PonyFans.com

Those of us that are complaining are not concerned with getting players from any state that are highly ranked recruits--that would not make sense.

First, we were concerned about was the very late start we made recruiting in Texas this year. In early May we were not just second, third or fourth in Texas' offers, but a distant last of all Texas teams. At the same time one coach had as many offers out outside the state as all the other coaches did put together. In short, many of our coaches were not pulling their weight. It was evident at our Junior Day, which was poorly attended, that not enough personal contact of high school players and their coaches had been made prior to that weekend. Even our remote camps were not as well attended as in the past. It all came down to getting a late start and not putting forth the effort in last fall and January-February. We need to work on our high school relationships, it is the high school coaches that drive to the "unofficials", the Junior Days and Camps. It is the high school coaches that alert teams to their players and players to possible schools.

Second, we have too many coaches that do not participate in recruiting at all--they are position coaches with NFL experience that go home the last game of the year and return for Spring practice, only to disappear the last day of practice until the Fall. We see this as an opportunity to get some young Texas assistants to join the staff, with the energy and desire to move up in the coaching ranks, not just put in their time to retire.

The good news is that Adrian has been promoted, and I understand in May there was a coaches meeting to address this lack of coordinated effort. Good things seem to be happening, but a little late. However, if you look at the offers we currently have outstanding for the next recruiting class 2013, we have almost as many offers out today to Texas players, than we did active offers the first of May of this year, to the 2012 class.

goldenstang wrote:

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

Thanks-77% are committed. Add Seaver Myers and Bryce Cottrell as two kids we hope to be in the race for.

If we can go and challege for a USC commit in California, why not go after some of the 77% of Texas recruits that say they are committed? Effort? Juevos?

Mexmustang wrote:If we can go and challege for a USC commit in California, why not go after some of the 77% of Texas recruits that say they are committed? Effort? Juevos?

Because the California kids don't have the same longstanding perception of SMU as the Texas kids do. They don't know about our history. They're probably being sold on how June has turned it around and back to back bowls and being the next Boise, TCU.

I just looked at that Texas 100 list. We weren't going to get the kids who have committed to Texas, A&M, OU and OSU. We just weren't. But we have 23 more opportunities, depending on how many of those we've offered.

Now, the staff has to own up to the mistakes it made by not pressing harder in Texas. But it's 720 miles from El Paso to Waskom and about 630 miles from Denison to Laredo. The sun does not rise and set on 100 players and how many SMU did and did not get. I think there are a few more.

And the other thing...SMU needs a big win to validate where the program is going! Texas kids want to see it because all they know is that SMU has sucked for years.

About 90% of Texas recruits can be found within 50 miles of I-45 and I-35. Don't know what the hell El Paso and Waskom have to do with anything. Not surprised you are clueless on that fact

Stallion wrote:About 90% of Texas recruits can be found within 50 miles of I-45 and I-35. Don't know what the hell El Paso and Waskom have to do with anything. Not surprised you are clueless on that fact

I'm pointing out the parameters of the state, and yes, I'm very well aware that DFW and Houston are the hotbeds, Mr. Glass is Half Empty.

But you take the approach that if the SMU staff doesn't have 2 or 3 of these 100 kids, the staff has screwed up.

This would be the list from the site that you've complained constantly about in how it has inflated its ratings.

I think we have beat this horse (er, Pony) enough. I think the coaches got the message and we are moving forward.
But, if a kid from Texas can't see that this train is leaving the station and doesn't want to particpate in a major, major turnaround, go to bowls, get a top education costing $55,000 per year, get coached up under two of the top coordinators in the country (June and Mason), have a direct connection to the NFL coaching staffs, and settles for an also ran in the Big 12, well, he wouldn't make out of the first semester of his freshman year.

Can't wait till September.

855 miles from El Paso to Orange

So I was checking out Rivals 100 and I did not see our name listed. I thought we got a recruit on this list? I think Stallion et all would be happy if for everyone not comitted SMU was listed as having an offer out to the guy, i don't know how much time/effort should be made with all of these guys but I think we should at least be broaching the subject of having them come to the best city in TX for college.

Pony_Law wrote:So I was checking out Rivals 100 and I did not see our name listed. I thought we got a recruit on this list? I think Stallion et all would be happy if for everyone not comitted SMU was listed as having an offer out to the guy, i don't know how much time/effort should be made with all of these guys but I think we should at least be broaching the subject of having them come to the best city in TX for college.

Per Stallion in another thread:

Colin Lagasse was rated No. 100 in the Old Coach (Rivals affiliate) Texas Top 100. I think its free content-see comment

http://theoldcoach.rivals.com/content.a ... ID=1182967

Mexmustang wrote:Those of us that are complaining are not concerned with getting players from any state that are highly ranked recruits--that would not make sense.

