Three Mustangs Earn CSC Academic All-District Honors

Via Mustang Wire

AUSTIN, Texas (CSC/SMU) – SMU Football placed three student-athletes on the College Sports Communicators (CSC) Academic All-District Team, as tight end Matthew Hibner, kicker Sam Keltner, and long snapper Morgan Tribbett earned recognition for excellence on the field and in the classroom.

To qualify for Academic All-District honors, student-athletes must carry a minimum 3.5 cumulative GPA, be at least a sophomore academically, and meet specific participation benchmarks during the 2025 season. The CSC Academic All-District program recognizes the nation’s top football student-athletes across all divisions for their combined academic and athletic achievements.

Hibner started all 13 games for the Mustangs, totaling 31 receptions for 436 yards and four touchdowns, including a season-long 80-yard reception. The graduate student was named a Campbell Trophy Semifinalist and earned All-ACC Honorable Mention honors. Off the field, Hibner continued his academic excellence, earning academic all-conference recognition for the fourth consecutive year.

Keltner anchored SMU’s special teams, converting 14 field goals and 36 PATs for a team-best 78 points. The Keller, Texas, native also handled kickoff duties, recording 4,744 yards and 42 touchbacks on 76 kickoffs. His performance in SMU’s 35-24 win over Clemson earned him ACC Specialist of the Week and Lou Groza Star of the Week honors.

Tribbett served as the Mustangs’ starting long snapper and saw action in every game this season. His consistency was instrumental in the success of both Keltner and punter Wade McSparron, who finished the year with 55 punts for 2,337 yards.

All three honorees played key roles in helping SMU post a 9–4 record and secure a victory in the Trust & Will Holiday Bowl.

SMU Signee Hudson Woods Powers Smithson Valley to Second Straight State Title

By Marc Henry Via Mustang Wire

On the biggest stage in Texas high school football, SMU signee Hudson Woods delivered a championship-caliber performance to help Smithson Valley claim its second consecutive state title with a convincing 28–6 win over Frisco Lone Star.

From the opening snap, Woods set the tone defensively. Lined up off the edge, he was a constant disruptive force, consistently living in the Lone Star backfield and never allowing the opposing offense to get comfortable. His get-off was elite, pairing a lightning-quick first step with violent, well-timed hands that allowed him to win early in reps. Woods showed advanced pass-rush polish, using his length to keep blockers at arm’s length, setting a firm edge against the run, and closing with speed once he cleared the tackle.

What stood out most was the variety in his rush plan. Woods mixed in power and finesse, flashing an effective bull rush, excellent bend around the corner, and the ability to counter when initially engaged. His motor never slowed, chasing plays down from the backside and applying constant pressure throughout the game.

The impact plays told the story: two forced fumbles, one returned for a touchdown, along with a pass breakup and multiple sacks. Each momentum-shifting moment came from Woods’ relentless effort and high football IQ, making him the centerpiece of a defense that rose to the occasion when it mattered most.

With back-to-back state championships now on his résumé, Woods heads to the Hilltop as part of SMU’s 2026 recruiting class. He has proven himself as a battle-tested defender built for the next level.

 Performances like this underline why he’s such a major pickup for the Mustangs and a defender who projects to make an impact early in his college career.

Texas State Championships Notes:“Receiver Gave an Invalid Fair Catch Signal”

By Roman Alacron From Friday Night Glory

During Shiner’s matchup with Muenster, a controversial special teams ruling briefly stole the spotlight.

Shiner returner Tyler Harvey settled under a kick and returned it out to the 43-yard line. Shortly after, officials initiated a review. At first, it appeared the review would determine the spot of the ball, but instead, it centered on whether Harvey had given a fair catch signal.

The confusion stemmed from the fact that it didn’t look remotely like a fair catch.

As the broadcast crew correctly noted, a legal fair catch signal requires the receiver’s arm to be raised above the shoulder. Harvey’s arm was clearly below his shoulder, and there was no obvious waving motion indicating an attempt to signal for a fair catch. Despite that, replay referee Nelson Barnes ruled that Harvey had given an invalid fair catch signal due to what was described as a “demonstrative movement of the arms.”

The ruling sent Shiner back to its own 15-yard line, completely deflating the Comanches’ momentum. That drive stalled, and Shiner was forced to punt.

Why Was the Play Even Reviewable?

There was noticeable frustration on the sidelines over the review itself. However, when the UIL implemented instant replay for championship games in 2018, it published a replay handbook outlining what plays are subject to review.

Under Article 4, reviewable plays involving kicks include:

• Receiving team advancing after a fair catch signal

Because of this provision, the AAC replay officials were within their authority to initiate a review, even though no penalty was called on the field.

What Constitutes an Invalid Fair Catch?

NCAA rules define a legal fair catch signal as:

“A signal given by a player of Team B who has obviously signaled their intention by extending one hand only clearly above their head and waving that hand from side to side of their body more than once.”

Those criteria were not met.

That leads to the concept of an invalid fair catch signal. Rule 2, Section 8, Article 3(b) states that an invalid signal includes:

“Any waving signal by any player of Team B… including a ‘T’ signal given during a free kick or scrimmage kick.”

By the letter of the rule, any demonstrative arm motion that could be interpreted as a signal, regardless of intent, can be ruled an invalid fair catch. While most observers in the press box agreed there was no intent by Harvey to signal, intent is not required for the ruling.

So while it may feel twisted, by rule, the officials could justify calling it an invalid fair catch.

Where the Officials Got It Wrong

That said, the officiating crew did make a critical mistake.

After ruling a fair catch, the ball was incorrectly spotted at the 15-yard line. Because the ball was caught in the neutral zone and ruled a fair catch, it should have been treated as a touchback and placed at the 25-yard line per Rule 6, Section 5, Article 1(a).

Instead, Shiner was incorrectly penalized an extra 10 yards.

Final Verdict

• Did Harvey intentionally signal for a fair catch? Almost certainly not. Both coaches echoed that sentiment.

  
  

• Did Harvey make a motion that qualifies as an invalid fair catch by rule? Unfortunately, yes.

  
  

• Did the replay booth have the authority to review the play? Yes.

  
  

• Did the officials apply the rule correctly after the ruling? No.

In the end, the call didn’t change the outcome. Shiner still fell 28–0 and had multiple opportunities afterward to seize momentum. But the sequence serves as a textbook example of how rigid rule interpretation and a misapplication afterward, can turn a subtle motion into a major moment.