PonyFans.com

If someone has floated this idea out there as a solution to the admissions issues that apparently face us in allowing athletes into SMU, I apologize in advance and ask that the moderator strike this post. I have been unable to read all the posts on this issue due to job constraints.

My proposed solution to this issue is that the administration and the athletic department should have an understanding that when an athlete qualifies under the NCAA minimum standards, but is denied admission by the admissions committee, said athlete should be admitted to the University with the understanding that they will be automatically redshirted their freshman year. They can practice with the team and learn the system, and at the same time concentrate on their school work and acclimate themselves to college. If the student athlete makes the minimum requirements for remaining eligible, they are then allowed to retain their scholarship and fully participate in whatever sport they are a part of. If they do not maintain the minimum requirements for eligibility, their scholarship will be revoked.

The last requirement I would have is that the University must have a bright line rule in place that would reflect the above and not vary from the rules set forth for eligibility.

That is just my two cents worth.

Pony Up!

There are a number of good ideas out there, this one is similar to normal admission, but redshirt. But, we have two problems, the first is a number of promises were made to alumns, to financial backers, to the athletic department, the coaches and to recruits. The second, someone made a mistake and the administration will not either try to fix it, or to take responsibility for it. The only comment from our administration is that a committee will be formed to examine the issue.

This has given rise to the point of view that Gerald Turner is not acting as an executive and taking responsibility for the univesity and repairing the damage done to these two students. Furthermore, it is now become apparent to many he maynot be the person to fix it--ever. This has become a mountain because of his lack of leadership and unwillingness to simply fix it.

If you were the CEO of your company, had made promises to your employees and your shareholders that something was to be the policy of the company and the policy was for some reason, not adheared to, and you were called to task for this, wouldn't you simply fix it? or would you call for a committee meeting in some distant future, thereby leaving all parties in limbo? casting a negative image on your company in the public? dividing your employees and shareholders? and leaving every potential shareholder (in this case donor) asking "if this CEO can properly manage my investment"?

Lot’s of guys can tear it up on the field but not in class. If they made the numbers to get in, I say play them until they don’t have the numbers. Another words if they qualify they can play period. O yes you have to get in first what was I thinking.