PonyFans.com

I thought we were all on the same team? Settle this dispute on the blvd. Whoever drinks the most beers before kickoff wins!

Two points that haven't been made in this thread which I believe are relevant to judging the 2010 class. First, many of the offers we have made have been the first offer the prospect has received and then almost immediately they receive interest from the likes of Tech, Oklahoma State, TCU, Kansas, Nebraska, and Baylor. It is almost as if, when the Big 12 schools see that SMU has offered, they jump on the kid. From this I conclude that our staff is ahead of the competition and rating services on many of these prospects, and therefore we can't judge the kids that have committed on the number of offers they have received. Second, we are not in a BCS conference and under the present rules we will never be able to win a national championship. Most kids coming out of high school with a 4 or 5 star rating will have the opportunity to play for a BCS school and hence a national championship. Until the BCS mess is settled and we can at least have the potential of playing for the national title we will be second to the BCS schools. What an SMU offer has to decide is whether to wait and see if he can get a BCS offer before SMU withdraws it's offer, or go ahead and commit to SMU. As time moves on, there will be more pressure on our offers to not let the SMU offer get away and we should pick up some of the top prospects.

However, after all is said and done, to continue to make SMU a desirable school for quality athletes, we must have wins.

San Antonio Mustang wrote:Two points that haven't been made in this thread which I believe are relevant to judging the 2010 class. First, many of the offers we have made have been the first offer the prospect has received and then almost immediately they receive interest from the likes of Tech, Oklahoma State, TCU, Kansas, Nebraska, and Baylor.

Not a valid comment at all. first it isn't true and second I think you will find the SMU staff trying to jump those other schools by offering when they hear there is interest from those programs rather than the reverse happening.

George S. Patton wrote:Again, I do not believe that the caliber of athletes committing to SMU look a whole lot different than what we have seen in previous years. You can judge that by offers and ability.

And don't forget W-L record.

jtstang wrote:

George S. Patton wrote:Again, I do not believe that the caliber of athletes committing to SMU look a whole lot different than what we have seen in previous years. You can judge that by offers and ability.

And don't forget W-L record.

Absolutely. A point I made on page 2, I think. Just FYI. But now I'm a pariah.

HFvictory wrote: I think you will find the SMU staff trying to jump those other schools by offering when they hear there is interest from those programs rather than the reverse happening.

HF, just curious what you've seen/heard to base this comment on or are you just surmising this to be the case since most of the staff is new to the area?

I'm guessing you don't really know this to be true.

HFvictory wrote:

San Antonio Mustang wrote:Two points that haven't been made in this thread which I believe are relevant to judging the 2010 class. First, many of the offers we have made have been the first offer the prospect has received and then almost immediately they receive interest from the likes of Tech, Oklahoma State, TCU, Kansas, Nebraska, and Baylor.

Not a valid comment at all. first it isn't true and second I think you will find the SMU staff trying to jump those other schools by offering when they hear there is interest from those programs rather than the reverse happening.

HF you contradict yourself. You can't have it both ways. Either SMU is out in front or they are not and are only offering after other schools have shown interest. I will admit that I have not made a list and so my comment is based on my impression after reading interview after interview of kids who have said that SMU was their first and that now a bunch of schools are interested. Perhaps my impression is wrong, but I do not believe so. Perhaps you want to give me a list of kids where SMU is trying to "jump those other schools."

I think the "effort" is there but right now after back to back 1-11 seasons, can't expect 4 star guys to be lining up to come play for SMU. Jones and company appear to be out there traveling and trying to mine for talent that hopefully can help us down the road but immediate impact guys are going to be few and far between with the current state of affairs.

let's just hope the guys we do have on board can win 3-4 games this year to get some positive momentum going for the program.

Somewhat disappointed in the results todate, maybe, but not the effort. The coaches have worked at recruiting harder than any SMU coaches in a decade, maybe two! The recruiting period is not over so we still have a chance to get the two or three recruits that will make a difference in the rankings of this class. This staff has been here 17 months and has been in the battle for many top recruits, just not have won any yet. Get some wins, and sign two or three and this situation will begin to change measurably.
I still believe that these coaches have several players committed that have the tools, but not the college interest to be very good players. Why would we offer them so early if June and his staff didn't feel that way? Unlike our prior staff, I believe these coaches are not making offers to kids that they think "might" turn it around, but kids that they believe have the skills to develop into real players. These coaches are not just trying to fill slots in a class.

