PonyFans.com

- Great job by Thad on this film. I knew the basic story but this really brought it to life...well done!

- SMU deserved a severe punishment and certainly got it. I tried to imagine TCU getting the death penalty right now...man would that suck. I would be lost.

- If you change the school from SMU to UT or ATM (even with the same level of cheating), there is no way UT/ATM would have received the death penalty. That pi$$es me off.

- Given all of the crap that was going on throughout the SWC, the film actually makes a compelling case that SMU was just in the wrong spot at the wrong time. Never really knew about the dueling newspapers and media frenzy that were involved.

- Bill Clements comes off as an arrogant arse....I was not familiar with his role in the process but I can't believe he was governor of our great state!

- F Craig James.

I came away from it with a new hero, Eric Dickerson. I knew he felt shunned during the 90's and early 2000's, but I had no idea that he and so many others still cared so much about SMU. (I'm not sure Craig James is one of those guys) One of my favorite quotes was when Dickerson said that he missed playing Saturdays at SMU most, not Fridays in high school or MNF in the NFL.

Bill Clements was a SMU dropout? Did I hear that right?

SMUPhil wrote:I came away from it with a new hero, Eric Dickerson. I knew he felt shunned during the 90's and early 2000's, but I had no idea that he and so many others still cared so much about SMU. (I'm not sure Craig James is one of those guys) One of my favorite quotes was when Dickerson said that he missed playing Saturdays at SMU most, not Fridays in high school or MNF in the NFL.

that quote needs to be reinforced to all of our current and future Mustangs..I dont think you could make enough of a big deal about a statement like that

Agreed on Dickerson. I wonder whether Craig isn't mad at us for not admitting his son. I know that rumor has been bandied about -- but is there any truth to it? He is absolutely distant when it comes to this program.

One other cause might be that he fears the stigma of the cheating during that time period hurting his career.

ponyboy wrote:Agreed on Dickerson. I wonder whether Craig isn't mad at us for not admitting his son. I know that rumor has been bandied about -- but is there any truth to it? He is absolutely distant when it comes to this program.

One other cause might be that he fears the stigma of the cheating during that time period hurting his career.

I would be ashamed and embarrassed to even go on camera if I were Dickerson or James. I was also surprised that Dickerson was so hurt by the way SMU has treated him over the last 20 years. Looks like Orsini certainly did something right in reaching out to ED a couple years ago. That guy was a heck of a running back.

ReedFrawg wrote:

ponyboy wrote:Agreed on Dickerson. I wonder whether Craig isn't mad at us for not admitting his son. I know that rumor has been bandied about -- but is there any truth to it? He is absolutely distant when it comes to this program.

One other cause might be that he fears the stigma of the cheating during that time period hurting his career.

I would be ashamed and embarrassed to even go on camera if I were Dickerson or James.

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

1. The only thing I can fault the film with is that it put too much emphasis on the first half of the story and sort of glossed over the second half. The second half of the story is the story of men who committed to the program knowing they were going to get abused for 4-5 year. It's the story of a small, proud university who's committed to winning the right way, and it's a team that after 25 years, made it back to the show last year. I know Thad shot miles of game footage from the regular season and Sheraton Hawaii Bowl... I would have liked to see more of it.

2. Probably the most powerful clip (as best I can tell) ended up on the editing room floor. It was a part of the interview with Hall of Famer Forrest Gregg where he basically called the NCAA a bunch of gutless animals that meow. If that was added in at the end of the movie when they were rolling the credits and showing the other programs that are cheating today, it would have given made the film even more electric.

3. I really, really hope that this project doesn't just end with ESPN's 30-for-30. If I recall, the runtime was 1:41-ish. Thad, if you're out there in cyberspace, I'd really love to see a 2-hour feature length version that could travel in independent film circuit. Add in the football footage from last year and the triumph at the Hawaii Bowl, and you not only have a great documentary, then you'd have a great "football" movie and a terrific feel-good story as well.

Anyway, I've worked in the creative business for as long as it's taken us to get back to a bowl. So I know the end result has a lot to do with compromises (and room for commercials). But now that the obligation to ESPN is fulfilled, there might be an opportunity to take the story one step further forward.

And yes, ED is one cool dude. And still a badass.

I was surprised that there was not more made about the faculty and their attitudes and actions that helped keep the program down the past 20 years. Pretty solid effort though. I was at TCU while all this was going on, I remember Homecoming at a soccer game at SMU, and the close losses to a really great SMU teams in the early 80's. Those were good times, too bad a lot of petty jealousy ruined a great conference.

