Page 3 of 3
Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:50 pm
by Stallion
I've always felt that early UT commitments are really irrelevant to SMU too and it actually forces top players to consider other options earlier in the recruiting season. However, I think the evidence over the last 10 years is the Big 12 North has stepped into that void to a much larger degree than in the dying days of the SWC.
Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:57 pm
by jtstang
mathman wrote:Sewanee Stang wrote:It's best for SMU, TCU, Baylor, etc when UT gets the top tier talent, so that they can battle against each other and the middling Big 12 schools for the next tier talent. From that level, there is enough talent in Texas for the other schools to field successful teams. When the top recruits go out of state in large numbers then UT has to drop down and grab some of the guys from the latter bunch, and then SMU, TCU & Baylor have to "lower their sights" to marginal recruits. The more the talent stays home, the more SMU can potentially benefit.
Somehow that made sense to me.
It's the math thing.