Page 1 of 1
I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Mon Oct 06, 2003 11:15 am
by HixsontoLeVias
....oh, so now Miami is our "model"?? If THAT'S the case, let's just go ahead and shut this thing down....some might say we are "past the point of return..", we will NEVER re :hmm: gain respectability..I don't buy this, but....we need to start showing some progress, some mo....NOW!! Long Live Ricky Wesson.
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Mon Oct 06, 2003 11:19 am
by abezontar
I dont' think I have ever heard anyone say that Georgia Tech was our model, where did you get that?
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Mon Oct 06, 2003 12:09 pm
by NavyCrimson
mid 90's when the dmn published a 1-2 page article with interviews from several administrators at that time.
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Mon Oct 06, 2003 12:40 pm
by abezontar
ah....is that still who we are attempting to model our program after?
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Mon Oct 06, 2003 1:17 pm
by Nacho
Bennett said our model is Miami. I'm going with that. Question: How do we know that our model really isn't Temple? Maybe that Miami thing was some kind of hoax. I digress. Miami seems to do okay with the Miami model. Let's keep it. 4 more years!
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Mon Oct 06, 2003 3:34 pm
by EastStang
Temple is a state school. Miami is a private school in a large metorpolitan area. There are two models we could follow for football: Miami or Rice/Duke. We, of course have followed the latter and are now trying to redirect toward the former.
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Mon Oct 06, 2003 3:49 pm
by FloridaMustang
Duke is in a major metropolitan area? Have you ever been to Durham? :w00t:
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Wed Oct 08, 2003 6:06 pm
by No Quarter
If Bennett said Miami is the model for SMU, maybe he meant the school in Ohio?
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Wed Oct 08, 2003 7:09 pm
by Charleston Pony
If Miami is in fact our model (meaning big time football can be played at a small private school in the middle of a major metropolitan area), do we start by renaming the school the University of Dallas? Or, do we convince the powers that be that SMU needs to offer "Exercise and Sports Sciences" programs like Miami does? I especially like their program in "Athletic Training". You won't hear our administration say SMU will follow the Miami model to athletic success, because you aren't likely to ever see those kind of programs at SMU. Realistically, that's what it would probably take for SMU to compete again at that level (not to mention violating NCAA rules in recruiting).
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Wed Oct 08, 2003 7:29 pm
by i10pony
Hey,
I'm all about exercise science and sports management programs. I'm also all about the recruiting violations. But lets be smart about it this time if we're gonna do it. As the great Jim Rome says "If you're not cheating, you're not trying, and its only cheating if you get caught."
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Wed Oct 08, 2003 7:31 pm
by i10pony
I'm just joking but I wish SMU could get away with that stuff and recieve a slap on the hand ala Arkansas, Alabama, Auburn, A$M, UH, Notre Dame, F$U....and the list goes on.
Re: I Thought Georgia Tech was our "model"??

Posted:
Wed Oct 08, 2003 7:44 pm
by SoCal_Pony
CP,
How about legitimate PE and kinesiology degrees so our athletes have the opportunity at careers in sports medicine, health training or coaching.
Since UT and A$M are our academic equivalents, use their JC admission standards.
Do this and I am satisfied.
No need for “Harrick-taught†or “athletic training†courses.