I POSTED THIS ON ANOTHER THREAD, BUT I THINK IT IS RELEVANT HERE TOO.

JUNE JONES CAN EVALUATE TALENT THATS FITS INTO HIS SYSTEM!

Scout.com allows us to see Hawaii's commits since 2002...

1999 HawaiÊ»i 9â€"4 5â€"2 T-1st W OÊ»ahu
2000 HawaiÊ»i 3â€"9 2â€"6 T-6th â€"
2001 HawaiÊ»i 9â€"3 5â€"3 T-4th â€"
2002 HawaiÊ»i 10â€"4 7â€"1 2nd L HawaiÊ»i: One 4 star, One 3 Star
2003 HawaiÊ»i 9â€"5 5â€"3 T-4th W HawaiÊ»i: Two 3 Stars
2004 HawaiÊ»i 8â€"5 4â€"4 5th W HawaiÊ»i: One 3 Star
2005 HawaiÊ»i 5â€"7 4â€"4 5th â€" : Three 3 Stars
2006 HawaiÊ»i 11â€"3 7â€"1 2nd W HawaiÊ»i: One 3 Star
2007 HawaiÊ»i 12â€"1 8â€"0 1st L Sugar †: Three 4 Stars, Four 3 Stars
HawaiÊ»i: 75â€"41 47â€"24

TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE SCOUT.COM didn't think too highly of his recruits, but he still recorded a 75-41 record, six bowl wins and a Coach of the Year Award.

http://hawaii.scout.com/a.z?s=219&p=9&c=8&yr=2003
[/b]


http://smu.scout.com/a.z?s=357&p=9&c=8&yr=2009

To me it looks like he's getting better overall recruits in his first year at SMU then he got during some seasons at Hawaii. He inherited more of a mess than he expected, but he's getting ready to make this team his, whether the recruit has 2 stars or 4
[/b]

Real interesting post Blvd_Stang. Thanks for reposting!

Considering the "delay" effect, this meant June took the team to a BCS bowl with only 7-8 rated upperclassmen--i.e., his most highly rated class was the Sugar Bowl year. Assuming you are referring to the rankings of high school seniors, not Juco's, this freshman class probably wasn't that large a factor in their first season following their recruitment, making your point more compelling! I would like to see the starting lineups of this team and how many were rated by the recruiting services.

In 2007, (UH) out of a total of seven rated players, three were jucos (1-four star and two-three star).

Last year we had seven three star (and I had forgotten, Darrius Johnson was only a two star, per Scout!).

Rivals had us with seven three star including Darrius and one four star.

On the otherhand, at Hawaii, June often took half of his kids from the Islands. I wonder if they were fairly rated? Considering the cost and "flak factor"-- I can see our Scout or Rivals representatives saying that they needed two weeks in the Islands to make a fair comparative ranking of Hawaiian high school football players--maybe many of those kids never received the attention they deserved and flew under the radar.

I just believe recruiting to Hawaii and recruiting to SMU is an apples and oranges scenario.

That said, Jones is in a better position to recruit to this program because of the adjustments that have been made. Plus, he's in a better state. He has more arrows in his quiver.

A lot has been lauded how he overcame everything and did great at Hawaii. Isn't is reasonable to think his success here will be tenfold? To me, the volume of recruits is one thing, but the caliber of their ability is more important.

At face value, I just don't know what we have because the information about who we are/were competing against to get these commitments is so uncertainty. That's why I have some concerns about where we're at.

And if that makes me skeptical about how good of a recruiter he and his staff are, then so be it.

I would love to be proven wrong.

George S. Patton wrote:I just believe recruiting to Hawaii and recruiting to SMU is an apples and oranges scenario.

That said, Jones is in a better position to recruit to this program because of the adjustments that have been made. Plus, he's in a better state. He has more arrows in his quiver.

A lot has been lauded how he overcame everything and did great at Hawaii. Isn't is reasonable to think his success here will be tenfold? To me, the volume of recruits is one thing, but the caliber of their ability is more important.

At face value, I just don't know what we have because the information about who we are/were competing against to get these commitments is so uncertainty. That's why I have some concerns about where we're at.

And if that makes me skeptical about how good of a recruiter he and his staff are, then so be it.

I would love to be proven wrong.

I would rather have a recruit with an offer from SFA than none at all!