Rebel10 wrote:We have not, as Stallion pointed out, lost a "better" player due to academic issues.
I heard one our our "better" OLs recently joined the Texas Tech squad...
We lost LeReibus for a year due to academic issues (grades were fine, but he got bad advice from his advisor and didn't make adequate progress toward a degree).
The OL from transfer from LSU had to sit because some of his credits wouldn't transfer. There are some a couple of kids on the current team who couldn't play this year for the same reason.
What happened to highly touted LBs Damien Neroes and Lincoln Richard?
Those are a few off the top of my head.
Livingston did not leave because of academic issues at SMU. Hope he does well at Tech.
LeRibus issues were not due to a reforms that June has requested. As you said his grades were fine.
Neroes had an attitude problem and also just him getting into SMU shows how they have adjusted standards.
Lincoln Richard quit because of playing time and he had a difficult attitude as well from what I understand.
"We will play man to man and we will pick you up at the airport." - Larry Brown
Stallion wrote:are we really getting better-I'd say there is solid evidence this program has stair-stepped down for 3 years in talent. Where is all this hidden talent on our roster and why didn't they play this year even though a bunch lost a redshirt year. None of those freshman kids apparently were impressive enough to get more than token playing time. Many of the redshirt freshman/sophmores who many hoped would step up failed to show.
This is actually a cogent argument. Usually, the first place you expect to see young talent showcased is on special teams. Other than JaBryce, did anyone on special teams really excite you?
"It's a couple hundred million dollars. I'm not losing sleep over it." -- David Miller
Rebel10 wrote:We have not, as Stallion pointed out, lost a "better" player due to academic issues.
I heard one our our "better" OLs recently joined the Texas Tech squad...
We lost LeReibus for a year due to academic issues (grades were fine, but he got bad advice from his advisor and didn't make adequate progress toward a degree).
The OL from transfer from LSU had to sit because some of his credits wouldn't transfer. There are some a couple of kids on the current team who couldn't play this year for the same reason.
What happened to highly touted LBs Damien Neroes and Lincoln Richard?
Those are a few off the top of my head.
You didn't name a single kid that flunked out of SMU. Again I can go to any school in the country and find kids that are academically disqualified. Hell just last week I came up with about 12 in 1 week's span at mid-term after those 3 kids at UT and other schools like USC, ND, Mississippi who were ruled academically ineligible at mid-term. I can name you kids at every school in Texas. Quit turning transfers or quitters into academic ineligibility issues. Plus for every SMU kid that transferred-spent time at a JC/CC-and then transferred back to Division 1A I can name 3 kids SMU got the same way with the same marginal transcripts.
Last edited by Stallion on Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris
When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
I don't want to keep kicking the same proverbial dead horse, so I'll make the point one last time.
SMU cannot comment on why a student-athlete leaves the program. So when a kid leaves the program and reports it's because he misses home (or whatever) that's not always the truth.
In the case of Tech's newest offensive lineman, do you not find it interesting the he reported different reasons for leaving SMU to different media outlets. And if he missed California so much, why is he now Lubbock of all places? I'd be hard pressed to come up with two more dissimilar locales.
"It's a couple hundred million dollars. I'm not losing sleep over it." -- David Miller
Hey pal the problem is most of those kids didn't leave SMU at the end of a term NOW DID THEY? Answer that question. There would be no reason to comment on kids leaving during a school term or quitting during a school term. In fact, SMU would not rule on eligiblity issues until the end of a term. BottomLine-SMU has not lost an unusual number of players to academic issues in recent years. Kids get homesick, lose interest in football and transfer all the time. If you really followed other Texas schools you'd know that.
Last edited by Stallion on Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris
When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
PerunaPunch wrote:I don't want to keep kicking the same proverbial dead horse, so I'll make the point one last time.
SMU cannot comment on why a student-athlete leaves the program. So when a kid leaves the program and reports it's because he misses home (or whatever) that's not always the truth.
In the case of Tech's newest offensive lineman, do you not find it interesting the he reported different reasons for leaving SMU to different media outlets. And if he missed California so much, why is he now Lubbock of all places? I'd be hard pressed to come up with two more dissimilar locales.
Livingston left because he was not performing well at the time. He was a freshman in his first semester and never sheard anything about missing home. When Klemm left he left. Nothing to do with grades. Kitchen was the only one to go back because he never went to class. SMU as Stallion has said is competitive in that area
Last edited by SMU 86 on Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"We will play man to man and we will pick you up at the airport." - Larry Brown
Hey PerunaPunch you finished your investigation into SMU admission policies-just wanted to know if you might have some idea about the 7 freshman admissions last year cited in the Provost Report that scored below the old traditional 700 SAT floor (recentered to 830) including a 620 and 740 and yet were still admitted to SMU. You think those 7 just might be among the 15 true freshman minority Football and Basketball recruits admitted at the start of 2013? Of course, that wouldn't even include Division 1A transfers and JUCOs on our Football and especially Basketball team because they are by definition not freshman. Waiting for your investigative report.
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris
When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
bsturman wrote:So I am confused.. SMU can compete with Baylor??? Please enlighten me
I think he was saying that since UCF beat them and we played UCF close tht while we may not beat Baylor we should be able to field a competitive team against them. They may also be losing Art Briles to Texas well. If UCF can why can't SMU?
"We will play man to man and we will pick you up at the airport." - Larry Brown
bsturman wrote:So I am confused.. SMU can compete with Baylor??? Please enlighten me
When reading a post from Rebel10 is important to understand that when he says "should", he means "should" in the sense of "if June was doing a better job we should be able to" do whatever it is the specific post is about. He does not really mean he expects SMU to compete with them in the actual upcoming game. At least that is what I read it to mean.
