|
PonyFans.com •
Board Index •
Around the Hilltop •
Football •
Recruiting •
Basketball •
Other Sports
This is the forum for talk about SMU Football
Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower
by b_caesar » Mon Jan 10, 2011 12:35 am
Samurai Stang wrote:b_caesar wrote: Agreed. Nor can it exclusively be the fault or hindrance, whether perceived or real, of RGT.
That, however, I disagree upon. As president, Turner possesses a number of powers, enough to hinder the building of such a practice facility. He is entirely capable of directing the building situation in either direction.
Capable, yes. But entirely? No. SMU's Board of Trustees has a significant level of influence over those sorts of decisions as well. Yes, they may generally follow various recommended courses of action as put forward, but they are no rubber stamp, either, to RGT's whims or desires. And he works at their pleasure.
Don't worry. Be Happy. Or not.
-

b_caesar

-
- Posts: 1539
- Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 10:17 pm
- Location: North America
by Samurai Stang » Mon Jan 10, 2011 9:17 am
b_caesar wrote:Samurai Stang wrote:b_caesar wrote: Agreed. Nor can it exclusively be the fault or hindrance, whether perceived or real, of RGT.
That, however, I disagree upon. As president, Turner possesses a number of powers, enough to hinder the building of such a practice facility. He is entirely capable of directing the building situation in either direction.
Capable, yes. But entirely? No. SMU's Board of Trustees has a significant level of influence over those sorts of decisions as well. Yes, they may generally follow various recommended courses of action as put forward, but they are no rubber stamp, either, to RGT's whims or desires. And he works at their pleasure.
The Board of Trustees has such an overlap with the Circle of Champions that one can safely assume that significant opposition to an indoor practice facility will not be found among them.
Far East Conference
-

Samurai Stang

-
- Posts: 1216
- Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:03 pm
- Location: Japan
by EastStang » Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:33 am
While its not on campus, I'd almost bet there's an old abandoned hanger at Love Field that can be bought probably cheaply due to environmental issues. Fix it up, put some paint on it and A/C and voila you have an indoor practice facility with big doors on it to open on nice days. Take that UT.
UNC better keep that Ram away from Peruna
-
EastStang

-
- Posts: 12681
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:01 am
by East Coast Mustang » Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:40 am
Water Pony wrote:Samurai Stang wrote:b_caesar wrote:You really think that if someone walked into RGT's office on Monday with $5 mil for an IPF he would pass it up?
One must only ask himself which is more likely: 1. Turner hinders the athletic department 2. SMU has a shortage of wealthy alumni
Yawn! Your posts are a broken record. Turner is not the issue.
Please, sell us once again on your argument as to why it's more important that we upgrade our swimming facilities. We'd all like to see that stream of idiocy on the football board once again. It's not like I go to the other sports forum and cause trouble. Hell, I don't think I've ever even been to the other sports forum, period.
-

East Coast Mustang

-
- Posts: 7433
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 8:35 am
by 1983 Cotton Bowl » Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:23 am
I won't wade into the larger "for or agin' Turner debate. I'll limit my comments to the following:
1. I believe an IPF is inevitable. It will happen at SMU within the next 5-10 years. Its a question of prioritizing, fundraising and where it will be located. I don't see Turner expending political capital to stop such a project if everyone else is on board. That just doesn't make sense.
2. SMU has a ton of building projects either being built or on the drawing board right now. This ranges from the Bush Library to academic buildings to the work on the south side of Mockingbird to Moody upgrades to a new natatorium. An IPF project will need to be prioritized, fundraised for, and scheduled somewhere within that larger context. With so much on its plate building-wise, adding an IPF project at this time could certainly be more complicated than simply whether a person or persons are for it or against it in principal. In the same vein, Orsini is the AD of the entire athletic department, not just the football program. If he's already promised and begun fundraising for other athletic projects like Moody and the natatorium, it could be politically difficult for him to simply tell the other programs that an IPF has jumped those projects in line and they are going to have to wait.
3. From what I have heard, June Jones very much wants to build an IPF. This leads me to believe that it has probably come up in meetings he's had with Orsini and Turner. Whatever they told him must have satisfied June enough for him to sign a contract extension. So I'm not too worried about it.
-

1983 Cotton Bowl

-
- Posts: 1745
- Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:17 pm
- Location: Charlotte, North Carolina
by StallionsModelT » Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:31 am
IPF is absolutely inevitable if we truly aspire to be " top 25 in everything we do".
Back off Warchild seriously.
-
StallionsModelT

