Memo to SMU men's hoops: Drop the act against the DISD

[papawasamustang]

Papa, you ever going to answer my question about what the model is for SMU hoops, taking into consideration it's NOT a huge state university, so your Gillespie quote need not apply. What other small WHITE private universities, w/actual academics and limited bunk degrees, w/quality facilities are we emulating? What's their approach to recruiting?

I think this is a very valid question, and worth more discussion. What are the examples of success that we could possibly emulate? What examples might we want to avoid? It might be instructive to look at the Tulsa teams of the late 90's-early 2000s, the TCU teams under Billy Tubbs and present, Gonzaga, both past and present, and perhaps also Rice, which seems to be on the rise with a good recruiting class for next year.

I think I've done about as good a job of explaining what I feel needs to be done as I can in my previous posts. If you are talking about other schools that recruit their backyards well than Purdue comes to mind along with Tx A&M right off the top of my head. The A&M program really seemed to take it to the next level when they started landing some of the top talent in DFW/Texas. Also, Stanford has had a pretty decent amount of Calf players on their roster in the past but I'm not sure about this years squad & doesn't Wake do a pretty good job of recruiting in their region? I would say a few others that come to mind are Butler, Northwestern, Temple, Saint Josephs & maybe Xavier just to name a few. I'm sure there are others.

I don't think it really matters anyway because most will disagree anyway. The losing culture is accepted & it doesn't look like anyone really cares if it changes or not except a few. As someone that thinks outside the back I say screw all the models & lets create our own.
Learn from previous mistakes, correct them & put a winning team on the court.

So, you are beating the drum of local players, but have no 'like' model to compare SMU to? The question wasn't who recruits their own backyards b/c MOST public universities do. It's a very different model then what a small, private, predominantly white, affluent, schools, w/no special majors, tend to use.

Over the weekend, i'll break it down by conference and roster, you'll see what I mean. Comparing SMU to A&M, OU, UT or any other massive state school, is apples and oranges. You can't quote Gillespie in this thread 10 times, if you don't understand the difference in philosophy between A&M and SMU etc.

Don't waste your time & I only quoted Gillespie 3 or 4 x's.

Why are u so caught up on this model you are making a big deal of?
Its my opinion. That's all. I want to see more local players @ SMU.
When I say local, I mean TX HS & JUCO. I didn't say NO to recruiting outside the state of Texas but I would like to see us establish a solid base here with the AAU, HS & JUCO coaches.
Doh is failing in recruiting, X & O's, player development & its time for a fresh approach. Its time to start keeping local talent in Dallas for a change IMO. It can't make things any worse & it would help create more of a local following, which this program could really use.

You can come up with all the models u want but if you have the right coach who recruits well, coaches well & develops his players you will have a model for success no matter what type of university it is.

[papawasamustang]

Papa, you ever going to answer my question about what the model is for SMU hoops, taking into consideration it's NOT a huge state university, so your Gillespie quote need not apply. What other small WHITE private universities, w/actual academics and limited bunk degrees, w/quality facilities are we emulating? What's their approach to recruiting?

I think this is a very valid question, and worth more discussion. What are the examples of success that we could possibly emulate? What examples might we want to avoid? It might be instructive to look at the Tulsa teams of the late 90's-early 2000s, the TCU teams under Billy Tubbs and present, Gonzaga, both past and present, and perhaps also Rice, which seems to be on the rise with a good recruiting class for next year.

I think I've done about as good a job of explaining what I feel needs to be done as I can in my previous posts. If you are talking about other schools that recruit their backyards well than Purdue comes to mind along with Tx A&M right off the top of my head. The A&M program really seemed to take it to the next level when they started landing some of the top talent in DFW/Texas. Also, Stanford has had a pretty decent amount of Calf players on their roster in the past but I'm not sure about this years squad & doesn't Wake do a pretty good job of recruiting in their region? I would say a few others that come to mind are Butler, Northwestern, Temple, Saint Josephs & maybe Xavier just to name a few. I'm sure there are others.

I don't think it really matters anyway because most will disagree anyway. The losing culture is accepted & it doesn't look like anyone really cares if it changes or not except a few. As someone that thinks outside the back I say screw all the models & lets create our own.
Learn from previous mistakes, correct them & put a winning team on the court.

So, you are beating the drum of local players, but have no 'like' model to compare SMU to? The question wasn't who recruits their own backyards b/c MOST public universities do. It's a very different model then what a small, private, predominantly white, affluent, schools, w/no special majors, tend to use.

