Non-BCS recruiting performance per Rivals lists

[Stallion]

how naive are you?

In 2010 we get 16 Three Stars and finish 76th

in 2002 we get 1 Three Star and finish tied for 69th.

in 2003 we get 10 Three Stars and finish 62nd

in 2004 we get 1 Three Star and finish 76th

in other years we finished lower-so I don't include-but if you don't understand what you are looking at-you can't make an intelligent observation from the data. Simply counting stars and comparing the number of stars in this class to ANY prior year is a complete waste of time that reveals absolutely nothing to those that know what they are looking at

[Wuba]

how naive are you?

In 2010 we get 16 Three Stars and finish 76th

in 2002 we get 1 Three Star and finish tied for 69th.

in 2003 we get 10 Three Stars and finish 62nd

in 2004 we get 1 Three Star and finish 76th

in other years we finished lower-so I don't include-but if you don't understand what you are looking at-you can't make an intelligent observation from the data. Simply counting stars and comparing the number of stars in this class to ANY prior year is a complete waste of time that reveals absolutely nothing to those that know what they are looking at

Why do you take criticism of your arrogant tone as disagreement with your facts?

[gostangs]

Because like most lawyers he would rather argue then comprend written words. Stallion - i think most if not all agree with you - but we wish you were not such a _____(you fill in the blank). Bragging on a fan board about how you beat everyone to the punch on some meaningless theory is a sign of extreme insecurity.

[ozfan]

yea but every other good program still gets around 25 commits. even if you have a great eye for talent, why not add 7 more guys you think could pan out - but may not.

also, what is up with boise's class? 10 commits?

The limit, if your are retaining good players who maintain their grades you do not have as many sc to throw around and a lot of kids cant afford to walk on in hope of getting one later.

[SMU2007]

Because like most lawyers he would rather argue then comprend written words. Stallion - i think most if not all agree with you - but we wish you were not such a _____(you fill in the blank). Bragging on a fan board about how you beat everyone to the punch on some meaningless theory is a sign of extreme insecurity.

another excellent example of reasons why america hates lawyers

[expony18]

glad i used my five minute break to read this thread.

[PK]

how naive are you?

In 2010 we get 16 Three Stars and finish 76th

in 2002 we get 1 Three Star and finish tied for 69th.

in 2003 we get 10 Three Stars and finish 62nd

in 2004 we get 1 Three Star and finish 76th

in other years we finished lower-so I don't include-but if you don't understand what you are looking at-you can't make an intelligent observation from the data. Simply counting stars and comparing the number of stars in this class to ANY prior year is a complete waste of time that reveals absolutely nothing to those that know what they are looking at

I'm not going to claim that I fully understand what I am looking at here, but from the data you have presented, what I see leads me to suggest that our "finish" position has more to do with how SMU did compared to all the other teams rather than how one year of SMU recruiting compares against another. The quality of our 16 three stars...even if inflated...probably still beats the quality of our past classes. When it is all said and done, the results on the field are all that matter. So, the next couple of years should shed some light on the real quality of this recruiting class.

[Stallion]

well you'll be delighted to know that in comparison to other CUSA teams total 3+ commitments by all CUSA teams is up 130% or so in just 2 years and about 300% since CUSA's first season in 2005. Its a miracle.

[SoCal_Pony]

I don't understand the difficulty in comprehending Stallion's statement. There is grade inflation at Rivals and the 16 3-stars in not near the achievement it would have been 8 years ago.

I am very happy with this class. It's a good one; but if next year we are again ranked the 17th best non-BCS class I would be disappointed, as I am sure our coaching staff would as well.

I happen to think next year is one of our most important seasons in SMU history. For the first time in 25+ years there are real expectations for this program.

It is imperative that we compete again for the C-USA championship and at a minimum, go to a bowl game to continue our upward recruiting momentum. That is no guarantee given our schedule and our lack of depth at QB.

Sneak in a win over Tech or TCU and we accelerate our return by at least 1 year.

[mathman]

I don't understand the difficulty in comprehending Stallion's statement. There is grade inflation at Rivals and the 16 3-stars in not near the achievement it would have been 8 years ago.

