If UC ends up playing UTEP in the Miami bowl something went horribly wrong in our season...I'll leave it at that.

(07-06-2015 11:29 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 08:32 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Blah from top to bottom

Playing the ACC at Navy's stadium, with a million bucks as a bonus, sounds like a ideal plan for ECU to me...

Yeah it was kinda cool the first five times

(07-06-2015 01:10 PM)DowdyPirate Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 11:29 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 08:32 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Blah from top to bottom

Playing the ACC at Navy's stadium, with a million bucks as a bonus, sounds like a ideal plan for ECU to me...

Yeah it was kinda cool the first five times

Its not like Hawaii on Christmas Eve is going to work for many. Great present to the players, but hardly nay fans can make that game due to the expense and family commitments.

(07-06-2015 11:48 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 08:26 AM)pesik Wrote:  Cure Bowl: Arkansas State vs. East Carolina

Miami Beach Bowl: Cincinnati vs. UTEP

Boca Raton Bowl: Northern Illinois vs. SMU

Sheraton Hawaii Bowl: BYU vs. Houston

St. Petersburg Bowl: North Carolina vs. UCF

Military Bowl: Miami vs. Navy

Birmingham Bowl: Texas A&M vs. Memphis

access/ny6:Chick-Fil-A Peach Bowl: Florida State vs. Boise State

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footbal...urn-oregon

But wait... I thought the "Access Bowl" belonged to the AAC???

I honestly think it is Boise or the AAC most years with the edge going to Boise being the media darling. It will be interesting to see if we have an 11-1 AAC Team vs. an 11-1 Boise who they select.

I think Marshall proved last year that they don't want a Sun Belt, MAC or Conference USA team in this event unless they absolutely have to take one. I mean an ECU team with a loss was ranked while an 11-0 Marshall team never seemed to sniff the rankings.

(07-06-2015 11:17 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  [quote='invisiblehand' pid='12176176' dateline='1436195907']
I find it incredibly doubtful that an SMU team that just underwent a complete overhaul will rebound that quickly. Tulsa would be a more likely candidate to win a few more games based on our returning talent alone.

SMU has always recruited well...

SMU has always recruited well? Unless the coaches are playing the games, it can be easily documented that SMU has NOT always recruited well. In fact, it can be easily established that SMU has consistently recruited poorly.

(07-06-2015 03:51 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 11:17 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  I find it incredibly doubtful that an SMU team that just underwent a complete overhaul will rebound that quickly. Tulsa would be a more likely candidate to win a few more games based on our returning talent alone.

SMU has always recruited well...

SMU has always recruited well? Unless the coaches are playing the games, it can be easily documented that SMU has NOT always recruited well. In fact, it can be easily established that SMU has consistently recruited poorly.

smu has recruited well, probably UH, uc, usf are the only ones that out recruit smu...they are on similar levels with ucf and ecu (note ucf has only been a decent recruiting team for 2 years)..with smu probably slightly ahead

people who say smu is a bad recruiting team are the same ones that say usf was a bad recruiting team before taggart...when that isnt true if you look at the rankings..they have had touted recruits (for the aac level) all over the field for them..they literally have 3 4star qbs on the roster

but to the original point, i dont see smu in a bowl...

(07-06-2015 04:16 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 03:51 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 11:17 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  I find it incredibly doubtful that an SMU team that just underwent a complete overhaul will rebound that quickly. Tulsa would be a more likely candidate to win a few more games based on our returning talent alone.

SMU has always recruited well...

SMU has always recruited well? Unless the coaches are playing the games, it can be easily documented that SMU has NOT always recruited well. In fact, it can be easily established that SMU has consistently recruited poorly.

smu has recruited we'll likely probably UH, uc, usf are the only ones that out recruit smu...they are on similar levels with ucf and ecu (note ucf has only been a decent recruiting team for 2 years)..with smu probably slightly ahead

people who say smu is at bad recruiting team are the same ones that say usf was a bad recruiting team before taggart...when that isnt true if you look at the rankings..they have had touted recruits (for the aac level) all over the field for them..they literally have 3 4star qbs on the roster

but to the original point, i dont see smu in a bowl...

IMHO the Texas and Florida schools benefit from being in areas with swollen recruiting populations as far as rankings go.... some of the kids from places like East Carolina or Tulsa may not be as highly starred... but end up being better players once they're on campus. It's just an exposure thing. The recruits in Texas & Florida have more access to scouting / recruiting agency combines and leagues.

