PonyFans.com

....after watching the players we put on the field today-I'm seriously not sure its getting too much better anytime soon. I thought we played pretty damn good not to get blown out. Not sure if we have put a less talented group of players on the field since the 1989-1990. This will be a long rebuilding project. I wonder how deep into the JUCO ranks we will go. We are sitting on a 22 game Division 1A losing streak and haven't won a CUSA in 2 years-those streaks could continue for awhile

the answer to your question is: Yes, again

Yes. I hope that JJ and crew can infuse the 09 team with a significant upgrade in experienced talent, but I'm not holding my breath.

this year's team and result probably rivals some of the worst teams/results we've had since the death penalty. That 0-12 season was rough and watching some of the teams that "quit" on their coaches and got blown out by 40-50 pts a game was certainly no fun.

Remember these guys finished without Sanders and Robinson who were our 2 best weapons. They never quit competing and I think that bodes well for the future. Just need to see year over year improvement. That, I believe, will be critical if Jones and his staff are going to rebuild a competitive program in 5 years.

It's hard to believe it could get worse than 0-12.......

Hey snob - how much did our win cost? You need to use that one more time. It is funny every time you use it.

JUCOS.......JUCOS.........JUCOS

Rock Bottom next stop

Season was bad enough, but Bell made it rock bottom.

Treadway21 wrote:Hey snob - how much did our win cost? You need to use that one more time. It is funny every time you use it.

How have any of Orsini's hires done at SMU? Which coach has improved the product that his/her team produces:

Jones - same record as prior year (and that coach did not make half of what JJ does)
Doherty - Last years 10-20 record was the worst since the last year of John Shumate!
Men's soccer - did we go to the NCAA tournament this year? With the prior coach, weren't we somewhat of a "perennial" NCAA tournament team?
Women's soccer - not sure if he hired this coach, but don't remember hearing about any NCAA tournament this year

OK I've had enough of this crap. An Athletic Director's job is to implement and fund a financial model and strategic gameplan for the program that will allow it to succeed and to hire Coaches. Both the BB and FB team were -or damn sure now are- total rebuild jobs. Its absolutely ridiculous to blame football or basketball losses on the damn AD until those coaches have 3-4 years to get the job done. Orsini has brought the SMU Athletic Program kicking and screaming into a position where it can succeed. A lot of those policies may be unpopular but that are absolutely essential in running an athletic program. The blame goes squarely on those that came before for where this program is today.

Here here.

Stallion wrote:OK I've had enough of this crap. An Athletic Director's job is to implement and fund a financial model and strategic gameplan for the program that will allow it to succeed and to hire Coaches. Both the BB and FB team were -or damn sure now are- total rebuild jobs. Its absolutely ridiculous to blame football or basketball losses on the damn AD until those coaches have 3-4 years to get the job done. Orsini has brought the SMU Athletic Program kicking and screaming into a position where it can succeed. A lot of those policies may be unpopular but that are absolutely essential in running an athletic program. The blame goes squarely on those that came before for where this program is today.

So can we expect improvement this year in basketball (year #3 for the coach)? Clearly you haven't seen this team play its last two basketball games................

It is a little early to write off the Basket Ball Team- but doesn't matter to a loser like yourself.

I did see the Illinois St game and thought we were much more athletic than in the past. Doherty had no chance to recruit anybody his first year since he was hired so late-on the daty he was hired something like 38 of the Top 40 players in Texas had already SIGNED-he finally gave a throw away scholarship-who has since left. His rebuilding job started with the 2007 Class. Not enough time.

Stallion wrote:OK I've had enough of this crap. An Athletic Director's job is to implement and fund a financial model and strategic gameplan for the program that will allow it to succeed and to hire Coaches. Both the BB and FB team were -or damn sure now are- total rebuild jobs. Its absolutely ridiculous to blame football or basketball losses on the damn AD until those coaches have 3-4 years to get the job done. Orsini has brought the SMU Athletic Program kicking and screaming into a position where it can succeed. A lot of those policies may be unpopular but that are absolutely essential in running an athletic program. The blame goes squarely on those that came before for where this program is today.

I totally agree with you.

As for the initial question, where we are as a team, I don't think we are quite as far away as things might seem. Here is a position by position breakdown, of where we are from a recruiting perspective. I did this player-by-player in an earlier post on the line, but here is position by position. Basically, I took the grades of Scout, Rivals, and ESPN, as well as the official offers for each player, and compiled a rating of whether a player projects to be a CUSA stud, CUSA average player, or CUSA benchwarmer. This analysis helps to show how bad we are right now, as well as where the improvements are coming from.

