NATE COOK LIKES SMU!!!!!!!!

[BIGBOY05]

NATE COOK A ALL DISTRICT 1ST TEAM WR ALL DISTRICT 1ST TEAM FREE SAFETY HAS BEEN OFFERED BY COLARADO AND A NUMBER OF OTHER SCHOOLS.HE LIKES SMU AND IF HE IS OFFERED HE WOULD TAKE IT ON THE SPOT HE IS N THE CLASS OF 04 6FT 2IN LONG BODY FRAME LONG ARMS AND CAN PURE OUT JUMP AND AS THE GREATEST HANDS IVE EVER SEEN YALL WILL HERE ABOUT NATE SOON. WHAT ARE THE COACHES WAITING FOR HERE IS THE GUY 2 BUILD AROUND HOPEFULLY SMU WONT WAIT 2 LATE 2 GO GET HIM

[SoCal_Pony]

According to the website Nacho posted this afternoon, Nate Cook is ‘rest of the best’ WR AND ‘rest of the best’ DB. Sounds like a really gifted athlete who would be a great addition to SMU.

Marcus, we need both you and Nate as MUSTANGS!!!!!!!!!!


[This message has been edited by SoCal_Pony (edited 07-17-2003).]

[hahaha]

Typical, SMU...Rest of the best is not much to be excited about

[GoRedGoBlue]

If everyone of your players was a Rest of the Best and had the right attitude, you'd win a National Championship.

40% of the Texas Top 100 don't make it past 2 seasons in College before they fail out, do drugs or just plain peaked in HS and didn't get any better in college.

Let's see how UT's CEDRIC BENSON does this year...cuz he didn't show much his Fresh year, and he plain sucked last year. I will see if he is my CASE IN POINT.

[Stallion]

that is so much crap! Just admit you don't know the first thing about what you are talking about. The fact is that the schools that recruit well in Texas are going to bowl games, have ranked teams, winning seasons and championships-the schools that don't like SMU, Rice, Tulsa and Baylor in comparison to its Big 12 Rivals do not. Passing that "recruiting doesn't matter" crap is for losers.

[GoRedGoBlue]

Who the hell said recruiting doesn't matter?

It totally matters, but don't just focus on the TOP100, because historically, STALLION, and you can surely attest to this, that HISTORICALLY, 30-40% of the State100s are in the 'Where are they now?' category before they make it to 20 years old.

Every year the DMNews publishes their 5-year old State 100 list...and you read countless athletes that didn't make it out of their first year of school.

Hell, some of the best ranked players we have had since the DP (Marcus Moseley, the kid that had his friend take the SAT for him out of Kimball?, etc) didn't make it past one year.

Thats a fact. Look it up.

[SoCal_Pony]

GRGB,

You bring up a good point, but I side more with Stallion on this.

You say 30% to 40% of the State's Top 100 are in the 'Where are they now?' category before they make it to 20 years old. While this may be true, what % of the States top 300 to 400, fall into this same category? It has to be more than the 30% to 40% you are stating for the top 100. Conclusion - Reduce the number of busts by recruiting the most sought after players.

Marcus says Nate Cook has been offered by Colorado. That is a good barometer for me.

Stallion, do you or anyone else have any more specific detail on Marcus or Nate?

[GoRedGoBlue]

SoCal, I agree that you measure their ability (or potential ability) by looking at the competition for their services. I'd rather have 25 players that other BCS teams wanted than 25 players unrecruited by BCS teams. Totally.

But, the most sought after players are not necessarily the ones you want (i.e., ones that are barely academically qualified) b/c most likely they are not going to stay in school. Some of the big schools may choose to pursue them and put them in Ohio State oral exam classes, but SMU just doesn't have those courses, and cannot afford to to waste a scholarship on the likes of those players.

For example: does anyone recall that Top3 class that Baylor signed 5-6 years ago? And only something like 15 of them made it into school out of 25? Now there are signs that many of their players won't be academically qualified coming out of summer school (at least that was a rumour going into summer).

So, we may never again have a Top10 class, who knows, but you don't NEED to have a Top10 class to compete at the highest level. The difference between a Top10 class and the Top40 class is about 5-6 players. If you choose 'quality' players in those positions, and the Top10 schools choose 'best athlete' that tends to flunk out, that will be the difference between the classes. On paper, that is clearly better, but over 4 years, perhaps not so much better.

On the years that you 'gamble' and win on those players, then you are an exceptional team...but on years you gamle and lose (see Baylor) then you average. Of course, Baylor gambled on MANY and came out a loser.

[Charleston Pony]

Both sides of this argument have merit, but I think the point here is that SMU is not in a position to go head to head with UT and A$M for the top guys at each position. If we are able to fill our roster with those "best of the rest" guys and we are selective in taking those who are good students, good "team" players, hard workers with a ton of heart (these decisions have to be influenced by reports from the kids' H.S. coaches), then...while we might not win a naational championship team...I suspect we will soon be able to compete with any of the top teams in the country.

Cavan made a good hire in coach Ringo who brought "connections" to the program. Bennett appears to be an improvement over Cavan and has taken those connections a step further. Bennett also made a good decision to keep coach Ringo (or was that Copeland's decision to make Ringo untouchable?)

Bottom line is that we appear to be doing very well considering we STILL haven't produced any wins we can use to help sell anyone on this program!!! Will this finally be the year we upset someone?

[Otto]

Does Nate Cook play at Allen HS, too?