(07-06-2015 01:30 PM)PT_american Wrote:  I honestly think it is Boise or the AAC most years with the edge going to Boise being the media darling.

Boise's edge is the easier schedule they play. Will usually be tough to match their win total with an AAC schedule.

(07-06-2015 04:25 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 04:16 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 03:51 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 11:17 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  I find it incredibly doubtful that an SMU team that just underwent a complete overhaul will rebound that quickly. Tulsa would be a more likely candidate to win a few more games based on our returning talent alone.

SMU has always recruited well...

SMU has always recruited well? Unless the coaches are playing the games, it can be easily documented that SMU has NOT always recruited well. In fact, it can be easily established that SMU has consistently recruited poorly.

smu has recruited we'll likely probably UH, uc, usf are the only ones that out recruit smu...they are on similar levels with ucf and ecu (note ucf has only been a decent recruiting team for 2 years)..with smu probably slightly ahead

people who say smu is at bad recruiting team are the same ones that say usf was a bad recruiting team before taggart...when that isnt true if you look at the rankings..they have had touted recruits (for the aac level) all over the field for them..they literally have 3 4star qbs on the roster

but to the original point, i dont see smu in a bowl...

IMHO the Texas and Florida schools benefit from being in areas with swollen recruiting populations as far as rankings go.... some of the kids from places like East Carolina or Tulsa may not be as highly starred... but end up being better players once they're on campus. It's just an exposure thing. The recruits in Texas & Florida have more access to scouting / recruiting agency combines and leagues.

i agree on a very minor level... its easier to fall through the cracks if your in one of the smaller states.. if your in a minor state you probably get 1 or 2 looks from a scouter and then they move on...if your in texas, florida and cali you will be scouted over and over and over, so if your good they will one even if the first film wasnt good

with that said i disagree on a major level... if what you were saying was true, tulsa would be recruiting oklahoma players more instead of texas but the majority of your recruits are mostly from texas....wierdly enough tulsa has made great teams with underrated texas players (G.J. Kinne, cody green ) and literally all the stars on your current team are from texas (Keyarris Garrett, Dane Evans, Keevan Lucas)

it has less to do with being better when they get on campus and more to do with the development that happens when they're there ...something ucf has excelled in..

I have a feeling we do better than 8th.

(07-06-2015 04:30 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 01:30 PM)PT_american Wrote:  I honestly think it is Boise or the AAC most years with the edge going to Boise being the media darling.

Boise's edge is the easier schedule they play. Will usually be tough to match their win total with an AAC schedule.

Boise played a tougher schedule than Memphis last year..

According to sagarin, boise's sos rank was 74, Memphis' was 120.

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

Just to remind you, the AAC was the 3rd best G5 football conference, CUSA 2, MW (On a down year) 1. The ever present notion on this board that the AAC is the most dominant G5 football conference is laughable.

(07-06-2015 06:06 PM)toohandsome Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 04:30 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 01:30 PM)PT_american Wrote:  I honestly think it is Boise or the AAC most years with the edge going to Boise being the media darling.

Boise's edge is the easier schedule they play. Will usually be tough to match their win total with an AAC schedule.

Boise played a tougher schedule than Memphis last year..

According to sagarin, boise's sos rank was 74, Memphis' was 120.

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

Just to remind you, the AAC was the 3rd best G5 football conference, CUSA 2, MW (On a down year) 1. The ever present notion on this board that the AAC is the most dominant G5 football conference is laughable.

MWC on a down year??? utah state and air force who recruits at dreadful level had 10 win teams
colorado state had its best season in nearly a decade
literally fresno was the only MWC team who wasnt on or better than their regular level

while on the other hand the AAC in a 11 team league had 1 qb who was an upperclassmen in the entire league...10 of the 11 qbs in our league were either freshmen or sophomore, with last year being their first season going into the year as the starter ... 3 of which even had season ending injuries early

smu had its historical worst year, and 3 of our coaches had to be fired , 2 other had all but the head coach fired....
and you had the audacity to say you had the down year... Memphis had its best year ever but every single other team in the league had seasons lower than their average

the AAC dramatically out recruits the MWC..and its not even remotely close
boise dramatically outrecruits everyone in the MWC, why boise will always dominate that league but boise would be 5 on the average year in the AAC

our league is dramatically better top to bottom on the average year..it will be hard to tell because neither of us are at a p5 level in OOC games and someone has to win in your conference games..but put any mwc in the AAC for a season and it will be blatantly obvious

we'll see what happens this year when 2/3 of our league have upper classmen experienced qbs and not being forced to play freshman

(07-06-2015 07:13 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 06:06 PM)toohandsome Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 04:30 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 01:30 PM)PT_american Wrote:  I honestly think it is Boise or the AAC most years with the edge going to Boise being the media darling.

