PonyFans.com

SMU keeps saying they're committed to athletic success. Let me see if I have this right:

Basketball- Legend HOF coach. Arguably best player ineligible and best recruit mysteriously off to China.

Football- Former coach multiple national coach of year awards. Comes to SMU and can't repeat his WAC success where he was able to recruit guys out of jail.

Swimming/Diving- great history, great coaches. Currently have no natatorium. Women are ranked top20?, men unranked.

M Golf- Had national coach of year. Fired after having top 10 success.

W Soccer- Has former national coach of year. Struggled this season.

M Tennis- Coach had several former national champions and NCAA tournament appearances. Mid-tier AAC team now.

Track- World renowned throwers coach. Former top 10 (top5?) team nationally. Got Margus Hunt. Not ranked high nationally anymore.

So we have all this top tier personnel and there are no institutional issues preventing athletic or recruiting success? And our most prized sport (m bball) is #55? Am I wrong here or does something not add up? Did all of our coaches forget how to coach recently?

Committed to taking your money

Well a lot is wrong. We do not have a men's track team which would account for not being ranked. Nothing mysterious about Mudiay going to China. Golf coach was violating NCAA rules so he suffered the consequences.

What's mysterious is that we are "committed to competing at the highest levels" but i never hear the term capitol one cup or directors cup....because we would barely score a point there, the measure of a schools' athletic success.

Who won the last 5 director cups? Who won last year? I do not think it is really the talk of the town.

If we get too 25 in football will you still be asking about directors cup?

Stanford won last year

SMU is way more committed to athletics than the SMU alumni fanbase are committed to athletics

SMU funds Basketball and Football at the top of G5 schools-funding that is somewhat incredible considering the number of fans we actually have

The numbers don't add up-the program is simply being kept alive by the generous donations of a handful of wealthy alumni because horrific ticket revenues for decades don't justify the expense. That's the way it is and always will be. SMU will get the athletic program its fans deserve and are willing to pay for

Yup

Stallion is totally wrong. The fan base is very committed. It is just tiny. That is, being an alum is in no way to be assumed to be a fan. We have to grow from scratch.

Explain how he is wrong. He says the dept is supported by a small number of wealthy contributors.

We have to become Dallas' team. We can't do it any other way. That means we have to want them to come, and we have to win enough to get their attention.

Starting with a new coach that is not in a social coma will be a nice fresh start.

smusic 00 wrote:Explain how he is wrong. He says the dept is supported by a small number of wealthy contributors.

Where he says "SMU is more committed than the alumni fanbase". His premise is that alumni are part of the fanbase. I say it is worse - you can't even count on generic Preston Smith SMU grad be a fan. We only have about 5000-10000 fans max.

We just hired Chad Morris. Does that spell non commitment?

gostangs wrote:We have to become Dallas' team. We can't do it any other way. That means we have to want them to come, and we have to win enough to get their attention.

Starting with a new coach that is not in a social coma will be a nice fresh start.

This. ^^^^

Stopped reading after the top two because no one really cares about anything other than fb and hoops.