PonyFans.com

i'm going with pye. he was horrible but at least honest.

turner is a liar. way worse in my book.

Richard Nixon.

Yes, good old Honest Pye. The guy that formed a committee to eliminate athletics and said it wasn't about eliminating athletics. That's the kind of honesty one just admires.

Had it not been for the alums raising hell with Honest Pye, we would not be chatting on an athletic fan board today. Instead, we would be standing around the water cooler bragging to all that will listen about how outstanding the new Bunsen burners are in the Organic lab.

Turner isn't perfect but at least he hasn't actively tired to eliminate sports.

http://www.2camels.com/worlds-biggest-l ... tition.php

it is close ponyte but in my book turner wins by a nose-a very long nose.

Ken Pye Penalty=Mt. McKinnley
Present Situation=Molehill exacerbated by a large number of marginal recruits being submitted to Admissions

Stallion wrote: exacerbated

This is for any marginal new recruits visiting the board...


ex·ac·er·bate
   
–verb (used with object),-bat·ed, -bat·ing.
1.
to increase the severity, bitterness, or violence of (disease, ill feeling, etc.); aggravate.
2.
to embitter the feelings of (a person); irritate; exasperate.

if this stands our recruiting will be toast. this will just kill it. kids will no longer have any trust in us.

Recruiting is the least of our concerns if this keeps happening...

Stallion wrote:Ken Pye Penalty=Mt. McKinnley
Present Situation=Molehill exacerbated by a large number of marginal recruits being submitted to Admissions

and yet I thought the presence of such recruits on the field contributed to your endorsement of the current "model" finally being what it needed to be

I'm surprised that you're not p!ssed that you upped your Mustang Club contributions under apparently false pretenses.

First, I didn't take a position on whether these kids have been unfairly denied admission. I'm pretty sure I could make a strong argument for admitting all NCAA qualifiers under the Clearinghouse. I 100% agree they have been treated unfairly by denial in the 11th hour. As for merits of the admission denial I don't have the facts to make that judgment. But its important to note that the NCAA Admission Standards have changed since this long Model debate has transpired. Used to be a 700 SAT floor-now there is no floor at all. Pye strictly scrutinized kids scoring less than 950 on the SAT-now it is possible to admit recruits scoring 250-300-350 and more points below even that scrutinized mark. I have no doubt SMU should admit all qualifiers under the old standards with a 700 SAT floor and that is necessary to compete with our natural and traditional rivals. But when you start talking about admitting recruits who might score 600 points below the average SMU student then I think a reasonable person might disagree with such a standard.

Stallion wrote:First, I didn't take a position on whether these kids have been unfairly denied admission. I'm pretty sure I could make a strong argument for admitting all NCAA qualifiers under the Clearinghouse. I 100% agree they have been treated unfairly by denial in the 11th hour. As for merits of the admission denial I don't have the facts to make that judgment. But its important to note that the NCAA Admission Standards have changed since this long Model debate has transpired. Used to be a 700 SAT floor-now there is no floor at all. Pye strictly scrutinized kids scoring less than 950 on the SAT-now it is possible to admit recruits scoring 250-300-350 and more points below even that scrutinized mark. I have no doubt SMU should admit all qualifiers under the old standards with a 700 SAT floor and that is necessary to compete with our natural and traditional rivals. But when you start talking about admitting recruits who might score 600 points below the average SMU student then I think a reasonable person might disagree with such a standard.

your point above is well made. Your second strongest commentary of the last couple of weeks (behind the chick jackpot).

Hood it up in that [deleted].

Mestengo wrote:Hood it up in that [deleted].

As a DP survivor, I can honestly state that president Turner is WORLDS better than Pye. I don't agree with a lot that goes on up on the Hilltop, but Turner HAS been a supporter of athletics, and he does condone school spirit. By contrast, it was almost as if Pye was wanting to turn SMU into one giant study hall. Hiring him was a complete miss. He didn't fit the culture of SMU at all.

Diffences? If Pye had run Duke, he would have run off coach K, Turner, running SMU will run off Coach Jones--what's the difference?