ReedFrawg wrote:I would be ashamed and embarrassed to even go on camera if I were Dickerson or James.

Why?

By all accounts, James never took a dime. His family didn't need the money, and he came to SMU because his girlfriend (now wife) attended SMU. No scandal there.

As for Dickerson, he was just standing up for what's right. After all, the gold Trans A&M didn't come from SMU. I think ED's point was not that SMU wasn't guilty, the were. But EVERYONE (TCU very specifically included) was doing it and many still are. I think his beef had to do with selective enforcement of the rules.

Speaking of petty jealousy deepellumfrog...
As an aside, does anyone find it odd that the lead NCAA investigator (a.k.a. UT's hatchet man) is now the Big XII Conference commissioner? I wonder what kind of salary comes along with that gig?

The brazeness to keep on paying players that "they had contracts with" after the first probation was so stupid and arrogant. When the "death penalty rules" came out they should have immediately stopped paying and come clean with the ncaa rather than risk the death penalty. That is why there should be prison sentences and fines for those involved rather than punishing the innocent institutions, players, students and those who are abiding.

smuuth wrote:The brazeness to keep on paying players that "they had contracts with" after the first probation was so stupid and arrogant. When the "death penalty rules" came out they should have immediately stopped paying and come clean with the ncaa rather than risk the death penalty. That is why there should be prison sentences and fines for those involved rather than punishing the innocent institutions, players, students and those who are abiding.

Hindsight is always 20/20...they figured all they had to do was wait 2 more years and they would be clean..the risk was stopping payments and having all of those guys tell the NCAA and either way I think they were going to make an example of us...

ReedFrawg wrote:- Great job by Thad on this film. I knew the basic story but this really brought it to life...well done!

- SMU deserved a severe punishment and certainly got it. I tried to imagine TCU getting the death penalty right now...man would that suck. I would be lost.

- If you change the school from SMU to UT or ATM (even with the same level of cheating), there is no way UT/ATM would have received the death penalty. That pi$$es me off.

- Given all of the crap that was going on throughout the SWC, the film actually makes a compelling case that SMU was just in the wrong spot at the wrong time. Never really knew about the dueling newspapers and media frenzy that were involved.

- Bill Clements comes off as an arrogant arse....I was not familiar with his role in the process but I can't believe he was governor of our great state!

- F Craig James.

While I may disagree with it, I at least understand James's attitude toward SMU a little better. From the documentary, it sounds like he was clean and really didn't want to go to a program where things were shady. He stuck with SMU for his girlfriend and based on the assurances from Ron Meyer that SMU was clean. It then turned out that they weren't, and he is forever associated with that regardless of his culpability. It might make me a little bitter towards my alma mater if I was consistently lied to to get me to the school.

smuuth wrote:The brazeness to keep on paying players that "they had contracts with" after the first probation was so stupid and arrogant. When the "death penalty rules" came out they should have immediately stopped paying and come clean with the ncaa rather than risk the death penalty. That is why there should be prison sentences and fines for those involved rather than punishing the innocent institutions, players, students and those who are abiding.

1. In for a penny, in for a pound. The problem is that they couldn't quit paying players on the "payroll". If they did, those players squeal and expose how deeply corrupt and prevalent the whole situation was. What the boosters did after the now infamous board meeting is stop paying for new recruits. I think they thought that if they could take care of players already on the payroll and get them graduated, the whole thing could be swept under the carpet and they could move forward with a relatively clean program.

2. You can't give a prison sentence for something that's not really illegal. It's a rules infraction, sure, but it's not a criminal offense to pay players. I would think the NCAA and/or SMU could bring a civil suit against universities and/or individual boosters and/or athletes for violating these rules. It might go something like: "Your honor, our university lost a $10 million bowl bid because of XYZ booster, and we'd really like to have that revenue back..."

abezontar wrote: While I may disagree with it, I at least understand James's attitude toward SMU a little better. From the documentary, it sounds like he was clean and really didn't want to go to a program where things were shady. He stuck with SMU for his girlfriend and based on the assurances from Ron Meyer that SMU was clean. It then turned out that they weren't, and he is forever associated with that regardless of his culpability. It might make me a little bitter towards my alma mater if I was consistently lied to to get me to the school.

This is the first time I've seen this take, though obviously it flows from the film and other Craig James actions I've seen.