ESPN reports

[Johnny Rock]

Stallion, you are correct in that SMU has accomplished very little in football and basketball in comparison to the other Division 1 schools in Texas. However, Copeland is not entirely to blame. Johnny faults the board and President Turner for creating stronger academic standards for SMU athletes than the rest of Division 1. Many players at the schools we play would not have been accepted to SMU and/or would not have waited to determine if they were accepted when they already had scholarship offers from other schools. The standards have lowered, which will help attract better athletes. It also looks like we could move into a better conference, which will help. But as Stallion notes, more needs to be done. Johnny, like Stallion, questions the so called Commitment. We can rah rah all day but the bottom line is wins. Wins will solve most of SMU's problems. Johnny still believes and has faith that one day we will win. Johnny also sees a black quarterback by the name of Phillips leading the charge. Go Mustangs!!!!

[WorldStang]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Stallion:
<B> UTEP(bowl game), Baylor(several bowl games), Rice(SWC Co-Championship),Houston(CUSA Championship and several bowl games) all since SMU has. Throw in NTSU too with their multiple bowl games and Sun Belt Championships. Hey if we are going to fire each and every coach that is hired perhaps we need to start moving up the food-chain until we get someone with the balls to tell the administration that they don't know what the hell they are doing.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 09-24-2003).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow.. had no idea you were going to be reaching back to SWC days for championships. Don't forget to include ours in the mid-90's as co-champs in Baskeball.

You miss my point all together though.. please explain what more can be done. Throw the stones all you want, but what more or different do you want to see? And.. why don't you just call and/or meet to explain to them.. I can set the meeting up for you.

[Eddie P]

I mean from supporters of athletics. Fellow fans and the like. Not "athletics" per se.

[Stallion]

I got an e-mail from someone about the away ticket game policy-and responded on this board a public forum-what were they going to tell me something that was locked away in a secret box or something that the public wasn't allowed to hear. I assumed as a lawyer they were going to tell me it was controled by contract and responded based on that assumption in this public forum-To this day nobody has clearly articulated the reasons for SMU's ticket policy-this might be a good place to do it since it was raised here rather than in a secret Pow-Wow with Stallion. If there was a reasonable reason for the policy then this argument wouldn't be going on for the last 3 years.

[Eddie P]

I'll apologize Stallion for ratcheting up the rhetoric. Sincerely, I apologize...it accomplishes nothing to exchange heat on a web board and it goes against my own policy of doing such. I do wish you would use the available avenues to contact someone in authority to discuss these things that we all talk about. You have considerable knowledge of many subjects that could be useful in improving things; I just don't see how it helps discussing it on a web board. But that is just my opinion...

[Stallion]

Johnny Rock-I wrote the hymnal you are singing out of-my point is that instead of firing coaches every 4 years you'd sooner get to the problem by heading up the food chain. Assuming we believe the AD and Administration that they have made the necessary COMMITMENT to compete in Division 1A and we still suck-then at some point one has to ask the question:do these people know what they are talking about or are thet just telling you what you want to hear. Oh and BTW its been 3 years since the Commitment and just about every team on our schedule is beating our brains in with teams complemented by JC/CC transfers some of who have already graduated since the Commitment. Or if they want to be honest just come out and saying it-this is far as commitment as we are willing to be make just like schools like Rice-we are willing to suffer any consequences that my arise as a result of our limited commitment. But please spare me that we have made a Commitment to compete on an equal playing field with any other natural and traditional rivals.

[ponyboy]

It's not a matter of your BEING wrong. That happens plenty enough. It's a matter of your admitting it when it happens. Case in point: CPC's post on eligibility. You were wrong and did not admit it. As always, you just stop posting on the topic in the hope that no one saw you show your rear end.

Ed's right, though. We shouldn't be arguing like this. But enough is enough.

[PK]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Johnny Rock:
<B>Johnny faults the board and President Turner for creating stronger academic standards for SMU athletes than the rest of Division 1.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually Johnny, it was Pye who was President when the academic standards for athletes went out of control as well as the requirement for acceptance of the recruit for admission before making an official visit. It is a result of President Turner's efforts that we have returned the standards for admissions of athletes to match the NCAA standards and made it possible for visits by athletes and offers to be made prior to actual acceptance of the recruit for addmission to the university. We still haven't made it easy for joco's to transfer because it is still hard to transfer enough credits to make it worth their while and we don't accept partial qualifiers. Other than that, our ability to recruit quality athletes has been greatly improved since Turner became President of the University.

[Hoop Fan]

I didnt think anybody was right or wrong on the eligibility topic. The way I read it, Comet has been here 5 years, but only played in 3 because of freshman redshirt and medical redshirt. Had he not been redshirted his freshman year, we would have gotten 4 years of production from him instead of 3. I thought that was Stallions point, but I don't remember Comets personal sitaution beyond what CPC posted.

[SoCal_Pony]

Something very positive could finally happen with this C-USA membership, but what if we are not invited and Rice and Tulsa are instead selected?

That could be a very real outcome and if it does happen then we are scr**d ROYALLY!

My question is this, why would our administration place us in such a precarious position?

Answer…for the very reasons Stallion is spouting. For that reason, I am grateful for his posts. And while I understand how his style can irritate some, his fundamental message is sound.

If anyone deserves to our anger, it is our administration (mostly past administration).

