|
What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
What should be SMU's top recruiting prior......ity at this point?
I would say kicker because I think we've filled the other positions for the most part. We had a terrible kicker last year.
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...Has to be Kharylake Martin, who has a meeting with coach B (and new OL coach?)left before deciding between SMU, UCF and Colorado... unless we can get one of the two transfers to come our way.
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...Quarterback.
------------------ "Winning ain't everything...but it's a lot more fun than the alternative!"
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...Anthony Schlegel.
Does anyone know if we're even making contact with him? "What kind of weirdo school are they running over there in Fort Worth?"
- Randy Galloway ESPN Radio (103.3 FM)
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...No third scholarship kicker, that is too many to have on the team. Especialy when you ahve players with potential at the position.
QB we are set with for a few years with this class. We need more DT, OL, and WR. On the OL I am especially concerned at Center. Reindl will play it this year, but who will move in after that? Eidson is a deep snapper. Kiescheik was a center in high school, but has played Guards since arriving here. Bryan Turner (recruit this year) might move to Center. Benson was recruited as a center, but rumor is he is moving to DT. WR is a major concern. Right now, Cunningham is the only player who has stepped up. And he might not be at full health next year. Griffen, Taylor, and Elliot were all decent recruits, but have not stepped it up yet. None of the other players from this years class or past classes were recruited all that hard. I was really hoping we could pull in a stud tall reciever in this class, but it looks like that will not happen...
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...I'd like to see Turner at center. I understand that he's an absolutely tenacious warrior and very strong. I think this class may be the foundation of a very good line in the future.
I would have liked to see Derricks, but I understand he?s no longer in the picture and was never actually offered. My enthusiasm regarding Martin has actually cooled quite a bit, so I?m on the fence on that one. Which leaves a great WR. I think JasonB is right. We?ve loaded up with potential players in this recruiting class, but I sure would have liked to see us nab a playmaker at receiver (or TE for that matter). I think the team is loaded down with pretty good receivers (probably too many actually), but we desperately need someone to step up and be a star. "It's a couple hundred million dollars. I'm not losing sleep over it." -- David Miller
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...I know we have a lot of recievers on the roster, but who has shown themselves to be "pretty good"? Vinson had one good game last year. Griffin hasn't shown all that much. Jay Taylor has been next to invisible, and Elliot hasn't played. Beyond Comet, we have no proven entities at reciever and that worries me for the seasons ahead. Some of these guys were highly rated, but until they prove themselves I think it is a position of concern (just like the O-line). I would feel better about it if Barnet had been moved to reciever instead of corner, but we are drastically lacking depth at corner as well.
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...What about Daniel Francis....he showed some real potential in the Rice Game? Caught almost everything thrown his way.
SMU's first president, Robert S. Hyer, selected Harvard Crimson and Yale Blue as SMU's colors to symbolize SMU's high academic standards. We are one of the few Universities to have school colors with real meaning...and we just blow them off.
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...Daniel Francis had a nice freshman year. Trey Griffin and Cedric Vinson showed flashes, but only flashes. Jay Taylor barely saw the ball thrown his way, so I'm not sure what we have in him. Elliott never even got on the field, so who knows? Comet is crucial to our offense this year, in that he needs to be the veteran leader from who the other receivers can learn.
JasonB is right - no more scholarship kickers. But on the other hand, JasonB is wrong - that we're set at QB. Most coaches want a QB in every class. So we're set for this year, but hopefully we'll reel in another stud passer in next year's class.
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...The key word concerning our WRs (other than Comet) is "proven". Other than Comet, I don't think you can say that we have any proven WRs, although some may prove to be good in the future.
I don't think we can judge them all based on last season either. Wallis didn't have success passing and Bartel started, what, 2/3s of the way through the season? In addition, Bartel didn't have the opportunity to develop rapport with his receivers as he was throwing baseballs all summer. "It's a couple hundred million dollars. I'm not losing sleep over it." -- David Miller
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...I think its hard to lump them together.
If the HP kicker is signed, I believe the SMU kicking will be better next year, and for several years into the future, even if Wolcott is redshirted in 2003. If Wolcott is not signed, the kicking may remain questionable. Above all, I feel it is worth it to sign Wolcott based on history, tradition, publicity, and more. K. Martin looks to be a horse. I wish he were committed already and I hope the coaches don't quit trying to make him a PONY! I certainly agree with the view posted by BUS. More good linemen are needed. IMO, Southern Methodist should always try to sign tranfers who are good players so we should try for Derricks, unless that door has been closed, and Schlegal also. Either or both of them would draw some local fans. Transfers are sort of lagniape, outside the regular recruiting process. I'm not sure the count of available scholarships at this point, but (as only a few on this board have pointed out) there is often a little addition and subtraction on national signing day. I'd be happy with the present group of players committed, but won't be surprised if some go elsewhere and would be gratified by the surprise signing of a top player not previously rumored. Further, we don't know who might transfer or drop out of school at the end of the term. Its no time for the coaches to stop. GO PONIES!
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...I'm going to take back what I originally said and say that we definately need more OL's and more CB's. I was very much influenced by the Superbowl. You can't get enough players in those positions. With Kevin Garrett gone we may need more DB's. OL is a given. I was youthfully unaware of our kicker situation(by youthfully I mean my SMU following only goes back 2 and a half years when I committed to attending the university).
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...Anyone know why Walcott is leaning toward TTech?
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...I had to pull this up, the sentiments towards the tail end of recruiting for and against Wolcott. Now the argument is whether to play him - and maybe SMU should.
In this thread also is praise for Daniel Francis (who might have made a difference), the need for a top receiver, and doubt about the QB situation. I'm still hoping the passing will come around! Go Ponies!
Re: What should be SMU's top recruiting prior...Big, ugly linemen. The uglier, the better.
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests |
|