Page 1 of 3

Fire Turner

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:10 pm
by expony18
Whether or not the CM stuff turns out to be true, this is getting ridiculous... every coach here has the same complaint. And while Stallion will point out how much things have improved, OUR university is not truly committed to atheletics.

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:13 pm
by JohnnyRock
Agree

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 10:18 pm
by MustangStealth
expony18 wrote:Whether or not the CM stuff turns out to be true, this is getting ridiculous... every coach here has the same complaint. And while Stallion will point out how much things have improved, OUR fanbase is not truly committed to atheletics.



One minor correction

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 10:53 pm
by expony18
No

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:31 pm
by 78pony
What ExPony18 says! That we have been silly enough to keep this guy, a non-profit head, for as long as we have, is insane! He only began to see clearly after thumbing his nose at TCU for the better part of 10 years.

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:53 pm
by H-E-B Mustang
Yet, he is inextricably one of the highest paid private university presidents in the country. Go figure.

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:55 pm
by gostangs
Yes - because he has raised more money for us in all areas than almost any president in the country, and advanced our university in countless ways.

Don't be stupid.

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:57 pm
by SMU_Alum11
He should do some campaign for athletics and get the IPF and maybe baseball :)

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:04 am
by H-E-B Mustang
gostangs wrote:Yes - because he has raised more money for us in all areas than almost any president in the country, and advanced our university in countless ways.

Don't be stupid.

So he's a good fund raiser. Not a president, bright eyes.

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:24 am
by gostangs
The best university presidents raise a ton of money. That's theor main function, particularly at a private university. By the way, in the last five or six years SMU has committed to over 100 million in athletic facilities, so if you say we are not committed to athletics it just makes you look kinda of silly.

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:31 am
by SoCal_Pony
gostangs wrote:Yes - because he has raised more money for us in all areas than almost any president in the country, and advanced our university in countless ways.

Don't be stupid.


Two things

1) Just as I support term limits on US Presidents, I also suspect it's in the best interest of universities to churn them as well.

2) As for his raising $$$, many moons ago I had a Finance professor at Cox named Art Patton who predicted SMU would rocket-launch its profile over the upcoming decades due to its wealthy alumni getting older, so I think its a little tricky to gauge how successful RGT has been at fundraising. No doubt he's been good, really don't know if I would call him elite.

He clearly was late to the party in regards to athletics, I also wonder if he is too nice a guy and not demanding enough on some of his deans. Regardless, I simply think 20+ years of a Presidency is enough.

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:46 am
by SoCal_Pony
Given all the advantages SMU has over almost EVERY non P5 school, during RGT's 20+ year term as President of SMU....

SMU ranks 106 out of 119 D-1 schools in terms of FB W/L record.

That is primarily on RGT.

I think virtually all PF posters would agree on the benefits of a successful FB program to the school as a whole. So obvious on so many levels. Yet RGT let it languish during such a critical time in NCAA history.

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:48 am
by H-E-B Mustang
gostangs wrote:The best university presidents raise a ton of money. That's theor main function, particularly at a private university. By the way, in the last five or six years SMU has committed to over 100 million in athletic facilities, so if you say we are not committed to athletics it just makes you look kinda of silly.

It is easy to see why, from your lowly perch, one’s eyes may glaze over while glancing at the glitter and array of buildings and fountains that festoon our campus, causing you to feebly strike out at others who question their significance. Notwithstanding, a comparison with other similar institutions like Baylor and TCU strongly suggests just how modest RGT’s accomplishments really are. Notable is TCU’s nascent, but significant, academic standing which is unquestionably on the rise. SMU’s reputation as a fine institution of higher learning was well established before his arrival. The extent to which RGT has improved that standing is indeed debatable. But, since this is an athletic-oriented forum, let’s focus on their participation in big-time athletics (a la, the Big 12) which is alas nothing more than a fading memory to us on the Hilltop. To borrow from Shelley, we should look on their works and despair.
Rest now.

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 8:59 am
by ponyinNC
poetic H-E-B

Re: Fire Turner

PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:47 am
by PerunasHoof
Be careful what you ask for, the next guy may not be any better. You're assuming that whoever we replaced Turner with would put athletics on a pedestal.