Boise's edge is the easier schedule they play. Will usually be tough to match their win total with an AAC schedule.

Boise played a tougher schedule than Memphis last year..

According to sagarin, boise's sos rank was 74, Memphis' was 120.

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

Just to remind you, the AAC was the 3rd best G5 football conference, CUSA 2, MW (On a down year) 1. The ever present notion on this board that the AAC is the most dominant G5 football conference is laughable.

MWC on a down year??? utah state and air force who recruits at dreadful level had 10 win teams
Since 2012 USU has had 11, 9, & 10 win seasons respectively. For how much you & the AAC homers want AF in a nationwide comference, it doesn't really sound like you respect them or their accomplishments all that much.
colorado state had its best season in nearly a decade
literally fresno was the only MWC team who wasnt on or better than their regular level
Not true. SDSU, Fresno, Hawaii, Nevada, & SJSU (The entire west division) were all down & under performed.

while on the other hand the AAC in a 11 team league had 1 qb who was an upperclassmen in the entire league...10 of the 11 qbs in our league were either freshmen or sophomore, with last year being their first season going into the year as the starter ... 3 of which even had season ending injuries early
Take a breath, guy. I never said the AAC wasn't down (this is the AAC board, so you all are well aware you were down), I was just pointing out the MWC was down aswell.

smu had its historical worst year, and 3 of our coaches had to be fired , 2 other had all but the head coach fired....
and you had the audacity to say you had the down year... Memphis had its best year ever but every single other team in the league had seasons lower than their average
Again, take it easy, I never said the AAC wasn't struggling. It was obvious, I mean CUSA was better than you guys this year.
the AAC dramatically out recruits the MWC..and its not even remotely close
boise dramatically outrecruits everyone in the MWC, why boise will always dominate that league but boise would be 5 on the average year in the AAC
This, again, isn't true. Boise out recruited everyone in the G5 last year, & is consistently at or near the top. According to 247, last year the MW had 3 teams Boise (#56 national rank, #1 MW), SJSU (#58 national rank, #2 MW), & SDSU (#66 national, #3 MW) out recruit the #1 ranked AAC school, Cincy (#67 national rank, #1 AAC).
our league is dramatically better top to bottom on the average year..it will be hard to tell because neither of us are at a p5 level in OOC games and someone has to win in your conference games..but put any mwc in the AAC for a season and it will be blatantly obvious
In year one you were the 3rd best G5 conference. Nobody in the AAC is close to Boise's football program. Boise would have the same success whether they're in the MW or AAC.

we'll see what happens this year when 2/3 of our league have upper classmen experienced qbs and not being forced to play freshman
Looking forward to it.

SMU will not take long to fix at all, but it will take more than one year. i don't see a bowl for us. I do think there will be some positive surprises, combined with a bunch of Bart Simpson head slaps.

The good news is 1) this staff can flat our recruit and has it as priority number one 2) They know how to run a real offense from this century 3) the best talent will be on the field, not just the talent that fits a bad system 4) our league will make you look good sometimes when you are not very good and finally 5) we serve beer in the stadium.

