Black Sunday

[crazy horse]

So, crazy horse, wouldn't you concede that the flogging of Pye has gone on long enough? I mean c'mon, it isn't as if the faculty is conducting seances to induce the old man to haunt the athletic program, is it?

I don't blame Pye personally. I was just trying to use a familiar term to refer to all the draconian restrictions placed on the program by the administration that were above beyond NCAA recommendations. There were many involved in the restrictions getting implemented. At the time, I'm sure he thought he was helping SMU. I thought so at the time myself.

And you are correct that there are others who could have made changes much faster.

Would you agree that without the added burden of academic/recruiting restrictions (regardless of who implemented them), SMU MAY have recovered much faster and been much more competitive now? Would that have made a difference in the SWC break up decision? I guess we will never know about either.

[SMUtrojanFAN]

hindsight is a bi*ch...

[EastStang]

Many of the Pye "reforms" were not well publicized until the dawn of websites like this one. I just figured that we weren't competitive because we had to take qualifiers. But really it was worse, we couldn't even TALK to non-qualifiers. And no one talked much about the abolition of the PE major back then, either. But I tend to agree without the DP, there would not have been the sacking of the Board of Governors followed by the emergence of the faculty and the hiring of Ken Pye. Additionally, Pye came from Duke and he told me that he envisioned SMU having a Duke like basketball program to get us back in the picture athletically. As we all now know he probably envisioned having a Duke like football program as well. However, he vetoed Larry Johnson coming to SMU personally which didn't help in establishing the basketball program.

[OC Mustang]

Many of the Pye "reforms" were not well publicized until the dawn of websites like this one. I just figured that we weren't competitive because we had to take qualifiers. But really it was worse, we couldn't even TALK to non-qualifiers. And no one talked much about the abolition of the PE major back then, either. But I tend to agree without the DP, there would not have been the sacking of the Board of Governors followed by the emergence of the faculty and the hiring of Ken Pye. Additionally, Pye came from Duke and he told me that he envisioned SMU having a Duke like basketball program to get us back in the picture athletically. As we all now know he probably envisioned having a Duke like football program as well. However, he vetoed Larry Johnson coming to SMU personally which didn't help in establishing the basketball program.

Not publicized? On the contrary, they were common knowledge to students during the rebuilding years (1989-1993). However, I think most people thought that the restrictions vis-a-vis athletes in general and football in particular were mostly academic in nature, not process. I would argue that having high standards wasn't the issue, or at least as much of one. It was/is the monkey-bars that an athlete and SMU had to navigate to satisfy the faculty and administrators that Coach Gregg was running a clean program. I recall an interview Gregg did for a video on SMU's return to football. He made the comment that the players were higher caliber and thus, special. He privately never complained about needing stupid kids. He complained about the process to get them on campus and get them signed.

[OC Mustang]

<edited b/c redundant-site acting up>

[OC Mustang]

So, crazy horse, wouldn't you concede that the flogging of Pye has gone on long enough? I mean c'mon, it isn't as if the faculty is conducting seances to induce the old man to haunt the athletic program, is it?

I don't blame Pye personally. I was just trying to use a familiar term to refer to all the draconian restrictions placed on the program by the administration that were above beyond NCAA recommendations. There were many involved in the restrictions getting implemented. At the time, I'm sure he thought he was helping SMU. I thought so at the time myself.

And you are correct that there are others who could have made changes much faster.

Would you agree that without the added burden of academic/recruiting restrictions (regardless of who implemented them), SMU MAY have recovered much faster and been much more competitive now? Would that have made a difference in the SWC break up decision? I guess we will never know about either.

See previous post on this, but I would agree that recruiting restrictions definitely hindered the program (can't overstate that), but academic restrictions less so (particularly, I refer to SAT/grades). Neither would have made a difference with SWC demise. That was about money. Texas wanted to go to the Pac-10 (and some say, still does) in the 1980s, and A&M wanted to do what Arkansas did and go to the SEC during the same period. And without those two schools, there is not enough of a television base to incent other schools not to look for other options. The remaining SWC members might make it just fine for the 90s, but we'd have seen defectors bail and cause additional pressure to unwind the conference (IMHO).