-
- Posts: 7800
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:46 pm
- Location: Dallas, Texas
by East Coast Mustang » Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:57 am
StallionsModelT wrote:IPF is absolutely inevitable if we truly aspire to be " top 25 in everything we do".
This. Highland Park has one for God's sake. It's embarrassing that we don't.
-

East Coast Mustang

-
- Posts: 7433
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 8:35 am
by Pony_Fan » Mon Jan 10, 2011 1:38 pm
East Coast Mustang wrote:StallionsModelT wrote:IPF is absolutely inevitable if we truly aspire to be " top 25 in everything we do".
This. Highland Park has one for God's sake. It's embarrassing that we don't.
And just about every high school in North Texas.
-

Pony_Fan

-
- Posts: 6130
- Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 4:01 am
- Location: Dallas,Tx, USA
by PK » Mon Jan 10, 2011 2:22 pm
CoxMustangFan wrote:(I think I'm one of the few that hope a baseball team is on the horizon).
There are more than a few who would like to see that, but due to title nine the cost of a new men's sport would be prohibitive.
SMU's first president, Robert S. Hyer, selected Harvard Crimson and Yale Blue as SMU's colors to symbolize SMU's high academic standards. We are one of the few Universities to have school colors with real meaning...and we just blow them off.
-

PK

-
- Posts: 8805
- Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 3:01 am
- Location: Dallas, Texas 75206
by PK » Mon Jan 10, 2011 2:33 pm
Not every school has a baseball team and not every school has a soccer team. TCU opted to have a baseball team and let their soccer team become a club sport and SMU did the opposite. It made sense for us to do that as our soccer teams have been very successful over the years...baseball not.
SMU's first president, Robert S. Hyer, selected Harvard Crimson and Yale Blue as SMU's colors to symbolize SMU's high academic standards. We are one of the few Universities to have school colors with real meaning...and we just blow them off.
-

PK

-
- Posts: 8805
- Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 3:01 am
- Location: Dallas, Texas 75206
by SMU1523 » Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:51 pm
PK wrote:Not every school has a baseball team and not every school has a soccer team. TCU opted to have a baseball team and let their soccer team become a club sport and SMU did the opposite. It made sense for us to do that as our soccer teams have been very successful over the years...baseball not.
Nobody gives a flying [deleted] about soccer... Last time I checked SMU is in Texas...
-

SMU1523

-
- Posts: 1351
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 9:03 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
by SMU89 » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:13 pm
Dutch wrote:Sammy 11 wrote:You guys have a good setup and while I feel our practice facilities and weight rooms can hold up against anyone not named Oregon I don't think any gap between our schools is going to cost recruits either way.
We have a big edge with the indoor facility, you have a newer & nicer venue for your stadium. Both schools are probably going to build on which one they don't have in the next few years.
we are in dallas, you are in waco.
1st and 10 vs Cracker Barrel. 
-

SMU89

-
- Posts: 5216
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:19 pm
- Location: Dallas
by Sammy 11 » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:23 pm
SMU89 wrote:Dutch wrote:Sammy 11 wrote:You guys have a good setup and while I feel our practice facilities and weight rooms can hold up against anyone not named Oregon I don't think any gap between our schools is going to cost recruits either way.
We have a big edge with the indoor facility, you have a newer & nicer venue for your stadium. Both schools are probably going to build on which one they don't have in the next few years.
we are in dallas, you are in waco.
1st and 10 vs Cracker Barrel. 
Nonsense. 1st and 10 vs George's. FIFY
-
Sammy 11
-
by Water Pony » Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:24 pm
East Coast Mustang wrote: Please, sell us once again on your argument as to why it's more important that we upgrade our swimming facilities. We'd all like to see that stream of idiocy on the football board once again. It's not like I go to the other sports forum and cause trouble. Hell, I don't think I've ever even been to the other sports forum, period.
Why is my comment that Turner is not the issue concerning an IPF or any other conspiracy theory so easily tossed out possibly related to my support for non-revenue sports, including a replacement Natatorium? BTW, you can sleep comfortably that a new swimming pool will not happen anytime soon, despite the obvious need. Happy?
Pony Up
-

Water Pony

-
- Posts: 5524
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 3:01 am
- Location: Chicagoland
by SoCal_Pony » Tue Jan 11, 2011 12:33 am
I think everyone understands the priority of FB and BB over other sports, but in defense of Water Pony, an upgrade to our Swimming and Diving facilities would probably return SMU to Top 10.
No other SMU sport that can make that claim.
I personally would love to see us make that improvement. (of course after Moody and FB upgrades)
-

SoCal_Pony

-
- Posts: 5901
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 4:01 am
Return to Football
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests
|
|