(07-06-2015 08:26 AM)pesik Wrote:  Cure Bowl: Arkansas State vs. East Carolina

Miami Beach Bowl: Cincinnati vs. UTEP

Boca Raton Bowl: Northern Illinois vs. SMU

Sheraton Hawaii Bowl: BYU vs. Houston

St. Petersburg Bowl: North Carolina vs. UCF

Military Bowl: Miami vs. Navy

Birmingham Bowl: Texas A&M vs. Memphis

access/ny6:Chick-Fil-A Peach Bowl: Florida State vs. Boise State

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footbal...urn-oregon

Oh...YUCK

AAC was down last year...bad year for the conference. MWC was not that great either and has had better conference years. CUSA had a great year last vs g5, particularly the lowest rated G5 schools, but flopped badly against P5 schools. Not sure CUSA had a single win vs P5 schools last year? Anyway going forward I see the MWC and AAC separating themselves. SB, MAC and CuSA will be significantly lower than those two each season from now on IMHO. AAC and MWC will probably teeter totter back and forth with each other but overall I see the two as pretty even.
Recruiting Rankings: Every year the recruiting rankings for the MWC are also lower than the schools that make up the AAC. Every year I've been following Scout and Rivals I've noticed that. After 10 to 15 years of seeing these ratings I'm starting to question their credibility. I've noticed that the PAC gets less 3 star, 4 star and 5 star recruits by their standards. I cant conclude the schools with lesser recruits are overachieving anymore, I have to conclude these high school recruits are harder to predict than anyone can know. ECU usually has much lower recruiting ratings than USF, Memphis and Houston BY FAR. Is ECU overachieving and Houston, USF and Memphis underachieving every year? That's what Scout and Rivals are suggesting and I don't believe it. Cheers!

(07-06-2015 07:59 PM)toohandsome Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 07:13 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 06:06 PM)toohandsome Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 04:30 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 01:30 PM)PT_american Wrote:  I honestly think it is Boise or the AAC most years with the edge going to Boise being the media darling.

Boise's edge is the easier schedule they play. Will usually be tough to match their win total with an AAC schedule.

Boise played a tougher schedule than Memphis last year..

According to sagarin, boise's sos rank was 74, Memphis' was 120.

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

Just to remind you, the AAC was the 3rd best G5 football conference, CUSA 2, MW (On a down year) 1. The ever present notion on this board that the AAC is the most dominant G5 football conference is laughable.

MWC on a down year??? utah state and air force who recruits at dreadful level had 10 win teams
colorado state had its best season in nearly a decade
literally fresno was the only MWC team who wasnt on or better than their regular level
Not true. SDSU, Fresno, Hawaii, Nevada, & SJSU (The entire west division) were all down & under performed.

while on the other hand the AAC in a 11 team league had 1 qb who was an upperclassmen in the entire league...10 of the 11 qbs in our league were either freshmen or sophomore, with last year being their first season going into the year as the starter ... 3 of which even had season ending injuries early
Take a breath, guy. I never said the AAC wasn't down (this is the AAC board, so you all are well aware you were down), I was just pointing out the MWC was down aswell.

smu had its historical worst year, and 3 of our coaches had to be fired , 2 other had all but the head coach fired....
and you had the audacity to say you had the down year... Memphis had its best year ever but every single other team in the league had seasons lower than their average
Again, take it easy, I never said the AAC wasn't struggling. It was obvious, I mean CUSA was better than you guys this year.
the AAC dramatically out recruits the MWC..and its not even remotely close
boise dramatically outrecruits everyone in the MWC, why boise will always dominate that league but boise would be 5 on the average year in the AAC
This, again, isn't true. Boise out recruited everyone in the G5 last year, & is consistently at or near the top. According to 247, last year the MW had 3 teams Boise (#56 national rank, #1 MW), SJSU (#58 national rank, #2 MW), & SDSU (#66 national, #3 MW) out recruit the #1 ranked AAC school, Cincy (#67 national rank, #1 AAC).
our league is dramatically better top to bottom on the average year..it will be hard to tell because neither of us are at a p5 level in OOC games and someone has to win in your conference games..but put any mwc in the AAC for a season and it will be blatantly obvious
In year one you were the 3rd best G5 conference. Nobody in the AAC is close to Boise's football program. Boise would have the same success whether they're in the MW or AAC.

we'll see what happens this year when 2/3 of our league have upper classmen experienced qbs and not being forced to play freshman
Looking forward to it.

sjsu is regular bottom feeder.. are we using their 1 decent year as their standard?? and hawaii aswelll...

and sdsu and nevada didnt have a 'down' year they had their regular year,..down year means this isnt normal for them ..nevedas average win total the last decade i kid you not is exactly 7 wins...

fresno is the ONLY teams that had a "down" year...