The point is that the admission argument is over-because those scores are even lower than I dreamed SMU would allow into school. I said SMU would admit just about anyone at the old traditional 700 SAT (830 recentered) or perhaps a little bit under. If those admissions are athletes then we have admitted kids WAY WAY WAY under what I have suggested was the floor. Time for the last 2 holdouts you and Mexmustangs to quit bitchin' about admission standards. SMU is playing on a fair and even playing field in football and basketball. Those 7 out of 15 would represent 47% of the freshman minority Football and Basketball players in the Class of 2013 if true not including the JUCOs and Division 1A transfers. We also established last week that 4 of 6 SMU Basketball players who have declared a major in the smumustangs.com player profiles are in the School of Education and Human Development. The other 2 are taking graduate level courses. The "SMU has not been fair to June Jones theory" is rapidly imploding. Never was true in the first place as the published numbers from his first 2 recruiting classes showed.
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris
When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
Look, all I am saying is that the kids that came in last year and the year before are a lot better than what was here before that.
Whether that is because of poor recruiting, kids never getting here, or kids leaving after they got here, whatever. For whatever reasons, there is a significant gap in talented players in our upperclassmen right now.
Next year's lineup: QB: Burcham - So - Rivals 3, Scout 2, ESPN 80, 1 BCS offer RB: Line - So - Rivals 3, Scout 3, ESPN 71 Outside WR: Taylor - so - Rivals 3, Scout 3; Halverson - So - Rivals 2, Scout 2 Inside WR: Sanders - So - Rivals 2, Scout 2, DJ - Jr - Rivals 3, Scout 2 LT: Weeks - So - Rivals 3, Scout 3, ESPN 75 LG: Rice - So - Rivals 2, Scout 3, ESPN 76, 1 BCS offer C: Lasecki - Jr - Rivals 3, ESPN 2 RG: McCarty - So - Rivals 2, Scout 2, ESPN 78 RT: Briggs - Jr - Rivals 2, Scout 2, ESPN 68 LE: Minor - So - Rivals 3, Scout 3, ESPN 76, 3 BCS offers RE: Nabusosh - Jr - Rivals 2, Scout 3 - ESPN 75 DT: Wright - Sr - Rivals 3, Scout 2, ESPN 73, 1 BCS offer OLB: Seals - Jr - Rivals 2, Scout 2, ESPN 74, Longoria - So - Rivals 3, Scout 2, ESPN 73 ILB: Yenga - Jr - Rivals 3, Scout 3, ESPN 73, 4 BCS offers, Horton - Fr - Rivals 2, Scout 2 CB: Montes - So - Rivals 2, Scout 2, ESPN 73, JR Richardson - So - Rivals 3, Scout 2, ESPN 73 BCS offers 1 S: Montgomery - So - Rivals 2, Scout 2, Randolph - Jr - Rivals 3, Scout 3, ESPN 76
While these are not the super high level caliber recruits we all want, they aren't exactly nobodies. The only true diamonds in the rough are: - Halverson (who showed something in the spring and will be up against the really good recruit coming in next year) - Deion (who I think showed something last year) - Briggs (who will compete with higher rated Reich and Myers) - Horton (nobody knows anything about, and he is just a guess at inside LB) - Montgomery (who made plays all year in practice and was good enough as a true frosh to show up in nickel packages)
That is way more "diamonds in the rough" than other BCS schools have as starters in the starting lineup. That said, outside of Halverson and Horton, the others have actually shown something on the field.
Regardless, what is a fact is that there are 14 underclassmen starting and only one senior. That typically equates to a slow start and getting better as the season moves along.
Stallion wrote:The point is that the admission argument is over-because those scores are even lower than I dreamed SMU would allow into school. I said SMU would admit just about anyone at the old traditional 700 SAT (830 recentered) or perhaps a little bit under. If those admissions are athletes then we have admitted kids WAY WAY WAY under what I have suggested was the floor. Time for the last 2 holdouts you and Mexmustangs to quit bitchin' about admission standards. SMU is playing on a fair and even playing field in football and basketball. Those 7 out of 15 would represent 47% of the freshman minority Football and Basketball players in the Class of 2013 if true not including the JUCOs and Division 1A transfers. We also established last week that 4 of 6 SMU Basketball players who have declared a major in the smumustangs.com player profiles are in the School of Education and Human Development. The other 2 are taking graduate level courses. The "SMU has not been fair to June Jones theory" is rapidly imploding. Never was true in the first place as the published numbers from his first 2 recruiting classes showed.
I agree with the fact that admissions is *ALMOST* a non-issue. The only reason it's still a factor is that (at schools where they don't burn your redshirt) you have 5 or even 6 years to mature. So the kids we were able to admit in 2012 and 2013 won't be upperclassmen for a couple of years, so in that respect, we are a few years behind our competition.
The bigger challenge going forward will be keeping students eligible, which as you point out is an issue every university faces. I was impressed with the fact that Stanford, Miami, Duke, Tulane and Rice all played in bowls this year.
"It's a couple hundred million dollars. I'm not losing sleep over it." -- David Miller
Let's assume Stallion s correct regarding admissions. I frankly don't follow it closely enough to present an argument one way or another... So I'll just sit that one out. But, while we are on the subject of academics and athletics - what is the story on the academic tutors and it's effect on recruits perceptions of SMU? The other topic that seems to come up is basket weaving majors (I believe the PC term is athlete friendly majors). I know JJ has been belly aching about some of these things. I've read other a whole ton of posts on this topic. Can anyone summarize this briefly?
