Hypothetical Question

by **bigdaddy08091** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:08 am

Billy Joe wrote:Orsini needs to let Bennett go after we get beat by Tulsa. He needs to make a statement that losing is not going to be accepted anymore. He then needs to get a new coach named and announce SMU is changing its model to better compete in Division 1-A football.

As an institution, we have tried this for 20 years. "Losing is not going to be accepted anymore." I say, we give PB complete control of the football operations, and let it roll? Everyone else get the hell out of the way!

by **The XtC** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:28 pm

[quote="bigdaddy08091"][quote="Billy Joe"]Orsini needs to let Bennett go after we get beat by Tulsa. He needs to make a statement that losing is not going to be accepted anymore. He then needs to get a new coach named and announce SMU is changing its model to better compete in Division 1-A football.[/quote]

As an institution, we have tried this for 20 years. "Losing is not going to be accepted anymore." I say, we give PB complete control of the football operations, and let it roll? Everyone else get the hell out of the way![/quote]

And I say you need both counseling and medication. I wouldnt give Phil phull control of a burnt out box of matches. Unless you're the type of person that enjoys watching a train wreck as it's about to happen? Is that it, are you hoping to see a couple of mangled bodies, or something?

by **EastStang** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:49 pm

Let's get past Tulsa and see where the chips fall. We had a really tough loss on Saturday against a team that we should have beaten. We need to just see what happens week to week and let Orsini decide what he wants to do. We will either rearrange the chairs on the deck this season, or we'll make a statement. If we rearrange the chairs, we'll know where the program stands.

by **jimhagle** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 3:55 pm

And please no search commitee this time-let this be Orsini's decision solely!

by **jtstang** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 4:22 pm

The XtC wrote: I wouldnt give Phil phull control of a burnt out box of matches.

A.

by **bigdaddy08091** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:23 pm

The XtC wrote:
bigdaddy08091 wrote:
Billy Joe wrote:Orsini needs to let Bennett go after we get beat by Tulsa. He needs to make a statement that losing is not going to be accepted anymore. He then needs to get a new coach named and announce SMU is changing its model to better compete in Division 1-A football.

As an institution, we have tried this for 20 years. "Losing is not going to be accepted anymore." I say, we give PB complete control of the football operations, and let it roll? Everyone else get the hell out of the way!

And I say you need both counseling and medication. I wouldnt give Phil phull control of a burnt out box of matches. Unless you're the type of person that enjoys watching a train wreck as it's about to happen? Is that it, are you hoping to see a couple of mangled bodies, or something?

PB does not play! We have been in position to make plays and win games all year long. When do we start holding players accountable for blocking and tackling.

by **perunapower** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:28 pm

Hey! I said that 3 weeks ago after we lost to UTEP because we couldn't freakin' tackle.

by PK » Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:07 pm

bigdaddy08091 wrote:PB does not play! We have been in position to make plays and win games all year long. When do we start holding players accountable for blocking and tackling.

So who is responsible for how they block and tackle? They have had the same problems since the first game. Here we are 7 games into the season with the same problems. You would think that they learned that stuff in high school, but hey...if they haven't, someone should be teaching them those fundamentals...don't you think?

by **Statler** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:15 pm

PK wrote:
bigdaddy08091 wrote:PB does not play! We have been in position to make plays and win games all year long. When do we start holding players accountable for blocking and tackling.
So who is responsible for how they block and tackle? They have had the same problems since the first game. Here we are 7 games into the season with the same problems. You would think that they learned that stuff in high school, but hey...if they haven't, someone should be teaching them those fundamentals...don't you think?

PK..Don't argue with helicopter parents (relatives)...They go by the rule, "My mind is made up--don't confuse me with facts."

by **Stallion** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:16 pm

there is a difference between players who don't know fundamentals and players who are not quick, fast, big, tall, strong or agile enough to play their positions-and that my friends is what is happening on defense this year. Hey you go see if a bunch of ATOs could tackle a 6-2, 225 pounder running a 4.5.. See Thomas at UTEP and Forte at Tulane. Aldridge will do the same thing(just as he did last year) no matter how long Phil spends on tackling dummies in the next few weeks. But I disagree with BigDaddyDonGarlits(wasn't he the big drag racer in the 1980s) because Phil actually recruited these overmatched kids and when it gets right down to it he is responsible. I will no longer deflect blame from a head coach who can't beat other cupcakes in a conference rated below a 1-AA conference(Southern Conference).

by **Statler** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:20 pm

Stallion wrote:there is a difference between players who don't know fundamentals and players who are not quick, fast, big, tall, strong or agile enough to play their positions-and that my friends is what is happening on defense this year. Hey you go see if a bunch of ATOs could tackle a 6-2, 225 pounder running a 4.5.. See Thomas at UTEP and Forte at Tulane. Aldridge will do the same thing(just as he did last year) no matter how long Phil spends on tackling dummies in the next few weeks. But I disagree with BigDaddyDonGarlits(wasn't he the big drag racer in the 1980s) because Phil actually recruited these overmatched kids and when it gets right down to it he is responsible. I will no longer deflect blame from a head coach who can't beat other cupcakes in a conference rated below the Southern Division 1-AA conferences.

OK the end is near...Darth and Stallion agree on something...

Mercury must be in retrograde.

by **bigdaddy08091** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:58 pm

The XtC wrote:
bigdaddy08091 wrote:
Billy Joe wrote:Orsini needs to let Bennett go after we get beat by Tulsa. He needs to make a statement that losing is not going to be accepted anymore. He then needs to get a new coach named and announce SMU is changing its model to better compete in Division 1-A football.

As an institution, we have tried this for 20 years. "Losing is not going to be accepted anymore." I say, we give PB complete control of the football operations, and let it roll? Everyone else get the hell out of the way!

And I say you need both counseling and medication. I wouldnt give Phil phull control of a burnt out box of matches. Unless you're the type of person that enjoys watching a train wreck as it's about to happen? Is that it, are you hoping to see a couple of mangled bodies, or something?

XTC, you must be 15 maybe 16 years of age? Do you know the history of this program? We have had several HC in the last 20 years. Do you know the definition of insanity? I will tell you. Doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results. We need to send a message that we are committed to something at this school other than the Cox School of Business, which is a damn good program.

by **Cadillac** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:19 pm

bigdaddy08091 wrote:
Do you know the definition of insanity? I will tell you. Doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results.

Said the guy who wants to keep Bennett.

On one hand, he's right, we need to change some things. But on the other hand, he's wrong: PB is one of those things.

-CoS

by **MrMustang1965** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:29 pm

Stallion wrote:Hey you go see if a bunch of ATOs could tackle a 6-2, 225 pounder running a 4.5.

The ATOs from SMU's now defunct chapter probably couldn't. However, there were several Taus who did a pretty good job playing for the Mustangs basketball team.

by **mrydel** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:46 pm

Has anyone else noticed that the guy that posted the trite definition of insanity as a part of his argument has referred to it no less than 5 times in the past week. Do you think he knows what the definition of insanity is?
Me thinks he is hoping for a different result.

Oh, and the real definition of insanity is your remark about XTC.

Hypothetical Question

Who is online