PonyFans.com

We like to blame our extended troubles on things like the SWC breakup. I find it ironic as hell on this week that we are ridiculous 28 point underdogs to a top 10 TCU team. The Frogs have thrived precisely because of the breakup and ole TCU was spurred by the breakup to get off its arse and run a real D-1 program. TCU would have never ever been Top 10 if still playing in the SWC. It was really a blessing in disguise for them because they met the challenge. While SMU has wallowed and procrastinated about making real changes over the past 10 years, TCU has cemented a future. Meanwhile, we continue to be form over substance and make changes to our uniforms, colors, fight song, mascot.

Great post...accurate, telling, and relevant.

after the dp the athletic dept at smu was ovetaken by the school hence 20 years of failure. we finally seem to have taken back control. tcu never lost control. that is the difference.

A broader base of alumni kept control over TCU, we basically became a university run by two people...without either representation or support of the general alumni. We forget that the death penaly changed not just the Athletic Department, but the entire governing body of the school.

TCU has basically been the REBUTTAL answer to 98% of the excuses the administration, AD and Head Coaches have regurgitated to all the loyal Mustang Cheerleaders for 20 years. But now we run our program pretty much like the TCU Model-so I feel confident that you are going to see SMU achieve tangible success if you have the patience to wait about 4-5 years for them to fully take place. But its not goin' to come from magic-pixie dust like many SMU fans have prayed for each and every August. Basically all of my criticisms of SMU's program came from the TCU Model.

Stallion wrote: But now we run our program pretty much like the TCU Model-so I feel confident that you are going to see SMU achieve tangible success if you have the patience to wait about 4-5 years for them to fully take place.

What TCU policies have SMU adopted? How has SMU copied TCU?

changes over the years:

-formerly SMU required full admission to university before offer by SMU-TCU did not-this became absolutely necessary as early recruiting escalated-formerly SMU would offer in December-2 months before signing date. This year we almost have completed our class by September
-formerly SMU required a written admission paper-TCU did not
-formerly SMU required what then was approximately a 1,000 SAT while TCU admitted within NCAA minimum qualification standards
-during alleged Commitment circa 2000-SMU basically would admit with coaches' decision if recruit scored 900 SAT but had to go through special admission procedure and faculty committe if below 900 SAT-TCU did not
-formerly SMU required an extra 2 core courses, TCU did not
-formerly SMU did not admit non-qualifiers or partial qualifiers-TCU did- NCAA changed rule so that distinction now insignificant
-formerly SMU's admission policies for JUCOs made transfer very difficult-TCU won championships especially BB but also FB with teams full of JUCOs, D1A Transfers and Prep transfers
-formerly SMU admission standards on Division 1A Transfers/Prep school transfers made transfer difficult-TCU did not
-formerly SMU did not commit or sign recruits that did not project as full qualifiers by signing date-TCU did commit such players (I call them "late qualifiers") and would allow the recruit to attempt to qualify after signing date but before Fall Practice
-according to a discussion I had with former SMU recruiting coordinator-formerly if a potential recruit wanted to retake class or SAT the two scores would be averaged-TCU simply accepted higher score

That's a good start-I'm sure I forgot a few. If I did I'm sure someone will supplement. Basically, it can be boiled down to TCU decided to compete with all players as long as they met Minimum NCAA Requirements for admission-SMU did not but expected SMU Coaches to compete with two hands tied behind their back. Each of these categories were identified by at least me from Day 1 that SMU had a football message board. If you sat down with any and all SMU Football or Basketball Coaches from 1989-2008 and discuss the unfair competitive playing field they competed undert they would confide to you that it was extremely significant-and each category had a detrimental effect on that Coaches ability to do his job. Two Coaches Cavan and Bennett bitterly discribed the problems and they were 100% correct. SMU now competes under essentially Minimum NCAA Admission standards see JUCOs, Division 1A Transfers, Prep School kids, late qualifiers, borderline qualifiers etc on SMU Football and Basketball Rosters

Stallion is dusting off the classics

Oh I forgot SMU had wimpy, prancing Show Horse as Mascot while TCU had the vicious purple Texas Horney Toad. That was the real program killer to the ponies-thank god June Jones and T. Boone have saved us from that program-killer.

Actually, I'm glad he asked some posters might not know the [deleted] we have put up with for the last 20 years

Actually, Stallion and Nacho are spot on. SMU's faculty senate was positioned and ready to inflict killer admision standards after the period of the DP, which added to its severity. In his comparison of the SMU vs TCU standards, Stallion might have said "all other Div 1-A schools" in place of "TCU" since SMU was trying to compete for recruits against all other schools, and at a huge disadvantage. I understand the playing field is a little more level now, and with the commitment to a big name coach, perhaps the Ponies are on their way back to respectability.

over the years I have estimated that 80-85% of NCAA schools basically admit NCAA Minimum qualification standards so it wasn't really a shot at TCU but a concern that SMU was trying to run an Ivy League program more like Rice, Vandy and Tulane. I think TCU did the right thing to be competitive. TCU maintains very high graduation levels too-and I think there still may be some lessons there for SMU.

