Recruit ranking question.

[GeorgiaMustang]

While looking at the Texas Rivals site, I saw that they already have 6 commitments. One 5-star and two 4-stars. The other three have not been ranked or given any stars. I assume that this is simply because they have not been evaluated by the talent scouts yet.

My question is this, since they have not yet been ranked, will their eventual ranking possibly be skewed higher due to their being offered by a national power like Texas and being a member of a recruiting class that already includes 3 of the Rivals top 100 prospects?

[MustangIcon]

Of course they will. And it makes perfect sense to me. If UT, USC, Florida, and Michigan all want some kid and offer him, odds are he is pretty darn good.

[smu diamond m]

I'm sure it does affect the eventual rank of the recruit. Has to.

[Stallion]

UT gets the pick of the players they want-so to an extent they rule the market. But in one year they got something like 24 out 29 kids offered. SMU on the other hand can't get a Top 100 kid to visit. Don't fool yourself 9/10ths of the players on their recruiting lists had 10 some 20 or could have had 30 offers. Half of SMU's class had no D1A offers. So its stretches credibility to suggests that recruiting services inflate UTs recruits and discount those great evaluators Tom Rossley, Mike Cavan, Phil Bennett or June Jones who ever is picking up scraps for SMU. In most years the proof is in the D1A offer puddin' and those high ranking by UT's recruits are backed up by tangible offers and the tangible results of the UT program prove it too.

[smu diamond m]

UT gets the pick of the players they want-so to an extent they rule the market. But in one year they got something like 24 out 29 kids offered. SMU on the other hand can't get a Top 100 kid to visit. Don't fool yourself 9/10ths of the players on their recruiting lists had 10 some 20 or could have had 30 offers. Half of SMU's class had no D1A offers. So its stretches credibility to suggests that recruiting services inflate UTs recruits and discount those great evaluators Tom Rossley, Mike Cavan, Phil Bennett or June Jones who ever is picking up scraps for SMU. In most years the proof is in the D1A offer puddin' and those high ranking by UT's recruits are backed up by tangible offers and the tangible results of the UT program prove it too.

Not saying these players don't deserve a high rating (nor that ours deserve higher), but that the fact that they hold an offer this early from a BCS school will improve the rating given.

[ponyboy]

SMU on the other hand can't get a Top 100 kid to visit.

Couldn't.

[Arkpony]

Touche`

[Mexmustang]

yet!

[George S. Patton]

UT gets the pick of the players they want-so to an extent they rule the market. But in one year they got something like 24 out 29 kids offered. SMU on the other hand can't get a Top 100 kid to visit. Don't fool yourself 9/10ths of the players on their recruiting lists had 10 some 20 or could have had 30 offers. Half of SMU's class had no D1A offers. So its stretches credibility to suggests that recruiting services inflate UTs recruits and discount those great evaluators Tom Rossley, Mike Cavan, Phil Bennett or June Jones who ever is picking up scraps for SMU. In most years the proof is in the D1A offer puddin' and those high ranking by UT's recruits are backed up by tangible offers and the tangible results of the UT program prove it too.

What's nice to see here is that the keeper of the star has already judged Jones' recruitment ability at this school after only 3 weeks time. That's amazing.

He's already suggested that Jones is a poor talent evaluator and won't be able to recruit kids unless they have a shaky background but are yet talented.

So he's done a nice job of already labeling someone who recruited in far different circumstances at Hawaii than under suggested better circumstances here.

I'm just glad to know that we don't have to waste our time in the next five years because the keeper of the star has already told us that Jones is a horrible recruiter.

How does he know that? He just does, so that's good enough for me.

[SMU 86]

I believe the next signing class will be a solid class for SMU. Coach Jones will have a year under his belt in the area to get to know the high school coaches in the Dallas area and recruit. Also, on a radio show in Houston he indicated that he will have 3 coaches assigned full time to the Houston area. Texas just had their junior day Austin this past weekend, that's why they have some commitments. I'm sure we will catch up after our junior day at SMU.

[Billy Joe]

Comparing UT to SMU is foolish. If SMU can start winning some recruiting battles with Tulsa, TCU, UTEP, Rice, Houston, and Baylor then we will see a big upgrade in talent. JJ has a succesful track record and his past success will attract better players than Bennett was able to attract to SMU. SMU does not need to recruit from a national top 100 list to be successful.

[smu diamond m]

SMU does not need to recruit from a national top 100 list to be successful.

Define successful.

SMU needs to recruit top 100 players all day long. Maybe not to win this patsy conference, but to be a good team overall.

[SMU_is_bowling]

Billy Joe wrote:
SMU does not need to recruit from a national top 100 list to be successful.

NOT YET!

[jtstang]

So its stretches credibility to suggests that recruiting services inflate UTs recruits and discount those great evaluators Tom Rossley, Mike Cavan, Phil Bennett or June Jones who ever is picking up scraps for SMU.

It's a little premature to lump Jones in with that recruiting juggernaut, isn't it Stallion? The guy's had what, three weeks here and already he's signed more immediate JUCO and transfer help than all of his predecessors combined.

[SMU Football Blog]

However, haven't we figured out that the subject of this thread was, in fact, exactly what was going on to some degree at Florida State? A handful of guys were three-stars and turned out to be spares that nobody wanted.