New Commitment!

by **HorsePower** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:07 am

So first it's "Coach can't recruit a top-15 QB" .... and when it's shown that he can, then the entire QB class gets badmouthed?
Grab a little BBQ sauce and eat that plate of crow.

by **McClown27** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:18 am

HorsePower wrote:So first it's "Coach can't recruit a top-15 QB" .... and when it's shown that he can, then the entire QB class gets badmouthed?
Grab a little BBQ sauce and eat that plate of crow.

It was a bad class. Everyone was talking about it that year. That is why McCoy got so many offers.

by **ponyboy** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:21 am

Stallion wrote:Willis committed 2 weeks before signing date

You're right. He committed the weekend of January 15th, 2005 which was 18 days before signing day. He did have offers from NM and Tulsa which are admittedly not Big 12 schools.

by **JasonB** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:25 am

I don't necessarily want a 6-3/6-4 guy, because I like mobile QBs. However, you would still like your mobile QB to be 6-2.

What I find interesting is that, according to rivals, we offered three QBs who are not mobile at all. And then we landed Logan Turner. Does that mean that we are going to recruit 2 QBs - one mobile, one traditional - this year? Or are we just trying to bring in the best athletes available at this point?

Stallion, I agree that he is short and, just as important, very light. Not much of a build on him. But for us to offer him this early, we must have seen something we liked. Does anyone know if he was in our camp? One thing that we all know about our coaches is that they do their homework. They wouldn't have offered this early unless it was someone they liked.

Looking at the video, I don't like some of his mechanics on deep balls. But, they do have video of him throwing every route. They also show he has good touch on fade patterns and deepballs. I also like that he puts the ball in positions where his receivers can run with it, and he makes quick decisions. I don't know about top speed, but he is elusive enough to make some things happen on the ground. Now that I think about it, his video kind of reminds me of Romo.

by **HorsePower** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:25 am

McClown27 wrote:It was a bad class. Everyone was talking about it that year. That is why McCoy got so many offers.

So McCoy's overrated, too?
Hmmm .... I thought Mack Brown only recruited All-Americans.

by **McClown27** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:27 am

I just can't stand the mindset of some of the people on this board. Some of you seem to believe that our coaches secretly recruit the best players, and those of us who look at the facts are simply trying to rain on your parade. Sure, we won five games last year, but don't expect a Pete Carrol array of prospects to begin to play this year. We don't have any experience or depth at QB or LB this year.

Just don't expect to win 8-9 this year and throw a fit about firing Bennett, this is a 4-6 win team. The recruiting has to improve. Being mediocre will help our recruiting, it just is not going to be immediate--like the Meyers run.

by **OC Mustang** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:41 am

Surely you are just being difficult for its own sake b/c in one thread you question recruits on rivals ratings & # of offers, and now by class and what time of year they commit. Yet, in the thread regarding OLM Niell's recruiting, you sell vitals & stats and can't understand lack of offers. What gives? Are you more capricious than you let on?

If your point is that you want a marquee name QB, then say so. Don't back into it by framing the debate about Bennett's inability to recruit QBs b/c clearly your comments as stated don't wash. The peanut gallery got you this time.

by **Stallion** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:58 am

I really don't care about many of the casual recruiting observations of many on this board. If you want offer a rational observation based upon facts rather than blissful ignorance then shoot. As for Neill he already has 6 offers 8 months before signing date. I'm just surprised he doesn't have 20 offers. As for Bennett let me repeat that SMU under Bennett has the worst QB recruiting record of any major school in Texas over the last 4 years. It does wash-it's really not even close-SMU's QB recruiting is pathetic.

by **Pony Fan** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:12 am

Stallion wrote:I really don't care about many of the casual recruiting observations of many on this board. If you want offer a rational observation based upon facts rather than blissful ignorance then shoot. As for Neill he already has 6 offers 8 months before signing date. I'm just surprised he doesn't have 20 offers. As for Bennett let me repeat that SMU under Bennett has the worst QB recruiting record of any major school in Texas over the last 4 years. It does wash-it's really not even close-SMU's QB recruiting is pathetic.

Doesn't deserve a response.

by **HorsePower** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:19 am

McClown27 wrote: .... The recruiting has to improve.

Agreed.

McClown27 wrote: .... Being mediocre will help our recruiting, it just is not going to be immediate--like the Meyers run.

So the keys to improved recruiting are the Dallas Morning News and general mediocrity. Gotcha.

by **McClown27** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:42 am

It certainly would help local recruiting if SMU was covered more on the Evening News and in the DMN. No one seriously denies that claim. The legitmate contention is whether it would be deserved. Unfortunately, SMU is located in the one area in Dallas that would prefer not to make money off of college football gates.

by **Ponymon** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:08 pm

Stallion wrote:I really don't care about many of the casual recruiting observations of many on this board. If you want offer a rational observation based upon facts rather than blissful ignorance then shoot. As for Neill he already has 6 offers 8 months before signing date. I'm just surprised he doesn't have 20 offers. As for Bennett let me repeat that SMU under Bennett has the worst QB recruiting record of any major school in Texas over the last 4 years. It does wash-it's really not even close-SMU's QB recruiting is pathetic.

In 2003, he did recruit Ricky Joe Meeks, who was a top 100 recruit in Texas and #27 pro style recruit per rivals. Trouble is he only stayed one year. :roll:

by **SMU Football Blog** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:50 pm

Well, I was certainly wrong about Willis.

I think it is ludicrous to say Bennett has done a terrible job recruiting QB's. It is equally ludicrous to suggest he has done a good job of it. It is equally ludicrous to suggest he has done a good job of developing the talent he has had a QB.

Indeed, in reality, it is ridiculous to say that about any position, with the possible exception of LB and safety. The track record simply isn't there to support any conclusion.

As for the QB position, it has been a complete mess for four years. Some of that is his fault and some of it is bad luck.

It is all on Bennett now. These are his players and his scheme and his coaching. It works out or it doesn't.

by **McClown27** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:59 pm

SMU Football Blog wrote:It is all on Bennett now. These are his players and his scheme and his coaching. It works out or it doesn't.

I think Burns has some accountability within the program too. He will be responsible if the offense regresses significantly.

by **SMU Football Blog** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 1:21 pm

McClown27 wrote:
SMU Football Blog wrote:It is all on Bennett now. These are his players and his scheme and his coaching. It works out or it doesn't.

I think Burns has some accountability within the program too. He will be responsible if the offense regresses significantly.

That is all well and good, but coaches are not given the opportunity to hire a third offensive coordinator if things don't go well.

New Commitment!

Who is online