PonyFans.com

According to Blackistone, Tubbs got an unfair shake because Cavan did not immediately get fired in 1999.

With tremendous arrogance, Blackistone then lays out his case for Tubbs getting an extension. I have never heard anything so silly in my life.

1) Blackistone comments that Tubbs should have gotten a longer deal in the first place.
Response: Why did Tubbs take the job? If this was such a crummy job for the recruiter of OU, he should have waited for another gig.

2) Blackistone believes that Blackistone should get extension based upon the team's performance last season. They played .500 ball, despite not having talent.
Response: Only at SMU is .500 bball expected to get you extensions and tremendous facility upgrades. Blackistone decided to skip any talk about program visability or attendance during Tubbs' tenure.

3) Blackistone Insinuates that the violations are not a big deal.
Response: Not a big deal? Have you heard about a little scandal in the 80's that ruined our athletic program? Ever hear of Ken Pye?
My only problem with this whole affair is that we had to buy Tubbs out after the tremendous harm he caused the program

As always, we only get media coverage when it is bad. Next year, when we beat Tulsa in football, it will be previewed on page 8 and the score will be in with the West Coast score.

McClown27 wrote:According to Blackistone, Tubbs got an unfair shake because Cavan did not immediately get fired in 1999.

With tremendous arrogance, Blackistone then lays out his case for Tubbs getting an extension. I have never heard anything so silly in my life.

1) Blackistone comments that Tubbs should have gotten a longer deal in the first place.
Response: Why did Tubbs take the job? If this was such a crummy job for the recruiter of OU, he should have waited for another gig.

Compared to Phil Bennett, he should have.

2) Blackistone believes that Blackistone should get extension based upon the team's performance last season. They played .500 ball, despite not having talent.
Response: Only at SMU is .500 bball expected to get you extensions and tremendous facility upgrades. Blackistone decided to skip any talk about program visability or attendance during Tubbs' tenure.

Again, this was nothing but an accurate reference to the Bennett treatment.

3) Blackistone Insinuates that the violations are not a big deal.
Response: Not a big deal? Have you heard about a little scandal in the 80's that ruined our athletic program? Ever hear of Ken Pye?
My only problem with this whole affair is that we had to buy Tubbs out after the tremendous harm he caused the program

Slush fund vs. detergent. Yeah, you're right, it's the same stuff.

As always, we only get media coverage when it is bad. Next year, when we beat Tulsa in football, it will be previewed on page 8 and the score will be in with the West Coast score.

Be careful what you ask for next time.

1993. The whole system that you defend has not gotten us to the tournament since 1993. All that talent Tubbs recruited never got us to the tournament.

Let's renovate Moody and build a practice facility for Tubbs!! Who cares if no one goes to the games and he doesn't recruit well!! Yahhh, he is a cheater too!!! Rah Rah Rah

JT,

I think it's obvious there was more to this than detergent and hamburgers.

mr. pony wrote:JT,

I think it's obvious there was more to this than detergent and hamburgers.

That's what I don't get. People are still holding on to this being about detergent and burgers. Its pretty obvious it wasn't.

If it was, I'll admit I've been a complete [deleted] on this board for the last two days. But I'm pretty sure it wasn't.

Danny Noonan wrote:

mr. pony wrote:JT,

I think it's obvious there was more to this than detergent and hamburgers.

That's what I don't get. People are still holding on to this being about detergent and burgers. Its pretty obvious it wasn't.

If it was, I'll admit I've been a complete [deleted] on this board for the last two days. But I'm pretty sure it wasn't.

This is clearly the last thing Copelqand wanted to do during this time. He is not an idiot looking to make one last splash. He just had surgery. Clearly something in the violations report is big enough to warrant this action. Unfortunately, when we have a cheater on SMU"s campus, we do not have the local support to fire him.

That's what I don't get. People are still holding on to this being about detergent and burgers. Its pretty obvious it wasn't.

Enlighten me, what is so obvious?

DickerJames wrote:

That's what I don't get. People are still holding on to this being about detergent and burgers. Its pretty obvious it wasn't.

Enlighten me, what is so obvious?

The fact that Copeland's statement said burgers and detergent would not be a fireable offense. The fact that he said they have found violations in multilpe areas.

Do you not agree that Copeland's statement says there is more to it than burgers and detergent? Now, if you think Copeland is blatantly lying in his statement, that's another story, and I can't help you there. I'm assuming that he's not dumb enough enough release a completely fabricated statement.

McClown27 wrote: .... This is clearly the last thing Copelqand wanted to do during this time. He is not an idiot looking to make one last splash. He just had surgery....

THis might be the most insightful thing you've ever said on this board. The surgery Copeland had turned out to be far more significant than was expected, and no personal grudge or vendetta that some folks might think he has is worth the extra hassle on a still-recovering man.

The title of this thread, however, is a bit misleading. Blackistone doesn't say cheaters should get an extension. He says Coach Tubbs should get an extension. Regardless of what Coach Tubbs did or didn't do, there are a lot worse cheaters out there, and Blackistone was lobbying for an extension for Coach Tubbs only.

It was a stupid, totally predictable column as always. What a one note clown.

Tubbs did get an unfair shake but in a few cases, Tubbs got canned for the right reasons.

But we wont know that until they tell us

Buddha wrote:Regardless of what Coach Tubbs did or didn't do, there are a lot worse cheaters out there, and Blackistone was lobbying for an extension for Coach Tubbs only.

I support a zero tolerance policy at SMU. I can see that you do not, I guess that explains our differences. If you know of any other cheating programs, you should turn them in.

This shows that we need to be sure to get more of the transfer issues worked out, or more coaches may take the cheating approach.

Whatever the case with his violations, the guy didn't deliver 1, not 1 Dallas area recruit. Except a transfer.

He was hired to bring them in, and now we are sittting here with a week left until last signing, with 2 scholarships, and no top recruits available.

Oh yeah, this guy was the savior, thanks for reminding me.

End of story, lets look on to next coach, and orsini, who looks to have a proven track record at building winners. Something that hasn't been on the hilltop for a long time.

Okay, you want a zero tolerance policy. Then be prepared, the next head coach will be a 24 year old 2nd chair assistant from a community college or a 95 year old ex-head coach who doesn't remember anyone's name and calls everyone "boy". There are shades of gray out there and there's black and white. From everything posted so far, the violations are of the chicken s variety. You know the kind of violations that generally don't even merit a reprimand from the NCAA. That's why people are upset. So far this is the scenario that we see. Gramps gives coach money (we don't know how much) to buy Sonny and his friends some good food on a road trip. Violation, yes, happens all the time, yes. Player shows up for a film session reeking. Coach asks, when was the last time you washed your clothes. Here take this laundry detergent and don't come back until your clothes are clean. On the plane to Montana, coach pulls Wittingham over and says, here's the play I want you to run and they go over the play on paper. This is after several long practice sessions during the week. Student is having trouble with his humanities paper, he asks an assistant coach to look it over and tell him what needs work. Assistant Coach helps the student athlete. Now tell me, zero policy dictates firing for any one of these offenses? I'd really like to know what the other violations were.

Reported Violations + Losing + Failure to Recruit + New A.D. + Desire to Build Facilities + Nonexistent Campus presence or attendance=Fired