Over the weekend, i'll break it down by conference and roster, you'll see what I mean. Comparing SMU to A&M, OU, UT or any other massive state school, is apples and oranges. You can't quote Gillespie in this thread 10 times, if you don't understand the difference in philosophy between A&M and SMU etc.

I only quoted Gillispie 4 x's, well 5 now & I happen to agree 100% with what he said & don't see why it shouldn't apply here.

Why are u so caught up on this model you are making a big deal of?
Its my opinion. That's all. I want to see more local players @ SMU.
When I say local, I mean TX HS & JUCO, not just DFW. I didn't say NO to recruiting outside the state of Texas but I would like to see us establish a solid base here with the AAU, HS & JUCO coaches.
Doh is failing in recruiting, X & O's, player development & its time for a fresh approach. Its time to start keeping local talent in Dallas for a change IMO. It can't make things any worse & it would help create more of a local following, which this program could really use.

You can come up with all the models u want but if you have the right coach who recruits well, coaches well & develops his players you will have a model for success no matter what type of university it is.

Gillispie's 2004 pledge to recruit Texas — home of three of the nation's nine largest cities — in hunting down talent has paid big dividends for the Aggies, who are vying for their first Big 12 title.

"It's very difficult to go outside your state," Gillispie said. "You've got to become nationally prominent year after year to beat someone on their home players. You have to try and stay as close to your campus as possible.

"We would all be making a big mistake if we didn't start close to home."

I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is that I agree with Gillispie & think we should be doing the same thing he describes in his quote above.

[PonyDoh]

Papa, you ever going to answer my question about what the model is for SMU hoops, taking into consideration it's NOT a huge state university, so your Gillespie quote need not apply. What other small WHITE private universities, w/actual academics and limited bunk degrees, w/quality facilities are we emulating? What's their approach to recruiting?

I think this is a very valid question, and worth more discussion. What are the examples of success that we could possibly emulate? What examples might we want to avoid? It might be instructive to look at the Tulsa teams of the late 90's-early 2000s, the TCU teams under Billy Tubbs and present, Gonzaga, both past and present, and perhaps also Rice, which seems to be on the rise with a good recruiting class for next year.

I think I've done about as good a job of explaining what I feel needs to be done as I can in my previous posts. If you are talking about other schools that recruit their backyards well than Purdue comes to mind along with Tx A&M right off the top of my head. The A&M program really seemed to take it to the next level when they started landing some of the top talent in DFW/Texas. Also, Stanford has had a pretty decent amount of Calf players on their roster in the past but I'm not sure about this years squad & doesn't Wake do a pretty good job of recruiting in their region? I would say a few others that come to mind are Butler, Northwestern, Temple, Saint Josephs & maybe Xavier just to name a few. I'm sure there are others.

I don't think it really matters anyway because most will disagree anyway. The losing culture is accepted & it doesn't look like anyone really cares if it changes or not except a few. As someone that thinks outside the back I say screw all the models & lets create our own.
Learn from previous mistakes, correct them & put a winning team on the court.

So, you are beating the drum of local players, but have no 'like' model to compare SMU to? The question wasn't who recruits their own backyards b/c MOST public universities do. It's a very different model then what a small, private, predominantly white, affluent, schools, w/no special majors, tend to use.

Over the weekend, i'll break it down by conference and roster, you'll see what I mean. Comparing SMU to A&M, OU, UT or any other massive state school, is apples and oranges. You can't quote Gillespie in this thread 10 times, if you don't understand the difference in philosophy between A&M and SMU etc.

I only quoted Gillispie 4 x's, well 5 now & I happen to agree 100% with what he said & don't see why it shouldn't apply here.

Why are u so caught up on this model you are making a big deal of?
Its my opinion. That's all. I want to see more local players @ SMU.
When I say local, I mean TX HS & JUCO, not just DFW. I didn't say NO to recruiting outside the state of Texas but I would like to see us establish a solid base here with the AAU, HS & JUCO coaches.
Doh is failing in recruiting, X & O's, player development & its time for a fresh approach. Its time to start keeping local talent in Dallas for a change IMO. It can't make things any worse & it would help create more of a local following, which this program could really use.

You can come up with all the models u want but if you have the right coach who recruits well, coaches well & develops his players you will have a model for success no matter what type of university it is.

Gillispie's 2004 pledge to recruit Texas — home of three of the nation's nine largest cities — in hunting down talent has paid big dividends for the Aggies, who are vying for their first Big 12 title.