I only hope we gain membership and it will be the impetus for more positive changes.

[GoRedGoBlue]

STALLION: Are you saying:

Hiring bennett was a bad hire?

YES/NO (if NO, then points to Copeland)

Building FORD STADIUM was a bad idea?

YES/NO (if NO, then points to Copeland)

Ridding SMU of the restrictive recruiting conditions was a bad idea?

YES/NO (if NO, then points to Copeland/Turner)

Getting that GAME DAY feel on Campus with the BLVD was a bad idea?

YES/NO (if NO, then points to Turner)


That there were NOT SMU administration issues outside the athletic department that HINDERED SMU athletics for 12 years?

YES/NO (if NO, then points to Turner)

That TURNER relaxing these policies was a bad idea?

YES/NO (if NO, then points to Turner)

Are you saying that ALL of what Copeland and Turner have done could have been done in 1 year since 2001?

YES/NO (if NO, then points to Copeland/Turner)

[PK]

Hoop Fan, Comet didn't have a freshman redshirt...that was a theoretical senario. Instead, Chris had his redshirt year last year as a medical redshirt. He will be getting his 4 years of eligibility in the allowed 5 year span. Ramon was an example of a hardship situation where he was allowed a sixth year. that doesn't happen very often.

[This message has been edited by PK (edited 09-24-2003).]

[78pony]

I agree to some level with most points suggested in this thread. Maybe, just maybe, consider this.

I had the opportunity to be with 5 young ladies (Jr's in hs) this past weekend for the OSU game. The early parts of the day were spent looking around and talking with 2 current sorority gals, an english prof, a B-school prof and several other school admin types. We went to the new Junkins engineering, Laura Lee Blanton Student Services and Dedman Life Sciences buildings, along with the B-school and Dallas Hall. We also went to the game and tailgated at my spot on Bishop Blvd. Mind you, my daughter has grown up with this. The other girls have not.

Folks, let me tell you this. There was not one of those young ladies that was not very very impressed. We got skunked in the game, but that did not come close to offsetting the many positive things these gals saw. They noted that the look of the campus, the 'cool' Boulevard setting, and the new construction were things they were not seeing, at least in this quantity, at other schools they had visited. As one put it, "it looks like SMU is a new school compared to one's my Mom & Dad have taken me to see." They also thought the girls on campus were beautiful (a concern) and the guys were studs (no concern whatsoever).

Bottom line: all will be applying to SMU.

I too am not happy with our recent athletic fortunes. But, I am confident in Turner, the administration's committment, and what Jim Copeland has been trying do behind the scenes. I think the overall picture at SMU is extremely bright, and that our best days are in front of us.

[Southland]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Stallion:
<B> That's funny-Trust Copeland-let me spell this out for you-if SMU gets into CUSA it is by default. Copeland has done nothing to get us into CUSA except to cash somebody else check for $57 million dollars. If SMU gets in it will purely on the basis of the heritage and tradition of this program pre-Kenneth Pye-So excuse me if I don't uncork a champagne bottle to toast the ineptitude of the SMU administration for all they done for (or to) SMU. No program in Division 1A has accomplished less tangible success in the last 15 years than SMU.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 09-24-2003).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is an intervention….

Some day, with maturity, you’ll realize that bitterness will get you nowhere in life, and when faced with challenges, it is better to be proactive than reactive.

I doubt anyone who spouts witless complaints has ever contacted Copeland or Turner to offer a strategy for improvement, or taken a second to listen to the initiatives of the University? Instead, the fantasy of omniscience continues amongst “faithful,” and you’re “insight” falls on deaf ears.

It comes through very clear that you've allowed your passion to turn to bitterness and anger. If you're half the booster you think you are, you'd look in the mirror, realize you're strategy of criticism without solution has failed, and try a different method of communicating you're "knowledge."

I've had frequent communication with both President Turner and Jim Copeland over the last two quarters, and if you think they've just sat back in their chairs and watched CUSA fall in their lap, you're head's in the sand. Both have been very proactive in the wake of ACC expansion, and both have generated meetings that you couldn't read about in Dave Campbell's football publication or download on rivals.com.

If you possess half the knowledge you tell us you do, pick up the phone to schedule a call with Turner or Copeland. You’ll find that both are very receptive when you communicate your concerns, are willing to listen, and offer a strategy you think can help the University.

When I was younger, I had the same reactive behavior you clearly possess. Like you, I got nowhere with the administrative influentials. It wasn’t until I changed my approach that I was able to effectively communicate points of concern. Since, both Turner and Copeland have both been receptive to, and used, suggestions I’ve made about scheduling, a return to campus football, conference affiliation, and recently, the BCS meetings. In every occasion, I’m sure they were already headed in the direction I was pointing, but you never know…

If you want to be stubborn, and write in all-caps about how I’m an idiot, go ahead. Just trying to help someone who clearly cares about the University’s athletic programs, but isn’t going to get anywhere, because of his current temperament.

[Nacho]

Here it is one more time: If you want widespread alumni, fans, friends, you name it support you have to win. Period. Winning is the name of the game. Until SMU wins support will be lukewarm at best. If SMU continues to lose support will wither until it is barely existent. I realize that consistent winning in football may be a couple of seasons away but until then don't expect fans to show up just because you have nice facilities or got into C-USA.

[This message has been edited by Nacho (edited 09-24-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Nacho (edited 09-24-2003).]