Texas No. 4 To Commit to UT

[Stallion]

Yeah Jack-ass that's what I've been saying for years. Every coach in the Athletic Department since 1989 and has known exactly what needed to be done but nobody seems to have the balls to articulate what all the coaches have known-the Emperor Is Not Wearing Any Clothes. In other words, SMU's Administration has been desperately misleading the SMU fanbase for years-17 years in fact- about its realistic ability to compete against its natural and traditional rivals. THIS IS WHAT THEY DIDN'T WANT THE SMU COMMUNITY TO FIND OUT. Therefore, we've been subjected to Cheerleader after Cheerleader much like you coming on this forum and spouting nonsense about how neat-o we will be "Next Year". Not gonna play that game anymore. Its long past time to lay all the facts and cards on the table.

[jtstang]

In fairness, I think the cards havve been laying out face up on the table for years. Problem is some people on this board think a pair of dueces beats a Royal flush every time when it comes to SMU football. In other words, people need to get real about what's going on...and I don't think PK is one of them. Optomistic and a bit sunshiney maybe, but he knows how to score a poker hand properly.

[PK]

SMU's Administration has been desperately misleading the SMU fanbase for years-17 years in fact- about its realistic ability to compete against its natural and traditional rivals. THIS IS WHAT THEY DIDN'T WANT THE SMU COMMUNITY TO FIND OUT.

Desperately misleading the SMU fanbase...desperately??? What does that mean? And now it is a conspiracy "THIS IS WHAT THEY DIDN'T WANT THE SMU COMMUNITY TO FIND OUT". You ought to write for the National Enquirer.

What we had after the DP was a Board of Trustees set up to be less than athletics friendly to avoid a repeat of what happen in the 80's. This was done by placing a large number of people on the board that had no direct ties to SMU. Then the authority to virtually control the recruiting process was handed to the Faculty Senate on a silver platter. Once those actions were taken, it created a situation that wasn't going to be easy to reverse. The Administration since Pye's leaving have had to push for the changes we need through diplomacy as the Faculty Senate now has the real power or at least in enough areas to make the task very difficult.

You have done an excellent, although some times over the top, job of educating all of us about the Pye model and its affects on the athletic program....but I don't think you were the catalyst in the Administration Office for their efforts. I believe they have always known what needed to be done...the problem was how to get it done given the political structure of the university.

[OC Mustang]

I have to say, this thread contains among the most egotistical and self-serving sentiment re-write of history that I have ever seen about SMU.

The Pye model this...the wrong model that. Whatever. I personally do not require somebody in the proverbial peanut gallery to tell me what is patently obvious...that we need to win, and we have needed it for 10 years. And what is with this internet equivalent of Turret's Syndrome (can't help oneself) in constantly re-framing SMU's institutional history for the last decade and a half into something that it wasn't?

"The Pye Model" as it seems to be called, wasn't a model. It was a preventative measure. Pye was not concerned with winning because he wasn't hired to be. Some of you may not like it, and you may not agree with it. I don't care, because not a one of you seems to consider that SMU as an institution was a going concern prior to Pye's tenure, and he was not hired to bring SMU back to athletic glory. He was hired to make payroll, and I don't mean in athletics. And talk about blinders...those of you who conveniently ignore the money foibles stemming directly from the scandal during your habitual burning of Pye in effigy are ignoring the facts.

10%+ tuition increases per year. The cutting of Sociology and Civil & Mechanical Engineering as academic disciplines. Staff being let go. And a university as close as a university could be to not making payroll. All the while, athletics hemorraging money and alumni bailing on our alma mater like rats leaving a sinking boat. Who was worried about our "natural and traditional rivals" (man, but that is a great red herring) when our own were playing either an embarrassed Peter or a defiant Judas?

Rant all you want about the changes needed NOW. Tell the faculty senate to buggeroff and the administrators & Board of Trustees that they should get with it. I will agree with you at this point in time. But all this about who piped up first about this or that and who has a better tan (a sunshiner) than whom and how bloody well bad Dr. Pye was for the university needs to just stop. It just makes being here on the board a tired exercise with little appeal, and for me that simply adds to the disappointment.

I'm done now. Need a nap. It's late and I am clearly grumpy.

