Getting it right about Ronnie Morgan

[Ponymon]

It may be that SMU has self imposed scholarship restrictions upon itself.

Two scholarships would seem to be the logical self-imposed penalty.

And I'm sure that the NCAA will take away 2 more given how they like to pile on to SMU. If it were Texas, they would be adding scholarships!

[SMU Football Blog]

Morgan did not sign before Doherty became coach-he signed I believe last Thursday.

When it comes to Morgan, we actually don't know a darn thing. We don't know if Morgan actually committed to SMU (my opinion); we don't know if Doherty even kept the offer open; we don't know if Doherty even tried to otherwise recruit Morgan.

....there ain't anything left unless he goes the Division 1A transfer, late qualifier or JUCOs attempting to graduate route. Morgan would have been a nice not great pickup. It may be that SMU has self imposed scholarship restrictions upon itself.

And there wasn't much to begin with anyway, and even less was considering SMU. The hand-wringing after Tubbs was let go was a tad much.

[Hoop Fan]

[quote="SMU Football Blog] And there wasn't much to begin with anyway, and even less was considering SMU. The hand-wringing after Tubbs was let go was a tad much.[/quote]

for someone who was tired of hearing about it all, this sure kicks up dust. Care to tell us what you mean? If you mean that missing out on Morgan was basically no loss, well, I'd like to have him signed right now. I've seen him play and while undersized, he is tough as nails. This class is looking like a potential washout. We'll see what Doherty can do. Even though we cannot expect the world from him by any means, what he does with these scholarships will show us just how crafty a recruiter he is. That is assumes SMU has not penalized itself. They sure should announce it if they have. I have serious doubts whether Doherty would have taken the job though if there were scholarship limitations.

[SMU Football Blog]

You are kicking up dust, not me. My point, and my only point, was there wasn't much out there when Tubbs was let go: i.e. there weren't many fish to catch, the catchable fish were not that big and there weren't that many hooks in the water, either. There isn't much now. There won't be much in the next couple of weeks. Firing Tubbs may or may not have cost us Morgan, who at the end of the day did not have many options either.

[Hoop Fan]

You are kicking up dust, not me. My point, and my only point, was there wasn't much out there when Tubbs was let go: i.e. there weren't many fish to catch, the catchable fish were not that big and there weren't that many hooks in the water, either. There isn't much now. There won't be much in the next couple of weeks. Firing Tubbs may or may not have cost us Morgan, who at the end of the day did not have many options either.

I understand, but we could do worse than Morgan. However, there are guys around the country who have emerged with good senior seasons. Not highly ranked guys, but good players nonetheless always exist in spring. The key for SMU like always is evaluating sleepers. They happen to be in New York or Seattle and all over, so we will test Doherty's theory that "they" know SMU in NY. By the way, we did get Brian Morris late in the spring last year. If I had to guess I would bet Doherty signs someone from the east coast where his contacts are, NY or Florida, soon. We do need to get at least one more player in this 2006 class.

[SMU Football Blog]

You are prbably right on all counts.

[EastStang]

Hmmm. going after "sleepers". I can't wait for Stallion to weigh in on this one. Let me quickly paraphrase what I expect he'll say. We've been going after sleepers for 20 years now. And those sleepers will likely be duds compared with highly recruited 4 star players. We can't recruit the 4 star players because our model is not set up to accommodate that level of student-athlete. You can't win championships without great players. You folks will turn on Doherty by next March not understanding why we are not great when he doesn't have the model to compete. Now EastStang might add- if you want to use the George Mason model where you pick up a team of sleepers and let them mature together, you might actually have a decent team. Stallion come back -But that has worked once in how many decades to get a team to the final four where they lost. The sure way to win is to have the best players in the Country. Egads I'm becoming schizophrenic.

[McClown27]

Hmmm. going after "sleepers". I can't wait for Stallion to weigh in on this one. Let me quickly paraphrase what I expect he'll say. We've been going after sleepers for 20 years now. And those sleepers will likely be duds compared with highly recruited 4 star players. We can't recruit the 4 star players because our model is not set up to accommodate that level of student-athlete. You can't win championships without great players. You folks will turn on Doherty by next March not understanding why we are not great when he doesn't have the model to compete. Now EastStang might add- if you want to use the George Mason model where you pick up a team of sleepers and let them mature together, you might actually have a decent team. Stallion come back -But that has worked once in how many decades to get a team to the final four where they lost. The sure way to win is to have the best players in the Country. Egads I'm becoming schizophrenic.

The reason that the George Mason model can now work is because all of the best high school players either immediately enter the draft or play one year in college. One no longer sees Patrick Ewing playing his senior year, or for that matter, Tim Duncan's Wake Forest against Marcus Camby's UMass. All of the skilled big players go to the NBA as soon as they are assured first round status. With the absence of skilled big players at dominant schools (like 20 years ago), more schools are able to compete.

[Stallion]

I've already posted quite definitively that George Mason employs the Stallion Model or worse.

[McClown27]

I've already posted quite definitively that George Mason employs the Stallion Model or worse.

Did I say otherwise? My point is that George Mason using the Stallion model would not have been able to compete in college basketball twenty years ago. College basketball has changed. The "BCS" basketball conferences are not able to *completely* dominate the "non-BCS" schools because their best talent is now in the NBA.