[Stallion]

You are completely in outer space if you don't think that academic restrictions hurt this program-and it was MORE than procedural changes hurt this program prior to 2000. We thought that we were getting a break from the administration circa 2000 when they lowered requirements by creating a 3 tier admission process. Even these improvements were way more restrictive than NCAA rules.
Remember the categories were something like Category 1 1050 SAT+ (automatic admission), Category No. 2 900 or 950 SAT (streamlined consideration) and below that Category No. 3 (supervised consideration by faculty committee). AND THOSE WERE IMPROVEMENTS 11 years after this mess began. Not to even mention the procedural roadblocks before that restricting visits and offers until acceptance by the university. Little prospect of admitting JUCOs because of transfer issues from even schools like Northwestern.
Just remember this-to this very day SMU still requires 2 extra core requirements not required by NCAA rules. Next year the NCAA will also require these additional core courses. TCU's Coach Patterson recently was talking about what an important change this would have on recruitment. Patterson recently ESTIMATED that it would affect as many as 30% of the recruitable high school seniors next year unless they planned accordingly. Those players whether 30% or somewhat lower could not attend SMU. There's a 30 yard head start to a 100 yard dash right there.
Taking into account the entirety of SMU's self imposed restrictions what % do you think these other more difficult roadblocks cut us off from. 50%?, 60%? of the recruiting pool. Let's just characterize it as trying to compete with one hand tied behind your back. It has not been unsual for teams we compete against to have 5-10% of their rosters manned by Division 1A transfers and another 5-10% of their rosters manned by JUCOs so add that the % before we even start talking about SAT/GPA. Before you claim I'm full of shit-you may want to do a check the average SAT for African Americans during that time period. I posted it on here several times and my recollection was something like 824 which was far far below Category 1 and Category 2 admissions.
Phil Bennett has a cakewalk compared to the conditions Gregg, Rossley and Cavan were expected to compete under.

[PK]

Having one hand tied behind our back may not be the case any more, but the 2 extra core requirements above NCAA requirements has still kept that one arm in a sling. The NCAA's change to include two more core requirements for everyone will free our arm from that sling.

Now if we can just get some athletic friendly course to entice some of these players that want to coach in the future, maybe we will finally be on a level field or a hell of a lot closer to it.

[PlanoStang]

You are completely in outer space if you don't think that academic restrictions hurt this program-and it was MORE than procedural changes hurt this program prior to 2000. We thought that we were getting a break from the administration circa 2000 when they lowered requirements by creating a 3 tier admission process. Even these improvements were way more restrictive than NCAA rules.
Remember the categories were something like Category 1 1050 SAT+ (automatic admission), Category No. 2 900 or 950 SAT (streamlined consideration) and below that Category No. 3 (supervised consideration by faculty committee). AND THOSE WERE IMPROVEMENTS 11 years after this mess began. Not to even mention the procedural roadblocks before that restricting visits and offers until acceptance by the university. Little prospect of admitting JUCOs because of transfer issues from even schools like Northwestern.
Just remember this-to this very day SMU still requires 2 extra core requirements not required by NCAA rules. Next year the NCAA will also require these additional core courses. TCU's Coach Patterson recently was talking about what an important change this would have on recruitment. Patterson recently ESTIMATED that it would affect as many as 30% of the recruitable high school seniors next year unless they planned accordingly. Those players whether 30% or somewhat lower could not attend SMU. There's a 30 yard head start to a 100 yard dash right there.
Taking into account the entirety of SMU's self imposed restrictions what % do you think these other more difficult roadblocks cut us off from. 50%?, 60%? of the recruiting pool. Let's just characterize it as trying to compete with one hand tied behind your back. It has not been unsual for teams we compete against to have 5-10% of their rosters manned by Division 1A transfers and another 5-10% of their rosters manned by JUCOs so add that the % before we even start talking about SAT/GPA. Before you claim I'm full of [deleted]-you may want to do a check the average SAT for African Americans during that time period. I posted it on here several times and my recollection was something like 824 which was far far below Category 1 and Category 2 admissions.
Phil Bennett has a cakewalk compared to the conditions Gregg, Rossley and Cavan were expected to compete under.

Like a good lawyer defending a client, you leave out minor details like
Gregg, and Rossley recruited under the SWC banner. Also, the 80's
glory years were still in most minds, and SMU was still known for good
teams in FB, and BB.

Phil Bennett has had to try to resurrect us from the DP, Pye, death of
SWC, critical injury to WAC, Copeland,and Turner's wishy washy
actions towards athletics. He was in disfavor, and about to be run off
from Ole Miss for that when he bailed to SMU.

Don't biotch about PB yet. The grave was much deeper when he
started climbing out of it.

