PonyFans.com

that the University has made up its mind so far as admitting Hall and Jackson are concerned and that the answer is "NO."

I agree with all the comment that those kids got a bum deal. If they signed a LOI and were on on the hook all this time and then denied admission, well that is shabby.

I don't know what their future educational plans might be. At the very least perhaps they can attend a community college. I would hope that an SMU alum or alum group with deep pockets and an interest in SMU's reputation and future ability to recruit would compensate the kids by offering to fund at least a year of college for both of them.

I suppose that such action might be a recruiting violation of some kind unless pre-approved by the conference and by the NCAA.

If their predicted academic performance was the problem and they flunk, well it won't cost a lot. If one or both succeed they will provide data points for the admissions people at SMU to consider if there is a "next time." If another school offers scholarships then at least SMU people will have made an attempt to do the right thing.

And I certainly think that if people involved with the admissions process dropped the ball that there should be some disciplenary action.

Can we stuff them at a junior college and go back and get them next cycle, like other schools do with non-qualifiers (I realize they are qualifiers, but still).

the SMU athletics department doesn't need free-agent rich alumni PERIOD. Of course it would be a violation.

CalallenStang wrote:Can we stuff them at a junior college and go back and get them next cycle, like other schools do with non-qualifiers (I realize they are qualifiers, but still).

This is what they were offered. Taylor declined and I think Hall is going to decine too although I have not heard that verified.

mrydel wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:Can we stuff them at a junior college and go back and get them next cycle, like other schools do with non-qualifiers (I realize they are qualifiers, but still).

This is what they were offered. Taylor declined and I think Hall is going to decine too although I have not heard that verified.

They are BOTH gone...Hall will go to UTSA and play baseball and football (in 2011 when it starts up) and Darryl leaves this week and will not be back to Texas.

They way the Unvisersity handled this situation is a travesty. I know that SMU wants to maintain high academic standards and not devalue the degree, but the school shafted these two young men. The problem isn't that these two kids didn't get into the school, the problem is that nobody from the University communicated with these kids until July 1st. Maybe these two kids don't belong in the classroom at SMU - fair enough, but now these two kids have limited or crappy options.

The school should have admitted these two students because the system was broken and the two students are paying the price. The benefit of the doubt should have gone to the kids.

Since this has happened I started looking at how other schools handle this same situation. Stanford and UVA typically sign 33 to 38 kids each season. Their scholarships are based upon the admissions committee. Both schools end up with 25 students. Those kids hear back in April or March and have an opportunity to land at a different school if they need to. Those schools keep their academic standards and produce football players. Boston College has a process where they get a pre-approval before they offer a marginal student a letter of intent. Why can't SMU put in some combination of these two processes?

Why can't we just compete with everyone else...

You qualify you qualify....

If these kids had buildings named for their families they would be in....

Lets just try it for a couple years and if it fails then we can go back...but lets at least give a full effort to see what can happen...

stc9 wrote:They way the Unvisersity handled this situation is a travesty. I know that SMU wants to maintain high academic standards and not devalue the degree, but the school shafted these two young men. The problem isn't that these two kids didn't get into the school, the problem is that nobody from the University communicated with these kids until July 1st. Maybe these two kids don't belong in the classroom at SMU - fair enough, but now these two kids have limited or crappy options.

The school should have admitted these two students because the system was broken and the two students are paying the price. The benefit of the doubt should have gone to the kids.

Since this has happened I started looking at how other schools handle this same situation. Stanford and UVA typically sign 33 to 38 kids each season. Their scholarships are based upon the admissions committee. Both schools end up with 25 students. Those kids hear back in April or March and have an opportunity to land at a different school if they need to. Those schools keep their academic standards and produce football players. Boston College has a process where they get a pre-approval before they offer a marginal student a letter of intent. Why can't SMU put in some combination of these two processes?

I agree, but I'm a little confused.

Is this a simple case of the University not having their [deleted] together or are these kids legitimately qualified and the school is continuing to be unreasonable (I admit I haven't seen any grades or test scores). Anybody have an idea of their overall academic standing.
If this is a case of the school being caught off guard than I can deal with that, and these kids will have a chance to play somewhere else so they will get over it.
I have no problem losing a few kids to academics if we hold ourselves to a standard. If Stanford and a few other schools can be successful on their own terms than I am willing to shoot for our own ideal since our standards aren't anywhere near theirs and should be able to win, and win big, based on our schools normal admittance standards.

leopold wrote:
I agree, but I'm a little confused.

