Channel 5 news reporting that SMU contacts Gary Patterson?

by **Ponymon** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:22 pm

J.T.supporta wrote:
Big Hoss wrote:
J.T.supporta wrote:why are you listening/watching ch. 5 news?

are you that bored

See the phrase "the wife called and told me". No matter how bored I am, it would only make matters worse if I ignore my wife!

apologies...if the wife says something then do it, i dont wanna get you in trouble. but stay away from NBC 5 if you can

I would rather watch Channel 5 than Dale Hanson and Channel 8!

by **SoCal_Pony** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:26 pm

Big Hoss wrote:Although, if it DID make TCU have to up their ante with the guy, we should just make it a habit to call him after every football season to help drain their program of funds. Would love to see that.

Remember that TCU poster who got all excited about contributing $.01 to the Mustang Club and how it cost us $5 in processing fees.

Would love to see us return the favor....SMU-style

by **planoponyfan** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:13 pm

Two thoughts jump to my mind:

1. Channel 5 has a two man sports department. NBC has ruined that station's ability to cover sports. That's why you frequently see some of their news reporters doing sports on the weekend. Derek Castillo and Newey Scruggs are the only full-time sports guys there. Their sources at TCU might be pretty good, but I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in anything they report.

2. I could see why Patterson might be more interested in SMU than Minnesota. He wouldn't really have to move far, wouldn't get stuck in snow, and could get a lot more money from SMU. I could certainly see SMU hiring him away for more money than TCU is willing to pay. That said, I don't think SMU is all that interested in him. If SMU called him, it's likely to check the background on Fran and what he left behind at that program - if SMU has to hire Fran.

by **mrydel** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:23 pm

This is a posted position. Just because we speak to someone does not mean we initiated the contact. There may be instances, and Patterson may be one, when a coach may put a feeler out to us just to see the reaction of his school and possibly get a raise or an extension. If nothing else it gets the coach some publicity and recruiting ammo by being able to tell recruits, "they wanted me but I knew my school was better for me and it would be for you too."

by **BRStang** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:25 pm

mrydel wrote:This is a posted position. Just because we speak to someone does not mean we initiated the contact. There may be instances, and Patterson may be one, when a coach may put a feeler out to us just to see the reaction of his school and possibly get a raise or an extension. If nothing else it gets the coach some publicity and recruiting ammo by being able to tell recruits, "they wanted me but I knew my school was better for me and it would be for you too."

Please, please, please...NO FATTERSON. Or his van down by the river.

by **PonyLove** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:29 pm

mrydel wrote: "they wanted me but I knew my school was better for me and it would be for you too."

Dear Recruits: We did not want him.

by **SMU Football Blog** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:30 pm

I have no problem with Patterson being the coach of SMU. Anybody that does is an idiot. With the exception of one year, he has been consistently kicking SMU's tail and going to bowls. But it would be stupid for SMU to cantact him for any other reason than to make TCU give him a raise. Though, I suppose that has its own amusing value.

by **BRStang** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:32 pm

SMU Football Blog wrote:I have no problem with Patterson being the coach of SMU. Anybody that does is an idiot. With the exception of one year, he has been consistently kicking SMU's tail and going to bowls. But it would be stupid for SMU to cantact him for any other reason than to make TCU give him a raise. Though, I suppose that has its own amusing value.

Blog, I just like hating him, and laughing at him pull his pants up, too much.

by **SMU Football Blog** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:34 pm

BRStang wrote:
SMU Football Blog wrote:I have no problem with Patterson being the coach of SMU. Anybody that does is an idiot. With the exception of one year, he has been consistently kicking SMU's tail and going to bowls. But it would be stupid for SMU to cantact him for any other reason than to make TCU give him a raise. Though, I suppose that has its own amusing value.

Blog, I just like hating him, and laughing at him pull his pants up, too much.

Really can't argue with that.

by **deepellumfrog** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:14 pm

PonyLove wrote:
mrydel wrote: "they wanted me but I knew my school was better for me and it would be for you too."

Dear Recruits: We did not want him.

You guys have recruits???

Anyway, that got me to thinking. Who is your top verbal at this point?

by **mrydel** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:17 pm

deepellumfrog wrote:
PonyLove wrote:
mrydel wrote: "they wanted me but I knew my school was better for me and it would be for you too."

Dear Recruits: We did not want him.

You guys have recruits???

Anyway, that got me to thinking. Who is your top verbal at this point?

I am willing to come back if they need me. I should have one year of eligibility left. :lol:

by **westexSMU** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:27 pm

[quote="George S. Patton"]That would be like Oklahoma great Darrell Royal becoming the head coach at the University of Texas.[/quote]....................A+

by **Peruna 2K5** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:45 pm

Patterson and his pit stains patroling the sidelines? Um, no.

Channel 5 news reporting that SMU contacts Gary Patterson?

Who is online