Was The Rise Real?

[footballdad]

Not sure I understand? I suspect if they were good high school prospects, then someone in Texas would have offered them, and they could have satisfied that love itch. If they were not good hs prospects, who then became accomplished in college, then good for them. Competing against Duke, Northwestern and Wake is by no means an automatic win for us. In fact, unless you had a love for Dallas/Texas/SMU/lovlier women/etc, I could see reasons to pick any of those three schools. I wish it weren't that way but...

I am just saying that there are very good football players at these schools that are our ideal academic peers. And they compete successfully at a P5 level. Maybe if we competed with Northwestern or Wake Forest for recruits we could be more successful than trying to take kids away from aTm, Houston or Texas Tech

Peers?..............Duke/Northwestern/Wake...........not even close.

[mustangxc]

Duke and Northwestern no, but Wake Forrest, Tulane, USC, Boston College, Miami are definitely peer institutions.

[1017 Mustang]

I can't tell you why but there has certainly been a shift in academic schools being successful in football since the ~2008/2009 Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Wake Forest, Duke, Stanford have all been more successful than tjey had been historically.

I believe we have also benefited from that wave. But those schools have been more successful in football (and basketball) than we have. They recruit nationally and don't seem to have the same player retention issues we do. I'm just saying we should mimic their strategies to football success rather than following Baylor, TCU or A&M

[mustangxc]

Pretty much all conferences stopped allowing teams to accept non-qualifiers and partial qualifiers which the top schools already did not admit to their schools so it has evened the playing field for top academic institutions and partially the reason teams like UTEP are now doormats.

[1017 Mustang]

Duke and Northwestern no, but Wake Forrest, Tulane, USC, Boston College, Miami are definitely peer institutions.

Yeah I'm saying all of these schools are our peers or schools that we should be working towards.

Rather than trying to compete with all of the former SWC and B12 schools for only Texas kids we should look in big cities nationally for more academically minded kids that can play. And we can probably beat schools like Wake and Northwestern more often for those recruits

[footballdad]

Duke and Northwestern no, but Wake Forrest, Tulane, USC, Boston College, Miami are definitely peer institutions.

Yeah I'm saying all of these schools are our peers or schools that we should be working towards.

Rather than trying to compete with all of the former SWC and B12 schools for only Texas kids we should look in big cities nationally for more academically minded kids that can play. And we can probably beat schools like Wake and Northwestern more often for those recruits

All the teams on that list are P5. Only true 'peer' is Tulane. A smart, quality player is going to take the P5 offer every time, unless he just happens to be a Dallas area kid that wants to stay close to home.

[Water Pony]

I agree that a P5 conference member (Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Duke, etc.) should have an edge on us in the eyes of desirable recruits. However, we should identify and pursuit recruits are ideal for SMU against any other G5 member, while stealing a few P5 capable kids.

For example, Pat Fitzgerald has built a great program at Northwestern, which is now perennially in the top half of the Big Ten. He recruits like Stanford, i.e. he profiles recruits that fit in Evanston. He doesn't pursue recruits who want the top brands schools, such as Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame,etc. His recruiters specifically target high character, good academic players, who are just under the radar of the tradtional powers. They find them early and cover them like a blanket.

As a result, he is now solid defensively as well as having a competitive offense. The players love him and NU is now competitive in all their games. Sonny can create such profile recruit for us. We must tell our story and sell our advantages, our reemerging tradition, quality of the degree and Dallas. Our ideal recruits are out there. Identify them and hold on tight.

Pony Up!

[mrydel]

I think if you will look at the new indoor facility being built at Northwestern you would have to admit they are going to go after top recruits period. It is one of the most impressive facilities, on the shore of Lake Michigan that I have ever seen. P5 money allows you to do a lot.

[Stallion]

you recruit players with talent not academic profiles--we are recruiting the right guys in both football and basketball-our biggest challenge is keeping those players when a P5 team comes calling. There is a small sliver of players who basically can't read and score below the traditional 700SAT/ACT minimum (as adjusted to the current SAT/ACT which inflated scores by 80-100 points) which we probably aren't going to admit even if they actually qualify under the NCAA sliding scale. They are generally more trouble than they are worth in the current APR environment--also the new rule is they can't play as freshman even if the qualify if they don't have a core GPA of 2.3. Here are the NCAA requirements for qualifying, being eligible as a freshman, the sliding scale and the upgraded core requirements

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/file ... _Sheet.pdf

[mustangxc]

While we cannot compete for a national championship at SMU I would argue that the path to a NY6 bowl may be easier at SMU than many P5s such as Iowa State, Vanderbilt, Duke, Texas Tech, etc. Those are the types of recruits we should be competing for. I understand 5 star players wanting to play at a football factory like Ohio State, Alabama, USC, etc. but for the top 3 star and lower 4 star players playing for a top G5 school is a better option than a mid to lower tier P5 for that very reason. Would you rather be on this year's UCF team that plays in the Peach Bowl or a mid tier P5 that is playing in a solid but not elite bowl game?

