Will SMU football ever be relevant again...

[bigdaddy08091]

Recruits follow success, but they will follow the top four schools in a BCS conference.

Which remain the same over the years.

[Stallion]

Now I just gave at least 5 examples of Top National programs whose fortunes went up and down based upon the recruiting success or lack thereof of various Head Coaches. Top programs DO NOT always remain at the top. There are no bigger names than UT, USC, OU, LSU et al and each have had a decade or so where they weren't getting the Top National athletes and weren't getting BCS type bowls. Right now ND, Texas A&M, and Miami are in that down cycle of "relatively" poor recruiting and mediocre results based upon their past. You can ignore it-go ahead but it can be documented. Here's another example:

1960s-the Darrell Royal era
1970s-the Barry Switzer era
early 1980s-the Ron Meyer era
mid 1980-mid 1990s- the Jackie Sherrill/Slocum era
2000 - X The Brown/Stoops era

I don't think there is any doubt these were the most dominant periods of recruiting success by head coaches in Texas over the last 50 years. There is a direct correlation between these dominant eras in Texas recruiting and the success of those programs as a result.

[PonySnob]

Right now ND, Texas A&M, and Miami are in that down cycle of "relatively" poor recruiting and mediocre results based upon their past.

Are there very many of the recruits at the schools mentioned in your post, who wouldn not be starters for SMU and would dominate in CUSA-light?

[Stallion]

that's exactly why I used the word "relatively". Note for example that Notre Dame's Senior and Junior Classes were ranked 32nd and 40th respectively which have got to be modern historic lows for that school. Not bad for some schools. During that period, Notre Dame's recruiting dropped off the cliff and it is showing 3-4 years later. Unfortunately, this wonderful period may not last as Notre Dame is starting to get some top prospects again. Count to 3-4 after 2006 and Notre Dame should rise again. Right now ND has the highest rated class in the Country for total points. But you could have detected a downward trend in ND Football based upon Rivals' analysis of their recriuiting. Amazing how that happens.

[Insane_Pony_Posse]

stallion do you think the "model" at smu is ready for a big time coach yet? or do you think alot more changes will still have to be made for any coach, even a big time coach, to put a team on the field that can win 8-9 games a year and/or win conference USA? in other words could a bob stoops/mack brown win at smu or will the model need to be futher developed?

[DiamondM75]

stallion do you think the "model" at smu is ready for a big time coach yet? or do you think alot more changes will still have to be made for any coach, even a big time coach, to put a team on the field that can win 8-9 games a year and/or win conference USA? in other words could a bob stoops/mack brown win at smu or will the model need to be futher developed?

Is this a rhetorical question?

[EastStang]

While I won't answer for Stallion, my opinion would be that under the current recruiting regime, a Mack Brown could win at SMU because of his stature as a coach who has won a National Championship and recruits have clearly heard of him. Steve Spurrier could probably fit that bill as well. But there are lots of excellent coaches who could not turn it around at SMU. In other words, the list would be pretty short. Other names that might pull it off: Carroll, Zook, Urban Meyer, and Rodriguez.

[Stallion]

I think there are a lot of coaches who could have sporadic success at SMU defined by a bowl game here and there. This conference is plainly awful and if we can't win 6-7 games playing the schools we have in the last few years then there is something wrong. But that's not the goal I have for this program. Remember the stated goal for this program is a Top 25 Goal. I don't think any decent Coach with alternatives is going to want to put up with SMU. Now if you are talking about an out of work retread or Coordinator desperate for his first job alternative then we got a shot at them. But again I'm hearing we don't want another Rossley, Cavan, Bennett, Dement, Tubbs type hire. Doherty was a lucky break and even he was a retread coaching at the bottom of Coaching ranks. Nice hire though-I've been on board all along there.

[mustang1108]

Look out for butch davis

[Insane_Pony_Posse]

Stallion I know you have stated SMU has made some of the necessary changes, but still many more have to be made. However if we fire Coach Phil and go after a bigger name coach, can we (even if we have the money) approach a bigger name type coach unless the changes to the model are already in place? Lets say Orsini calls Turner and says "Terry Bowden/Rick Neuheisel/whoever is willing to come, but he wants some changes so he can recruit players that currently could not get in SMU".....can Turner make that kind of call on the fly?.....or does that have to get tied up in committee and then we lose the coaching candidate?