[PlanoStang]

You are completely in outer space if you don't think that academic restrictions hurt this program-and it was MORE than procedural changes hurt this program prior to 2000. We thought that we were getting a break from the administration circa 2000 when they lowered requirements by creating a 3 tier admission process. Even these improvements were way more restrictive than NCAA rules.
Remember the categories were something like Category 1 1050 SAT+ (automatic admission), Category No. 2 900 or 950 SAT (streamlined consideration) and below that Category No. 3 (supervised consideration by faculty committee). AND THOSE WERE IMPROVEMENTS 11 years after this mess began. Not to even mention the procedural roadblocks before that restricting visits and offers until acceptance by the university. Little prospect of admitting JUCOs because of transfer issues from even schools like Northwestern.
Just remember this-to this very day SMU still requires 2 extra core requirements not required by NCAA rules. Next year the NCAA will also require these additional core courses. TCU's Coach Patterson recently was talking about what an important change this would have on recruitment. Patterson recently ESTIMATED that it would affect as many as 30% of the recruitable high school seniors next year unless they planned accordingly. Those players whether 30% or somewhat lower could not attend SMU. There's a 30 yard head start to a 100 yard dash right there.
Taking into account the entirety of SMU's self imposed restrictions what % do you think these other more difficult roadblocks cut us off from. 50%?, 60%? of the recruiting pool. Let's just characterize it as trying to compete with one hand tied behind your back. It has not been unsual for teams we compete against to have 5-10% of their rosters manned by Division 1A transfers and another 5-10% of their rosters manned by JUCOs so add that the % before we even start talking about SAT/GPA. Before you claim I'm full of [deleted]-you may want to do a check the average SAT for African Americans during that time period. I posted it on here several times and my recollection was something like 824 which was far far below Category 1 and Category 2 admissions.
Phil Bennett has a cakewalk compared to the conditions Gregg, Rossley and Cavan were expected to compete under.

Like a good lawyer defending a client, you leave out minor details like
Gregg, and Rossley recruited under the SWC banner. Also, the 80's
glory years were still in most minds, and SMU was still known for good
teams in FB, and BB.

Phil Bennett has had to try to resurrect us from the DP, Pye, death of
SWC, critical injury to WAC, Copeland,and Turner's wishy washy
actions towards athletics. He was in disfavor, and about to be run off
from Ole Miss for that when he bailed to SMU.

Don't biotch about PB yet. The grave was much deeper when he
started climbing out of it.

[PlanoStang]

You are completely in outer space if you don't think that academic restrictions hurt this program-and it was MORE than procedural changes hurt this program prior to 2000. We thought that we were getting a break from the administration circa 2000 when they lowered requirements by creating a 3 tier admission process. Even these improvements were way more restrictive than NCAA rules.
Remember the categories were something like Category 1 1050 SAT+ (automatic admission), Category No. 2 900 or 950 SAT (streamlined consideration) and below that Category No. 3 (supervised consideration by faculty committee). AND THOSE WERE IMPROVEMENTS 11 years after this mess began. Not to even mention the procedural roadblocks before that restricting visits and offers until acceptance by the university. Little prospect of admitting JUCOs because of transfer issues from even schools like Northwestern.
Just remember this-to this very day SMU still requires 2 extra core requirements not required by NCAA rules. Next year the NCAA will also require these additional core courses. TCU's Coach Patterson recently was talking about what an important change this would have on recruitment. Patterson recently ESTIMATED that it would affect as many as 30% of the recruitable high school seniors next year unless they planned accordingly. Those players whether 30% or somewhat lower could not attend SMU. There's a 30 yard head start to a 100 yard dash right there.
Taking into account the entirety of SMU's self imposed restrictions what % do you think these other more difficult roadblocks cut us off from. 50%?, 60%? of the recruiting pool. Let's just characterize it as trying to compete with one hand tied behind your back. It has not been unsual for teams we compete against to have 5-10% of their rosters manned by Division 1A transfers and another 5-10% of their rosters manned by JUCOs so add that the % before we even start talking about SAT/GPA. Before you claim I'm full of [deleted]-you may want to do a check the average SAT for African Americans during that time period. I posted it on here several times and my recollection was something like 824 which was far far below Category 1 and Category 2 admissions.
Phil Bennett has a cakewalk compared to the conditions Gregg, Rossley and Cavan were expected to compete under.

Like a good lawyer defending a client, you leave out minor details like
Gregg, and Rossley recruited under the SWC banner. Also, the 80's
glory years were still in most minds, and SMU was still known for good
teams in FB, and BB.

