Is SMU a national university

[BigEasyPony]

One disturbing trend over the last few years is SMU's resistance to recruiting regionally or even nationally. I know there are a ton of great players in Texas, but SMU could stand to start pulling from Louisiana, Oklahoma, Kansas and Arkansas. I know that we have taken a few out-of-state kids recently, but I know there are some kids in Louisiana who would go to SMU to play football if they were recruited. I think 50% of our student body is from outside the state of Texas so I think we should begin to look for more cruits (maybe 20-25%) outside the state. While I think the Texas should always be where th bulk of our recruits come from I do think that a program is enhanced by recruiting regionally/nationally. I know Tulane pulls 5 or so recruits out of Texas every year. Why can't SMU pull 5-10 out-of-state recruits every year. Look st Tulsa, Kansas, Tulane and several other schools as examples of schools who raid Texas. SMU needs to think larger and realize that b/c of SMU's national reputation they have an opportunity to actively recruit out-of-state.

Thoughts?

[PerunaPunch]

I disagree. SMU does not have a huge national renown, especially in football... at least not anymore. Conversely, anyone from this area of Texas should be very familiar with SMU's sterling qualities (unless they've been living under a rock).

And even with THE COMMITMENT, where we've increased the recruiting budget by 50%, our staff and our recruiting budget is paltry in comparison to the state schools.

Finally, we could stock an NFL team from the talent that comes out of Texas. We need to focus our efforts where we can be most successful here in our own backyard. If you don't believe me, just look at how this philosophy has paid off in this (thus far) and the last recruiting class.

<small>[ 12-28-2003, 10:02 AM: Message edited by: PerunaPunch ]</small>

[i10pony]

I heard during the 70's and 80's we used to recruit nationally in fball. But we were a lot better back then. IN BBALL I personally think we don't get enough in state talent. UT gets the best bball recruits in the state then Arizona, Duke,and UConn raid the rest. SMU should be signing the Okafors, Ewings, and Endi Ebis that come out of Texas every year. Bhop is the only nationally recruited guy we have signed in a long time. I think the last guy we had that was highly regarded was John Konkak

[Stallion]

Koncak was from Kansas City.

[GoRedGoBlue]

50% of Students are from out of state.

[The Q]

I agree with BigEasyPony's premise that we should expand the recruiting base. But I don't think it's tim to take that step yet. There are some good players in Arkansas, certainly a bunch in Oklahoma and I get the impression that Louisiana might be fourth or fifth in the country in terms of cranking out top-shelf players, after Florida, California, Texas and maybe Pennsylvania (where La. ranks specifically is not the point - the fact is there are a ton of good athletes coming out of the Pelican State every year.)

If an out-of-state player comes to SMU and says he's interested, like that guy Wilburn (I think that's his name) did this year, that's fine. If we're able to get in EARLY like we did with Cory Muse and Ervin McGee last year, that's cool, too. But I think we should maintain the focus of our recruiting effort on Texas guys. The coaches need to convince Texas HS coaches first that their program will work, and if we can win even just a few games next year, that will show that the program, when matched with the proper (and maturing) talent, will work. We seriously could go 3-9 next year and be a "hot" recruiting team.

I say keep the coaches recruiting in Texas. Get some top-level kids in here, and watch the wins start coming. THEN expand the target recruiting area.

[PerunaPunch]

Hey, the one and only reason I grew up in Dallas and went to SMU is because my dad was recruited out of the swamp. SMU sent out an airplane, picked him up, and the rest is history. So I'm certainly not going to complain if we want to recruit in OK, LA, and AR.

But I think this is really a moot issue. Our focus is on a 300 mile radius around Dallas (due to the aforementioned logic). However, we're obviously selectively recruiting on a semi-national basis as seen by some of the recruits we're pulling out of Oklahoma (Muse and McGee last year), Georgia (Sturdivant last year), and Florida (Weatherford who we went after this year). So we're not recruiting in Texas to the exclusion of everywhere else. SMU is just being smart with the recruiting budget, and recruiting where their efforts SHOULD pay the biggest dividends (again based on the aforementioned logic).

[Johnny Rock]

Why look elsewhere when some of the top talent in the country is within a 300 mile radius of SMU? We do get students from around the country? Why? SMU is serious about academics. SMU struggles to get good football players within the 300 mile radius? Why? SMU is not serious about football. Well, sure, we did build a new stadium. But our competition has on campus facilities too. It is an easy answer. Our model is not a Division 1-A model. Players know this and that is why we get out recruited by Tulane, Tulsa, La. Tech, etc. every year. Did I mention TCU? We do not even recruit many of their players because of our model. Do we graduate more of our players...sure. But we sure do get our butts kicked on the football field. Until changes are made, do not expect much on Saturdays. I used to have expectations, but not anymore.

[PK]

I wouldn't exactly call our last game with TCU a butt kicking. They were damn glad to get out of Ford with a W.

[EastStang]

Texas has some decent basketball players, but there is more depth in for example the Chicago area (where we used to get a lot of players), or DC where I live. You may have an equal number of HS All Americans from across the Country, but every first and second team All-Met player from DC area can play in Division I (unless academics get in the way). Virtually every one of them is offered by numerous Div. I programs. Dallas may not have that depth. In fact there are some DC high schools where the subs are offered by Division I (DeMatha and Gonzaga come to mind). So the point is that for basketball we need to recruit players wherever we can get them. I would rather get five solid Division I players who are Second team All-Met DC than spend a lot of energy fighting with UT over one HS All-American.

[Stallion]

The Dallas Metroplex has more top college BB players than just about any metropolitan area in the country in both quality and depth. There have been several stories that confirm that over the last few years.

[EastStang]

That's great, but using your football criteria, how many of them have multiple offers from credible programs?

[Stallion]

well let's look at 2002-Bryan Hopkins, Derron Williams, Bracey Wright, Daniel Horton, Chris Bosh and Ike Diougu. I'd take my chances with that group against any metro All-Star team you want to pick.

[LA_Mustang]

Many experts at ESPN, Rivals, and the Insiders are saying that DFW has entered that group of Chicago, NYC, and So Cal as the best places for big-time bball recruits. The 2005 and 2006 DFW classes are shaping up to be unbelievable....2005 could be the best ever.

[i10pony]

For Bball talent I'd put Houston in with all those cities too. Dement just can't get those players to come to SMU. Bhop is the exception because he also signed his brother.