but yet they still somehow manage to go to bowl games.

[jtstang]

Also, regarding the p.e./basketweaving/hand clapping issue, apparently Tulsa does not compete on a level playing field either, but yet they still somehow manage to go to bowl games.

All the more reason we need every advantage we can get to compete with Tulsa. Bring on the PE degree and maybe we can get some of those Tulsa-bound studs to give us a second look, because they sure don't do it without one.

[BRStang]

Also, regarding the p.e./basketweaving/hand clapping issue, apparently Tulsa does not compete on a level playing field either, but yet they still somehow manage to go to bowl games.

All the more reason we need every advantage we can get to compete with Tulsa. Bring on the PE degree and maybe we can get some of those Tulsa-bound studs to give us a second look, because they sure don't do it without one.

Yes, I agree.

[Stallion]

as for the SAT scores I was told by an employee of the university in an unsolicited discussion-who shall remain nameless-who is probably in among the top 5 positions to know the truth-that SMU averages tests scores. This was oh 2-3 years ago. So unless it has changed I'll believe that person told me the truth. If it has since changed its still germane to the discussions about the problems we have faced.

[Nacho]

SMU does not average SAT scores.

Are we better off than we were 6 years ago (to paraphrase the Gipper)? Certainly not on defense if I may answer my own question.

[SoCal_Pony]

Sorry, not trying to give anyone a headache. But like others, I assumed over the last few years that "the model is broken" because so many espouse that view point. However, after looking into it a bit more, I cannot find anything to substantiate it, really.

BR,

The biggest indicator I know that we are not on a level playing field is PB himself.

If I recall, some 55+ players on his last K-State roster did NOT come directly from HS, but through JC and other routes.

PB can recruit. PB can recruit JCs extremely well. Everyone agrees talent level is low when PB arrives...yet PB recruits only a handful of JCs in his 6 years here.

It simply doesn't add up.

[BRStang]

Sorry, not trying to give anyone a headache. But like others, I assumed over the last few years that "the model is broken" because so many espouse that view point. However, after looking into it a bit more, I cannot find anything to substantiate it, really.

BR,

The biggest indicator I know that we are not on a level playing field is PB himself.

If I recall, some 55+ players on his last K-State roster did NOT come directly from HS, but through JC and other routes.

PB can recruit. PB can recruit JCs extremely well. Everyone agrees talent level is low when PB arrives...yet PB recruits only a handful of JCs in his 6 years here.

It simply doesn't add up.

Right. I acknowledge the P.E./Kinesiology/credit hour issue affecting JUCO/transfers. I'm trying to find out if there are any OTHER specific issues that establish that we are not on a level playing field. Seems to me a simple addition of a P.E.-type major could solve a world of problems. But I also keep coming back to the issue of Tulsa--they don't have a P.E.-type program, either. How do they get the JUCOs to transfer in and get credit.