PonyFans.com

This class has the most P5 and FBS offers per recruit since the DP. Don't know of another class since the DP that had 72% of the players having P5 offers.

Donnell88 wrote:The rule of thumb is that approximately half of your recruits never see significant playing time, if at all, due to academic problems, injuries, off-the-field issues, transfers, etc. That's why I am happy with 25 prospects that are all capable of starting at some point.

Very true. Nevertheless, the mess that June made of our roster is going to make for some real opportunities for PT for the 2015 and 2016 classes. Although there are a few Juniors/Seniors who will start/play in the Fall, our upperclassmen provide ZERO depth at the DL/OL/LB/DB positions. Basically, if they aren't starters, many of the upperclassmen are never going to see the field in a backup role.

Frankly, but for about 10-15 upperclassmen (example: Davis, Sutton, Richardson, Green, Lawler, Briggs, etc), our Roster would remind me a lot of our first post DP team. If you look at the roster below, the underclassmen are simply going to have to play in the Fall.

http://www.smumustangs.com/sports/m-foo ... l-mtt.html (Sort it by position and it is easy to see how much PT will be available at OL/DL/LB/DB).

HarvCrimYaleBlue wrote:While SMU is 4th in the AAC I would point out we had a full class at 25.

#43 USF 16 commits
#48 UCF 20 commits
#49 UH 19 commits

We have almost 30% more commits on average than our AAC competitors. Makes me wonder where everyone would have landed if each school took 25.

Careful with that blasphemy on this board.

Said the same thing myself. Those 3 schools, with their TX & FL recruiting bases, are most likely the ones SMU will need to keep pace with for the foreseeable future. Frost and that Oregon offense at UCF, will provide another very difficult offense to contend with.

The tide is definitely rising in the AAC.

HarvCrimYaleBlue wrote:While SMU is 4th in the AAC I would point out we had a full class at 25.

#43 USF 16 commits
#48 UCF 20 commits
#49 UH 19 commits

We have almost 30% more commits on average than our AAC competitors. Makes me wonder where everyone would have landed if each school took 25.

I understand your point and the site clearly shows the average points per commit are higher for those teams. That said, quantity has a quality all its own.

I think the 4th place ranking is for average? When you look at the average per recruit, our place doesn't drop, but it illustrates a bigger gap from us to the schools above us.

If you were a glass-half-full type of person, you could look at it and think that if SMU dropped to 16 commits, we would drop our 9 worst commits which would put our average up really high as well.

We are 4th in both total and average. You can sort by either one by clicking on the top. We would still be 4th in average even if you excluded the 9 commitments with the 9 lowest points.

That cannot be true mathematically. Dropping the lowest 9 commits would raise the average -- unless all commits had the same number of points.

Freeman is probably one of our best and he was last on the rankings

When I add up the "offer points" of all 25 signees I get a total of 7,778.41... not sure where the extra 904.86 came from.

Point is there is no exact science, even the offer list..though that can be a good indicator. We got a solid class full of plenty of players other good teams (including AAC teams) wanted. I trust that these players are up to hccms standards and can fit into his system adequately.

ponyboy wrote:That cannot be true mathematically. Dropping the lowest 9 commits would raise the average -- unless all commits had the same number of points.

I did not say it did not raise the average I said we were still were 4th in the conference in average per recruit even if you dropped out 9 recruits with the lowest points. I assure you that is true mathematically.

GreenbeltPony wrote:When I add up the "offer points" of all 25 signees I get a total of 7,778.41... not sure where the extra 904.86 came from.

I noticed the same thing. Secret sauce I guess.

The joy of this all is, this team currently does a good job of finding undervalued recruits. They average higher numbers of offers than previous "efforts" but they are still undervalued based on other ratings. Key for HCCM and company is how they fit the system. I laugh a little because, at the hazard of using a phrase thrown about by the former regime, they look for DITR who fit the system and have great potential. Just so happens that the rough is now a much more manicured version that facilitates a more direct approach to the green and enables a greater chance to hit it pin high.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

yep higher number of post commitment offers including many P5s is a good sign because there was very little upgrades this year on either Rivals or Scout. A service that doesn't update to account for Senior Year and recruiting intensity is suspect to that extent. At least RecruitsbyOffers detects that movement -its negative is that it doesn't always award the content, loyal early commit

Puckhead48E wrote:The joy of this all is, this team currently does a good job of finding undervalued recruits. They average higher numbers of offers than previous "efforts" but they are still undervalued based on other ratings. Key for HCCM and company is how they fit the system. I laugh a little because, at the hazard of using a phrase thrown about by the former regime, they look for DITR who fit the system and have great potential. Just so happens that the rough is now a much more manicured version that facilitates a more direct approach to the green and enables a greater chance to hit it pin high.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

If June signed an "undersized" recruit, he was 2-4" shorter than an average D1 starter at his position.

If Morris signs an "undersized" recruit, her is 1-4" taller than an average D1 starter at his position. Morris is looking for guys with athletic frames who can thrive after 1-2years in the strength & nutrition program.