PonyFans.com

Bennett's made a few questionable x and o and tactical decisions but nothing material in the grand scheme of things. He brings a solid face to SMU football and exceeds expectations in recruiting. He ain't the issue.

The big reason for our lack of success this year has been the offensive line. Those guys have been pushed around and have done an excellent imitation of a sieve. Everyone we've faced have been bigger, faster, stronger and only in the TCU game did I see anything resembling strong o-line play.

Special teams play gets an honorable mention for our woes, but special teams are always a function of how much confidence the team in general has.

ponyboy wrote:Bennett's made a few questionable x and o and tactical decisions but nothing material in the grand scheme of things. He brings a solid face to SMU football and exceeds expectations in recruiting. He ain't the issue.

When is this so called "better" recruitig going to pay off? At this point, this team is pretty much all his guys and yet we are lucky to score 14 points in a game and the defense routinely gives up over 40 points per game.

What has Bennett done to improve the line? Where are the OL recruits that "have exceed expectations" to make the line better than it was when he started. OL play was a problem when he got here, and it is still a problem now. He hasn't had any postiive impact on it whatsoever.

ponyboy wrote:He brings a solid face to SMU football and exceeds expectations in recruiting.

Examples please. Shouldn't "exceed[ing] expectations in recruiting" pay off in more than 7 wins in 4 years?

in recruiting Phil Bennett = Mike Cavan. Both started nicely but faded fast. I really can't believe I am saying this because we had a lot of turnover with Cavan but Mike Cavan was better at developing young talent than Phil Bennett. Phil Bennett ain't going to enjoy great success from his short recruiting success because they either flunked out, left or never get their chance to play. Mike Cavan was not afraid to play quality freshman-from Game 1 he showed confidence in Brewer, Newsome, Alex Pahulu and Chris Sanders and all responded well as true freshman-please no Flanigan speeches-I agree. Phil Bennett's tenure is marked by an inability to develop young talent. He can't even find a way to get his best athletes on the field even as sophmores or redshirt freshman.

A few questionable calls?

It's way too many to be called a few.

He brings a solid face to SMU football and exceeds expectations in recruiting.

You are kidding yourself if you think he is recruiting well.

The big reason for our lack of success this year has been the offensive line.

You are correct that the o-line has issues. PB is the one who recruited them and he and his staff coaches them!

Bennett is the CEO of this team and is 100% responsible for all of its actions. I find it hard to believe that you don't think he is the problem.

PonySnob wrote:When is this so called "better" recruitig going to pay off? At this point, this team is pretty much all his guys and yet we are lucky to score 14 points in a game and the defense routinely gives up over 40 points per game.

I think our defense holds its own and keeps us in games until they wear out from being on the field all game (we even went two quarters with A&M till the defense gave out ). True, the OL needs help, and our offensive playcalling/execution needs work. But the defense has been an inspiration.

First the defense does not give up 40 points per game. Take out the A&M game which was a number of factors, and they look like they give up around 25 per game against similar teams including points off special teams and offensive turnovers. Twenty-five is not a bad number, not a great number, but about average. The below average factor is the offense. Bennett has fired one OC and hired Rusty Burns who by all accounts is an offensive genius. The offense just hasn't turned around despite some skill players with some raw talent. Kennedy seems lost out there. Pellerin has speed. Chase can get open and hustles. Givens has blazing speed, just no hands. The academic casualties aren't really Bennett's fault are they? I mean, we can't complain on one hand that we don't let in marginal academic students, and then blame the coach when the some of the ones we do let in flunk out. You're sounding like those professors now. As for developing young talent. You mostly used offensive examples and Cavan was an offensive minded coach. Bennett is a defensive minded coach. Guys like Rutledge, Rogers, Irena-Standbury, Villoria developed fine under Bennett, just didn't have the raw talent all of the time to stay with their opponents.

Mustang_Matt wrote:I think our defense holds its own and keeps us in games until they wear out from being on the field all game (we even went two quarters with A&M till the defense gave out ).

Problem: that's only half the game. Are you suggesting they are not properly conditioned? And why did they not tackle pretty much the whole game @ A&M?

Geez I think every player you mentioned except Rogers was recruited by Cavan weren't they. Cavan got them on the field early didn't he? Bennett really is awful in getting young recruits ready to contribute.

jtstang wrote:Problem: that's only half the game. Are you suggesting they are not properly conditioned? And why did they not tackle pretty much the whole game @ A&M?

I'm suggesting that when your offense repeatedly goes three-and-out, the defense gets little time to rest. After doing that for three and a half quarters, it is not surprising they give up, say, two long drives to Marshall in the 4th.

Stallion wrote:in recruiting Phil Bennett = Mike Cavan. Both started nicely but faded fast. I really can't believe I am saying this because we had a lot of turnover with Cavan but Mike Cavan was better at developing young talent than Phil Bennett. Phil Bennett ain't going to enjoy great success from his short recruiting success because they either flunked out, left or never get their chance to play. Mike Cavan was not afraid to play quality freshman-from Game 1 he showed confidence in Brewer, Newsome, Alex Pahulu and Chris Sanders and all responded well as true freshman-please no Flanigan speeches-I agree. Phil Bennett's tenure is marked by an inability to develop young talent. He can't even find a way to get his best athletes on the field even as sophmores or redshirt freshman.

So True.

Mustang_Matt wrote:I'm suggesting that when your offense repeatedly goes three-and-out, the defense gets little time to rest. After doing that for three and a half quarters, it is not surprising they give up, say, two long drives to Marshall in the 4th.

Well, I was asking about the A&M game since you brought it up. What about my second question? Why did they not tackle pretty much the whole game @ A&M?

As for the Marshall game, I watched it an the bottom line is SMU was not good enough to win on either side of the ball, and Marshall was. And in fact, somebody posted that time of posession was roughly 50/50 in that game.

EastStang wrote:First the defense does not give up 40 points per game. Take out the A&M game which was a number of factors, and they look like they give up around 25 per game against similar teams including points off special teams and offensive turnovers. Twenty-five is not a bad number, not a great number, but about average. The below average factor is the offense. Bennett has fired one OC and hired Rusty Burns who by all accounts is an offensive genius.

So far, Burns has certainly not looked like an offensive genius last year, his offense scored, 13,0,7,13,20,10,10,0,41,38,27 points each week. So far this year 23, 21, 8, 10,13 points. This ranks #108 out of 117 schools. Defensively, we are giving up 30 points per game which ranks us 89th out of 117 schools so far this year.

"Take out the A&M game which was a number of factors, and they look like they give up around 25 per game against similar teams including points off special teams and offensive turnovers" Eaststang

Take out the ATM game???? Are you kidding??

That means we can take out the Navy game when they kicked our [deleted], Ok. St. when Woods went nuts, UTEP game.. the list goes on!! Do any of you see a pattern here. STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOR THE FACT THAT WE SUCK AND CANNOT COMPETE YEAR AFTER YEAR.

NO.. DO NOT TAKE OUT THE ATM GAME. REMEMBER THE ATM GAME AND ALL OF THESE OTHERS WHERE SMU'S [deleted] WAS HANDED TO THEM. FACTOR ALL THE STATS AND SEE WHAT YOU GET.. A HALF-ASSED COACHING JOB THAT'S EMBARASSING.