PonyFans.com

When reading this remember that SMU has always required the extra 2 core course all NCAA schools will require next year;

TCU coach says recruiting for 2008 will be harder
TCU football coach Gary Patterson said that recruiting is about to get a lot tougher for college coaches because of new NCAA guidelines that require high school athletes to complete 16 core classes in order to enroll in a college. Before, only 14 core classes were required, Patterson said.

"That's a big deal," Patterson said.

For the Class of 2008 -- Division I only -- if you plan to enter college in 2008 or after, you will need to present 16 core courses in the following breakdown:

4 years of English
3 years of mathematics (Algebra I or higher)
2 years of natural/physical science (one must be a lab science)
1 year of additional English, math or science
2 years of social studies
4 years of additional core courses (from any area listed above, or from foreign language, nondoctrinal religion or philosophy)

Stallion wrote:When reading this remember that SMU has always required the extra 2 corTCU coach says recruiting for 2008 will be harder
TCU football coach Gary Patterson said that recruiting is about to get a lot tougher for college coaches because of new NCAA guidelines that require high school athletes to complete 16 core classes in order to enroll in a college. Before, only 14 core classes were required, Patterson said.

"That's a big deal," Patterson said.

For the Class of 2008 -- Division I only -- if you plan to enter college in 2008 or after, you will need to present 16 core courses in the following breakdown:

4 years of English
3 years of mathematics (Algebra I or higher)
2 years of natural/physical science (one must be a lab science)
1 year of additional English, math or science
2 years of social studies
4 years of additional core courses (from any area listed above, or from foreign language, nondoctrinal religion or philosophy)

e courses the NCAA will require next year.

Interesting word order. I'm guessing the cut and past got away from you lol.

-CoS

Dimwit Pillsbury Doughboy. If everyone has to comply with the same rules then why would you claim it is “harder”?

KnuckleStang wrote:Dimwit Pillsbury Doughboy. If everyone has to comply with the same rules then why would you claim it is “harder”?

ummm...because next year he'll be on more of a level playing field whereas before he took recruits that a lot of schools voluntarily didn't recruit, now he won't be allowed to take a lot of those recruits

TCU has been accepting players with 14 credits for years. Some of their top recruits were players that SMU couldn't talk to. It will be interesting to see how Patterson does next year on the recruiting circuit. Perhaps if things are not going well on the recruiting trail, and TCU has another good year next year, he'll take the cash at a BCS program and bolt.

[quote="EastStang"]

Perhaps if things are not going well on the recruiting trail,
and TCU has another good year next year, he'll take the
cash at a BCS program and bolt.

Sheesh,

You may take great comfort in believing that but the reality is

that he will in all likelihood recruit another stellar class as usual.

Alaric wrote:

KnuckleStang wrote:Dimwit Pillsbury Doughboy. If everyone has to comply with the same rules then why would you claim it is “harder”?

ummm...because next year he'll be on more of a level playing field whereas before he took recruits that a lot of schools voluntarily didn't recruit, now he won't be allowed to take a lot of those recruits

I'll worry about this about as much as I worry about our recruting classs being ranked outside the top 70 for the last 10 years.

ReedFrawg wrote:

Alaric wrote:

KnuckleStang wrote:Dimwit Pillsbury Doughboy. If everyone has to comply with the same rules then why would you claim it is “harder”?

ummm...because next year he'll be on more of a level playing field whereas before he took recruits that a lot of schools voluntarily didn't recruit, now he won't be allowed to take a lot of those recruits

I'll worry about this about as much as I worry about our recruting classs being ranked outside the top 70 for the last 10 years.

Rivals Ratings 2007
TCU---80th

I'm telling you there is something wrong with Rivals Total Points calculations for TCU. No way they could have 12 recruits 3 or 4 stars and only have that many points. They are in the mid 50s as far as average points. SMU is something like 98th in Total Points and 88th in Average points. But that TCU score is patently wrong.

Stallion wrote:I'm telling you there is something wrong with Rivals Total Points calculations for TCU. No way they could have 12 recruits 3 or 4 stars and only have that many points. They are in the mid 50s as far as average points. SMU is something like 98th in Total Points and 88th in Average points. But that TCU score is patently wrong.

Look at UCF and Southern Miss. Same number of 4 and 3 stars.
UCF average stars-- 2.31 Points--298
S.M. average stars-- 2.29 Points--439

How does that make sense??

you get a lot of bonus points for getting a state ranked player or a position ranked player but again those numbers too seem out of whack.

It has got to be that darn global warming. Get Gore on the internet, he can fix it.

I'll worry about this about as much as I worry about our recruting classs being ranked outside the top 70 for the last 10 years.[/quote]

Rivals Ratings 2007
TCU---80th[/quote]

It's obviously out of whack....look at the teams around us and how many 3 and 4 start players they have. We're around #56 in average stars. Hopefully we can hold off FIU...

ReedFrawg wrote:I'll worry about this about as much as I worry about our recruting classs being ranked outside the top 70 for the last 10 years.

Rivals Ratings 2007
TCU---80th[/quote]

It's obviously out of whack....look at the teams around us and how many 3 and 4 start players they have. We're around #56 in average stars. Hopefully we can hold off FIU...[/quote]

I agree with you completely. It doesn't make sense. But if you are going to use their numbers to talk about the last 10 years, you gotta live with what they have this year. You can't pick and choose the ones you like. Personally I think TCU has done an outstanding job the last 10 years and hope we begin to do as well.

I agree with you completely. It doesn't make sense. But if you are going to use their numbers to talk about the last 10 years, you gotta live with what they have this year. You can't pick and choose the ones you like. Personally I think TCU has done an outstanding job the last 10 years and hope we begin to do as well.[/quote]

I'm not picking and choosing...you are making the same point Iam. Our ranking doesn;t make sense but Rivals hasn't been right about our class rankings for the last 10 years so I'm not worried about it now. It's another attempt by "the man (BCS)" to keep down the little man (non-BCS or TCU in this case). We'd hate to acknowledge that TCU (or any other non-BCS) gets athletes in the same ballpark as the Big 12.