Is this a simple case of the University not having their [deleted] together or are these kids legitimately qualified and the school is continuing to be unreasonable (I admit I haven't seen any grades or test scores). Anybody have an idea of their overall academic standing.
If this is a case of the school being caught off guard than I can deal with that, and these kids will have a chance to play somewhere else so they will get over it.
I have no problem losing a few kids to academics if we hold ourselves to a standard. If Stanford and a few other schools can be successful on their own terms than I am willing to shoot for our own ideal since our standards aren't anywhere near theirs and should be able to win, and win big, based on our schools normal admittance standards.

No one really knows the details of the circumstances of these two kids, except the kids themselves and their families. However, the suspicions seem to head in the direction of them being deemed marginal students (SAT and GPA) and the admissions committee needing to see grades from the spring semester (ending in late May or mid-June) before arriving at a final decision, which was then followed by an appeal process (which the coaching staff was involved in). This supposedly resulted in the late timing of their notification of their final rejection.

There are multiple lengthy discussions, and some good info, regarding this situation, what it might mean to SMU's recruiting efforts, the degree of institutional commitment to fielding a great football team, the changes in NCAA qualifications, etc on the Football board.

Piecing all of the available news articles together. The admissions committee, specifically one of the Athletic department admission subcomittees, rejected the students back during normal admissions. The Athletic Department appealed the rejection - which is a step in the Athletic Department/Football Program has a right to do. However, the part that SMU screwed the pooch on is that nobody ever notified the students that this was going on. They thought their admission to SMU was a done deal. On or about July 3rd, both students were notified that they didn't make the academic standards set forth by SMU. My issue with this entire situation is the nobody ever notified the students that their application for admissions was still under review. This isn't March or April where another college, with lower standards, from their offering schools can step in and give these students an available scholarship. It is the middle of July most good programs have no scholarships left for 2010. If these kids cannot cut the academic mustard that is fine, just don't string them along and take away other opportunities. SMU did that. SMU should have admitted these two because the system is broken.

Don't confuse NCAA academic standards with real academic standards. The NCAA's standards are designed for schools like Florida State where any kid who can see lightning and hear thunder are welcome (and they still have to cheat in online classes).

stc9 wrote:My issue with this entire situation is the nobody ever notified the students that their application for admissions was still under review.

If true, a good part of the blame here falls on JJ and company, does it not?

Oh no you didn't!!!! Look they may have ASSUMED Hall's ACT score was good enough but they knew the first SAT score probably wasn't because they told Hall to take the ACT.

Look, the kids should have been admitted last week. I understand why their "decision" was late-- we were waiting on the second semester grades (I believe). The coaches felt they qualified, the students thought they qualified, the coaches re affirmed that they thought they had qualified, somehow the system changed and people weren't properly informed that they didn 't qualify, although it very much sounds like a subjective decision.

Two kids suffered.

I cannot allow the university to now sit on principle and let these two flounder. What happened to ethics, leadership, and justice at the university? If it no longer exists, the university has no reason to exist. Just admit the error, whoever made it, coaches, administration, acceptance committee, rule makers, make an exception, clarrify the rules and make it work.

Mexmustang wrote:Look, the kids should have been admitted last week. I understand why their "decision" was late-- we were waiting on the second semester grades (I believe). The coaches felt they qualified, the students thought they qualified, the coaches re affirmed that they thought they had qualified, somehow the system changed and people weren't properly informed that they didn 't qualify, although it very much sounds like a subjective decision.

Two kids suffered.

I cannot allow the university to now sit on principle and let these two flounder. What happened to ethics, leadership, and justice at the university? If it no longer exists, the university has no reason to exist. Just admit the error, whoever made it, coaches, administration, acceptance committee, rule makers, make an exception, clarrify the rules and make it work.

Very well stated. I think they should have bit the big one and let the two kids in school.

Mexmustang wrote:Look, the kids should have been admitted last week. I understand why their "decision" was late-- we were waiting on the second semester grades (I believe). The coaches felt they qualified, the students thought they qualified, the coaches re affirmed that they thought they had qualified, somehow the system changed and people weren't properly informed that they didn 't qualify, although it very much sounds like a subjective decision.

Two kids suffered.

I cannot allow the university to now sit on principle and let these two flounder. What happened to ethics, leadership, and justice at the university? If it no longer exists, the university has no reason to exist. Just admit the error, whoever made it, coaches, administration, acceptance committee, rule makers, make an exception, clarrify the rules and make it work.

At least one is now accepted elsewhere. The main thing floundering is SMU's reputation.