SMU Still Looking For QBs

[Stallion]

Charles Wagonner was also a Texas Top 25 too. Collier was a Texas Top 100. We didn't have a recruit named Michael Young but I believe you are speaking of Mitchell Bennett who was a Texas Top 50 or so. Waggoner was a stud rarely seen around here these days. Look I don't care what you think of Emfinger, Rivals etc but the fact remains that Dickerson was the consensus most highly recruited player in the Nation. The whole class was the 3rd highest recruited class in the country and it was followed by another class rated around 6th in the country. These guys had offers from the top teams in the country. Its not fair to suggest that this years recruits are going to be immediate difference makers when we are signing guys the majority of which aren't in the Top 150 in Texas and the class is rated oh about 80th in the country. They may be good players in time but I don't expect a single one to even get on the field in 2006. For Bennett to turn this thing around-and it ain't going to be in 2005-you better hope Chris Phillips is the QB or we will be rebuilding again with a new head coach.

[Stallion]

FOOD FOR THOUGHT-take it or leave it-you can totally disregard what Rivals has to say but some might find it enlightening-SMU has one recruit right now rated 5.4. There are 157 recruits from Texas in the Rivals Database who are rated 5.4 or higher. So what does that tell you about the type of kids SMU is getting commitments from. And if you think its BS explain to me the 20+ players in the Top 157 who SMU has offered but have decided to go elsewhere.

[RGV Pony]

Stallion...this being the case, how does this year's situation stack up versus the same time of year for the previous two classes?

[2112]

edit

[PerunaPunch]

The main difference I see in recruiting this year over prior years is that we continue to set out sights a little higher with regards to the quality of some of the kids we're offering. Obviously the coaches feel they can close some of these kids.

The recruiting services are no way close to science, but they're the best we have. As many on this board do, I talk to our coaches and college coaches and realize that for the most part they're as full of B.S. as the recruiting services can be.

So you talk to everybody, read the pubs, get the stats and make your own opinions.

But every coach – high school, college or pro – is going to pimp his own players. So take whatever you hear and read with a grain of salt.

[anurep]

Yeah, who was the moron that ranked Adrian Peterson as the number 1 back in the country? I bet he feels stupid.

[jtstang]

FOOD FOR THOUGHT-take it or leave it-you can totally disregard what Rivals has to say but some might find it enlightening-SMU has one recruit right now rated 5.4. There are 157 recruits from Texas in the Rivals Database who are rated 5.4 or higher. So what does that tell you about the type of kids SMU is getting commitments from. And if you think its BS explain to me the 20+ players in the Top 157 who SMU has offered but have decided to go elsewhere.

Right you are, but it also says we ARE recruiting higher rated kids...they just don't want to come to SMU. And tell me what you think is going to change that, 'cause I don't see anything. SMU football has no fan support, a second rate conference affiliation, no tv package to crow about, and perhaps the worst 15 year stretch in the history of college football going for it. If a top tier recruit wanted to come here, I would recommend a psychiatric profile before we signed him.

[gostangs]

Look - you can wallow in it if you want to, but you are wrong - there is plenty to offer.

1. recruiting class quality has improved- things should be on the rise
2. non pro graduates (95% of all players) get placed into good jobs after SMU at a much higher degree then their flunky counterparts
3. girls
4. early playing time if you are decent
5. girls
6. CUSA far better then WAC from a players perspective - certainly better then Southland, MWC, or constantly fixture at the bottom of Big 12 (Baylor)
7. no matter what happens, you will always have a better outlook on life then jstangs
8.scheudle is easier so it should be more fun
9. girls

[jtstang]

Look - you can wallow in it if you want to, but you are wrong - there is plenty to offer.

Well then why the f@#* are we losing out on the top guys we are offering as Stallion has pointed out? According to your list, we must be recruiting a bunch of guys who don't like girls. No wonder our football team can't score.

[Stampede]

well, jt. Let me 'spain it to u in plain English.

When SMU recruited ED, Waggoner, James Michael Charles, Carter, Etc. jsut to name a few, our record was 4-7. They saw SMU as the "sleeping giant in Dallas" that Darrell Royal insisted be "kept down".

SMU signed those players and, as I recall, signed what was the #1 class in Texas that year. (something like 12 out of the top 20 players in the Dallas Times Herald Blue Chip list) Ultimately, UT was instramental in administering the poison drink to the ponies with J. Niells Thompson chairing the infractions committee.(on more than one occasion) Heck, old J. Niells was only the dean of the UT law school at the time. For some reason, he could not see himself recusing himself from our case.

SMu did not get the DP because of the way we recruited that class. Matter of fact, SMU served its' probation and was in the Cotton Bowl and then Meyer left and ....enter Collins.

Point of this... do not sell SMu short on what it has to offer a talented athlete. We do not have to have the top players but we can compete with most schools on the level of education, facilities and environment.

[jtstang]

Thanks for 'spaining to me sunshine, but that ain't no plain English word. I suppose if we start up another slush fund like the one that got those recruiting classes, we could surely get some of those top players who will not accept our offers now. Are we now the sleeping giant of C-USA? Not sure that gets you the same players as the old SWC. And stop blaming the death penalty on UT, we cheated our @sses off and got caught and thumbed our noses at the NCAA right up to the freaking governor hisself. If we have all that stuff to offer talented athletes, 'SPAIN IN PLAIN ENGLISH WHY THE TOP TIER PLAYERS AREN'T TAKING OUR OFFERS, FORCING YOU TO THEN 'SPAIN THAT THEY REALLY ARE NOT THAT GOOD AS SOON AS THEY COMMIT ELSEWHERE.

[anurep]

jstang, I think gostangs should be given a labotomy and locked up. Get him/her off the streets. Good grief.

[RGV Pony]

Slush fund no, but I'd wager to guess that prior to the most recent nationwide claims to curtail lavish recruiting perks, we would have done just fine if the Mustang Club had as much financial zeal & backing as the original slush fund. The program certainly could benefit from using that kind of cash legally. I might be wrong, but it seems until only very recently it would've been just fine to have 'donated' corporate jets fly recruits into Love Field & make the ten minute drive to campus.

So, from my point of view...slush fund no, mo money yes. But it's just that. My point of view.

[SoCal_Pony]

In the entire non-BCS world you cannot name 3 schools more appealing than SMU, assuming we were truly committed to succeeding. Truth is you probably cannot even name 1. But for the sake of argument, try and name 3 and as an SMU alum I will give my unbiased opinion as to why you are wrong.

So the question becomes, why we are not one of the Top 3 non-BCS FB programs in the country? By now we should all know the answer.

[RGV Pony]

non-BCS? Honestly I don't see why it's hard to recruit to San Diego St. Here's three that would seem to be easier to recruit to than SMU:

1.San Diego State-have the reception for recruits at hotel Coronado
2.Tulane-the Big Easy...this year they could have the recruits there for Mardi Gras, which is right around signing day time
3.Colorado State-Ft. Collins is beautiful, and a real shot at a W vs a big XII school every year


and before we say that Tulane plays in an empty Superdome and SDSU plays in an empty whatever they call Jack Murphy now, we (SMU) may have a nice lil ole stadium of our own, but it's really tacky how the late afternoon sun reflects off of those empty metal seats over on the student/band side on game day