The Great Jim Gush

[Junior]

Have to agree. If you are consistently getting beat on the field, that's a pretty good indication that you're probably not winning the recruiting battle either.

[ponyboy]

Oh my.

Look, if you get out the exacto knife and get to the heart of what he's trying to say (not an easy task at all,) yes the argument that 80% of winning is due to talent belongs on the table. It's just that the data presented in its support is virtually meaningless. Even if the group chosen is a fair selection of "opponents on our schedule," they not only outrecruited us as a group but also had better coaching, conference affliation (in the case of Baylor, A&M, Texas, Tech, and now TCU), fan support, etc, etc. To try to use that data to support that argument is laughable idiocy.

[PK]

...and the beat goes on.

[Stallion]

Those are the schools we were in a conference with and against whom we have recruited against for about 100 years. They are the traditional, major Division 1A schools in the Texas talent pool. We have only rarely played any of those teams since 1996 when we were not in the same or relatively equal conference. A few games with Baylor, 1 I think against A&M, more against Texas Tech. TCU was in a relatively similiar non-BCS conference. Houston was in a relatively similiar non-BCS conference before we were reunited in CUSA. But we aren't talking whether its fair or not to SMU-we are talking generically whether recruiting is 80% of winning in College Football-and specifically whether recruiting s8uccess against the same schools you compete against in a specific talent pool is indicative of winning. Arguably, we have not outrecruited Baylor, Tech, Texas, A&M or TCU in any year in which players were recruited and eventually played an SMU team. Recruiting success is very indicative of overwhelming success on the field. This is borne out even if you focus on the second tier schools like TCU, Baylor, Tech and Houston against whom we have a terrible winning percentage against. Rarely do those schools finish in the Top 30 in recruiting yet it still holds.

[NickSMU17]

Id like Stallions opinion on something. I might get lambasted for this, but oh well.

No question jj was the right guy at the right time for SMU. that said, where do you think, say, Fran would be/would have been in year 4 of tx recruiting as opposed to where we are.

Stallion??

Still waiting

[Stallion]

I'm purposefully not going down that speculative road except to point out that I thought Fran would be a good coach based on his proven ability to recruit Texas and hire Coaches with Texas roots. I would have thought June would have tried to align a staff in a way to do so too. Having MacMakin would have helped but even he is a little crusty much like SMU's Coaching Staff

[RGV Pony]

I'm purposefully not going down that speculative road except to point out that I thought Fran would be a good coach based on his proven ability to recruit Texas and hire Coaches with Texas roots. I would have thought June would have tried to align a staff in a way to do so too. Having MacMakin would have helped but even he is a little crusty much like SMU's Coaching Staff

Agree on all 3 points.

[NickSMU17]

What about this guy for after JJ tenure?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trooper_Taylor

[Stallion]

BTW interesting-I went back and checked my update on March 17th-one of the points I made even that early was that Baylor had already blanketed the DFW area with 22 offers and SMU had only 3. Now they have 6 DFW Commitments from 3 stars and SMU has none from DFW 3 star and above recruits. Did Baylor do its homework in Dallas before SMU even bothered to scout its backyard? Its paying off for Baylor

[RGV Pony]

Did Baylor do its homework in Dallas before SMU even bothered to scout its backyard? Its paying off for Baylor

It would be hard to argue otherwise, it seems

[stampedesbabyboy]

BTW interesting-I went back and checked my update on March 17th-one of the points I made even that early was that Baylor had already blanketed the DFW area with 22 offers and SMU had only 3. Now they have 6 DFW Commitments from 3 stars and SMU has none from DFW 3 star and above recruits. Did Baylor do its homework in Dallas before SMU even bothered to scout its backyard? Its paying off for Baylor

How is it paying off for Baylor? surely they need to get on the field for Baylor before you can say "its paying off"....What other Texas Schools offered their DFW Commitments??

[Stallion]

6 recruits with a combined 33 offers and a guesstimate of about 2/3rds BCS offers. Pretty solid group for Baylor this early

[stampedesbabyboy]

6 recruits with a combined 33 offers and a guesstimate of about 2/3rds BCS offers. Pretty solid group for Baylor this early

Although I know you have the resource and ability to answer my question.....I Knew you wouldnt!

[Stallion]

Make that 7 DFW recruits with 38 offers. SMU offered

http://rivals.yahoo.com/northtexas/foot ... lmer-89922

[stampedesbabyboy]

Make that 7 DFW recruits with 38 offers. SMU offered

http://rivals.yahoo.com/northtexas/foot ... lmer-89922

In other words ( You wont say it) of all the 7 Baylor DFW Commitments. One Player has one offer from one Texas School......WOW....That is really Kicking Tail !! Outstanding Recruiting!!