PonyFans.com

He was mentioned in the Rivals Pony Express less than 3 weeks ago and on the prior Wednesday by the moderators-days before the June Jones/Klemm issues arose. Title stays-that's why I said former Target. I post all the positive and negative reports I find on recruiting-if you don't like it don't read my posts. I posted several positive developments on Scout and Rivals message board at about the same time-one pretty significant post about a Big-Time Prospect(s) that nobody has even mentioned

and so marks the beginning of the end of SMU football as we know it.

Stallion wrote:He was mentioned in the Rivals Pony Express less than 3 weeks ago and on the prior Wednesday by the moderators-days before the June Jones/Klemm issues arose. Title stays-that's why I said former Target. I post all the positive and negative reports I find on recruiting-if you don't like it don't read my posts. I posted several positive developments on Scout and Rivals message board at about the same time-one pretty significant post about a Big-Time Prospect(s) that nobody has even mentioned

You read into that story what you wanted to. Go back and read what Dwan said. Now, either you can use logic for this or you can stick to your agenda.

Personally, I'd never even heard of this kid until I read this thread. So when I got on his page and sorted through the stories on him, I thought "SMU really was on this guy's radar?" Given, that's my take on it.

But if other people -- finite audience as it is -- are coming to the same conclusion, that should tell you something.

Your headline stinks.

This guy has been mentioned several times. I dont know if we ever had a realistic shot at him but we were going after him. I have no problem with the title of the headline because it is accurate.

If you didn't know who he was, you probably don't follow SMU recruiting all that much. There have been multiple stories in the PX about him and discussions about him being team mate of Printz. When I said, he never was seriously considering SMU...that doesn't mean he wasnt a target...SMU was activley recruiting him, I just don't think we ever had a shot at him.

There is really nothing wrong with Stallion's head line

ClickClack wrote:If you didn't know who he was, you probably don't follow SMU recruiting all that much.

I'm very hit and miss with it. There are days when I will go check out what's going on. There are days where I don't even look at the site. Glad I have it, though.

For someone like me in that category, you could interpret the headline as saying that this was SMU's recruit to lose. And SMU lost him to UCLA.

If you look at his list, you could say he was [fill in school here] target.

I will give him credit for creating a headline that grabbed people's attention. It worked in that regard.

Mitch McConnell wrote:

ClickClack wrote:If you didn't know who he was, you probably don't follow SMU recruiting all that much.

I'm very hit and miss with it. There are days when I will go check out what's going on. There are days where I don't even look at the site. Glad I have it, though.

For someone like me in that category, you could interpret the headline as saying that this was SMU's recruit to lose. And SMU lost him to UCLA.

If you look at his list, you could say he was [fill in school here] target.

I will give him credit for creating a headline that grabbed people's attention. It worked in that regard.

I think you are overstating it to say that "SMU's recruit to lose" is a reasonable interpretation of "target." Nothing wrong with the title of his post.

Dude never took a visit to SMU. He was scheduled, but cancelled and never showed up on campus.