Interesting Recruiting Turns...

[RedRiverPony]

That's OK, it's only a matter of minutes before TCU fans start shrieking about how their coaches didn't want the guy anyway, how they're too good to recruit him. All I know is that OSU has been a recruiting machine in recent years, and I'm hearing they're absolutely thrilled about getting this guy.

[HFvictory]

No question TCU wanted Bell. Came down to 2 and OSU got the commit. TCU did pick up Massey as a commit. Don't know if Bell is qualified, he is working hard at getting there & is really a very good kid.

[DR'95]

Some regional rankings (from Rivals):


5 Oklahoma
9 Texas
10 Texas A&M
20 Arkansas
23 Texas Tech
31 Oklahoma State
56 Texas Christian
65 Tulsa
69 North Texas
73 SMU
76 Baylor
78 Houston
Rivals

[SoCal_Pony]

To place this in perspective, TCU’s class this year, in which we hear they are losing out on all their key high school prospects, is still ranked higher than our class of last year.

That is an impressive feat by TCU as it appears they have the 2nd highest ranked non-BCS recruiting class behind fellow MWC-mate San Diego St., which is ranked #50. Is it safe to assume all of TCU’s 3 and 4 stars signees are JCs?

We on the other hand are ranked below NTSU. One can spin this all they want, but in my books, if Rivals ranks us below NTSU, you cannot judge this class a success. Far from it.

Stallion’s theory of lost momentum appears to be true. Last years’ 0-12 season may have set us back a couple of years, if not longer.

[JasonB]

You have to interpret a little more than just looking at the rankings.

TCU's high school recruiting class has been dismal. Yes, all of their three and up star players are JUCO signees. So from a HS perspective, not a good year at all. Once you include JUCOs, they have a solid year.

Rivals is not perfect. They mess up from time to time, and you have to look at it a little deeper than just the ratings. For example, they have a guy on there, Spivital, who is a kicker/QB. No offers, interested in SMU, SMS, Toledo. Says he probably won't make a decision until AFTER signing day. So, not a good recruit right? Well, for some reason he is a two star, 5.4 rating, which on rivals is higher than, for example, Kyle Griffin.

Looking at North Texas, they have two three star recruits, one is a JUCO, and one is a pretty highly rated RB who went there because all the other schools had filled their RB quota - he is a solid pickup. The JUCO is supposed to be "three star", but only had an offer from Temple, so don't know how far I would go with that one.

The other recruits they have are all two star, NONE of whom have a SINGLE offer from a BCS school. NONE. Yet, somehow they have 5.3 ratings and an offer from NT and Middle Tennessee State.

So, in summary, some of the rankings are a joke and you have to take them with a grain of salt. NT has one good recruit coming in, and doesn't come close to our recruiting class. Period.

[EastStang]

I'm sorry, but when you're 0-12, 73rd best isn't good enough to get you out of a losing season. The one hope in all this was the Bennett's recruiting would make up for his lack of head coaching experience. So far it has worked, but if we start that recruiting spiral downward, I don't see anything changing any time soon.

[SoCal_Pony]

JB, I understand the nuances of Rivals ranking system and agree that Griffin should be upgraded (as well as others being downgraded).

My point is we are in a tier with NTSU, TCU is in a higher tier.

IMO, TCU has decisively beaten us this year in recruiting, their JCs will contribute to the butt-kicking we receive next season at Amon Carter. TCU will be favored the following year at Ford as well.

I agree with EastStang, 73rd doesn’t dig us out of our hole.

[JasonB]

Just was trying to clear things up. We are NOT in the same tier as NT, in fact most of our recruits are very solid recruits. This is not a top tier class by any stretch of the imagination, but I would suggest that to say it is one of the worst is definately a stretch. This is nowhere close to the classes we had prior to Bennett. We are picking up a lot of solid players.

Yes, there is a big difference in the JUCOs. We picked up three players: an unheralded WR, and two QBs who seem like they are going to be decent. But none where very widely recognized. TCU on the other hand had some very, very solid JUCO recruits. And that puts them ahead of us when considering the overall recruiting class.