QB: Right now, we have all frosh, and the highest rated one is Smith, who is betwen average and benchwarmer. Jones is a great QB evaluator, so you give him a break in this category because of his knowledge base. Padron comes in next year and has about the same regard as Smith, in official terms. You trust Jones, but clearly we don't have a stud yet.

RB: Martin is the only player who projected to an Average CUSA player. We don't have anyone coming in right now to fill this void of a playmaker.

WR: Based on projections, we should have 1 stud, 5 average player, and the rest aren't CUSA quality. We got lucky with both Robinson and Sanders, who are CUSA studs even through they were projected as worse. Unfortunately, the projected stud was Burley, and a projected average was Medford. We lose a projected average in Henderson to graduation. So, basically, we should have two good players and a handfull of "guys" and then not much depth. And, as we saw, we have two good players, some guys, and not much depth. And when you take the good ones out of the system, the rest can't carry it. Next season, you have Sanders and Robinson, then you have Wilkerson and Haynes with potential, Beasley and Loftin can be role players. Johnson, Jourbet, and McDade are all players coming in who project as average with interesting upside potential. So I think we are fine starting next season at WR with an increase in athleticism.

OL: From recruiting standpoints, our line should be awful. Chase is a TE. Upperclassmen Lobo, Poynter, Nigh projected as bad, and Enright was projected good by one service, but had no offers to match. The frosh are a little better, with Lebreus projected to stud and Free and Emshoff as average. Enright has played better than average, so that leaves us with a young OL, but probably more talented next year... but only four projected decent players. Coming in next season, Favreau and Atchinson project to be studs, while COllins, Hughes and Miller are average. Obviously, you don't expect OL to really contribute well until RS Sophmore year. So, unfortunately, I think we will improve athletically next season, but struggle with youth and talent. '10 gets a lot better, we finally have an average line, and '11 projects us as an above average line in CUSA.

DL: Again, projections show that we should be bad, and we were. Elizee Handy, and Johnson are the only players who projected as average. Handy is out of position and Johnson hasn't produced yet. Rest weren't supposed to be good and haven't been consistant. From the frosh Thompson projects as a stud, and Ellison as average. So, next season with the two graduats, we have a stud and 2 average returning. And a bunch of players who shouldn't project to much, but at least are a year bigger and stronger to handle the college game. Coming in, you have three players with Frazier, Henderson, and Williams who have issues, but project as average. So, I think next year (barring JUCO), we struggle again on the line, although maybe not as much because there are at least more bodies with the redshirts and frosh this season who are more ready to play. In two years, I think we start progressing towards an average line. With the depth next season, hopefully we can move Yenga to outside linebacker.

LB: Again, projections show we should be bad, and we are. Odiari should be a stud, and Jones and Parker should be average, but are frosh. We should improve with those guys, and if Yenga moves here, you have a significantly better unit. This position doesn't have a lot of depth, but there is a chance for significant improvement.

CB: Ratings wise, we should have a stud and three solids (bell, McCann, McElroy, Robinson). These should be better next year and continue to progress. This unit should project to be average to above average in CUSA.

S: From projections, you have a stud in Bailey and a solid in Banjo. Coming in next season, Scott projects at least to average. We should be better at this position next season and continue to improve from there.

So, I would suggest that we should be significantly better at WR next year, possibly LB as well, and improve in all other positions other than OL. I would brace for a potential step back for the OL next season, but significant improvement after that.

We have a long way to go, yes. But we will see some improvement next season, and in 2010, significant improvement because of maturation of better talent at two of the weakest points of the team, DL and OL.

In short:
'08:
QB: Below average
RB: average
WR: average
OL: below average
DL: below average
LB: below average
CB: average
S: below average

'09:
QB: Below average
RB: Below Average
WR: above average
OL: Below average
DL: below average
LB: below average
CB: Above average
S: average

'10:
WB: average
RB: below average
WR: above average
OL: average
DL: average
LB: below average
CB: average
S: average

With the recruits on board right now, I would expect improvement, but still a below average CUSA team next season. In 2010, I would expect to see enough improvement on both sides of the line to allow a .500 record. And in 2011, we finally become a winning team.

The only way I see this time table pushing up is if we add some JUCOs on the line, LB, RB, and QB in that order of need.