PonyFans.comBoard IndexAround the HilltopFootballRecruitingBasketballOther Sports

Thanks to the Ticket's George Dunham

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

Thanks to the Ticket's George Dunham

Postby ClassOf81 » Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:57 pm

Georgio "did some homework" and explained the difference between the SMU system for admission and those at other schools. He explained that recruits can't even come for an official recruiting visit until after they're admitted, at which point most top players already are committed elsewhere.

It was the first time in ages that anyone on The Ticket (other than the great Mark Followill) has discussed SMU objectively, rather than getting into the shameless bashing those other sports non-experts utilize, and hopefully will educate local sports fans about the difficulties SMU faces in the annual recruiting wars.

We need to change the system, not to the point of getting back to 1980s-style recruiting, but just to level the playing field.

Major thanks to George Dunham for casting an objective light on this issue.
User avatar
ClassOf81
All-American
 
Posts: 990
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2000 3:01 am
Location: Highland Park, Texas

Re: Thanks to the Ticket's George Dunham

Postby SMUPonyFan » Tue Oct 10, 2000 2:15 pm

Good to hear that. I have something for George to say on the air of the ticket. I posted it under recruiting.

------------------
Go Red, Go Blue, Go Mustangs, S M U
Go Red, Go Blue, Go Mustangs, S M U
SMUPonyFan
Varsity
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2000 3:01 am
Location: Dallas, Texas, TX

Re: Thanks to the Ticket's George Dunham

Postby MustangMom » Tue Oct 10, 2000 10:08 pm

I agree that the SMU policy needs to change regarding recruiting. We have a fabulous stadium and training complex. But, will this help?????? If I understand correctly, SMU coaches cannot recruit a player and ask him to commit to SMU, until he has officially applied and been accepted to SMU. This cuts us out of the running for many players. Other schools are "after them" and they will not wait for SMU.

The group that made this rule for SMU overreacted to the death penalty. Yes, big changes needed to be made, but this
rule is just plain silly. If the University wants to have a football team, then give the coaches the freedom to recruit. Playeres still have to make their grades to play.

The University will find that a competitive program will benefit the University in so many ways. Alums will return to campus and their interest will be revived - and not only in football.
Go Mustangs!!<BR>-MustangMom
MustangMom
Junior Varsity
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2000 4:01 am
Location: Houston, Texas, U.S.A.

Re: Thanks to the Ticket's George Dunham

Postby OC Mustang » Tue Oct 10, 2000 11:44 pm

I do not post here very often; however, I think that this forum is much more positive and upbeat than another board that I commonly frequent. I apologize for the length.

Although I vehemently believe that the current policy is a pivotal strategic disadvantage now, I do not think that it was an overreaction to the unpleasantness of the late 80s at the time. With respect to MustangMom, to apply outcome-based judgement to a 12 year-old decision is overstating it.

Few people realize just how seriously the university was financially hurting. B/C real estate & oil went south, the school finances and thereby its academic credentials were threatened. The scandal further increased the possibility that academic credentials would be called into question. I know that may be difficult for SMU alum, students, and supporters to accept, but it is the truth. President Pye did not discontinue the Civil & Mechanical Engineering program because he wanted to. Nor did he lay off staff because he wanted to. He did both, among a number of other things, for the same reason that he ruthlessly tightened academic safeguards; to keep SMU viable in its chief mission: to educate those students who went there.

Now, SMU enjoys considerable monetary prosperity and an administration that is not saddled with the same issues that the previous administration was. The glaring weakness now is the credibility to the athletic programs. Academic credibility is in very little danger, for the most part; however, public image is in a world of hurt.
Athletics is, for better or for worse, the most widely accepted means of furthering that public image.

Now is the time for a thoughtful, deliberate change to the strategy employed by admissions as well as the athletic dept.

When the staff and the faculty bring up the shifting of assets away from them, or they discuss the slippery slope, they use 8-12 year old information. 8 years ago, there was no internet as we know it, and the gene map was but a slow moving idea. They ought to be reminded of that.

Philosophically, I am of the opinion that SMU should either move to Division III or get serious about Division I. To continue the ridiculous notion that we can be competitive with current policies intact is tantamount with pretending that a dot.com will not ever have to produce profits.

I have said it before both in other web forums, as well as to SMU Trustees & President Pye when they were deciding whether to continue in Division I (circa 1993); we must decide whether we are going to play football or not. To continue the way we are headed is to make a decision to not play football. A person called Stallion, with whom I disagree about most everything except this, said it best: Football will be dead; we just won't know it.
"Moderation in all things, and especially in Absoluts [vodka]." The Benediction, Doc Breeden, circa 1992
User avatar
OC Mustang
Heisman
 
Posts: 1898
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2000 3:01 am
Location: Formerly Laguna Niguel CA - Now Marshall TX

Re: Thanks to the Ticket's George Dunham

Postby THE ROCK » Wed Oct 11, 2000 12:56 am

Good insight, OC CA Mustang. I am greatful for your perspective on things. I was not aware of economic situation at that time, so I consider myself a little bit more enlightened.

I agree with you very strongly on your opinion that SMU should move to Division III or get serious about division I. Right now, we are treating this program like a division III program, so why should we expect the team to be able to compete at the division I level? We shouldn't.

One of the main reasons I have not jumped on the Fire Cavan band wagon is because I see him as handcuffed. I don't know if any coach in the country could do much better with the current set of circumstances. We made an investment in Cavan, and we should stick with it. There is no reason to fire him. We need to make a commitment to winning, by we, I guess I mean the administration. Good post OC CA.

I hope to see you more often. I am a bit of an optimist, and I hate seeing some of the stuff on mm.com.
CAN YOU SMELL WHAT THE ROCK IS COOKIN'?
THE ROCK
Scout Team
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2000 3:01 am
Location: Miami, Florida, USA

Re: Thanks to the Ticket's George Dunham

Postby MustangMom » Thu Oct 12, 2000 12:33 am

OC CA,

I also enjoyed reading your post. I also have gained a new insight. Whether I am right or wrong in my opinion that the current recruiting policy stemmed from an ongoing over reaction to the death penalty handed to SMU - the bottom line is it needs to change.

I really would hate to see SMU go Division
III. So, the powers that be need to rethink their position and let us compete on the same recruiting field as the other Division I schools.

As I have stated before, winning football programs do bring alumae back to the school and they reconnect. This benefits all areas of the University.



------------------
Go Mustangs!!
-MustangMom
Go Mustangs!!<BR>-MustangMom
MustangMom
Junior Varsity
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2000 4:01 am
Location: Houston, Texas, U.S.A.


Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 16 guests