PonyFans.com

Since 1987, when SMU was handed the death penalty, 120 schools have participated in Division 1-A football. Of these 120 schools, only 3 have lower winning percentages than SMU. (3 other schools, all of which had higher winning percentages than SMU, dropped football altogether).

Here is a closer look at our true peers, the 3 schools that have performed worse than SMU.

1) Buffalo University began participating in D1-A football in 1993. Since our own DP, Buffalo's opponents have included Lock Haven, Edinboro, Hobart, Cortland, Mercyhurst, Alfred, Duquesne, Mansfield, Frostburg State, Canisius, Ithaca and Baldwin-Wallace.

2) Temple University was voted out of the Big East and is considering dropping down to Division 1-AA status. In fairness to Temple, they have placed more emphasis on basketball, where they have made 20 consecutive post-season appearances (17 NCAA and 3 NIT tournaments). We can only dream of that level of success.

3) Kent State has never ended a football season ranked in any major college poll. On their own website they list the installation of 'permanent lights' in 1996 to Dix Stadium as a facility improvement. Like Temple, Kent State has emphasized basketball over football, having made 6 consecutive post-season BB appearances.

Given our oft-mentioned strengths: Football history (only USC, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio St., Illinois and Alabama have placed more athletes in the Pro Football Hall of Fame…SMU has more than any school in Texas), academic reputation (the Princeton Review gives the following academic ratings: UCLA 85, UT 83, SMU 82, A&M 81, USC 80, TTech 75 and Baylor 73), alumni generosity ($542M campaign raise), first-rate campus and football facilities and a location at the epicenter of high school football; this is particularly hard to accept. As I have posted earlier, not that we in any way deserve or will receive BCS membership, but IF we had membership, say in the Big XII, I am convinced we could out-recruit any school in Texas sans UT and maybe A&M. No other school in Texas, or for that matter, few schools nation-wide, can make that claim. For most 18-year olds, especially urban dwellers, Dallas is a far more appealing place to live than Waco, Lubbock, Fort Worth, Stillwater, Manhattan Kansas or College Station. IMO, with BCS membership and the right ‘model’, SMU could be a perennial Top 15-30 program. I am smart enough to realize this will not happen. I can accept that. What I cannot accept is our current situation, a program that fails to compete at even the lowest levels.

Given these facts, only a naïve individual could blame our post-DP head coaches for our ineptitude. To my surprise, many on this board do. I blame our current and previous Administrations/Boards. And while I applaud the easing of some restrictions, they are clearly not enough. Look how this administration has handled Phil Bennett. By not allowing him from Day 1 to fill obvious voids with JC-help, they have taken away any momentum from this truly talented recruiter. Instead we have to wait 2+ years for our red-shirts to mature; with the pressure now on Coach Bennett to win this season. We can only speculate how last years’ goose egg influenced Marcus Shavers, Donald Massey, Ryan Johnson, James McClinton or Chris Hall, among others. We do know that Rivals ranked SMU’s recruiting class # 62 two years ago and #76 last year. It is now mid-July and we have (maybe) 1 commitment. Stallion predicted this almost 2 years ago; he was, as usual, dead on. Momentum matters. To make things worse, we have to sit back and watch yet another school rise from the ashes, this time UTEP, whose use of JC’s/CC’s in BB and now JC’s in FB are turning their programs around. They get it, we don’t.

So concludes my long-winded post for the summer. You can argue this if you want, but at the end of the day, our record, sadly, speaks for itself; Buffalo, Temple, Kent State, SMU. It is pitiful and we deserve more.

Thank you for a well thought out post. I too understand your position about the past administration and having our coaches handcuffed. In my head, I put most of the blame on the Faculty Senate. Pye set this body up to have more power than the Pres. of University. ( Think of this as the Supreme Court )

Mr. Turner has worked with this body to improve things. Please take the time to look at the CHANGES on the Faculty Senate since Mr. Turner arrived. Only when these people are athletic friendly or at least athletically savvy can SMU take the final steps to leveling the playing field.

Things have gotten better but, Mr. Copeland and Mr. Turner have a ton of work to do to get SMU back in the game of College Sports.

It is nice to see there are some other realistic SMU fans on this board other than myself. As you know so cal pony, many of the posters on this board either work for the school itself or are real close to the coaches. There posts often fail to see the current state of SMU athletics. The program is in real trouble but only a few seem to acknowledge that fact. What is almost more disturbing than our losses is the fact that many alumni and students simply quit caring about SMU sports due to the lack of commitment from the school. This is obvious from the dismal attedendance numbers at both the football and basketball games.

SoCal_Pony wrote:What I cannot accept is our current situation, a program that fails to compete at even the lowest levels.

Sad but true, isn't it? Good research on the other inept schools, man.

