Page 4 of 7
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Tue May 31, 2011 9:48 am
by ponyboy
Please actually read RedRiverPony's post above and respond. It will be two minutes well spent.
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Tue May 31, 2011 11:58 am
by Wuba
Mexmustang wrote:You obviously have never managed a group of people--yes, we have slackers, guys that leave the state of Texas to go home before the players have towled off in the last practice of the spring.
If we do have people like that (and again, would love to know your source for the allegation) then why do you rip on them rather than on their boss who employs them despite that behavior?
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Tue May 31, 2011 12:00 pm
by Pony_Law
NickSMU17 wrote:Pony_Law wrote:At the end of the day success in college football comes from coaching football. I trust our coaching staff know enough about their system to find players that fit well and will excel in it regardless of what state they live in. Look at Norter dame, great recruiting class after great class and they still suck. I think it is absured for people to say we are not recruiting texas because we don't offer the top guys. SMU is a school that will never be in a position to get any of the top 20 prospects in the state unless some outside factor like family is in play(these guys want to play in a major conferences) but we don't need these guys to achieve our goals. To achieve our goals we need to be able to steal some good mid level guys and find guys others are ignoring that will thrive in the run and shoot. We do that and we win our conference almost every year with 10+ wins and occasional BCS runs.
Cop out...
TCU has competed with every school in the state except UT and won head to head battles...Did they offer anything better than what we have to offer now?
How is this a cop out? In the last four years only one of the top 20 texas recruits has gone to a non-BCS conference school. Where did that player go TCU this year when there is the promise of being in a BCS conference. I'm not saying SMU can't win battles against other schools in TX but they need to pick and choose where to fight and the top recruites in TX is not the place to do it.
My main point however was that people on this board are to concerned with trying to get top texas talent when we don't need it. Boise state has not had a top 50 recruiting class in the last 4 years and TCU has never cracked the top 25. Are both of those programs top 25, of course because they find the right players (not just the best) and have good coaching staffs.
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Tue May 31, 2011 1:07 pm
by ponyboy
It doesn't mean you don't try in Texas either. It means you pick a plan that this year will get you the best possible players regardless of their zip code, a plan that appears to be working.
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Tue May 31, 2011 11:43 pm
by ponyscott
Wuba wrote:Mexmustang wrote:You obviously have never managed a group of people--yes, we have slackers, guys that leave the state of Texas to go home before the players have towled off in the last practice of the spring.
If we do have people like that (and again, would love to know your source for the allegation) then why do you rip on them rather than on their boss who employs them despite that behavior?
Wuba..there are guys that DO know what is going on and YOU don't and they won't tell you, because why would they tell you? Who are you?....you have no source, but they do....that frustrates you.
Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:32 am
by Wuba
ponyscott wrote:Wuba wrote:Mexmustang wrote:You obviously have never managed a group of people--yes, we have slackers, guys that leave the state of Texas to go home before the players have towled off in the last practice of the spring.
If we do have people like that (and again, would love to know your source for the allegation) then why do you rip on them rather than on their boss who employs them despite that behavior?
Wuba..there are guys that DO know what is going on and YOU don't and they won't tell you, because why would they tell you? Who are you?....you have no source, but they do....that frustrates you.
You are wrong. I am not at all frustrated that I do not have sources. I am disappointed in people who come on these sites repeating information they have been fed from their "sources" without considering whether their source might have an agenda.
And I ask again, why do people criticize the assistant coaches without criticizing their boss who allows them to do these things that bother them? Or should I say, whatever it is that bothers the person they act as a mouthpiece for?
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:25 am
by Stallion
you can see very clearly what is going on with the raw numbers of who is offering, where we are offering and when we are offering. If you have some historical perspective this ain't difficult to figure out.
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:34 am
by NickSMU17
I have no sources other than just opening my eyes to reality....
Half the stuff does nothing,
2.5 guys try
1 does all the heavy lifting...
the end...
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:37 am
by ponyboy
How does that compare to other winning programs, Nick? I know he's new to the coaching profession, but is it even remotely possible June Jones has a system that works? How are we looking, recruiting wise? Last time I checked we have 18 Rivals four stars showing interest. But I'm just an unfrozen caveman lawyer.