2) i said average recruiting..sjsu had its best recruiting class ever with 33 recruits..but lets not pretend they dont average in the 120's over the last 8 years ..
and like i noted earlier we fired a ton of coaches last year, houston lost 6 recruits after we fired our coach including our 4star qb recruit....similar for the other teams.. (ill also not that that 247 has taken off our commits who didnt enroll but hasnt done it for certain teams in the MWC like SJSU, at the end of signing day USF finished with the best G5 recruiting class)

again you are using 1 year as a staple to make long term assumptions.... sjsu is a dreadful recruiting team on average..

ucf has been on a scholarship reduction punishment for the last 2 seasons, which is just ending, usf's average is in the high 40's, cincy is in the late 50's early 60's, houston is in the 60's.....
sdsu averages in the mid 70s similar for fresno..and beyond those 3 (including boise) it just gets really really ugly on the recruiting front ....the rest probably average 110 on the average year

literally everyone else in the AAC not uconn and memphis dramatically outrecruits the rest of your league on average (yes this includes tulsa and tulane)

(07-06-2015 08:45 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 07:59 PM)toohandsome Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 07:13 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 06:06 PM)toohandsome Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 04:30 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Boise's edge is the easier schedule they play. Will usually be tough to match their win total with an AAC schedule.

Boise played a tougher schedule than Memphis last year..

According to sagarin, boise's sos rank was 74, Memphis' was 120.

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

Just to remind you, the AAC was the 3rd best G5 football conference, CUSA 2, MW (On a down year) 1. The ever present notion on this board that the AAC is the most dominant G5 football conference is laughable.

MWC on a down year??? utah state and air force who recruits at dreadful level had 10 win teams
colorado state had its best season in nearly a decade
literally fresno was the only MWC team who wasnt on or better than their regular level
Not true. SDSU, Fresno, Hawaii, Nevada, & SJSU (The entire west division) were all down & under performed.

while on the other hand the AAC in a 11 team league had 1 qb who was an upperclassmen in the entire league...10 of the 11 qbs in our league were either freshmen or sophomore, with last year being their first season going into the year as the starter ... 3 of which even had season ending injuries early
Take a breath, guy. I never said the AAC wasn't down (this is the AAC board, so you all are well aware you were down), I was just pointing out the MWC was down aswell.

smu had its historical worst year, and 3 of our coaches had to be fired , 2 other had all but the head coach fired....
and you had the audacity to say you had the down year... Memphis had its best year ever but every single other team in the league had seasons lower than their average
Again, take it easy, I never said the AAC wasn't struggling. It was obvious, I mean CUSA was better than you guys this year.
the AAC dramatically out recruits the MWC..and its not even remotely close
boise dramatically outrecruits everyone in the MWC, why boise will always dominate that league but boise would be 5 on the average year in the AAC
This, again, isn't true. Boise out recruited everyone in the G5 last year, & is consistently at or near the top. According to 247, last year the MW had 3 teams Boise (#56 national rank, #1 MW), SJSU (#58 national rank, #2 MW), & SDSU (#66 national, #3 MW) out recruit the #1 ranked AAC school, Cincy (#67 national rank, #1 AAC).
our league is dramatically better top to bottom on the average year..it will be hard to tell because neither of us are at a p5 level in OOC games and someone has to win in your conference games..but put any mwc in the AAC for a season and it will be blatantly obvious
In year one you were the 3rd best G5 conference. Nobody in the AAC is close to Boise's football program. Boise would have the same success whether they're in the MW or AAC.

we'll see what happens this year when 2/3 of our league have upper classmen experienced qbs and not being forced to play freshman
Looking forward to it.

sjsu is regular bottom feeder.. are we using their 1 decent year as their standard?? and hawaii aswelll...
Eh, I wouldn't call them a bottom feeder. SJSU is historically a .500 program (.498 to be exact). Not great, but certainly not a bottom feeder. As far as Hawaii, their winning percentage is better than houston's (hawaii-.555 Houston - .534) not to mention they've been to a BCS bowl (2008 sugar bowl), something Houston has never done (Unless you want to count the cotton bowls in the '80s).

and sdsu and nevada didnt have a 'down' year they had their regular year,..down year means this isnt normal for them ..nevedas average win total the last decade i kid you not is exactly 7 wins...

