Will SMU football ever be relevant again...

[ponyinNC]

I think that we are so passed the death penalty stigma that we should go after the best candidate...regardless of past improprieties or scandals. I think its time we made a 'statement' hire in football. Most of our current student population wasn't even alive for the DP era!! Why continue to punish them and the faithful alumni that have had to endure losing season after losing season??

For what?? So that we can appear "holier than thou" in the eyes of the NCAA and we can have high graduation rates?? So when teams absolutely dismantle us on the field we can say, "oh yeah?? well what was your team's grad rate??"...not the kind of smack talk I enjoy having to resort to!

I dont give two $%^'s about grad rates or sat scores when it comes to my favorite football team. As long as they are eligible, sign em' up! I welcome a rebuttal argument...

[mustangxc]

UT under Makovic, UT under Brown
A&M under Sherrill A&M under R.C Slocum (in his last 5 years)
Miami under Jimmy Johnson and Butch Davis, Miami under Coker
OU under Stoops and Switzer, OU under the 3 coaches between their tenure
USC under Carroll USC under the previous 3 coaches

These are programs built on the best recruiters in the business an area their predecessor failed in. Programs go up and down and generally it relates directly to recruiting

Add in the most obvious of all South Carolina under Lou Holtz and everyone else and South Carolina under Steve Spurrier!

[EastStang]

Which of course leads us all back to "the model". Bennett was an ace recruiter at K State and A&M. He knows how to recruit and how to attract top players and how to organize a recruiting effort. [enter the obligatory "he forgot more... " joke] What changed? Why has Bennett failed according to the Stallion analysis in recruiting? And I'm not asking empiracally, I'm asking functionally. Why did we lose 1 on 1 recruiting battles with Baylor, with TCU, with Rice, with Tulsa? Not to mention Ark., A&M, UT and Tech. What did he do wrong? Or what should we be doing that we're not doing? Are we handicapping ourselves in ways we do not appreciate? These are the questions that need to be asked over the coming months. Because unless those questions are answered, we could find another guy with a great resume, who has enthusiam, who has had great recruiting success in other places, and yet fails here. I truly thought Bennett would succeed simply because he could recruit. There are only so many Zooks, Browns, Meyers, Spurriers, and Stoops out there. How do we recognize the next Mack Brown?

[Insane_Pony_Posse]

I dont give two $%^'s about grad rates or sat scores when it comes to my favorite football team. As long as they are eligible, sign em' up! I welcome a rebuttal argument

i think you may be shocked at the excitement if we just move out of the "cellar" and into the "1st or 2nd floor". we aren't going from the cellar to the penthouse, but if SMU were to start winning just 7,8, 9 games a year, be the CUSA Champion, and be in bowl games the interest and excitement would be enormous. SMU fans/students are so beat down from losing they have forgotten or just don't know what it feels like to have a winning team. i doubt Turner is ever going to let SMU become Moron or Thug U. but thats not to say we cant have some exciting Top 25- Top 30 football on the Hilltop. Lets get to that level first, then talk about moving up to a higher level.

[Stallion]

again-you are one of the worst offenders of this "Bennett was an ace recruiter" non-sense. I admit Bennett was known for evaluating overlooked players and turning them into decent Big 12 players but I really never considered him an ace recruiter from Day 1 which was one of my chief objections to him in the first place. Winning with 45 JUCOs and marginal academic recruits at K-State doesn't make him an ace recruiter from SMU's perspective.

[PlanoStang]

again-you are one of the worst offenders of this "Bennett was an ace recruiter" non-sense. I admit Bennett was known for evaluating overlooked players and turning them into decent Big 12 players but I really never considered him an ace recruiter from Day 1 which was one of my chief objections to him in the first place. Winning with 45 JUCOs and marginal academic recruits at K-State doesn't make him an ace recruiter from SMU's perspective.

45 JUCOs, and marginal marginal academic recruits at K-State doesn't make him an ace recruiter from SMU's perspective.

Copeland Copeland Copeland What were you thinking

[BRStang]

I think that we are so passed the death penalty stigma that we should go after the best candidate...regardless of past improprieties or scandals. I think its time we made a 'statement' hire in football. Most of our current student population wasn't even alive for the DP era!! Why continue to punish them and the faithful alumni that have had to endure losing season after losing season??

For what?? So that we can appear "holier than thou" in the eyes of the NCAA and we can have high graduation rates?? So when teams absolutely dismantle us on the field we can say, "oh yeah?? well what was your team's grad rate??"...not the kind of smack talk I enjoy having to resort to!

I dont give two $%^'s about grad rates or sat scores when it comes to my favorite football team. As long as they are eligible, sign em' up! I welcome a rebuttal argument...

I believe our problem stems from the vicious cycle that started in 1989 and continued to drill us further and further down in the ground. Death penalty begets poor recruits begets losses begets SWC breakup begets poor recruits begets losses begets WAC 16 breakup begets poor recruits begets losses begets coach firings and wrong coach hirings begets more losses and more poor recruits.

Now, to the coaching issue: Do you honestly think even with a gazillion dollars we could get a Spurrier in here? NO! Why would a top name coach with no baggage ever come to SMU post 1993 and risk going to the grave? To spend several years just trying to climb out of the cellar and only then to compete for the top spot in the second lowest conference on the totem pole and, perhaps, if he's lucky, a ranking in the top 30?

The way I see it is that our ascent, if ever, can only come after baby steps over several years with the right coach(es) at the helm (Doherty-type hire who are using this job as a stepping stone). It will take a huge commitment from the university and wealthy alumni and even then, only with a huge bit of luck.

Now, then, STALLION: I'm confused, you're actually giving some credit to the notion that a coach (as a recruiter) can actually turn a program around?

[bigdaddy08091]

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.

Okay, let's bring in the best coach possible. I promise you nothing will change, due to the fact that SMU is not on the radar for many top recruits. What changes that is the attitude of the institution towards its athletic programs. Lets not discuss other programs, because we do not know what they are doing to be successfull, othr than winning. Most of us thought PB was the savior when he came. How quickly that changes. You can be the best coach, but if you cannot bring in the talent then you are not a good coach. I still say the instituiton/tradition recruits. When recruiters come into your home football is not the talk. They try to sell the institution, because the football info is in front of every recruit 24/7. They can't lie about that. All the history lessons on coaches still confirm that the great institutions remain the same, with a Boise State every once in a while. That would be nice, but we need to build a traditon at SMU and you cannot do that playing musical chairs with coaches, unless you ar a BCS School.

[Insane_Pony_Posse]

re: What changes that is the attitude of the institution towards its athletic programs.

Agreed we need alot more support from the institution,
but there probably are not many other college institutions that
have put togther 42 million dollar brand new football stadiums
in the last 7 years.

[ALEX LIFESON]

56 MILLION.

But Insane Pony is right, SMU didn't build this palace of a stadium that also includes a top notch weight room, locker rooms, meeting rooms etc... to let this go down the tubes.

[bigdaddy08091]

56 MILLION.

But Insane Pony is right, SMU didn't build this palace of a stadium that also includes a top notch weight room, locker rooms, meeting rooms etc... to let this go down the tubes.

So, why did they build it?

[Ponymon]

As a safe place to shoot off fireworks, of course!