PonyFans.com

I have been critical of the administration over some of the IPF decisions (amongst other things), but I think SMU did the right thing by hiring Sonny. I know it's early and I could be very wrong but he seems to have assembled a good staff and done a decent job of recruiting with the time he has had. I did like the swagger that our former coach had, but I was growing concerned about recruiting. If I'm going to complain about what we get wrong, I should stand up and give credit to things I think we may have gotten right.

And I must admit, I posted this on the wrong board. This should be on football.

Okay, flame away and tell me what an idiot I am.

I agree that Sonny has assembled the most qualified staff since the 80's. I'm not close enough to know if it is simply because Cal is paying 70% of his salary and those funds are going to the assistants when in the past those funds weren't available.

Regardless, this staff looks experienced and capable. Chad's were - without exception - young, new to on field coaching, or new to their particular coaching role. This is to be expected when dealing with a limited budget for assistants.

So, hopefully they can recruit in the upper quarter of the AAC, if they can then we have a chance to compete and win some conference championships.

My takeaway is that for the first time since Collins, we have a HC that I see staying at SMU long term if he has success - meaning 7-8 wins "most years" with a conference title game sprinkled in.

Pony81 wrote:I agree that Sonny has assembled the most qualified staff since the 80's. I'm not close enough to know if it is simply because Cal is paying 70% of his salary and those funds are going to the assistants when in the past those funds weren't available.

Regardless, this staff looks experienced and capable. Chad's were - without exception - young, new to on field coaching, or new to their particular coaching role. This is to be expected when dealing with a limited budget for assistants.

So, hopefully they can recruit in the upper quarter of the AAC, if they can then we have a chance to compete and win some conference championships.

My takeaway is that for the first time since Collins, we have a HC that I see staying at SMU long term if he has success - meaning 7-8 wins "most years" with a conference title game sprinkled in.

Seems reasonable, mostly. I do have to wonder why SD would not be pulled back to a P5 school IF he is successful at SMU and when the 70% factor expires.

By contrast it was always assumed that CM always had an upper echelon destination as his goal and presumably does still. SMU and maybe Arkansas were always waypoints. It is interesting to recall that some GT faithful could never understand why Frank Broyles didn't go "home."

Another thought is whether Broyles stature as a coach would have changed had he gone against Vince Dooley for a number of years.

I wish both of them well, Sonny Dykes and Chad Morris. And yes, wouldn't it be neat to have '7-8 wins "most years" with a conference title game sprinkled in?'

Not wanting to be mean but an observation. Looking at conference and recruiting and records.
I think Dykes will have a better winning percentage than Morris over the next 4-5 years.

I'm not a Morris apologist by any means, but Dykes' having a better winning percentage will be due to Chad doing a lot of the dirty work to clean up after JJ.

ponyboy wrote:I'm not a Morris apologist by any means, but Dykes' having a better winning percentage will be due to Chad doing a lot of the dirty work to clean up after JJ.

Sonny definitely seems to be a solid hire so far. Any successes he has will certainly be his own and not due to Chad or June--if nothing else due to differences in strength of schedule.

Chad definitely helped modernize the program--but I don't understand this idea of Chad doing "dirty work" to fix our ruinous program.

1) We went 7 - 6 last year. I'm bc it couldve been worse--but Chad certainly didn't lift us up higher than we currently stood. Especially with as easy a schedule as we had last year.
2) Our program has done pretty well in aggregate over the last 10 years

(I also had a much more detailed post detailing this earlier that got deleted)

1017 Mustang wrote:

ponyboy wrote:I'm not a Morris apologist by any means, but Dykes' having a better winning percentage will be due to Chad doing a lot of the dirty work to clean up after JJ.

Sonny definitely seems to be a solid hire so far. Any successes he has will certainly be his own and not due to Chad or June--if nothing else due to differences in strength of schedule.

