Rick Hart the muppet AD

[smusic 00]

Good stuff, 2nd.

[gostangs]

You appeal post season. Lose seniors or lose games and you withdraw appeal. It's easy

However I predict our president doesn't want to deal with this and wants to look good to his knight commission buddies so we don't even appeal. We are scared of our shadow when the NCAA shows up.

Hope I am wrong.

[RGV Pony]

Goose was cooked when it was decided ours was level I. As 94 said somewhere, we prob should've hired different counsel whose singular purpose was to lobby for and hopefully get our violation to be level 2.

Here is where I fault smu :from at least the time it was leaked that it could be lack of coach control, a postseason ban was a possibility. A binary possibility at that. Either level 1 and ban or level 2 and no ban. Given that these "new" rules were posted in 2013, smu really got caught with its pants down. What's more, golf shouldn't even have been a question since it involved HC. Sucks but that's what it says in black and white.

[max the wonder dog]

Further, the appellate committee (Vandie, Texas, GW, Miami Ohio, and a Detroit lawyer) aren't exactly a bunch of friendlies.

Seems there's a case a Texas member recusal.

[Mustangsabu]

SMU knew all this at the same time it was coaxing maximum revenue out of the fan base. Aside from the gross incompetence of the athletic department at all points along this path, I think that it is in the lack of honesty with the fan base that I have the biggest problem. I know I will be ridiculed for it by many but I can't believe that Rick Hart is still AD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RGV Pony]

Also shows why, as preposterous it looks, Lville is saying with a straight face Pitino didn't know. And all the media is backing it up. Why? To start posturing from the get go that theirs is level 2

[Mestengo]

Yeah and what about our numerical ranking you still want to believe you're in the 1500 lol

[RGV Pony]

We never really got out of the 1500, even with moody. Sold out moody from a season ticket holder point of you represents 1800 accounts. So 1800 people are actually "season ticket holders" with an average of around 3 tickets each

[2ndandlong]

SMU knew all this at the same time it was coaxing maximum revenue out of the fan base. Aside from the gross incompetence of the athletic department at all points along this path, I think that it is in the lack of honesty with the fan base that I have the biggest problem. I know I will be ridiculed for it by many but I can't believe that Rick Hart is still AD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow. So much I disagree with in such a short post.

SMU knew all this at the same time it was coaxing maximum revenue out of the fan base.

SMU knew what exactly? Every fan that bought tickets (that wasn't a total bandwagoner) would have known that SMU basketball was on probation stemming from a Dougherty violation that predated Rick Hart. No university had ever been penalized under the new infractions committee structure, so SMU had no idea what they were in for. SMU hired outside counsel to assist with developing expectations, and the resulting penalty came no where close to what they developed.
So what exactly did SMU know when they raised mustang club donations? Ticket sales were at an all-time high in terms of demand. The plan to raise prices had been in motion for 2 years before announced . . . more than 3 years before the first infractions committee interview took place with Larry Brown, Ulric Maligi, Keith Frazier or anyone else.

Aside from the gross incompetence of the athletic department at all points along this path, I think that it is in the lack of honesty with the fan base that I have the biggest problem.

Gross incompetence of the athletic department? Read the NCAA ruling in its entirety, not Pat Forde's [deleted] editorial. SMU's athletic department was COMMENDED FOR ITS COMPLIANCE PROGRAM which was restructured under Rick Hart. The NCAA has praised SMU for its compliance program explicitly which is why this is a coach control issue and not an institutional control issue.

And show me the lack of honesty. Everything I heard from Rick or anyone else in the athletic department was, we have no idea what the new infractions committee will do. That was a very responsible and honest answer. I never heard him say, this is going to be no big deal. He came out and said, we don't have a clue. If you want to fault the athletic department for not knowing, ok, maybe, but there are a lot of schools that were intently watching what was going to come of the SMU ruling because they didn't have a clue either, and they are now all pooping their pants.

I can't believe that Rick Hart is still AD.

Rick Hart hired Coach Morris which I think most of the alumni base is pleased with. A lot remains to be seen obviously, but I hardly think this is a decision to fire him over. Could he have fired Jones sooner? Sure that would have been a fun day on ponyfans, but that wouldn't have done a lot to make SMU a more attractive destination for head coaches. We were already a mediocre landing spot for a lot of real talent. We did great with what we had to offer.

I think people are pleased with hiring Enloe for golf; although, he inherited a lot of talent.

From a construction perspective, tennis is world class, Moody is phenomenal, Ford renovations have been very well received upstairs and the natatorium is getting addressed. IPF is what the IPF has been for the last decade, but we are hopefully closer now with more serious talk in the department than I've ever heard them seriously entertain at any point in the past.