Geez PF and Stall, get a room.

TCU fan here...1st time to post on ponyfans.com. Love the site.

Stallion...what exactly do you mean when you say "formerly?" If pre-DP, then you mean back when SMU had no standards. I assume you mean in the first years to follow DP. If you recall, TCU was also got caught doing the same thing...just not as well (hehe). SMU's program was more blatant and the punishment more severe. In fact, SMU is still being punished for their past.

TCU got lucky when with Fran. Beating USC in the El Paso Bowl was a fluke, but that is just the type of spark (miracle) TCU needed. SMU program is on the rise.

I never want to see TCU and SMU quit playing each other. Two class schools, class cities, and most importantly...class fans and alumni. I just about puke when I see the Little 12 "scholars" from UT, A&M, Tech, etc. TCU and SMU are in a class of their own...and I wouldn't want to see that change. Go Frogs and good luck Ponies! Everyone on this board is welcome at my tailgate...West Side (Home Side) of Amon Carter Stadium.

Hoop Fan wrote:We like to blame our extended troubles on things like the SWC breakup. I find it ironic as hell on this week that we are ridiculous 28 point underdogs to a top 10 TCU team. The Frogs have thrived precisely because of the breakup and ole TCU was spurred by the breakup to get off its arse and run a real D-1 program. TCU would have never ever been Top 10 if still playing in the SWC. It was really a blessing in disguise for them because they met the challenge. While SMU has wallowed and procrastinated about making real changes over the past 10 years, TCU has cemented a future. Meanwhile, we continue to be form over substance and make changes to our uniforms, colors, fight song, mascot.

Since that time - perrennial losers - private schools like Rice, Tulsa, Wake Forest, Vanderbilt have all tasted success. Even frackin' Tulane made it to the top 15 with Shuan King!

Look at Basketball - Wake, Vandy, Tulsa, and hosts of others have had immense success - numerous sweet 16s in hoops - SMU - nothing - nada. one 1 and done appearance in 1993. One NIT in the Sasser years. A load of jack squat (chris farley reference intended).

I am p#$$ed. BEAT THE [deleted] OUT OF TCU!

Stallion wrote:changes over the years:

-formerly SMU required full admission to university before offer by SMU-TCU did not-this became absolutely necessary as early recruiting escalated-formerly SMU would offer in December-2 months before signing date. This year we almost have completed our class by September
-formerly SMU required a written admission paper-TCU did not
-formerly SMU required what then was approximately a 1,000 SAT while TCU admitted within NCAA minimum qualification standards
-during alleged Commitment circa 2000-SMU basically would admit with coaches' decision if recruit scored 900 SAT but had to go through special admission procedure and faculty committe if below 900 SAT-TCU did not
-formerly SMU required an extra 2 core courses, TCU did not
-formerly SMU did not admit non-qualifiers or partial qualifiers-TCU did- NCAA changed rule so that distinction now insignificant
-formerly SMU's admission policies for JUCOs made transfer very difficult-TCU won championships especially BB but also FB with teams full of JUCOs, D1A Transfers and Prep transfers
-formerly SMU admission standards on Division 1A Transfers/Prep school transfers made transfer difficult-TCU did not
-formerly SMU did not commit or sign recruits that did not project as full qualifiers by signing date-TCU did commit such players (I call them "late qualifiers") and would allow the recruit to attempt to qualify after signing date but before Fall Practice
-according to a discussion I had with former SMU recruiting coordinator-formerly if a potential recruit wanted to retake class or SAT the two scores would be averaged-TCU simply accepted higher score

That's a good start-I'm sure I forgot a few. If I did I'm sure someone will supplement. Basically, it can be boiled down to TCU decided to compete with all players as long as they met Minimum NCAA Requirements for admission-SMU did not but expected SMU Coaches to compete with two hands tied behind their back. Each of these categories were identified by at least me from Day 1 that SMU had a football message board. If you sat down with any and all SMU Football or Basketball Coaches from 1989-2008 and discuss the unfair competitive playing field they competed undert they would confide to you that it was extremely significant-and each category had a detrimental effect on that Coaches ability to do his job. Two Coaches Cavan and Bennett bitterly discribed the problems and they were 100% correct. SMU now competes under essentially Minimum NCAA Admission standards see JUCOs, Division 1A Transfers, Prep School kids, late qualifiers, borderline qualifiers etc on SMU Football and Basketball Rosters

Stallion is completely correct with his assessment. This coming from someone who worked with the admissions process during the Caven years from the admin side. Mike was a great guy and a heck of a recruiter - had he had the current setup (that June now has) - I fully believe that Mike and his crew would ahve been extremely successful. (Though I still do not agree with his benching of players prior to the TCU game - ugh!).