What's the matter with our coaches?

Mitch McConnell · Post by **Mitch McConnell** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:45 pm

Texas kids -- yes, Texas kids -- and the ones we refuse to evaluate came up to SMU in the middle of July for an unofficial visit.

According to the 3 amigos, I thought we already wrote off this state.

smudubs · Post by **smudubs** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:56 pm

Mitch-- I will have to tell you like I do my son when he is picking on his sister for no good reason. Stallion and Nick have been relatively quiet. Why start a fight with them. In the end the fight will just annoy the rest of us and it won't be as much fun or satisfying as you thought it would be.

Junior · Post by **Junior** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:08 pm

becuase mitch isn't happy unless he's [deleted] someone off or picking a fight. i can guarantee you it will be less than one week from today that he tells us yet again that he doesn't like JJ as well.

this is kinda weird, though, as he doesn't usually start new threads to lash out like this. he usually does it in the middle of others threads.

either way, he's entitled to his opinion.

GiddyUp · Post by **GiddyUp** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 7:48 pm

you sir have officially made my Foe list...please raise the debt ceiling

Mitch McConnell · Post by **Mitch McConnell** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:13 pm

Well, that's fine. I enjoyed meeting you during the CIT games and enjoyed the conversation. And I'd buy you a beer again. I'm just extremely frustrated with these 3 who portray themselves as the all-knowing for recruiting and that they do a great job pointing out all of the shortcomings repeatedly.

And then when SMU gets a little momentum going on the commitment/visit side, they go dark. Maybe they don't have to say anything. Who knows.

But if you're going to frequent these boards, then criticize/praise equally. They're not doing that. And if they claim they do, they have a funny way of showing it.

When Marks committed, I didn't see one comment from either of these three to denote what a big deal this was. And it was A BIG DEAL!

I'm sorry if my position is unpopular and everybody puts me on foe. But I call it like I see it. I'm not here to win popularity contests.

NickSMU17 · Post by **NickSMU17** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:18 pm

Good thing, because you aren't winning any popularity, beauty or intelligence contests...

reddevil · Post by **reddevil** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:20 pm

Mitch McConnell wrote:When Marks committed, I didn't see one comment from either of these three to denote what a big deal this was. And it was A BIG DEAL!

Both Stallion and Nick applauded the Marks commitment. Get some new material.

GiddyUp · Post by **GiddyUp** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:32 pm

everyone is happy about the Marks commitment, no question.

No worries, it's a message board, no big deal.

Mitch McConnell · Post by **Mitch McConnell** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:35 pm

NickSMU17 wrote:Good thing, because you aren't winning any popularity, beauty or intelligence contests...

Whatever you say, Mr. Zambrano!

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:21 pm

73% of the Texas Top 100 are committed according to Rivals Lone Star Recruiting-(the main Rivals Texas Top 100 hasn't been released yet). SMU has a shot at Taiwan Johnson but lost two kids today that reports indicated we were focusing on. Donald Hopkins and Simon Gaines committed to Mizzou. Not sure of too many other alternatives in the Texas Top 100. Months ago Russell Hansborough showed interest. There are more good players out there-last year there were about 280 3 stars or greater but for the most part the vast majority of top Texas players are off the board-of course there can be decommitments. I think SMU right now is looking at about 7-8 other 3 star recruits it has a realistic shot at-a relatively small number. But its later than some think. This has got to be the highest percentage of committed Texas players 6 1/2 months before signing date ever.

Blvd_Stang · Post by **Blvd_Stang** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:29 am

Mitch McConnell wrote: I'm just extremely frustrated with these 3 who portray themselves as the all-knowing for recruiting and that they do a great job pointing out all of the shortcomings repeatedly.

Sir, I understand where you're coming from. But you're doing the same thing to them, and exposing all of us to your personal vendetta. Can't you just understand that we agree, but continuing to harp on it does nothing?

goldenstang · Post by **goldenstang** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:31 am

Stallion wrote:73% of the Texas Top 100 are committed according to Rivals Lone Star Recruiting-(the main Rivals Texas Top 100 hasn't been released yet). SMU has a shot at Taiwan Johnson but lost two kids today that reports indicated we were focusing on. Donald Hopkins and Simon Gaines committed to Mizzou. Not sure of too many other alternatives in the Texas Top 100. Months ago Russell Hansborough showed interest. There are more good players out there-last year there were about 280 3 stars or greater but for the most part the vast majority of top Texas players are off the board-of course there can be decommitments. I think SMU right now is looking at about 7-8 other 3 star recruits it has a realistic shot at-a relatively small number. But its later than some think. This has got to be the highest percentage of committed Texas players 6 1/2 months before signing date ever.

The main Rivals Texas Top 100 has been out for about a week now.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruit ... bSevlGPZB4

smudubs · Post by **smudubs** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 9:09 am

I don't always agree with what people say on this board, but I can normally follow most posters' points. That being said, to those of you who complain about the coaches' recruiting efforts in Texas, are you more concerned with the fact that the coaches are not offering enough Texas recruits in general or that they are not offering enough recruits in the Texas 100?

The Texas Top 100 is a tough nut to crack. TCU only has six commitments from the Top 100 this year and this is in year thirteen of their rebuilding project and a year after they won the Rose Bowl, renovated their stadium, and got invited to a BCS conference. Three on the Top 100 list are committed to non-BCS schools--one to Houston, one to SMU, and one to Arkansas State. Of the 73 kids who have committed from the Texas Top 100, over half of them committed to one of three schools: Texas (16); A&M (14); and Tech (8).

Conversely, SMU has three commitments from kids in the California Top 100 with others showing significant interest. The kids in Cali seem more willing to explore options outside of the big name schools.

My point is that SMU appears to making progress in Texas, but as you can see from TCU, if you ain't in the Big XII party, its a slow climb to get highly regarded kids to seriously consider your program. So I applaud the coaches for going outside to build the program while we build credibility with the Texas kids. Long term, where do you think this program will be when our coaches can walk into any home in Texas and California and be taken seriously by highly regarded recruits?

If we can ever figure out how to keep these kids academically eligible, we are going to have something special.

One Trick Pony · Post by **One Trick Pony** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 9:16 am

If Mitch Will adhere to the 17 second rule, buy all drinks, and sit across from my table he's welcome.

One Trick Pony · Post by **One Trick Pony** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 9:19 am

Blvd_Stang wrote:
Mitch McConnell wrote: I'm just extremely frustrated with these 3 who portray themselves as the all-knowing for recruiting and that they do a great job pointing out all of the shortcomings repeatedly.
Sir, I understand where you're coming from. But you're doing the same thing to them, and exposing all of us to your personal vendetta. Can't you just understand that we agree, but continuing to harp on it does nothing?

The funny part is they don't even realize their being used to leak info.