What's the real basis for Turner to fire him? Football is hopefully in the right direction, the issues in basketball have absolutely no connection to him as an AD, and he's seen fundraising quadruple since he took over - it had more than tripled before revisions to basketball, so his track record here was pretty nice well before that. Contrast that to Orsini who saw about a 25% increase in fundraising throughout his tenure. The only other major change to fundraising during that period of time is a devilishly handsome board member appointed by Orsini's crew, so that's probably it.

[PerunasHoof]

SMU knew all this at the same time it was coaxing maximum revenue out of the fan base. Aside from the gross incompetence of the athletic department at all points along this path, I think that it is in the lack of honesty with the fan base that I have the biggest problem. I know I will be ridiculed for it by many but I can't believe that Rick Hart is still AD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow. So much I disagree with in such a short post.

SMU knew all this at the same time it was coaxing maximum revenue out of the fan base.

SMU knew what exactly? Every fan that bought tickets (that wasn't a total bandwagoner) would have known that SMU basketball was on probation stemming from a Dougherty violation that predated Rick Hart. No university had ever been penalized under the new infractions committee structure, so SMU had no idea what they were in for. SMU hired outside counsel to assist with developing expectations, and the resulting penalty came no where close to what they developed.
So what exactly did SMU know when they raised mustang club donations? Ticket sales were at an all-time high in terms of demand. The plan to raise prices had been in motion for 2 years before announced . . . more than 3 years before the first infractions committee interview took place with Larry Brown, Ulric Maligi, Keith Frazier or anyone else.

Aside from the gross incompetence of the athletic department at all points along this path, I think that it is in the lack of honesty with the fan base that I have the biggest problem.

Gross incompetence of the athletic department? Read the NCAA ruling in its entirety, not Pat Forde's [deleted] editorial. SMU's athletic department was COMMENDED FOR ITS COMPLIANCE PROGRAM which was restructured under Rick Hart. The NCAA has praised SMU for its compliance program explicitly which is why this is a coach control issue and not an institutional control issue.

And show me the lack of honesty. Everything I heard from Rick or anyone else in the athletic department was, we have no idea what the new infractions committee will do. That was a very responsible and honest answer. I never heard him say, this is going to be no big deal. He came out and said, we don't have a clue. If you want to fault the athletic department for not knowing, ok, maybe, but there are a lot of schools that were intently watching what was going to come of the SMU ruling because they didn't have a clue either, and they are now all pooping their pants.

I can't believe that Rick Hart is still AD.

Rick Hart hired Coach Morris which I think most of the alumni base is pleased with. A lot remains to be seen obviously, but I hardly think this is a decision to fire him over. Could he have fired Jones sooner? Sure that would have been a fun day on ponyfans, but that wouldn't have done a lot to make SMU a more attractive destination for head coaches. We were already a mediocre landing spot for a lot of real talent. We did great with what we had to offer.

I think people are pleased with hiring Enloe for golf; although, he inherited a lot of talent.

From a construction perspective, tennis is world class, Moody is phenomenal, Ford renovations have been very well received upstairs and the natatorium is getting addressed. IPF is what the IPF has been for the last decade, but we are hopefully closer now with more serious talk in the department than I've ever heard them seriously entertain at any point in the past.

What's the real basis for Turner to fire him? Football is hopefully in the right direction, the issues in basketball have absolutely no connection to him as an AD, and he's seen fundraising quadruple since he took over - it had more than tripled before revisions to basketball, so his track record here was pretty nice well before that. Contrast that to Orsini who saw about a 25% increase in fundraising throughout his tenure. The only other major change to fundraising during that period of time is a devilishly handsome board member appointed by Orsini's crew, so that's probably it.

Thank you.

[Stallion]

Also SMU isn't getting maximum revenues

SMU is getting revenues sufficient to survive with an eye toward moving up

We can revisit the astronomical costs to attend UT sporting events or compare with for example a Gonzaga if you like

The questions to be answered that will determine our future

1. Do you want SMU to play at the highest level
2. Are you willing to pay what is necessary to play at the highest level
3. after receiving invoice, are you sure you want to pay for SMU to play at the highest level

We aren't a state school that can finance the athletic program off the back of huge student fees. SMU alumni, family and friends will have to pay that bill. I'm still not sure its economically viable based on the support for the program

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

SMU knew all this at the same time it was coaxing maximum revenue out of the fan base. Aside from the gross incompetence of the athletic department at all points along this path, I think that it is in the lack of honesty with the fan base that I have the biggest problem. I know I will be ridiculed for it by many but I can't believe that Rick Hart is still AD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow. So much I disagree with in such a short post.

