Page 1 of 2
Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:55 pmby MustangMan2001
Dear Casey:
Thank you for sending your recent email. I always appreciate hearing from recent alums.
You asked several questions. One relates to the timing of the announcement. If students are admissible by regular standards, they are admitted before they sign their NLI. If they require additional review due to SAT/ACT scores and GPA, they are reviewed throughout the spring semester. In very marginal cases, it is sometimes required that grades be evaluated for the spring semester, which doesn’t end until the end of May in Texas and as late as the second week in June in West Coast schools. This is a challenge that we will be reviewing in the near future.
I hope you saw the article in The Dallas Morning News this morning. It provided some additional information that would be relative to your question about the admissions process.
Best wishes,
R. Gerald Turner
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:18 pmby Insane_Pony_Posse
MustangMan2001 wrote:Dear Casey:
I hope you saw the article in The Dallas Morning News this morning.
Best wishes,
R. Gerald Turner
yeah and I hope Turner saw this particular sentence in the article he refers to:"Glen West, Hall's coach in the powerhouse Brenham program, has questioned the
timing of the decision and told the Brenham Banner-Press this week that Hall's situation
will serve as a warning to future Brenham athletes.."
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:34 pmby mr. pony
Good point.
And how did we go from JJ saying in '08 that SMU accepted NCAA qualifiers to the new '09 policy that doesn't do that?
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:59 pmby Samurai Stang
mr. pony wrote:And how did we go from JJ saying in '08 that SMU accepted NCAA qualifiers to the new '09 policy that doesn't do that?
A lying Turner is the simplest and best explanation.
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:10 pmby BIGHORSE
What it all boils down to is Turner is a LIAR!!!
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:13 pmby Samurai Stang
BIGHORSE wrote:What it all boils down to is Turner is a LIAR!!!
A fact that the letter conveniently avoids.
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:17 pmby rich59
Before calling someone a liar it would be wise to review all the information. The way I read the article in the DMN, SMU is accepting a good many NCAA qualifiers. It does not reflect well on the alumni of SMU to see some of the intemperate language and seemingly unfounded accusations which are voiced on this forum.
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:26 pmby BIGHORSE
rich59 wrote:Before calling someone a liar it would be wise to review all the information. The way I read the article in the DMN, SMU is accepting a good many NCAA qualifiers. It does not reflect well on the alumni of SMU to see some of the intemperate language and seemingly unfounded accusations which are voiced on this forum.
The point is that Turner said 2 years ago that we would allow all recruits that the
ncaa would pass, but that is not the case.
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:01 pmby couch 'em
I'm more interested in whether we intended to admit all NCAA qualifiers and backed out, or if we never intended to at all.
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:23 pmby HB Pony Dad
couch 'em wrote:I'm more interested in whether we intended to admit all NCAA qualifiers and backed out, or if we never intended to at all.
I think Turner is wrong.
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:30 pmby HB Pony Dad
Does this sound like our president?
"We relish this opportunity to help this student-athlete get his life back on track with an education at the... University
The NCAA has granted another year of athletic eligibility to former
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:36 pmby Samurai Stang
rich59 wrote:Before calling someone a liar it would be wise to review all the information. The way I read the article in the DMN, SMU is accepting a good many NCAA qualifiers. It does not reflect well on the alumni of SMU to see some of the intemperate language and seemingly unfounded accusations which are voiced on this forum.
Turner is clearly a liar. Your support of him is unfounded.
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:58 pmby redpony
It is hard to believe that we would have a person with such little honesty, integrity and ethics leading our university. What is the BOT thinking? His actions reflect upon the entire university.
GO PONIES!!!
MUSTANG MANIA LIVES
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:02 pmby SMU2007
rich59 wrote:Before calling someone a liar it would be wise to review all the information. The way I read the article in the DMN, SMU is accepting a good many NCAA qualifiers. It does not reflect well on the alumni of SMU to see some of the intemperate language and seemingly unfounded accusations which are voiced on this forum.
Shut up gerald.
Re: Response From Turner via Sec
Posted:
Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:10 pmby Mexmustang
It comes down to two simple questions:
First, did the administration not tell supporters and coaches that NCAA qualifications would admit a recruit?
Second, if this is not the criteria, what is it? Define it in simple terms a 2.1 gpa? a 725 on the SAT? What is it? Sounds extremely subjective to the point of being arbitrary.
The simple point is there are many alumns that have lost patience with 20 years of athletic mismanagement and are extremely distustful of the administration. Hiding behind a so-called "spokeman" that doesn't answer any questions, doesn't offer any public appologies and doesn't begin to define what our admittance policy is won't cut it. Gerald, you have been called to task! Don't you get it? Your agenda has been challenenged and the rank and file want you to answer for it.