Verbal Commit #2

[Ponymon]

there is no such thing as a 4.8. Search 4.8 under the Database. 4.9 means no analyst has seen enough of the recruit to offer an opinion. You have to be death, dumb and blind not to get a 5.0 in their system-or sign very late and they've moved on to the next recruiting class. 5.2 is pretty mediocre and would almost certainly translate into a player in the Bottom 1/3 of the recruiting class pool.

BTW a 1 Star (ONE STAR for those who can't seem to read) is in the DROP down box. Since 4.9 is used for 2 Stars (TWO STARS), obviously, 1 star (ONE STAR) would equate to a 4.8 or LESS! They may never use it, but it IS in the system!

[Stallion]

I wasn't trying to be a smartass -just trying to enlighten you from your ignorance: This is directly from Rivals

The ranking system ranks prospects on a numerical scale from 6.1-4.9.



6.1 Franchise Player; considered one of the elite prospects in the country, generally among the nation's top 25 players overall; deemed to have excellent pro potential; high-major prospect

6.0-5.8 All-American Candidate; high-major prospect; considered one of the nation's top 300 prospects; deemed to have pro potential and ability to make an impact on college team

5.7-5.5 All-Region Selection; considered among the region's top prospects and among the top 750 or so prospects in the country; high-to-mid-major prospect; deemed to have pro potential and ability to make an impact on college team

5.4-5.0 Division I prospect; considered a mid-major prospect; deemed to have limited pro potential but definite Division I prospect; may be more of a role player

4.9 Sleeper; no Rivals.com expert knew much, if anything, about this player; a prospect that only a college coach really knew about

[George S. Patton]

So dead people are higher than a 1 star?

[WorldStang]

Don't mind the old attorney.. he thinks he works for rivals and beats up posters on this board to make up for his lack of.. (fill in the blank).

[SMU88]

I like the fact that coach is trying to get these quick versatile players!! Welcome to SMU!!! GO PONIES!!

[mavsrage311]

I like the fact that coach is trying to get these quick versatile players!! Welcome to SMU!!! GO PONIES!!

well, thats one way to spin it.

Personally, I like the undersized/no other real offers version.

Truth hurts people

[Ponymon]

I like the fact that coach is trying to get these quick versatile players!! Welcome to SMU!!! GO PONIES!!

well, thats one way to spin it.

Personally, I like the undersized/no other real offers version.

Truth hurts people

I had a friend of mine that was 5-9 when he graduated from high school. When he got out of the Navy 4 years later he was 6-4. Just because he is undersized right now doesn't necessarily mean that he will remain undersized. Of course, the odds are against his showing this type of growth, but at least he is definitely an athlete, which you can plainly see by reviewing the Rivals tape.

[jtstang]

I had a friend of mine that was 5-9 when he graduated from high school. When he got out of the Navy 4 years later he was 6-4. Just because he is undersized right now doesn't necessarily mean that he will remain undersized. Of course, the odds are against his showing this type of growth, but at least he is definitely an athlete, which you can plainly see by reviewing the Rivals tape.

So we are recruiting on "spec growth" now? That's genius.

[mavsrage311]

I like the fact that coach is trying to get these quick versatile players!! Welcome to SMU!!! GO PONIES!!

well, thats one way to spin it.

Personally, I like the undersized/no other real offers version.

Truth hurts people

I had a friend of mine that was 5-9 when he graduated from high school. When he got out of the Navy 4 years later he was 6-4. Just because he is undersized right now doesn't necessarily mean that he will remain undersized. Of course, the odds are against his showing this type of growth, but at least he is definitely an athlete, which you can plainly see by reviewing the Rivals tape.

