A Few Truths...

[Pony Boss]

here's a factor
i have no interest in going to smu bbal games this season. zero.

Lol gimme your seats!

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

We need to just take our medicine and move on past this thing. We're appealing the recruiting and schollie sanctions that have the most potential to damage the program long-term. Getting some relief on those would be a huge win in my book. We never had a chance to get the post-season ban overturned on appeal.

Getting [deleted] and excoriating Turner, Hart, the Board, etc. on PF's is easy. We don't have to sit in their chairs, weigh all the factors, and make the hard-headed decisions about what's in the best interest of the program. This is a bad situation. There are no great options. Any decision they make is bound to upset someone. Right now they have to do their best to mitigate the damage and move the program forward long-term. I think they are doing that.

Not appealing the post-season ban may be emotionally unsatisfying, but I have yet to see a persuasive argument that the school blew it by not appealing that sanction.

I guess the talking points are out. You seem to think appealing is about winning or losing and it is not. The appeal is about delaying the ban until next year so the team can make a run in the tournament this year as ESPN noted. And yes, I know talking points are out on that as well. Let's be honest, they did it to mitigate loss of revenue in ticket sales and donations if the ban would have been pushed back to next year.

Believe me, I understand the argument that the appeal is about dragging things out, and not about winning and losing. And while I don't find the argument persuasive, that doesn't mean that I think its totally invalid. But I do also think that the chance of actually prevailing on an appeal of the post-season ban has to be considered as well. A kamikaze appeal that the school knows it will lose burns up resources and credibility, which is not in the interest of SMU, the athletic department, or the basketball program. And there is no guarantee that the ruling wouldn't come down before the tourney. So if the appeal is denied in that scenario, we've wasted time, money, resources, and credibility for zero results.

Even if the appeal does drag things out so that this team can play in the tourney, then it means we're looking at a post-season ban next year. Which greatly increases the likelihood of: (1) our underclassmen transferring out of the program; and (2) being unable to effectively recruit for another year. If both those risks play out, then the program crashes and burns and we bottom out for years to come. I don't want to trade the future of the program just so Markus and Nic can get one more shot at the dance.

It's not a question of talking points. It's a difference of opinion. Simply dismissing opposing views as "talking points" isn't fair. I understand your frustration and I understand and respect the arguments for appealing the post-season ban. I just don't agree with them.

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

And I don't deny the possibility that revenues were a factor. I actually think the revenue issue is a legitimate concern. If an appeal is likely to inflict financial harm on the athletic department, that has to be factored in as well.

[Rebel10]

Yes Corso, it's obvious you have been given your talking points. As I indicated the talking points have been given out and you are following the company line. First off the argument is persuasive, so much so ESPN even spoke on it. I think they have more credibility than you do. There are scare tactics like with the talking points which you have passed on. The moving the ban to next year would not effect either the 2016 or 2017 class imo. The coaches have pretty hard core recruiting restrictions in 2016 so don't get your hopes up high for a stellar class even by taking the ban this year. By delaying the ban and allowing the team to try and make a big run in the tournament this year would help recruiting more because we are not in a P5 conference where going to the sweet does not matter that much. Next I think some think that when Nic and MK leave that the team will be just as good next year and that is not necessarily going to happen. If finances were a major factor don't be corrupt and say it was for recruiting just admit that it was more about money than the student athlete. If they are just treating the players like property or commodities just admit it. But this whole thing could backfire in their faces imo.

[Grant Carter]

Yes Corso, it's obvious you have been given your talking points. As I indicated the talking points have been given out and you are following the company line. First off the argument is persuasive, so much so ESPN even spoke on it. I think they have more credibility than you do. There are scare tactics like with the talking points which you have passed on. The moving the ban to next year would not effect either the 2016 or 2017 class imo. The coaches have pretty hard core recruiting restrictions in 2016 so don't get your hopes up high for a stellar class even by taking the ban this year. By delaying the ban and allowing the team to try and make a big run in the tournament this year would help recruiting more because we are not in a P5 conference where going to the sweet does not matter that much. Next I think some think that when Nic and MK leave that the team will be just as good next year and that is not necessarily going to happen. If finances were a major factor don't be corrupt and say it was for recruiting just admit that it was more about money than the student athlete. If they are just treating the players like property or commodities just admit it. But this whole thing could backfire in their faces imo.

Why do you think they are treating the players like property or commodities?

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

Ouch! I'm "Corso", I have less credibility than ESPN, I'm passing on "scare tactics", I'm "corrupt", and I apparently refuse to admit that SMU treats it's student athletes like "property or commodities". Why, oh why, do you hate me so, Reb?

Anyway, I know we're not going to agree on this. Mine is just one Pony's opinion.

[Rebel10]

Ouch! I'm "Corso", I have less credibility than ESPN, I'm passing on "scare tactics", I'm "corrupt", and I apparently refuse to admit that SMU treats it's student athletes like "property or commodities". Why, oh why, do you hate me so, Reb?

Anyway, I know we're not going to agree on this. Mine is just one Pony's opinion.

Hey, a good debate is sometimes contains an ad hominem. Though most of the time it is not necessary like what I just did. LOL. I take the Corso back and the corrupt etc was not aimed at you.

[smupony94]

Everyone there

[RGV Pony]

Yeah but nic has his fingers crossed on his left hand

[Rebel10]

Again, let me put it like this, I totally agree with OBF in that the best thing for this team is to make a good run in the NCAA tournament this year. Losing Nic and MK next year may mean more than a lot of people think.

[smupony94]

Yeah but nic has his fingers crossed on his left hand

I got the pinky swear earlier

[gostangs]

Reb speaks the truth. Anyone wondering how it will go only has to look back at how we did when nic was out long stretches last year. It wasn't pretty.

We blew our chance a deep run in the tournament. Bad decision.

[smupony94]

Reb speaks the truth. Anyone wondering how it will go only has to look back at how we did when nic was out long stretches last year. It wasn't pretty.

We blew our chance a deep run in the tournament. Bad decision.

then stop posting and go find a new team to cheer for it's not going to change

[Rebel10]

Reb speaks the truth. Anyone wondering how it will go only has to look back at how we did when nic was out long stretches last year. It wasn't pretty.

We blew our chance a deep run in the tournament. Bad decision.

then stop posting and go find a new team to cheer for it's not going to change

I don't think he has to find a new team to cheer for just because he does not agree with what the administration has done with the team. After all he is not mad at the team, if fact it is obvious that he really likes the team and just does not like what was done to it.

[Stallion]

SMU has 3 young, highly/nationally recruited PG prospects that are very capable of taking over for Nic Moore over the next 4 years. That's the least of our problems. Really our one legitimate problem in the forseeable future is our big men. I'm not sure if we've ever had this many good young prospects at the other positions in my lifetime-and they are spread from Juniors to this years recruits. So we've got immediate answers and exciting prospects for the future. Geez this is getting ridiculous. We won't even miss being -2 in numbers this year because there are not enough basketballs on the Court to play all our talent