|
|
Page 1 Story on SMU football in today's LA Times SportsModerators: PonyPride, SmooPower
34 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Boy, that ought to be the dictionary definition of "lack of institutional control"....
If "everybody was doing it"...did Rice ever get into trouble?
I do not know that they ever got investigated, but the word on the street back when I was playing was that they had more "depth" at sugar daddy than any SWC team. Supposedly they paid down to the 3rd team level.
No doubt about it jt, the coaches clearly knew something was going on, but didn't have any way of stopping either other than quit on a national champion calibre team. I always wondered if Meyer was happy to be going to the Pros where it was kosher to pay players and not be there on the scene when the ax inevitably fell. Of course the payroll also had a good effect, no one transferred back then because they would have to forgo the unpaid part of the signing bonus. They knew if they ratted out the school, they'd lose part of their signing bonus as well, so it tended to keep the players in line except of course in the case of SMU.
I hope you are not suggesting that Meyer was not knee deep in it. Arguably things only really went to pot when Meyer left because he wasn't around to keep everything organized.
I don't remember Rice having any great teams during the late 70's - mid 80's.....they must not have been paying very much....certainly not as much as Clements and Co. were paying our guys to come to the Hilltop! What ever happened to the player that did rat SMU out? I would imagine he has not been on the Hilltop in quite a long time.
David Stanley was rumored to have sold his story, to our friends at Belo.
from the L.A. Times story:
"Bennett has always wondered why only two schools, SMU and later Texas Christian, took the brunt of NCAA violations. "I'm a Texas A&M grad, I recruited against all of them," Bennett says. "They can't point fingers…. This was a buyer's market, I'll tell you right now. It was a sign of the times. And there was nobody void of it. I mean nobody: state universities, private schools. It just befuddles me that the two schools that get hit the hardest are two private schools, SMU and TCU." Well, Coach. How 'bout this? Both schools are in cities whose economies don't revolve around those universities and - specifically - the football programs. 20+ years ago, if A&M had been hit with the DP, it would have impacted College Station & Bryan's economies, the same with U.T. & Austin (remember this was before the high tech industry came to Austin), OU with Norman, Nebraska with Lincoln, Alabama with Tuscaloosa, etc. The NCAA knows this and that's why they'll never level a DP again. Let's face it: the DP only hurt SMU, not the city of Dallas.
eaststang--bobby collins and staff "didn't know who (stanley) was until commitment day? a high school all american? they didn't know who they had letters of commitment out to? please explain.
on another note: as our record improves and pb grows the program, we are going to see more of these "life after death penalty" articles. might as well get used to them. our first conference championship and trip to a good bowl game may take the sting out of them a bit. we'll be able to point to what SMU has overcome with a good bit of pride.
I didn't press Collins at the time since it was cordial golf outing and I could tell the subject was not a pleasant one to discuss, and quite frankly I didn't know all the ins and outs of how recruits sign LOI at that time since I was not an athlete. All he said was that this kid was offered without his knowledge. And that on signing day, he discovered that the kid had signed without his imput. He said the kid was not in their plans and did not meet their needs and that no one on Collins staff had contacted the recruit. I don't know who signed the offer, but clearly Collins knew he couldn't refuse it at that point. The boosters were running the assylum. Remember the Board of Governors at that point had pretty much seized control of the University and were making decisions without the imput of the Trustees. I don't know any more than that.
Both James and Bennett state that SMU is a Diamond in the Rough because of its "recruiting area" and "Dallas". I agree but I guess we ain't close yet because we have just about been shut out in Dallas this year.
It is a shame that we haven't done well, but a little more excitement, a little more winning will go a long way to help that.
East, i don't know when you met collins, but that just isn't true. everyone wanted the kid. one of the most heavily recruited defensive players in the nation out of high school. what is true is that collins' staff were looking elsewhere, and strongarmed into the deal. (of course they were not going to turn down the potential) the rest was pure disaster. Go Ponies!
Clearly, this was when the NCAA investigators were camping out on campus at that point. Collins may have been spinning at that point. I think the substance isn't much different. They were not recruiting the guy, and they were forced to take him. Collins may have been embellishing the story. I don't know. The fact was the boosters had as much influence in who was recruited as the coaches.
the world in which david lived in the day was full of boosters. he and his family played every swc school for their benefit. most of the top texas h.s. kids then were being as recuited by boosters as much as any coach or recruiter. oh, the tales david told. smu was nothing compared to ut and a$m.
Go Ponies!
34 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: Google [Bot], peruna81 and 1 guest |
|
