PonyFans.com

I am a proponent of academics defining a reputation of a university. I am also a proponent of athletics being the face of the university.

When I was on this campus in the late 1980s (my Freshman & Sophomore years were when the FB program was shut down), our then-late President implemented a kneejerk curricula and admitting standard system that completely tied the athletic department's hands. It was the perfect storm for the faculty.

However, I can tell you that the death penalty split this campus and possibly the alums and created an apathy that still glaringly exists.

But this the time for academia to STAND DOWN!! and create a system that can allow student-athletes to come to this campus and REPRESENT THIS SCHOOL with great character!.

In short, when it comes to academics and athletics -- NEVER THE TWO SHALL MEET!!

While the Cox Business school has a great reputation, people are drawn to a school because of its athletics programs. It can increase the applicant pool, increase enrollment and thereby translate into more $$ and resources to help the University. This isn't hard to understand, folks.

Football is the galvanizing agent that makes alums want to stay connected to their school. They loved their experience. They will donate more $$ if athletics is successful. This isn't hard to understand, folks.

I think we can all agree there should be no shame for us to produce graduates with PE and Education degrees. My feeling is if you go to school, put in the hard work and come away with a degree, you have my respect.

When the Phil Bennett era stopped on Oct. 28, it should have sent a message to Dr. Turner and the provost that if they really going to give athletics have a fair fight, then it must change.

Bennett wasn't a good coach and made some poor talent evaluations, but we should all understand that he wasn't alone in this poor record.

And once Dr. Turner and Co. have the nerve to stand up to the faculty (just like they did about the Bush Library) and say these changes are coming, it will be up to those professors to either live with, stew over it or move on. And I never ready anything where there was this mass exit as the wheels continue to turn bring the Library here.

Should some leave, this school has a great national reputation so that it will attract quality professors. This school was here before these professors got here and it will be here when they leave.

I'm not suggesting that we completely drop our admitting standards to 820 on the sliding scale SAT, 21 core courses and XX on the ACT. But we shouldn't dismiss those students either.

And even if they graduate from HS, they may need to take a class to fit our standards or interview with an academic committee in a non-hostile environment. I don't even know if that is the right method but we can do without the adversarial setup we currently have.

The transfer hours dilemma is nationwide. There's going to be some that won't be accepted but an alternative must be adopted for those who want to come here.

Obviously, re-defining the Education major is an absolute. To not have one on this campus is an insult to the 1,000s of teachers in this state who bust their butts to help students get into college in the first place.

And yet we apparently take elitist position that this is beneath us because we only want to offer the high-brow degree programs. Baloney!!

Think of Kiniesiology majors who could be coaching in area schools and promoting our alma mater. All college degrees should be valued whether it is in civil engineering or Kiniesiology. The elitist faculty appears not to value it.

YOU GET OUT OF YOUR COLLEGE EXPERIENCE WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT!!

Really, AD Steve Orsini is limited to what he can do. Sure, he can fight for the changes. But he really has to have the ear of Dr. Turner. And he's going to have to be honest with the candidates when they come to interview because what they're dealing with.

If this aligns me with the Keeper of the Star, then so be it. But if SMU is going to have a consistent athletic pulse instead of trail of "almost" heres and "almost" theres, then things have to change.

OR ELSE WE'VE BEEN WASTING OUR TIME SINCE 1989!!

Does anyone have enrollement stats going back to the 70's? Would it show a correlation to football record? I am only inquisitive, becuase I thought I heard on that Bob Hope Youtube video that the enrollment was over 6,000 back in the early 80's.

Be careful, Patton, these kinds of rants got you in trouble as Big10Ponyfan

George S. Patton wrote:I am a proponent of academics defining a reputation of a university.

That's an interesting statement from someone who repeatedly blasts the faculty at a university he claims to support.

Adademics and athletics are NOT mutually exclusive. Ask Coach K. Ask the folks at Boston College about their academics. Ask Rice's baseball coach if he gets any academic liabilities into school. Ask Stanford officials about all of their partial qualifiers.

While you're at it, ask the coaches at SMU. Ours is a great university, and I'm proud to be an alumnus, and I'm proud of the education we got and the faculty that taught us. We have some great athletes at SMU - we just need more of them.

Casey wrote:

George S. Patton wrote:I am a proponent of academics defining a reputation of a university.

That's an interesting statement from someone who repeatedly blasts the faculty at a university he claims to support.

Adademics and athletics are NOT mutually exclusive. Ask Coach K. Ask the folks at Boston College about their academics. Ask Rice's baseball coach if he gets any academic liabilities into school. Ask Stanford officials about all of their partial qualifiers.

While you're at it, ask the coaches at SMU. Ours is a great university, and I'm proud to be an alumnus, and I'm proud of the education we got and the faculty that taught us. We have some great athletes at SMU - we just need more of them.

Our faculty can go shove it!! They are a dividing force on this campus. The only thing I want from them is to instruct and grade fairly. Our athletes will determine for themselves if they will be eligible or ineligible for forthcoming semesters.

I'd much prefer the entire college landscape to be one where students are athletes, not athletes being students. I'd rather a landscape to be where, if the NFL wants to develop players, they do so on its own nickel, similar to the farm program for baseball.

However, I'm resigned to the reality that there is too much $$ for the ivy-towered profs and administrations to just say no to major athletics. If we are going to be I-A (or whatever it's called these days) then we need to act like it.

Unless one is an ivy-league school, academic reputation is not sufficient to energize the faculty, students, and alumni. The alternative is having a great athletic program. I would love to see the day when Ford and Moody are filled by the Mustang Nation. Having a great football team will energize the alumni and non-alumni, increase applications, and increase funding.