First, we were concerned about was the very late start we made recruiting in Texas this year. In early May we were not just second, third or fourth in Texas' offers, but a distant last of all Texas teams. At the same time one coach had as many offers out outside the state as all the other coaches did put together. In short, many of our coaches were not pulling their weight. It was evident at our Junior Day, which was poorly attended, that not enough personal contact of high school players and their coaches had been made prior to that weekend. Even our remote camps were not as well attended as in the past. It all came down to getting a late start and not putting forth the effort in last fall and January-February. We need to work on our high school relationships, it is the high school coaches that drive to the "unofficials", the Junior Days and Camps. It is the high school coaches that alert teams to their players and players to possible schools.

Second, we have too many coaches that do not participate in recruiting at all--they are position coaches with NFL experience that go home the last game of the year and return for Spring practice, only to disappear the last day of practice until the Fall. We see this as an opportunity to get some young Texas assistants to join the staff, with the energy and desire to move up in the coaching ranks, not just put in their time to retire.

The good news is that Adrian has been promoted, and I understand in May there was a coaches meeting to address this lack of coordinated effort. Good things seem to be happening, but a little late. However, if you look at the offers we currently have outstanding for the next recruiting class 2013, we have almost as many offers out today to Texas players, than we did active offers the first of May of this year, to the 2012 class.

Another point that buried in what Mexmustang is saying, is that we are being too reliant on Klemm. Without a doubt Klemm has been huge for us and has done more than anyone could have dreamed of with respect to the Cali recruits. However, if you listen to what the Cali recruits say, their interest and commitments have more to do with a relationship with Klemm, not their view of SMU. I don't think it is wrong to say that Adrian Klemm has a big-time presence in Cali, not necessarily SMU. If Klemm moves on to greener pastures (and there has been some rumblings), our connections to Cali are likely gone and we are back Reinbold's connections in La. and our sub-par efforts in Texas. The long-term success of SMU football will at some point depend on its connections in the state of Texas. Once we have a stronger reputation in TX, the Adrian Klemms of the world can come and go, but we will still be able to recruit. This is why offering kids in TX is so important, it helps build the reputation and presence of the team, at a time when SMU has a coach with a national reputation and has been in the media. Today, the point isn't necessarily what TX top 100 recruits commit to SMU, its what relationships we are building within the state of TX for the long term benefit of the program. Rightly or wrongly, some TX hs coaches may see SMU's lack of interest in their players as insulting, which will hurt our long term success. This is why the recruiting effort in TX and offers, up until May, has been so troubling. I think all are very pleased about the recruits we are picking up in Cali, but nothing about recruiting Cali prevents us from working harder to improve our presence in TX, which means sending out more offers in TX. We don't want to be known as the one college team in TX that doesn't care about TX hs football as much as it cares about recruits outside of TX.

I don't see this so much as SMU not being interested in recruiting Texas so much as not being able to recruit Texas as well as others. We don't see as much of a return on efforts spent here as we do in other states, or at least that's the way I interpret it.

Yes, I think the Texas recruiting grounds are definitely important to our long-term future, but we just don't seem to have the traction here. Eventually, we're going to have to make the investment. But as someone above pointed out, even TCU doesn't have more than a foothold in the Top Texas 100.

I don't see how we can afford at this point in our re-growth to spend x% of our total recruiting effort in Texas to get a much smaller return on that same percentage recruiting effort in California. We seem to be getting a much better return on that investment out there for the time being.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think this model is sustainable, but it doesn't seem like we have many options at this point.

Now feel free to tell me I don't know what the hell I'm talking about, but also keep in mind that I do not hold myself out to know the first thing about college football recruiting. Nor do I claim to have any additional insight into the behind the scenes work that is going on. Just my opinion based upon the information here and on Rivals.

Is this a question of not having the recruiting bandwidth outside of Klemm, or just not seeing results from those on the Texas recruiting trail?

It comes down to effort and teamwork.

Junior wrote:Yes, I think the Texas recruiting grounds are definitely important to our long-term future, but we just don't seem to have the traction here.

I don't see how we can afford at this point in our re-growth to spend x% of our total recruiting effort in Texas to get a much smaller return on that same percentage recruiting effort in California. We seem to be getting a much better return on that investment out there for the time being.

These two points are mostly accurate. We don't have much traction in TX, which is the problem.

It is important to focus a good percentage of our recruiting efforts were we can expect to see a greater return. We are getting a much better return in Cali. However, Klemm is the only one who is recruiting Cali. So where is the rest of our recruiting effort? This is were the problem lies. If we need to focus the majority of our efforts in Cali because we have traction there, fine. We can build our program with Cali players and we can work on gaining traction in TX by showing TX players sustained success (This will likely only work as long as we have Klemm). However, this is not what we are doing from the perspective that only one coach seems to be recruiting Cali. This approach means there is a lot more effort that can be devoted to recruiting or simply building our profile in TX.