Stallion Question

[SoCal_Pony]

Can you tell us your best guess as to the average score last years’ recruiting class would have received based on this years’ more precise measure.

I think this is an effective way to gauge Bennett’s class going forward and to better understand if our play on the field is impacting our recruiting.

As an example, is Wilton McCray’s 5.0 score considered above average, average, or below average when compared to last years’ class.

Thanks,

[Stallion]

5.0 is a considered a very marginal prospect the lowest 2 star rating. In prior years almost all recruits to decent schools got at least a 2 star although this year I see signs that they may be more stringent with the more precise scale. 5.5 is considered a 3 star rating. Donald Massey for example this year is rated a 5.5. I would think most of our 3 stars from last year would have been rated low 3 stars at about 5.5 or 5.6 with the possible exception of Massey, Boren, Muse and Cleveland who possibly might have been 5.7 but I DOUBT it. However, most of our 2 star guys last year were pretty solid. I like the new rating because it distinguishes between the warm body 2 star recruit with at most 1-2 offers from marginal programs from the highly recruited 2 star kid who might have been highly recruited by 3-4 strong programs like Tech, Okie St and others. Right now Chase is rated 5.6(and he strongly recruited nationally), Henderson at 5.4, Lindley at 5.4, Mckinney at 5.3 and McCrary at 5.0. Again I still say the best way to determine whether a school is competitive in recruiting is compare the offers(not interest which is published by the SID's Office) of its players from quality Division 1A schools. The coaches are the paid professionals hired to evaluate talent. However, with early commitments you might not have enough info to compare.

<small>[ 11-03-2003, 07:13 AM: Message edited by: Stallion ]</small>

[Dr Jeske]

so Stallion in your honest opinion, do you think if SMU had all 5.4 rated guys over Tulsa who had all 5.0 rated guys that SMU would win that matchup evey year by more than a touchdown?

5.1 or 5.2 or what ever is an arbituary number set by a couple of individuals who to the best of my knowledge don't have a long history of coaching in the D1 ranks, but everyone gives them credit like they know exactly how good these kids will be. I'm not talking about the Adrian Peterson's of the world, I'm talking about a player like Bryan Turner compared to Jamison Newby. Turner is a 5.2. Newby is a 5.1. Do you really contend that the difference is actual or even enough to make a difference on the field to pull out a victory

They don't look at more than the top 150 kids, for more than a minute. Then they find out that a certain college offered a scholarship. Do we know for a fact that it was an offer and not interest?

Coaches. players, Fans, all will exaggerate. I think the funniest line is the people on this board who say we will beat you because we had the highest rated non-BCS recruiting class. Hasn't been proven yet, Tulsa has never beaten SMU in recruiting in the last 15 years (according to the experts)yet they can win 4 games, including one against us.

So while better rated classes show progress in improving talent, they don't guarantee nothing.

Despite all your talk I won't concede that we have the worst or next to worse talent in the country, so there are other factors which are cause for our 0 win season

[SoCal_Pony]

Mack Brown is the poster boy of a great recruiter who can’t coach.

Over the past 4 years, he has been #1 in recruiting, yet is 0-4 against OU.

But look closer at UT’s record. During this time they are 38-9, with bowl wins over Washington and LSU and a heartbreaker loss to Joey Harrington and Oregon.

They are also 8-0 against OSU, A&M and Nebraska.

Over the past 4 years their average ranking is #8.

So for all the criticism of Mack Brown, he still has teams with that perform within a relative proximity to his recruiting rankings.

We have had only 1 good recruiting class and the real stars of this class have yet to play…Massey, Boren, Muse and Phillips.

Give us 4 years of top non-BCS recruiting and yes, we can be extremely competitive with any non-BCS team.

[Stallion]

you obviously didn't read my post very closely as I clearly said the offers from coaches were the most reliable-what you idiots that refuse to recognize is that those ratings largely reflect the offers received. Yes I think that if SMU signed a class full of 5.4's(Henderson and Lindley-Texas Top 100) they would beat a team full of 5.0 recruits EVERY DAMN YEAR. Its basically what TCU has done for the last 4 years when btw I very prominently predicted TCU would go on at least a 5 year winning streak against SMU based on the talent disparity alone. I caught a lot of hell for that but it is obvious to anyone who follows recruiting that there is no comparison in the talent at these schools.

[ponyboy]

This is where you absolutely refuse to get it, Stallion. BOTH recruiting AND coaching matter. So it's not necessarily the case that the 5.4 guys will beat the 5.0 guys every damn time. Why not? Because coaching matters. Ask the Dallas Cowboys.

Get it through your thick skull. BOTH recruiting and coaching matter.

[Dr Jeske]

Ponyboy is right, coaching matters also, which was my main point. But hey Stallion you keep basing everything on tenth's It's like running a 4.5 or a 4.6 40 yard dash. Not much difference in a ten yard run

[Stallion]

FACT: Ponyboy and the rest of you with your anecdotal "feelings" about recruiting have been proven wrong for 14 straight years now. BTW the difference between running a 4.3 or 4.4 can be worth a million dollars in the pros. The difference between running a 4.6 and 4.5 can mean a full scholarship to a Division 1A school or Stephen F. Austin instead.

<small>[ 11-04-2003, 06:54 AM: Message edited by: Stallion ]</small>

[ponyboy]

FACT: You changed the subject again because you know you're wrong. BOTH coaching AND recruiting matter. BOTH.

[Stallion]

I never changed the subject - you did the subject was about recruiting from the very first post and I never said anywhere that Coaching doesn't matter-as a matter of fact I have never said that PERIOD although people on here claim I say it all the time. What I have said is that SMU has not been competitive with its natural and traditional rivals because it has not been competitive in recruiting since it does not compete on an even playing field. That's a FACT. P.S. I've got a suggestion for some of you if for some reason you want to make a positive point about the football program- state your opinion, back it up forceably with facts not emotional cheerleading, and stay away from cross-examining the person who might be able to beat you over the head with facts that will discredit your opinion. I don't have to agree with your position-tough-get over it.

<small>[ 11-05-2003, 07:00 AM: Message edited by: Stallion ]</small>

[Dooby]

Originally posted by Stallion:
I never changed the subject - you did the subject was about recruiting from the very first post and I never said anywhere that Coaching doesn't matter-as a matter of fact I have never said that PERIOD although people on here claim I say it all the time.

To be fair, Stallion, what you have said many times on this and the other board is something to the effect of "It doesn't matter who the coach is" as long as SMU refuses to compete on an even playing field with its natural and traditional rivals.

I understand the difference and you understand the difference. But not everyone here does.

And if you weren't so freakin' antagonistic, people wouldn't be be so quick to attack you.

For example, I made a comment about jucos and you quoted me and jumped down my throat. Which was unnecessary because I agree with you on most every point, especially jucos. You see, Stallion, while I pretty much agree with on all things SMU football (except I wanted Cavan fired so bad it hurt), you drive me bonkers because you tend to act like a jack@ss.

<small>[ 11-05-2003, 07:50 AM: Message edited by: Dooby ]</small>

[Stallion]

P.S. don't worry I realize that but I really don't care because I don't plan on running for President of The Jack....(i'm sorry) Mustang Club anytime soon.