2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 3:09 pmPonyFans.com
SMU Fan Site
http://www.ponyfans.com/phpBB3/
2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Page 1 of 2
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 3:09 pmRe: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 3:11 pmnot sure they have all the additions and substractions of all 125 teams in yet
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 3:13 pmRivals has SMU at #91
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 3:16 pm247 still has 7 (or is it 5 - hell I'm even confused) guys on our list that don't belong-they added the Big DB-but not the 3 Army Preps who may not count-I don't know. I've never seen such a last minute drastic turnover in a class before. Suffice to say we are likely going down from No. 78
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 3:46 pmScout has us at No. 75 but again with 2 Three Stars and 3 Two Stars who didn't sign for the 2014 Class
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:10 pmBy ESPN's rankings, the SEC has 7 of the top 9 and all but Vanderbilt in the top 36. They continue to be unstoppable.
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:15 pmSEC recruiting is unreal. Kentucky signed a better class than Texas...in football.
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 6:30 pm
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:30 ami don't know what everybody is crabbing about. we outrecruited all our traditional instate rivals: rice, utep, ntsu, utsa. plus tulsa and tulane. only slightly behind uh. i think that includes most of the "schools at our level". give em another extension.
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:42 amInteresting article in fort Worth Star Telegram surveying local high school coaches in Tarrant county with several questions rating different recruiters and their schools. Guess what Texas university was graded as the one that needed to improve their recruiting the most........yes, SMU! They did get a positive response for not hurrying through when meeting with local coaches compared to Aggies who pretty much hello and goodbye if they don't have a top prospect.
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:59 amA couple of lowlights from the Star Telegram Recruiting Survey
http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/02/05 ... .html?rh=1
4. Why were they so difficult? Any horror stories?
• “Not so much difficult to deal with as it is difficult to communicate with them and hear back from them. I feel that they are in the middle of the most talented football area in the country and should have great relationships with every single high school in DFW, but it does not seem like they do. I do not know where they focus their energy recruiting, but I think more of it should be focused right in their own back yard.†(SMU, North Texas)
16. Which program do you believe needs to step up its recruiting game the most?
1. SMU
2. Texas
3. UNT, Texas Tech
http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/02/05 ... .html?rh=1
4. Why were they so difficult? Any horror stories?
• “Not so much difficult to deal with as it is difficult to communicate with them and hear back from them. I feel that they are in the middle of the most talented football area in the country and should have great relationships with every single high school in DFW, but it does not seem like they do. I do not know where they focus their energy recruiting, but I think more of it should be focused right in their own back yard.†(SMU, North Texas)
16. Which program do you believe needs to step up its recruiting game the most?
1. SMU
2. Texas
3. UNT, Texas Tech
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 12:00 pmsbsmith wrote:A couple of lowlights from the Star Telegram Recruiting Survey
http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/02/05 ... .html?rh=1
4. Why were they so difficult? Any horror stories?
• “Not so much difficult to deal with as it is difficult to communicate with them and hear back from them. I feel that they are in the middle of the most talented football area in the country and should have great relationships with every single high school in DFW, but it does not seem like they do. I do not know where they focus their energy recruiting, but I think more of it should be focused right in their own back yard.†(SMU, North Texas)
wow. let's extend Jones.
freakin' Hart is an idiot. it is costing us more to keep Jones than fire him. let Mason or Phillips coach this year, anyone but Jones!
16. Which program do you believe needs to step up its recruiting game the most?
1. SMU
2. Texas
3. UNT, Texas Tech
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 12:30 pmgreat find
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 12:38 pmsbsmith wrote:A couple of lowlights from the Star Telegram Recruiting Survey
http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/02/05 ... .html?rh=1
4. Why were they so difficult? Any horror stories?
• “Not so much difficult to deal with as it is difficult to communicate with them and hear back from them. I feel that they are in the middle of the most talented football area in the country and should have great relationships with every single high school in DFW, but it does not seem like they do. I do not know where they focus their energy recruiting, but I think more of it should be focused right in their own back yard.†(SMU, North Texas)
16. Which program do you believe needs to step up its recruiting game the most?
1. SMU
2. Texas
3. UNT, Texas Tech
If this, coming straight from High School coaches in DFW, does not make June jumpstart and step his recruiting game up...nothing ever will.
Re: 2014 Football Recruiting Ranking @ 247sports.com
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 1:39 pmGreat find. Extremely interesting! I'll try to find a way to sneak a copy of this onto June's desk.