It is refreshing to see a little systems think instead of the more tradition blame game on this board. For too long we have wiped our self like crazed Iranians during Ramadan. Wailing away with whips till we bear raw our flesh. And it has gotten us absolutely nowhere. The slow dismantling of the systems and thought processes that have dominated SMU since 1987 has taken far too long. Hopefully, with some of the self imposed destructive behavior removed, we will see some improvement. Needless to say, there will be plenty that will always blame the coach and demand that we fire our current coach and replace hire with the next Bear Bryant (as if we can find and recruit such a coach). Hopefully, a better understanding of the entire system and the need to address anti athletic systems will continue. As we correct previous anti athletic policies, we should see a change in our lack of athletic successes.

The point to be drawn is that the death penalty hurt and it hurt badly. I will not weigh in on whether we're all the way there, but what is certain is that strides have been made to allow us to be more competitive of late. We've seen no payoff yet.

As for your quote that "only a naïve individual could blame our post-DP head coaches for our ineptitude," I don't believe anyone has EVER come on here to solely blame the coaches. But coaching does matter and competitive disadvantage vis a vis recruiting shouldn't lead one to conclude it doesn't.

All in all, nice essay.

One other note. I still believe Phil Bennett's the right man for the job.

To blame our current situation on the death penalty is an absolute joke. That was over 20 years ago!!! We continue to suck due to unfair recruiting restrictions, our lack of an athlete friendly curriculum, and money. It has nothing to do with the death penalty. That excuse is tired and unacceptable.

Yo LA..
ONLY because of the death pentalty did SMU lose it's President and found Dr. Pye. That directly lead to the NEW power and decision structure.

In the wake and because of this SMU was and still is not playing on a level playing field.

Those are the FACTS. Directly related.

Now I too am tired of excuses. Let's get this show back on the road. Curriculm, advertising/marketing and money.

BUS, I worded that poorly. The death penalty IS the reason for the unlevel playing field. My point is its a joke to still blame the death penalty for our failures. I know there are smart people in charge at SMU but it is amazing this has progressed to this point. In a business sense, SMU athletics would have closed down years ago running the business this way. For some reason, the changes needed to survive have never been made?? TCU did it, we haven’t.

I think Stallion said in the last post on this topic that the issues remaining are transferable credits and athlete friendly majors. Some of it may be educating JUCO college advisors about our requirements so that they can advise these kids which classes to take and which ones to avoid. Some kids unfortunately will always be too stupid to succeed at SMU academically. That's just a fact and I know Stallion is not advocating loosening up the restrictions to let in the truly academically challenged. That's just a disaster waiting to happen. This will require some very real review by the Faculty Senate and the President to find that middle ground which will allow legitimate hours to transfer but not courses designed for fourth graders, vocational education, or remediation. (PS my wife teaches in a Community College and has elementary school students in some of her classes). Secondly, the athlete friendly majors issue needs to be acted upon. Certainly, SMU should provide majors for people who want to pursue a physical education career in schools. However, I want to note that many schools sytems are now looking for coaches who also teach so that they can keep get more milage out of their budgets. So a pure PE major may very well be a ticket to unemployment in the future.

LA_Mustang wrote:My point is its a joke to still blame the death penalty for our failures.

We don't disagree at all, LA. Not at all. Your point is a good one. We should not be using the DP as a reason for failure. And we do exactly that to the degree we continue to allow post-DP overreaction to dictate our future.

What's more strange to me than anything is this. Since we relaxed recruiting restrictions over the last few years, we've seen nothing but continued deterioration of on-field performance. Why is that?

Younger players learning to play, and holdovers from the restricted days which really weren't that good. Hopefully, last year was the nadir and this year we will see an upswing.

The BUS is a 1983 graduate of SMU with a BA in Physical Eduacation. I have on several occasions written Dr. Turner on the subjects of student involement, marketing and my favorite subject, athletically friendly majors.

My ideas have been to bring back PE and develop a Sports Marketing degree. Combining classes from PE, the B-school and some contract law, arbitration and writting courses, there you go.

Oh, I think is Texas now.... To teach you have to first have a degree in a subject field and secondly, you take additional hours in education to become certified. SMU does not offer those certification courses.

Who would go to a school like SMU ( 32,000.00 per year ) to get a job that only pays 32,000.00.
First Lady Bush!!!

BUS wrote:
Oh, I think is Texas now.... To teach you have to first have a degree in a subject field and secondly, you take additional hours in education to become certified. SMU does not offer those certification courses.!

Sometimes you seriously frighten me. I cant count how many times I've told you this, and I dont know why you still refuse to believe it. I'll give it one more shot, because if I dont i know this sort of thing spreads like a virus. This link should take you to the best place to start reading.

http://www.smu.edu/teacher_education/