SMU knew all this at the same time it was coaxing maximum revenue out of the fan base.

SMU knew what exactly? Every fan that bought tickets (that wasn't a total bandwagoner) would have known that SMU basketball was on probation stemming from a Dougherty violation that predated Rick Hart. No university had ever been penalized under the new infractions committee structure, so SMU had no idea what they were in for. SMU hired outside counsel to assist with developing expectations, and the resulting penalty came no where close to what they developed.
So what exactly did SMU know when they raised mustang club donations? Ticket sales were at an all-time high in terms of demand. The plan to raise prices had been in motion for 2 years before announced . . . more than 3 years before the first infractions committee interview took place with Larry Brown, Ulric Maligi, Keith Frazier or anyone else.

Aside from the gross incompetence of the athletic department at all points along this path, I think that it is in the lack of honesty with the fan base that I have the biggest problem.

Gross incompetence of the athletic department? Read the NCAA ruling in its entirety, not Pat Forde's [deleted] editorial. SMU's athletic department was COMMENDED FOR ITS COMPLIANCE PROGRAM which was restructured under Rick Hart. The NCAA has praised SMU for its compliance program explicitly which is why this is a coach control issue and not an institutional control issue.

And show me the lack of honesty. Everything I heard from Rick or anyone else in the athletic department was, we have no idea what the new infractions committee will do. That was a very responsible and honest answer. I never heard him say, this is going to be no big deal. He came out and said, we don't have a clue. If you want to fault the athletic department for not knowing, ok, maybe, but there are a lot of schools that were intently watching what was going to come of the SMU ruling because they didn't have a clue either, and they are now all pooping their pants.

I can't believe that Rick Hart is still AD.

Rick Hart hired Coach Morris which I think most of the alumni base is pleased with. A lot remains to be seen obviously, but I hardly think this is a decision to fire him over. Could he have fired Jones sooner? Sure that would have been a fun day on ponyfans, but that wouldn't have done a lot to make SMU a more attractive destination for head coaches. We were already a mediocre landing spot for a lot of real talent. We did great with what we had to offer.

I think people are pleased with hiring Enloe for golf; although, he inherited a lot of talent.

From a construction perspective, tennis is world class, Moody is phenomenal, Ford renovations have been very well received upstairs and the natatorium is getting addressed. IPF is what the IPF has been for the last decade, but we are hopefully closer now with more serious talk in the department than I've ever heard them seriously entertain at any point in the past.

What's the real basis for Turner to fire him? Football is hopefully in the right direction, the issues in basketball have absolutely no connection to him as an AD, and he's seen fundraising quadruple since he took over - it had more than tripled before revisions to basketball, so his track record here was pretty nice well before that. Contrast that to Orsini who saw about a 25% increase in fundraising throughout his tenure. The only other major change to fundraising during that period of time is a devilishly handsome board member appointed by Orsini's crew, so that's probably it.

Thank you.

I second that thank you.

[RGV Pony]

Also SMU isn't getting maximum revenues

SMU is getting revenues sufficient to survive with an eye toward moving up

We can revisit the astronomical costs to attend UT sporting events or compare with for example a Gonzaga if you like

The questions to be answered that will determine our future

1. Do you want SMU to play at the highest level
2. Are you willing to pay what is necessary to play at the highest level
3. after receiving invoice, are you sure you want to pay for SMU to play at the highest level

We aren't a state school that can finance the athletic program off the back of huge student fees. SMU alumni, family and friends will have to pay that bill. I'm still not sure its economically viable based on the support for the program

Excellent point. And remember this is the same fan base where people would pay a, what 250 or 500 donation, then bring 6 people to the blvd chow line at $18 per (the cost to smu) 6 times a year and then be incensed that smu finally did some math and limited.

[PonyKai]

Also SMU isn't getting maximum revenues

SMU is getting revenues sufficient to survive with an eye toward moving up

We can revisit the astronomical costs to attend UT sporting events or compare with for example a Gonzaga if you like

The questions to be answered that will determine our future

1. Do you want SMU to play at the highest level
2. Are you willing to pay what is necessary to play at the highest level
3. after receiving invoice, are you sure you want to pay for SMU to play at the highest level

We aren't a state school that can finance the athletic program off the back of huge student fees. SMU alumni, family and friends will have to pay that bill. I'm still not sure its economically viable based on the support for the program

Excellent point. And remember this is the same fan base where people would pay a, what 250 or 500 donation, then bring 6 people to the blvd chow line at $18 per (the cost to smu) 6 times a year and then be incensed that smu finally did some math and limited.

So we're rich but cheap, whiny, and couldn't spell loyalty if you spotted the consonants?

[RGV Pony]

And bingo was his name-o