I am very happy with this class. It's a good one; but if next year we are again ranked the 17th best non-BCS class I would be disappointed, as I am sure our coaching staff would as well.

I happen to think next year is one of our most important seasons in SMU history. For the first time in 25+ years there are real expectations for this program.

It is imperative that we compete again for the C-USA championship and at a minimum, go to a bowl game to continue our upward recruiting momentum. That is no guarantee given our schedule and our lack of depth at QB.

Sneak in a win over Tech or TCU and we accelerate our return by at least 1 year.

I think that is spot on. We need to split our OOC games in some fashion.

[Mexmustang]

No question that we will be younger in the backfield than last year. But, I do believe our depth at qb is much improved. Last year's starting quarterback began the year without the growth that we expected from his play in every game his freshman year. He was backed up by another sophomore with limited game experience.

In comes a true freshman that seemed to grow with every game experience. This year, most expect Kyle to keep progressing. JJ. McDermott is a real find The coaches, especially June is extremely high on him, he is a third year junior. Competing for the position may not just be "lipspeak". Brandon will be a junior, as a passer, he doesn't compare with first two. But, he doesn't seem to get rattled, and could provide that emergency role should the first two go down. Then we have an incoming freshman that the coaches are also extremely high on. He could step in later in the year, just like Padron did if the first two go down. Just saying, last year we seemed to have only three, two sophomores and a true freshman. This year we have a sophomore, two juniors and a freshman. I beleive we have more quality and depth than in several years.

[ponyboy]

I'd love a reply to my question, which is how does TCU average about #50 in recruiting rankings over the past several years yet spend so much time in the top 25 on the field? Are the rankings flawed in that they don't judge fit to system? To what degree does coaching and/or "system" influence on field performance independent of recruited talent? Opinions requested. Thanks.

[Stallion]

I've explained it about a hundred times. Recruiting is relative to the schools on your schedule. Top 25 is more relative to Won-Loss Record.

First of all they are ranked somewhere around 26th last time I looked not 50th in average per recruit. That's NUMERO UNO for non-BCS schools. This has happened several times that they have had the No. 1 non-BCS class in the Country in an average per recruit analysis because TCU generally takes much smaller classes and keeps those kids in school. If you did a comparison of TCU Classes over the last 12 years-and analyzed it under an average per recruit basis-TCU would be in the Top 1-3 non-BCS programs over that perioid. I'm not so sure they wouldn't be No. 1 but BYU and Utah have consistenly rated high too. In my opionion no non-BSC school out recruits top BCS schools for more recruits than TCU PERIOD.

Second, you are comparing recruiting ranking against Top 25 rankings. But TCU does not play in a BCS Conference. If you look at their schedule they have higher rated classes than about 85% of the teams on their schedule which is roughly their winning percentage. Would TCU win 85% of its games in the SEC where this year 6 teams finished in the Top 10 in recruiting? Would a second tier SEC school like Georgia or say LSU stand a good chance of winning most all its games if it were a member of the MWC? Would SMU win a game in the Big 12 South?

Once you realize that recruiting is relative to your competition on your schedule then it really isn't such a mystery. Its also the reason SMU still has a lot more recruiting work than many realize to reach the level TCU is at now.

[Stallion]

Wow! I knew there was a pretty strong factual basis for this theory but didn't know evidence was so strong. Based on average per recruit TCU has finished in the Top 3 of all current non-BCS schools in the following years:

2003-3rd
2004-2nd
2005-3rd
2006-1st
2007-1st
2009-1st
2010-1st

and I don't have them in front of me but I'm pretty sure Franchione's first two classes would have been No. 1 too. Patterson may of had a small dip in recruiting when he first got there but his classes are getting better and better every year now

[ozfan]

I'd love a reply to my question, which is how does TCU average about #50 in recruiting rankings over the past several years yet spend so much time in the top 25 on the field? Are the rankings flawed in that they don't judge fit to system? To what degree does coaching and/or "system" influence on field performance independent of recruited talent? Opinions requested. Thanks.

Could be astute recruiting and good coaching....hmmm