[tristatecoog]

I met a Yale basketball coach at an Adidas tournament. He was looking for talent but needed at least a 1000 on the SAT. He could recruit a couple highly talented guys at the low end of the scale but needed others to balance it out.

Yale and Harvard aren't exactly SMU and Tulane when it comes to recruitment but schools like Stanford, Northwestern, Vandy and Duke may have a similar formula. It seems like only a few football players are choosing a college based upon its academic ranking and many of those come from higher income families.

[1017 Mustang]

Northwestern has a very similar recruiting and commitment profile on scout and rivals. Mostly 2 and 3 stars with maybe one 4 star (in fact some Northwestern commits are from Texas). Our only difference is that 90% of our recruits are from Texas. If we followed on the heels of all the Duke, Wake, Northwestern, Stanford even Cal, UNC or UVA we would be in a better overall position.

And Stallion you complain about us not having a talented enough team via recruiting all the time. How can we be "recruiting the right guys" and not be talented enough to compete?
Also if we shift our brand to the academic school in Texas that plays damn good football and puts people in the NFL that would raise our national profile more than focusing on keeping up with former SWC schools.

We also wouldn't have to worry about whole other school departments that may not contribute to our academic top line. Recruit more quality football players from the same schools that you recruit your regular students from.

[SoCal_Pony]

We tried that from 1989-2007 and went to no bowl games and had 1 winning season.

Some people have bad memories. That was indeed a lousy strategy (and expensive).

I understand the national appeal of academics of Stanford, Northwestern or Duke, but certainly not SMU. For Texas kids, maybe. For kids in other parts of the country, No Way.

[peruna81]

I agree that a P5 conference member (Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Duke, etc.) should have an edge on us in the eyes of desirable recruits. However, we should identify and pursuit recruits are ideal for SMU against any other G5 member, while stealing a few P5 capable kids.

For example, Pat Fitzgerald has built a great program at Northwestern, which is now perennially in the top half of the Big Ten. He recruits like Stanford, i.e. he profiles recruits that fit in Evanston. He doesn't pursue recruits who want the top brands schools, such as Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame,etc. His recruiters specifically target high character, good academic players, who are just under the radar of the tradtional powers. They find them early and cover them like a blanket.

As a result, he is now solid defensively as well as having a competitive offense. The players love him and NU is now competitive in all their games. Sonny can create such profile recruit for us. We must tell our story and sell our advantages, our reemerging tradition, quality of the degree and Dallas. Our ideal recruits are out there. Identify them and hold on tight.

Pony Up!

Fitzgerald also "coaches them up" and develops the talent to be competitive. I will argue that JJ and his staff may have gotten more out of our talent on hand than any recent coaches (30 years)...at least during a portion of his tenure when he was still engaged.
Fitzgerald also has the (as mentioned) P5 brand...it makes a difference in all aspects of recruiting the type of player SMU or Northwestern would go after.

[1017 Mustang]

None of these replies about the futility of this strategy after the death penalty rebut the fact that UVA, Wake, BC, NWestern using a "national academic strategy" have recruiting classes ranked about the same as Chad' s classes under SMU (when SMU recruiting was "apparently" understood as best in recent memory). But they are:
1) more successful on the field than we have been in the last 30 years (bowl games, top 25 wins and top 25 placement) even though we arguably put more people in the NFL
2) compete in a more competitive conference
And
3) we have a better chance of swinging smart kids who are damn good football players from other academic institutions than swinging kids who view themselves as athletes mainly from the 15 or so established athletic programs that compete for Texas kids. [deleted] if Wake can do it we can.

Even if we only emphasize California, the south and Midwest (the places where our students come from anf where the SMU degree is most valuable) that's opening up our pool to kids who have shown to be successful in school and on the field. All I'm saying is if your business is failing, then check out the best practices of your competitors