Chad definitely helped modernize the program--but I don't understand this idea of Chad doing "dirty work" to fix our ruinous program.

1) We went 7 - 6 last year. I'm bc it couldve been worse--but Chad certainly didn't lift us up higher than we currently stood. Especially with as easy a schedule as we had last year.
2) Our program has done pretty well in aggregate over the last 10 years

(I also had a much more detailed post detailing this earlier that got deleted)

Yeah plus the reff gave us a game because the guy was excited he got a touchdown on the other team. Never seen that in my life. The rest you can credit to real wins.

One Trick Pony wrote:

1017 Mustang wrote:

ponyboy wrote:I'm not a Morris apologist by any means, but Dykes' having a better winning percentage will be due to Chad doing a lot of the dirty work to clean up after JJ.

Sonny definitely seems to be a solid hire so far. Any successes he has will certainly be his own and not due to Chad or June--if nothing else due to differences in strength of schedule.

Chad definitely helped modernize the program--but I don't understand this idea of Chad doing "dirty work" to fix our ruinous program.

1) We went 7 - 6 last year. I'm bc it couldve been worse--but Chad certainly didn't lift us up higher than we currently stood. Especially with as easy a schedule as we had last year.
2) Our program has done pretty well in aggregate over the last 10 years

(I also had a much more detailed post detailing this earlier that got deleted)

Yeah plus the reff gave us a game because the guy was excited he got a touchdown on the other team. Never seen that in my life. The rest you can credit to real wins.

Cheap call and rule should be changed but it happens more often than you would think. Memphis has one called back against us the first year the rule was in place.

Pony81 wrote:
My takeaway is that for the first time since Collins, we have a HC that I see staying at SMU long term if he has success - meaning 7-8 wins "most years" with a conference title game sprinkled in.

Sonny hasn't done anything yet to indicate he wants to be here "long term".

sbsmith wrote:

Pony81 wrote:
My takeaway is that for the first time since Collins, we have a HC that I see staying at SMU long term if he has success - meaning 7-8 wins "most years" with a conference title game sprinkled in.

Sonny hasn't done anything yet to indicate he wants to be here "long term".

His new house is so close to campus that it considered “on-campus”


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

He said as much at his introduction. Reference to Patterson plan at pc who.

So glad SMU hired Sonny instead of Traylor. The staff, recruits, the buzz, and especially the S&C program, are all much better than they would have been IMO.

From what I have seen so far, I would have to agree

One Trick Pony wrote:

1017 Mustang wrote:

ponyboy wrote:I'm not a Morris apologist by any means, but Dykes' having a better winning percentage will be due to Chad doing a lot of the dirty work to clean up after JJ.

Sonny definitely seems to be a solid hire so far. Any successes he has will certainly be his own and not due to Chad or June--if nothing else due to differences in strength of schedule.

Chad definitely helped modernize the program--but I don't understand this idea of Chad doing "dirty work" to fix our ruinous program.

1) We went 7 - 6 last year. I'm bc it couldve been worse--but Chad certainly didn't lift us up higher than we currently stood. Especially with as easy a schedule as we had last year.
2) Our program has done pretty well in aggregate over the last 10 years

(I also had a much more detailed post detailing this earlier that got deleted)

Yeah plus the reff gave us a game because the guy was excited he got a touchdown on the other team. Never seen that in my life. The rest you can credit to real wins.

The dumb kid may have given us the W, but the refs did not. It's a rule, and it has been a rule. It might be a dumb rule, and it might need to be changed, but it's a rule. I would agree the win "shouldn't count" or was "given to us" if the ref decided on a whim to take away a TD, and the player had no idea what the consequences were before the act. That's not what happened. The kid knew better and presumably knew the rules. He made a dumb decision that cost his team 4 points and likely a win. If he did, he's a dumb@$$ for costing his team a TD. If he didn't, his coach is a dumb@$$ for not properly educating his players.

Bla bla