PonyFans.com

California recruits

Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Mitch McConnell wrote:Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Well we have the same coaches on staff that had the same areas as last year but one. Are you saying we need to make more staff changes so JP won't be the only one carrying the Texas load?

Not sure about Pervert State University just yet. The other 4 I gotta agree will have big drop offs. Of course only two really concern us. Maybe next year isn't the disaster many seem to expect.

SMU 86 wrote:

Mitch McConnell wrote:Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Well we have the same coaches on staff that had the same areas as last year but one. Are you saying we need to make more staff changes so JP won't be the only one carrying the Texas load?

I'm saying: Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Mitch McConnell wrote:

SMU 86 wrote:

Mitch McConnell wrote:Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Well we have the same coaches on staff that had the same areas as last year but one. Are you saying we need to make more staff changes so JP won't be the only one carrying the Texas load?

I'm saying: Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Since that is gong to happen anyway and you have the almost the same staff that seemed not to be hitting Texas hard what do you do with the current coaches to not have one man carrying the load. Unless you like offering scholarships to JV players. By reducing the Cali presence we need to increase the Texas presence and not just by one man. What do you suggest we do to increase our Texas presence outside of the area JP will handle?

I'm not paid to determine recruiting territories. I just come on this board to express my beliefs. The coaching staff could give a rip what I think.

Who will top 5 turnarounds be?

Mitch McConnell wrote:I'm not paid to determine recruiting territories. I just come on this board to express my beliefs. The coaching staff could give a rip what I think.

It did not ask about determining territories. I am asking do you think the rest of this current coaching staff can carry the rest of the Texas load in recruiting based upon what they have done in the past? What are your beliefs on that? Or are you one of those types that just like to complain but not offer solutions. By the way, I don't think a lot of people care what you think. At least I try to converse with you.

Mitch McConnell wrote:I'm saying: Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Does repetition make an opinion somehow more valid?

Mitch McConnell wrote:Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Agreed. Not totally abandon.

I'm still hoping SMU makes it into the Pac16 some day!

Let's get UCLA on the OOC until then and beat their [deleted] at the Rose Bowl!!

ojaipony wrote:

Mitch McConnell wrote:Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Agreed. Not totally abandon.

I'm still hoping SMU makes it into the Pac16 some day!

Let's get UCLA on the OOC until then and beat their [deleted] at the Rose Bowl!!

I assume you want SMU in the PAC16 because you live out there and would get to see games. I get that.

But I think it would be better to be in the Big 12 to create interstate rivalries and against old SWC foes.

Either would be better that the Big East though.

jtoutloud wrote:

ojaipony wrote:

Mitch McConnell wrote:Reducing SMU's presence in California to only cherry picking instead of a base -- the way it should be.

Agreed. Not totally abandon.

I'm still hoping SMU makes it into the Pac16 some day!

Let's get UCLA on the OOC until then and beat their [deleted] at the Rose Bowl!!

I assume you want SMU in the PAC16 because you live out there and would get to see games. I get that.

But I think it would be better to be in the Big 12 to create interstate rivalries and against old SWC foes.

Either would be better that the Big East though.

Correct about SMU in Pac16.

Completely agree with your last sentence. Maybe in 5 years? We win CUSA next year, compete for BE title in years 2 and 3 and then win it 2 years in a row and get reunited with our SWC brethren in a mega conference (TCU, TT, Rice, UH, UT, aTm, AR, SMU, Baylor, OU, OSU, ).

Here's how the megaconference alignment will go down (it's too obvious and rational to actually happen):

SEC (schools located in the southeast ... current SEC minus AR plus Clemson, Miami, FSU, USF)
SWC (schools located in the southwest ... old SWC as above)
PAC16 (schools located in the west ... current Pac12 plus Boise, BYU, Utah, etc)
"Big 10" (schools located in the midwest ... Ohio State, MI, PSU, MO, NE, Iowa, MN, Indiana, etc)
ACC (schools located in the atlantic coast area - VA, VA Tech, UNC, NC State, Louisville, Cincy, ECU)

winners and runners up of each conference play in a playoff tournament scenario for NC.

Sorry - got off on a tangent there.

Man I like the BE. Money almost equal to big12 and much easier path to bcs bowl, best basketball in the country and exact overlap of where our out of state students come from. What's not to like?

We will help the BE move up in stature because, if SMU can hold on to the coaching staff they have right now, SMU will be one of the most exciting teams in college football. And, we will get great press from the Eastern media, etc. This could turn out to the the best conference for SMU, including the B12, SEC, B10, PAC12, etc. I hope it works that way and we have stay here for many years.