BTW, talked to a friend of mine today who has a wife in the Ed school at SMU. Says that it is similar to the Ed school at TCU: you must major in a substantive area (like history, math, etc) and take some other education courses to supplement the substantive major. We're lacking in degree programs, apparently, in areas like coaching, kineseology, pe, etc.

OR-See-Nee wrote:I'd much prefer the entire college landscape to be one where students are athletes, not athletes being students. I'd rather a landscape to be where, if the NFL wants to develop players, they do so on its own nickel, similar to the farm program for baseball.

However, I'm resigned to the reality that there is too much $$ for the ivy-towered profs and administrations to just say no to major athletics. If we are going to be I-A (or whatever it's called these days) then we need to act like it.

Unless one is an ivy-league school, academic reputation is not sufficient to energize the faculty, students, and alumni. The alternative is having a great athletic program. I would love to see the day when Ford and Moody are filled by the Mustang Nation. Having a great football team will energize the alumni and non-alumni, increase applications, and increase funding.

BTW, talked to a friend of mine today who has a wife in the Ed school at SMU. Says that it is similar to the Ed school at TCU: you must major in a substantive area (like history, math, etc) and take some other education courses to supplement the substantive major. We're lacking in degree programs, apparently, in areas like coaching, kineseology, pe, etc.

VERY WELL SAID...I AGREE WITH YOU ALLL THE WAY......GEEZZZ...

Pony94 wrote:Does anyone have enrollement stats going back to the 70's? Would it show a correlation to football record? I am only inquisitive, becuase I thought I heard on that Bob Hope Youtube video that the enrollment was over 6,000 back in the early 80's.

A better gauge would be total # of applications

" ... This school was here before these professors got here and it will be here when they leave ... "

Couldn't have said it any better.

Gee, thanks for the insight General Pop Tart! Guess I was too big a DA to get a MD, MBA or become a Fellow in the American College of Chest Physicians. I guess the entire time I was busting my tail for SMU football during the Mustang Mania/Pony Express days only lead to a life without the IQ to walk and chew gum at the same time. Gordon McAdams (MD), Brain O'Meara (MD) and Mike Randle (MD) have also been confined to a life without a shred of intelligence. I tend to disagree that academics and athletics are mutually exclusive.

Now, that said, I agree whole heartedly that it is athletics that draws a large number of alumni back to the campus. I have no desire to visit the old Organic lab but do want to see a winning football program. And I agree that degrees in fields that attract athletes are needed. Athletes have an interest in their sports and expertise that they may feel is their life's calling to pass to future generations. There isn't a think wrong with educational programs (and think about it, which teacher sounds more desirable, a teacher from SMU or a teacher from Prairie View) that prepares a person for the teaching profession.

There should be some changes to accommodate transfer hours. There should be degree programs that are attractive to athletes. There should be a commitment to enhance the quality of campus life for students by having successful football (go to any winning college and see if a Saturday there is more exciting to a kid than a Saturday at Ford). And now is the time to make those changes. Excuse time is over. We have paid the price of mistakes made a generation ago. It is time to move forward and return SMU to a winning program.

Funny thing SMU had multiple times more Academic All-Americans under Ron Meyer and Bobby Collins than since the DP. Always has been my point-that smart kids are smart enough to want to go to the best football programs.

OR-See-Nee wrote:BTW, talked to a friend of mine today who has a wife in the Ed school at SMU. Says that it is similar to the Ed school at TCU: you must major in a substantive area (like history, math, etc) and take some other education courses to supplement the substantive major. We're lacking in degree programs, apparently, in areas like coaching, kineseology, pe, etc.

According to TCU's School of Education website, they do offer majors in Education. Now you can major in another field and then take education courses to perpare for the certification, but TCU does offer majors in Education: http://www.sofe.tcu.edu/Undergraduate/UnderLinks/Chart.htm

ponyte wrote:Gee, thanks for the insight General Pop Tart! Guess I was too big a DA to get a MD, MBA or become a Fellow in the American College of Chest Physicians. I guess the entire time I was busting my tail for SMU football during the Mustang Mania/Pony Express days only lead to a life without the IQ to walk and chew gum at the same time. Gordon McAdams (MD), Brain O'Meara (MD) and Mike Randle (MD) have also been confined to a life without a shred of intelligence. I tend to disagree that academics and athletics are mutually exclusive.

Now, that said, I agree whole heartedly that it is athletics that draws a large number of alumni back to the campus. I have no desire to visit the old Organic lab but do want to see a winning football program. And I agree that degrees in fields that attract athletes are needed. Athletes have an interest in their sports and expertise that they may feel is their life's calling to pass to future generations. There isn't a think wrong with educational programs (and think about it, which teacher sounds more desirable, a teacher from SMU or a teacher from Prairie View) that prepares a person for the teaching profession.

There should be some changes to accommodate transfer hours. There should be degree programs that are attractive to athletes. There should be a commitment to enhance the quality of campus life for students by having successful football (go to any winning college and see if a Saturday there is more exciting to a kid than a Saturday at Ford). And now is the time to make those changes. Excuse time is over. We have paid the price of mistakes made a generation ago. It is time to move forward and return SMU to a winning program.

This isn't a slap at you or mrydel or any other former football players. Nor am I saying that we have to "dumb" down our standards to get risky kids in here. Nor am I belittling the players who were on this campus before I got there.

But if we're honestly give ourselves a fair shot, we have to change some things.

And when it comes to the faculty who would resist this = they have a choice.

They are either for this or against this -- and we pretty much know where they stand.

My comments are really going after the MILITANT FACULTY!!