Scatter shooting while reading the posts

[ponyplayer]

for some of us these Still are the days!




Faculty senate?.....very interesting.

[PerunaPunch]

you are right-most don't know why we suck. I've been in shock for years about this. It wouldn't be this way at any other school in Texas. That's exactly why I have tried to "educate" this board. What really sucks is that the Coaches all know what is going on but remain quiet to keep their jobs while meanwhile all the cheerleaders go out and defend position and policies the coaching staff actually wants to change.

I can't speak for the board, but President Turner has been a proponent of the athletics program from day one. And if you think we get pissed when we lose, you should try being around Jim Copeland.

And for the record, the Coaches DO know what's going on, and they've been anything but silent.

Stallion, you have to get involved to know what's going on. You can't learn it all on Rivals – they don't give us that much coverage.

If I recall correctly from one of your earlier posts, wasn't it you who were giving Bennett credit for finally buying into the "Stallion Plan" of recruiting JUCOs? Isn't Bennett (with Turner's endorsement) responsible for bringing about the School of Education we've been clamoring for, so we could offer some athlete-friendly degrees??

The biggest problem we face in rapidly correcting our football woes is that steering the school is like steering a battleship. You start steering and a mile later the ship starts to turn. That, and the financial issue.

I think it's fair to question some of Bennett's play calling – especially early in his tenure. I can also question some of his personnel decisions with the luxury of hindsight. But whether it's the turf field or the new hall in Ford Stadium used to impress recruits, one thing Bennett has done extremely well is parley his status (his honeymoon period if you will) into getting some fundamental things changed to help make the program competitive.

However, our recruiting budget is still a fourth of our "natural and traditional rivals". We still don't have a training table. There's a heck of a lot more to it than merely the spectre of the DP.

[EastStang]

Okay, let's talk about the recruiting budget and the training table issues for a moment. Are you saying that our recruiting budget is 1/4 that of Rice's, TCU's or of UT's? Obviously, without the BCS $$$$, we won't outspend UT on recruiting (especially if they're paying players). Although I think the NCAA is starting to limit some of those expenditures with new legislation. We ought to outspend TCU and Rice in recruiting (without paying players). We can't beat our rivals if our linemen can't stuff their faces or have the trots from eating school cafeteria food. Perhaps those are modest changes that need to be addressed by the Athletic Department. I agree with the Battleship analogy. Universities change things with glacier like speed (although President Pye's changes were instituted in days not years). At that point however, no one knew what those changes really meant and given the scandels was willing to speak out since there were lots of issues as to whether the University would still be around. Now, you have vested interests in the faculty trying to stop any loosening of any restrictions. I agree that change takes time, but I think the message from this Board is that patience is running out. The clearest message sent was the low attendance last Saturday. Clearly, the Dallas public, and our own student body are not buying into the current football program. Some changes need to be made sooner rather than later.

[PerunaPunch]

UT's '05 budget is projected to be $82 million. Big 12 revenue is more than doubling this year to $8.8 million PER SCHOOL (up from $4 million last year).

Ohio State is budgeting $92 million (they're the largest spender) for '06, which will make them the biggest spender in the nation.

OU will be up to $62 million this year.

I believe our budget is $13 million, but I'lll try to find out for sure

[NavyCrimson]

aaaaa -

after looking @ those numbers -

i really don't think it matters -

[SMU Football Blog]

UT's '05 budget is projected to be $82 million. Big 12 revenue is more than doubling this year to $8.8 million PER SCHOOL (up from $4 million last year).

Ohio State is budgeting $92 million (they're the largest spender) for '06, which will make them the biggest spender in the nation.

OU will be up to $62 million this year.

I believe our budget is $13 million, but I'lll try to find out for sure

The SMU athletic budget is a little more than that, but not by a significant amount. But don't focus on the Big XII schools, focus on the non-BCS schools that are still whooping our butts.

Also, bear in mind that just under 1% (yes, less than 1%) of the SMU total budget is what is referred to as the "athletic deficit". This figure is about $3,000,000.00. This is a tremendous sore spot for the faculty. You give one dime to athletics and they have a caniption fit. It was so bad in 2000, the head of the faculty senate had to beg the members of the faculty to shut up about the cost of Ford Stadium because it was becoming an embarassment. They are convinced, of course, that if not for football, they'd all be able to cruise to class on school-provided Segways.

[PerunaPunch]

That's where the faculty is completely out of touch. Football and to a lesser extent basketball and other athletics is what keeps the majority of almuni connected with the University after graduation.

As a graduate, I support the Meadows School, but not nearly to the same extent that I patronize athletics. Meadows is somewhat unique in that they offer oppportunities for interaction with local alumni (we attend some of the concerts. My wife takes dance classes up there, etc.).

But I seriously doubt we'd have maintained that connection if we weren't on campus a few dozen times a year for football and Mustang Club.

[PK]

How many times do I have to tell you, the board of trustees' doesn't realize there is anything wrong. They think losing is caused by the death penalty 20 years ago. By and large, they have no idea SMU does anything differently than any other school. And that goes for 90% os SMU alumni, too.

If a new AD were hired and said, "You know most schools that are successful, spend money on athletics AND they let their coaches recruit players that are not Rhodes Scholars." The board of trustees would resond, "Really?!?!?!" I really believe they have no idea.

Surely the Hunts and Ford know the truth about the situation and understand that the dp is long gone and not the reason for our current situation anymore...unless you count the current power of the Faculty Senate which is a result of the dp. I would give my eye teeth to have a board like TCU has. Those folks get it.

[Stallion]

I realize all of the past and present coaches in both FB and BB absolutely know exactly why we don't compete. But Bennett is the only one who has even publicly hinted that SMU should make changes so he gets a small tip of the hat. Cavan merely pouted. I really don't give the AD or President much credit at all because they were the vocal proponents of the Commitment which was a lie plus they never gave their public endorsement to playing on an even playing field which pulled the wool over many many SMU supporters. Sorry I think after 10 years an AD should make a very public argument for the necessity of playing on equal playing field after leading one of the worst athletic programs in America. If he's not willing to put his job on the line for the benefit of the program then I really have no use for such politicians and cautious lifetimers. Turner gets the same grade Herbert Hoover has gotten from historians on his attempts to deal with the Great Depression. That being said I'm not the one going around and demanding that any coach or AD should be fired-didn't even demand that Rossley be fired after losing to Rice 6 years in a row. The reason is that the people doing the firing are the ones who should know which parties are dragging their feet and which ones are constructively dealing with the problem. That ain't my job. My concern again was that many SMU supporters were being misled about what needed to be changed in order to compete and the fact that almost no one was standing up and strongly making the argument for a strong athletic program which competed on an even basis with its natural and traditional rivals.

[RGV Pony]

I'd really like for someone who has connections to talk to Hunt and Ford and ask them to divulge their take and interpretation on current events. I'd love to see it in print...do they agree with us? With Stallion? With me? With jtstang? With MrMustang?

[Pony_Fan]

That is pretty much all we are asking for - COMMUNICATION with fans and telling us what is goign on and what is not working and what they are trying to fix. We have been in the DARK way too long. It's all heresay.....why is this so difficult??

[Col. Nathan R. Jessep]

Okay, let's talk about the recruiting budget and the training table issues for a moment.

Training table?

Hell, EastStang, SMU doesn't even serve breakfast at the Mac Cafeteria in the the 3-dorm South Quad (where most SMU FR/SO athletes reside).