Phil Bennett has had to try to resurrect us from the DP, Pye, death of
SWC, critical injury to WAC, Copeland,and Turner's wishy washy
actions towards athletics. He was in disfavor, and about to be run off
from Ole Miss for that when he bailed to SMU.

Don't biotch about PB yet. The grave was much deeper when he
started climbing out of it.

[OC Mustang]

You are completely in outer space if you don't think that academic restrictions hurt this program-and it was MORE than procedural changes hurt this program prior to 2000. We thought that we were getting a break from the administration circa 2000 when they lowered requirements by creating a 3 tier admission process. Even these improvements were way more restrictive than NCAA rules.
Remember the categories were something like Category 1 1050 SAT+ (automatic admission), Category No. 2 900 or 950 SAT (streamlined consideration) and below that Category No. 3 (supervised consideration by faculty committee). AND THOSE WERE IMPROVEMENTS 11 years after this mess began. Not to even mention the procedural roadblocks before that restricting visits and offers until acceptance by the university. Little prospect of admitting JUCOs because of transfer issues from even schools like Northwestern.
Just remember this-to this very day SMU still requires 2 extra core requirements not required by NCAA rules. Next year the NCAA will also require these additional core courses. TCU's Coach Patterson recently was talking about what an important change this would have on recruitment. Patterson recently ESTIMATED that it would affect as many as 30% of the recruitable high school seniors next year unless they planned accordingly. Those players whether 30% or somewhat lower could not attend SMU. There's a 30 yard head start to a 100 yard dash right there.
Taking into account the entirety of SMU's self imposed restrictions what % do you think these other more difficult roadblocks cut us off from. 50%?, 60%? of the recruiting pool. Let's just characterize it as trying to compete with one hand tied behind your back. It has not been unsual for teams we compete against to have 5-10% of their rosters manned by Division 1A transfers and another 5-10% of their rosters manned by JUCOs so add that the % before we even start talking about SAT/GPA. Before you claim I'm full of [deleted]-you may want to do a check the average SAT for African Americans during that time period. I posted it on here several times and my recollection was something like 824 which was far far below Category 1 and Category 2 admissions.
Phil Bennett has a cakewalk compared to the conditions Gregg, Rossley and Cavan were expected to compete under.

I won't say that you are full of [deleted]. You have a valid point...several actually. However, I am calling this tiered approach and two course add-on part of a flawed recruiting system, not flawed academic requirements in and of themselves. Would you say that we compare academically to Stanford, Northwestern, UNC, UC-Berk, or even Notre Dame? They have high standards (or even higher), and arguably, could beat SMU 4 out of 5 times or more on the field. They also have better conferences to attract athletes, so perhaps the two work in tandem to offset each other. Do these universities carry the two additional core course requirements? Either they do, and it isn't an issue, or they don't, and their athletes are still carrying better scores on the whole than ours.

I don't know, Stallion. My overall points were a) academic rigor is a GOOD thing, not a BAD thing, b) if you accept the former, then really it is about making it easier to apply and matriculate, not about standards, and c) Ken Pye has been absent from this debate for over a decade, and the same conversation is being hailed over and over as was held up in the SAC in Hughes-Trigg between 1989-1993 by myself and many others. That tells me that the old man may have brought it on, but it is kept alive by some other peckerwoods. Falls into the category of "Who is more foolish...the fool, or the fools that follow?"

[mr. pony]

It was the DP, period - plain and simple.

I don't blame SMU's reaction - even now. Any other school would have done the same or more.

No one had ever gotten it, or ever will again, so what SMU did in response can't be compared to ANYTHING!!!!!!!

Those faced with this abomination of a penalty, which should never have been administered, did the best they could.

D*mn the NCAA.

[Mexmustang]

Sad to say, but the school has until Monday (20 years, plus one day) to get things fixed. First step, come out with an agressive positive public position about SMU athletics and the "fixes" which have been made and those in he works, (new stadium, campus-wide appreciation of the importance of athletic success to the university, special athletic friendly majors on he drawing board, etc.). Second, give ourselves a final parole (welcome back to the university the blacklisted alumns, swear that the term death penalty will never be used by any member of the administration or faculty when referring to SMU atletics, and state firmly that SMU was unfairly singled out from other major programs, which have continued to violate the rules even into this season)--afterall criminals and some murderers get parolled in 20 years after receiving life sentences!
If not accept that SMU and a number of us no longer share the same vision for our school.

[mr. pony]

My apologies for the multiple posts. The site would not take it and I continued to try to send it.

I can't delete them either.