Good call on Nevada. Would have figured with some of the great kaepernick teams they would have averaged more.. I guess not . As far as SDSU, even though they average right around ~7 wins, that team wasn't as good as some of their 7-8 win teams in the past. (Idk if that makes sense, but it makes sense to me :) )

fresno is the ONLY teams that had a "down" year...
The whole west division was terrible, & some of their records didn't necessarily reflect that (Nevada, SDSU)
2) i said average recruiting..sjsu had its best recruiting class ever with 33 recruits..but lets not pretend they dont average in the 120's over the last 8 years ..
and like i noted earlier we fired a ton of coaches last year, houston lost 6 recruits after we fired our coach including our 4star qb recruit....similar for the other teams..
Have any links to back up those SJSU claims? They tend to recruit very well, even though they may not perform as such.
(ill also not that that 247 has taken off our commits who didnt enroll but hasnt done it for certain teams in the MWC like SJSU, at the end of signing day USF finished with the best G5 recruiting class)
Okay, we'll use Scout.com then. OH LOOK, Boise is #1 in that ranking too.. Or is that wrong?
again you are using 1 year as a staple to make long term assumptions.... sjsu is a dreadful recruiting team on average..
Link?
ucf has been on a scholarship reduction punishment for the last 2 seasons, which is just ending, usf's average is in the high 40's, cincy is in the late 50's early 60's, houston is in the 60's.....
sdsu averages in the mid 70s similar for fresno..and beyond those 3 (including boise) it just gets really really ugly on the recruiting front ....the rest probably average 110 on the average year
Link? I'm not saying your wrong, but it would be nice to see them..
literally everyone else in the AAC not uconn and memphis dramatically outrecruits the rest of your league on average (yes this includes tulsa and tulane)
Frankly I don't really care about recruiting rankings. I'm more concerned with player development & wins. Who is the more successful conference in that regard? That's probably asking a lot, but it would be cool to see the avg. winning percentage as a whole conference. Maybe I'll sit down and calculate it out someday

(07-06-2015 05:01 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 04:25 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 04:16 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 03:51 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 11:17 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  I find it incredibly doubtful that an SMU team that just underwent a complete overhaul will rebound that quickly. Tulsa would be a more likely candidate to win a few more games based on our returning talent alone.

SMU has always recruited well...

SMU has always recruited well? Unless the coaches are playing the games, it can be easily documented that SMU has NOT always recruited well. In fact, it can be easily established that SMU has consistently recruited poorly.

smu has recruited we'll likely probably UH, uc, usf are the only ones that out recruit smu...they are on similar levels with ucf and ecu (note ucf has only been a decent recruiting team for 2 years)..with smu probably slightly ahead

people who say smu is at bad recruiting team are the same ones that say usf was a bad recruiting team before taggart...when that isnt true if you look at the rankings..they have had touted recruits (for the aac level) all over the field for them..they literally have 3 4star qbs on the roster

but to the original point, i dont see smu in a bowl...

IMHO the Texas and Florida schools benefit from being in areas with swollen recruiting populations as far as rankings go.... some of the kids from places like East Carolina or Tulsa may not be as highly starred... but end up being better players once they're on campus. It's just an exposure thing. The recruits in Texas & Florida have more access to scouting / recruiting agency combines and leagues.

i agree on a very minor level... its easier to fall through the cracks if your in one of the smaller states.. if your in a minor state you probably get 1 or 2 looks from a scouter and then they move on...if your in texas, florida and cali you will be scouted over and over and over, so if your good they will one even if the first film wasnt good

with that said i disagree on a major level... if what you were saying was true, tulsa would be recruiting oklahoma players more instead of texas but the majority of your recruits are mostly from texas....wierdly enough tulsa has made great teams with underrated texas players (G.J. Kinne, cody green ) and literally all the stars on your current team are from texas (Keyarris Garrett, Dane Evans, Keevan Lucas)

it has less to do with being better when they get on campus and more to do with the development that happens when they're there ...something ucf has excelled in..

The majority of our players are still from Oklahoma.... But we did bring in Montgomery to grab those talented skill position players out of Texas that Todd Graham tended to get.

(07-06-2015 11:33 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 11:17 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 10:18 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I find it incredibly doubtful that an SMU team that just underwent a complete overhaul will rebound that quickly. Tulsa would be a more likely candidate to win a few more games based on our returning talent alone.

SMU has always recruited well... A good coaching staff will reverse bad results to good quickly, especially if your program resides in a king football state like Texas.

I'm just saying... even last year Tulsa looked ahead of SMU talent wise. Both teams brought in new coaches and good talent in the offseason; but, I would say there's probably just not enough there at SMU right now for Morris to do a complete 180 in less than 10 months. Last year's SMU team looked inept mentally, and not just from a coaching standpoint.

Edit: I'm not saying there won't be marked improvement. There WILL BE... It will probably just be slower going.

You bring valid points, nvisiblehand

I'm not sy'n SMU will dominate and do a complete 380, I will however, not take them lightly either.