"It's very difficult to go outside your state," Gillispie said. "You've got to become nationally prominent year after year to beat someone on their home players. You have to try and stay as close to your campus as possible.

"We would all be making a big mistake if we didn't start close to home."
5
I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is that I agree with Gillispie & think we should be doing the same thing he describes in his quote above.

Well, b/c schools that are most like SMU from a national perspective, do it very differently then what you are suggesting. I'm not against locals either, but its not like we don't have Texas kids on the team. The key is to get better national kids and better local kids, not completely hone in on Dallas/DISD or Texas in general. The student body suggests diversity geographically, why shouldn't the roster?

The bottom line is that schools like Dook, Wake, BC, Miami, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Gonzaga, and tons of other Top 25 style privates, recruit nationally, at least 50% of the time, if not more. Same can be said of most the Jesuit programs in the Big East etc. That's really all there is to it, recruit better players, no excuses. Where they are from is really pretty irrelevant. Attendance and revenue is generated by winning, not if a kid played in the DISD.

[Stallion]

Pony Doh -
Which States and which regions produce more players? Would it surprise you that out of the Rivals National Top 150 since 2002(which are all the years in the database), Texas has produced twice as many Top 150s than New York? 93-45.

[PonyDoh]

Pony Doh -
Which States and which regions produce more players? Would it surprise you that out of the Rivals National Top 150 since 2002(which are all the years in the database), Texas has produced twice as many Top 150s than New York? 93-45.

No, that doesn't surprise me at all. NYC is all NY has, and it's talent has been down for years and years. Atlanta, Maryland/DC, LA/So Cal, Chicago etc. Lets not beat kick a dead horse here, I'm not saying Texas isn't good enough to recruit, it certainly is. I'm merely saying it gets picked over pretty quickly by the sheer number of D1 school, not to mention border raiders. Beyond that, SMU needs to recruit nationally, as well as in Texas. The key being better players

Also, Rivals basketball is a joke. Solid for football, laughable for hoops.

[StangBry]

how about the fact that dfw is 3rd amongst all cities with the most current nba players? its a joke if you think dallas is a 2nd tier recruiting area.

[PonyDoh]

how about the fact that dfw is 3rd amongst all cities with the most current nba players? its a joke if you think dallas is a 2nd tier recruiting area.

DFW is not DC/Balt, Chicago, Atlanta or LA. That's the first tier. Most don't think it's Houston either. Its not a slight on the area, it has many fine players. This is very overblown at this point. Again, all I'm saying is that SMU needs to better recruit nationally & locally. We have TExas players on the team, they just aren't the ones many want. There are a slew of reasons for this, that have been beaten to death on this site.

[EastStang]

Obviously in any Metro area it depends on which players from which schools in which divisions you recruit. For example, I would say that any kid from the DC Metro Conference which is the Catholic League conference where they can and do recruit players is the conference to hit in the DC area. Kids who shine there, will shine in Division 1. On the other hand, a kid may burn up the IAC, like the kid this year from Landon who is on everyone's radar, but the rest of the conference is average, so a kid might put up huge numbers in that conference and not be Division 1 calibre (didn't used to be that way when Ed Tapscott played at Sidwell Friends). The inner city DC Public School League has some players, but many are going to have academic issues.

[PonyDoh]

Obviously in any Metro area it depends on which players from which schools in which divisions you recruit. For example, I would say that any kid from the DC Metro Conference which is the Catholic League conference where they can and do recruit players is the conference to hit in the DC area. Kids who shine there, will shine in Division 1. On the other hand, a kid may burn up the IAC, like the kid this year from Landon who is on everyone's radar, but the rest of the conference is average, so a kid might put up huge numbers in that conference and not be Division 1 calibre (didn't used to be that way when Ed Tapscott played at Sidwell Friends). The inner city DC Public School League has some players, but many are going to have academic issues.

Christian Webster is a very good player, but he's a low D1 through mid major prospect. Can fill it up, but lacks top end athleticism. Ultimately, high school ball is nice, whether its the IAC or WCAC, but AAU is what gets you recruited. For example, Webster played for DC Assault 17s this past year, and while a solid contributor, certainly wasn't a premier performer. His gaudy high school numbers were put in perspective. On the other hand, Markel Starks was marquee this past summer, and he's a an IAC kid as well. WCAC guard play is just disgusting this year between Dematha/Gonzaga etc.