The odds of going from 5'9" to 6'4" are pretty slim I'd say. All I've been trying to say is that this early in recruiting, we should be getting more guys close to blue-chip status than sleeper status. Guys that have the measurables. There will be plenty of undersized sleepers to "pounce" on when the well runs dry right before signing day

[mustang06]

I assure you that we are targeting the best players that we can get. We would love to have the athletes that bigger schools get, but they simply don't want to come here. We have not been to a bowl in forever, we aren't on TV a lot, we are in Conference USA, and we don't turn out hardly any NFL players. For now, we just have to hope that the guys we do get can develop into good players and that they can play well as a team. At that point, when we start winning consistently, we can hope to get some better prospects. For now, I guess we just have to hope that our smurfs can grow into players.

[RGV Pony]

I assure you that we are targeting the best players that we can get. We would love to have the athletes that bigger schools get, but they simply don't want to come here. We have not been to a bowl in forever, we aren't on TV a lot, we are in Conference USA, and we don't turn out hardly any NFL players. For now, we just have to hope that the guys we do get can develop into good players and that they can play well as a team. At that point, when we start winning consistently, we can hope to get some better prospects. For now, I guess we just have to hope that our smurfs can grow into players.

That's a pretty good argument, and would certainly have held water across the board in the athletic department for awhile. However, when one considers that our bball team similarly hasn't been the NCAAs in forever, plays in cUSA, and has hardly any NBA players (1), yet the recruiting class and its targets have picked up, it makes it difficult not to ask why football recruiting goes as it does. Except of course that it's likely an issue that transcends much more than just SMU...that is, college basketball annually demonstrates how the non-BCS schools are at least allowed on the same playing field. Not so the case with football.

[mavsrage311]

I assure you that we are targeting the best players that we can get. We would love to have the athletes that bigger schools get, but they simply don't want to come here. We have not been to a bowl in forever, we aren't on TV a lot, we are in Conference USA, and we don't turn out hardly any NFL players. For now, we just have to hope that the guys we do get can develop into good players and that they can play well as a team. At that point, when we start winning consistently, we can hope to get some better prospects. For now, I guess we just have to hope that our smurfs can grow into players.

I feel like Bennett gives up on recruiting the blue-chippers, that he doesn't even try. This is what I've heard. I understand that most won't even consider us, but there are some that will. As stated above, Doherty is making Bennett look really bad by the progress the basketball program is already making in just a year. This will be Bennett's 6th year I believe, if he's not gaining momentum in recruiting NOW, will he EVER?

[Stallion]

its up to the Head Coach to change the perception of the Program BEFORE the team starts winning. Its a common trait of coaches who successfully turn programs around. Bennett got a decent start but that 0-12 season, for which he deserves substantial-but not total blame- made his job 10 times more difficult. On second thought there was no excuse for not winning at least 2 games. The SMU administration deserves much of the blame for hiring coaches without giving them the tools to succeed.

[George S. Patton]

its up to the Head Coach to change the perception of the Program BEFORE the team starts winning. Its a common trait of coaches who successfully turn programs around. Bennett got a decent start but that 0-12 season, for which he deserves substantial-but not total blame- made his job 10 times more difficult. On second thought there was no excuse for not winning at least 2 games. The SMU administration deserves much of the blame for hiring coaches without giving them the tools to succeed.

I totally agree with that. They probably should have won that UTEP game here, but that was his second year and so most of the roster were Cavan's leftovers.

If Bennett doesn't survive this year, I would think his successor will be in a far better position to run the program since the program returned from death.

[PK]

I feel like Bennett gives up on recruiting the blue-chippers, that he doesn't even try. This is what I've heard.

Are your "feelings" based upon what you have heard or are those two separate thoughts you threw out there. Where have you heard this and from whom. I have seen a number of mentions on this board of recruits with offers from BCS schools and SMU. Of course they have eventually commited to one of the BCS schools, but the point being that we have been actively recruiting many of the same guys the BCS schools are recruiting. Perhaps you have other players in mind when you say "blue-chippers", but just because we may not be listed as a school of interest by some of these "blue-chippers" does not mean we have not tried to recruit them. Just IMHO.