[Stallion]

Kenneth Pye was an abysmal failure as President of this university. He lost the support of the business community, lost the support of the alumni community and in fact many of the problems you describe result from his own style-if you can call it a style- that antagonized a great percentage of the community. Its no coicidence that within 1-2 years of Turner's Presidency that Turner raised $500,000,000 while Pye tenure SMU went begging. He wasn't hired to "meet payroll" or heal the hurt resulting from the DP-I can't imagine a worse personality that could possibly be chosen to raise funds, court financial contributions or unite the university.

Nobody liked the guy-people didn't respond to his vision for the university and he pissed off the people who could make a difference. SMU's athletic scandal was a cheating scandal not an academic scandal. His "preventive measures" of knowingly and intentionally handicapping the athletic program was not a "preventive measure" which had any logical relation to the actual problems that caused the DP. This type of attitude that Pye was "not concerned with winning" is exactly why so many alumni are so pissed off at the university and probably will never support the SMU again. You don't knowingly and intentional dismantle a department of the university to punish it for what happened as a result of individuals who were no longer associated with the university.

No wonder we have about 12,000 football fans and 2,000 Basketball fans. Congratualations to Kenneth Pye on all he did for-and to SMU. Compare the difference between how Baylor and SMU responded to their athletic crisis-which one chose the path that was best for the long term benefit of the university and which one created divisions that last 17 years later? The results of the Kenneth Pye regime have made SMU arguably the least successful program in Division 1A -in terms of championships, bowl games and NCAA Tourney appearances I guess he did achieve his goals.

[OC Mustang]

A half billion within two years of his hiring? Actually, it was $542 million from 1997 to 2002. Not within two years of his hiring. And you know, he better had raised that kind of money. THAT was the first criteria on the list for hiring HIM in the first place.

The campaign that was running about the time Turner got to SMU and Turner finished off included a slate of donations post 1990, during Pye's tenure, the lion's share coming from Dedman Sr., Ray Hunt, Bill Clements, the Hughes-Triggs, Roy Huffington, Bobby Lyle, and Jeanne Tower Cox and friends of the late Sen. Tower. They pulled SMU out of the financial gutter. And interestingly enough, Pye got high marks from all. Dedman, Ray Johnson, Les Alberthal, Laura Lee Blanton, Ruth Altschuler...are you telling me that they were all wrong about Pye's character and his effectiveness?

I concede that Pye did indeed rub a good number of folks the wrong way in a variety of ways and for a variety of reasons. He rubbed athletics the wrong way by not taking Larry Johnson. He ran Dave Bliss off when he did that. Wow, that guy was a real success story at Baylor. Hmm. Wondered if Pye was a better judge of character than we thought. He made the business school people mad when he contemplated out loud that it might make sense to focus the business school on its graduate programs and phase down their undergraduate. I personally heard him say that he was wrong about that because the undergrad business school was unique in its success compared to our private academic school peers. As for the rest of the business community, you mean the ones that were funding the football payroll? Frankly, Pye was considerably better at raising money on behalf of the business school. Unfortunately, Dean Blake was worse.

I never said that I agreed with all of his decisions or his entire "vision" for the university, but I do give the benefit of the doubt about his "style", "vision", and reason for being there to Ray Hunt and Bob Dedman, who obviously felt he was good at his job.

(BTW, I edited this post because I was unduly harsh to you personally...I re-read your post and felt uncomfortable with the way I said some things...so I changed it.)

[Arkpony]

It is "I could NOT care less" , assuming you mean you care very little. If, on the other hand, you DO care a LOT, then it is, as you say "I could care less". We expect improvement on the next post.

[BUS]

Yo, Judge... you thinking about champagne and football???

I sure am. Look forward to seeing you next year.

Next year, have you ever heard such a thing. Next year, we WILL be better.

Like
THIS year.

[Flatlander]

I feel sorry for some of these early commits. I mean, here you are, an 18 year old kid at the top of the world, ready to have five schools wine and dine you for a weekend at their cost and UT asks for an early commit, cancelling all other visits and you only get to go 3 hours south on I-35 to Austin.

These kids are missing out. Where's the interest in Hawaii for the free recruiting trip only to say 'it's too far from home'......please tell me these kids are smarter than this......obviously, the kid forgot that the Horns took both the kid from Stephenville and the Arlington kid to bolster the spot at QB, possibly for the next four years.

Mr. Chiles, have you met Bishop Lynch's own Matt Nordgren? Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it, son.