[BrianTinBigD]

Money or coaches have nothing to do with it anymore. Ask your child, the athlete, where he or she wants to go to school. It has nothing to do with coaches. The same schools have been consistent for years, and coaches have come and gone, but the school has remained strong. It is about the University, not coaching or recruiting. Why do you think all the coaches are trying to get to the best schools? SMU screwed this thing up years ago, not PB. Bob Stoops leaves OU, recruiting remains the same. They do not have to recruit. SMU has to recruit. Half the football players across the country have no idea SMU even has a football team.

Let me respond with:
Howard Schnellenburger
Gary Gibbs

or perhaps something in burnt orange like:
David McWilliams
John Mackovic

Quite simply, players play for coaches not tradition. Ask Baylor how life has been since Grant Teaff left or what Nebraska has been doing since they lost Tom Osbourne. Explain South Florida, Boise State, Utah with Urban Meyer, the miracle in the LA Coliseum this weekend. This is what you pay for and it is the coaching that makes your team better. It matters at every level of football.

[SMU Football Blog]

Stallion I know you have stated SMU has made some of the necessary changes, but still many more have to be made. However if we fire Coach Phil and go after a bigger name coach, can we (even if we have the money) approach a bigger name type coach unless the changes to the model are already in place? Lets say Orsini calls Turner and says "Terry Bowden/Rick Neuheisel/whoever is willing to come, but he wants some changes so he can recruit players that currently could not get in SMU".....can Turner make that kind of call on the fly?.....or does that have to get tied up in committee and then we lose the coaching candidate?

Ask this question: Could Orsini commit to building a practice facility for basketball on the fly? No. Was that a big part in bringing Doherty here? Yes. So, how did that happen? Lots of planning; lots of things going on behind the scenes in a very short period of time (three weeks between Tubbs dismissal and Doherty being hired).

Maybe I am wrong but I don't think Orsini approaches candidates with nothing more than "We have budgeted for a __% salary increase over last year."

[EastStang]

I think that changes in admissions policy is a Board of Trustee issue. After the death penalty and the Tate follies, Pye was on a short leash by the UMC and Trustees. They did not want to see SMU in the headlines of another scandel. I suspect that any hiring of a football coach above a certain level budgetted by the Board of Trustees would be another item that they'd have to discuss. I also think that Orsini is working on making sure there is enough gold in the bank account for such a hire. And I suspect that in his interview with Bennett last year a number of those issues were aired. I think Orsini knows where the problems are and what he can commit to with a new coach.

[Insane_Pony_Posse]

SMU Football Blog I hope you are right, because we need to make SMU a very attractive place for a prospective big name coach. Of course some of the parts are already in place. The new stadium, the Dallas media market, being in the middle of a hot bed recruiting area for football talent, a great airport, a great business community with post grad job opportunities, a rich football tradition, ect.....

I just worry that this is going to be a real "cross-roads" for SMU.....a monumental decision that will dictate whether we remain in the basement of college football or we rise to a level of real sustained respectability.

I trust Orsini will/can make the right decision if he is allowed to and not restrained by the anti-sports groups within the university.

[SMU Football Blog]

I think that changes in admissions policy is a Board of Trustee issue. After the death penalty and the Tate follies, Pye was on a short leash by the UMC and Trustees. They did not want to see SMU in the headlines of another scandel. I suspect that any hiring of a football coach above a certain level budgetted by the Board of Trustees would be another item that they'd have to discuss. I also think that Orsini is working on making sure there is enough gold in the bank account for such a hire. And I suspect that in his interview with Bennett last year a number of those issues were aired. I think Orsini knows where the problems are and what he can commit to with a new coach.

Let's be honest. Turner is practically bullet-proof at this point. Nobody has to like everything he has ever done, but he has been good for SMU and if he sticks around, he will get a building named for him at some point. If Turner wants somethign bad enough, I think he gets it. We have several good sports advocates on the Board these days as well.