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:38 am
by ponyboy
ponyboy wrote:RedRiverPony wrote:So you're saying Coach Jones is playing to his coaches' strengths? What a shocking approach!
Three coaches got the bulk of the recruits last year: Coach Klemm (6.5 - Conner Preston said he was recruited by Coach Klemm and Coach Morrison), Coach Mason (6) and Coach Reinebold (6). But the suggestion that the other coaches aren't pulling their weight is ludicrous. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. We don't know all of the responsibilities for each coach (i.e. the coach who works as an academic liaison between the team and the LEC has a huge, thankless job that doesn't get reported on those money-driven sites, but without the work he puts in with the LEC, some players will become ineligible), and it is absolutely right for the head coach to give more recruiting responsibility to the best recruiters.
You think Ed Orgeron is at USC because he's a great tactician for defensive linemen? No. He knows the position, being a former DL himself, but he's there because he's a raving lunatic who fires up the team on Saturdays ... and because he's a terrific recruiter. It's no accident that after Jordan Payton, the WR who committed to USC from the womb, started considering SMU, Lane Kiffin switched Orgeron over to recruit Payton the rest of the way. Recruiting is Orgeron's biggest asset to a team, and Kiffin - whacko that he is - is playing to the strengths of his staff.
Consider:
º Alabama's top three recruiters in the 2011 class appear to have been Sal Sunseri, Jim McElwain and Jeremy Pruitt, who were responsible for all but four of Bama's class, which is universally accepted as one of the nation's best. Obviously, Nick Saban is wasting money on his other assistants, right?
º At Texas Tech, someone named Robert Prunty is credited with pulling in 9.5 recruits, with 10 more coming from three other assistant coaches, so the other 8 assistant coaches pulled in just 9.5 recruits. Tommy Tuberville clearly needs to fire those 8 slackers.
º On the other hand, North Carolina traditionally recruits pretty well, and this year seemed pretty balanced; Sam Pittman is credited with landing 5.5 recruits and Troy Douglas 4.5, but six other assistant coaches got credit for at least one recruit - none more than 2.5. By the "everyone should be pulling his weight" theory, UNC should have a better class than Alabama, right?
Of course not. All of this is to say there are different approaches to recruiting. Coach Jones has had a number of very good players over the years, has sent a lot to the NFL and has won a lot of games. To get on here and suggest that he has a staff of some guys who work hard and some who don't is, at the very least, uninformed. Coaches have different strengths and therefore get assigned different tasks. It sounds like some of the people here have an axe to grind against some members of this staff who have given us our first two bowl berths in 25 years. It's tiresome to fans, and I would bet discouraging to players and recruits who read this board, too.
Can we get a gloom and doomer response to this very solid post, please?
Bump.
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:06 am
by NickSMU17
The truth is out there...you can either look or ignore...
I am not going to be able to change your mind that is certain...
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:20 am
by Wuba
NickSMU17 wrote:I have no sources other than just opening my eyes to reality....
Half the stuff does nothing,
2.5 guys try
1 does all the heavy lifting...
the end...
A quote by you on another thread:
"I know exactly the arrangement...I have talked to people involved about it..."
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=53128&start=15#p654574
So which is it? Do you talk to people who are involved (i.e. sources) or do you have no other sources than what you see/infer from Rivals?
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:32 am
by NickSMU17
Does it matter?
The truth is there...if you choose not to look that is fine, but I would prefer to build a program rather than have a good football team...
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:44 am
by ponyboy
Can you please take two minutes to read RedRiverPony's post above and respond? Or you could just continue talking over everybody and therefore not risk having your mind changed.
Re: Do recruiting critics want it both ways?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:48 am
by Wuba
NickSMU17 wrote:Does it matter?
The truth is there...if you choose not to look that is fine, but I would prefer to build a program rather than have a good football team...
I do not disagree about the importance of building a good program not just a good team. I am not arguing about the truth being there. Like you and many on here I would like to see us building deep long term relationships with the Texas coaching community that will have lasting value no matter who is on the staff here, rather than depending on 1 guy with great connections in California.
I do disagree that it does not matter when you switch between claiming to have inside sources and claiming not to have inside sources. It does not help your credibility, which is too bad because I appreciate a lot of what you have to say.
It is especially important to stay credible if you do have inside sources. People will infer (correctly or not) who your inside source is and your credibility reflects on that inside source.