However, to say our class is significantly worse than their overall class is a bit of an exageration. No, this isn't a great recruiting class, but we are not horrible.

Here is another comparison:

Right now we are even in rivals with northern illinois. Same number of recruits, same number of points.

They have one three star player, we have one three star player. HOWEVER, their three star QB was only offered by Toledo, Ball State, Indiana, and Bowling Green. Our three star was offered by Florida, K State, LSU, Nebraska, Oklahoma, etc. Advantage SMU.

According to Rivals, of their other players, exactly NONE were offered by a BCS school.

According to Rivals, of the other SMU players, according to rivals, three of the other SMU recruits were offered by BCS schools.

According to the ESPN insider, 5 of the SMU recruits were offered by BCS schools.

According to the ESPN insider, 2 of the Northern Illinois recruits were offered by BCS schools.

So, no, SMU has not had a banner year recruiting. But is it a decent class? Yes, it is. According to my numbers, we have 7 players who have been offered by a BCS school. Of course, it would be nice to have JUCO players who were offered by major schools, but 7 of 14 is still not horrible when you look at other schools in the mid major conferences. Add in that you get a solid running back from a BCS school and a good CB from transfers, and that ups the value of this class as well.

[JasonB]

Also, to provide additional comparison information, TCU has a total of 7 recruits who have been offered by BCS schools, 4 of which are JUCO players. We have a total of 4 according to Rivals. So, yes, overall their class is better because of the JUCOs, but to say it dominates ours is a bit extreme.

[PK]

I want to be careful here not to get Stallion bent too much. Yes the rating services have some value...but what counts is what shows up on the playing field and that won't be apparent for a while with this years class. Until then, we just have to argue the ratings prepared by others.

Coach Shumann once stated to me that some times these great high school athletes have actually peaked in high school and never develop beyond that and some times the average to good high school athlete is still learning and growing and breaks out and peaks once he starts playing college ball.

I guess that some times it's just a crap shoot.

[PerunaPunch]

JB,

Realize too that for every incurable PonyFans "Pollyanna" optimist, there's also one who's preaching doom and gloom because this year's recruiting class doesn't contain a half dozen Dickersons and 10 JUCOs.

Sure, this class may not look like OU's or LSU's, but there's a heck of a lot in this class to be excited about.

[Stallion]

in reality the quality of this class is just about the same as last year but half as big. Its too small and not deep enough to really insure that this program will turn the corner. There ain't enough top DLM and OLM or top DE, LB types who are athletic and ready to play. Where are the Safeties? Where are the Big-play Wide Receivers. Too many small, short CBs and WRs on the roster and not enough physical, tall Wideouts-you know the ones that have literrally destroyed this team over the last two years. So while there is quality in small numbers the Class failed to address numerous important holes and I think threw scholarships at positions where ther aren't needed. BTW this class should sink into the 90's according to the Rivals rating system (endorsed the last two years by our favorite Cheerleader GoRedGoBlue). We really don't improve too much under average star rating per recruit because we have several players just under the 3 star level. The discerning Cheerleader this year must look to the secondary rating system and there were stack up pretty close to others in quality of HS Recruits if not quantity.

[Hal]

Again, the rankings don't mean much. Because not only are all players still maturing and (in many cases) growing, meaning they might or might night evolve into the player they're projected to become. And those rankings are made based on certain criteria and high school performance-related stats. For example, look at Darren Sproles. Here's a guy who's as productive and exciting as just about any RB in the country. But he's a little guy who relies on his speed, acceleration and change-of-direction to be effective. How would he have fared had he chosen .... Nebraska or Wisconsin (where the linemen traditionally are hige and slow) instead of Kansas State? Sproles is a little like Jessie Henderson -- he's supposed to be too small, but under the system, but in the right system, he's sensational. Hopefully we got a bunch of guys like that, who will thrive in SMU's system.

<small>[ 01-30-2004, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: Hal ]</small>