Speakingof a level playing field

[mrydel]

For those that did not see, University of Arkansas has just revised their admission standards to accept D's from transfer students. This was done in order that they be able to compete with the rest of the SEC teams. I do not know anything of SMU's standards in this regard, but it is an example of what other schools are doing in order to "keep up with the Jones's". I make no opinion on what we should do since I am not familiar with all of our standards, merely pointing out a fact of what others do to stay level.

[PonySnob]

If they can play ball, get them into school! Maybe it's time to get some athlete-students on the team instead of student-athletes!

[ponyte]

What does one find on a U of Ark football player's SAT?

Drool, of course.

[LA_Mustang]

Yeah, but I bet Arkansas will never go 0-11 and fail to make a bowl for 20 straight years.

[Stallion]

there is a fair and reaonable median without becoming a Kansas St, Mississippi St, South Carolina, San Jose St or Fresno St. We would be well on the academic side of that line if we simply allowed our football coach to recruit 3-4 JUCOs a year, our BB coach 1-2 JUCOs a year and applied minimum NCAA admission standards for freshmen eligibility without parial or non-qualifiers. Nobody in Texas would bat an eye at that since everybody else gets away with a lot more.

[Cheesesteak]

I only read what mrydel posted, but assuming the the U. of A. and SEC keep chasing the lowest common denominator in order to get players into school...that is pathetic.

Arkansas typically isn't attracting football transfers from Stanford where a D grade could indicate legitimate academic abilities when compared to the national pool of football transfer students.

With the SEC in the lead, college football is frequently in serious conflict with the real mission of universities.

Something has to eventually give. Either D-1A squads will become like minor league sports teams or college athletics will be set on a new course by college presidents acting as a united front.

At some schools the "level playing field" has become a ditch.

[Mike Damone]

Actually Vanderbilt has allowed the D transfers for quite a while. And they're a little more respected than SMU academically.

[Cheesesteak]

Vanderbilt is in the SEC (accepting D grades) but their President Gordon Gee recently abolished the intercollegiate athletic department (while staying in the SEC) putting oversight under Vandebilt's Office of Student Affairs.

There must be heated debate at Vanderbilt about where D-1A college football is headed.

[Mike Damone]

Many of the SEC schools have greatly increased the quality of their degrees while maintaining good football teams. I think we could do the same.

[Southland]

Originally posted by Stallion:
there is a fair and reaonable median without becoming a Kansas St, Mississippi St, South Carolina, San Jose St or Fresno St. We would be well on the academic side of that line if we simply allowed our football coach to recruit 3-4 JUCOs a year, our BB coach 1-2 JUCOs a year and applied minimum NCAA admission standards for freshmen eligibility without parial or non-qualifiers. Nobody in Texas would bat an eye at that since everybody else gets away with a lot more.

AMEN...
1. Retags
2. The ability to offer JUCOs (not necessarily a sound strategy annually, but our coaches still need the ability to plug holes when necessary)
3. Increase budget for recruiting in neighboring CUSA states, particularly divisional CUSA states where we will have an annual presence.

Keep in mind; neither President Turner nor Jim Copeland makes the decision on redtaging or JUCOs. In fact, Jim has been pushing for these changes for 7 years... it is the decision of the Board of Trustees, and many are still in love with Pye's vision. Ultimately, the board makes budget approvals as well, although President Turner provides a recommendation.

If you want to direct your frustration anywhere, write a letter to each trustee. I'm sure you can find the names of all the trustees on the SMU website. Address the letter directly to the individual trustee and they will receive them when the board meets (quarterly).

[mrydel]

Stallion,

I agree with your assessment, and wonder if you can help me with some history for curiosity sake. When I was recruited (1968), admission standards were higher at SMU than the other (for the most part) SWC teams. I think the standards were loosened sometime after I left in 1972 ( I lost track of the Ponies for a while living in the Northest and Gore not having invented the internet yet). Were they loosened even more while the great 80s teams were being built, and then were they hamstrung by what you refer to as the Pye model after the DP. I am sorry to be so ignorant on this, but it might help a lot of folk with their understanding or opinions if they know what restrictions we have had at what times during the past 35-40 years, andhow those restrictions have affected football at SMU.

I feel you probably know the breakdown on this but of course everyone and anyone with knowledge of this is welcome to respond. Thanks

[ponyte]

During the mid to late 70s and the 80s the University President was allowed to accept 12 unqualified admissions a year. The ratio was 1/2 athlete to 1/2 non-athlete. This work well for the non-athletes as it allowed admission for some alum’s' kid that didn't meet admission qualification and allowed for borderline athletes.

This system was abolished when the university flogged itself with whips like crazed Iranians during Ramadan.

[Stallion]

I wasn't focused on it until really after Pye came-we were successful in the 1980's so no one questioned what we were doing because we were doing the same as just about everyone in the country-our graduation rates were if anything toward the top of the SWC and I never remember embarrassing numbers at least in comparison the rest of the SWC. -and it bears repeating that the DP was for financial payments and cheating to athletes but did not involve academic fraud. I've posted this before but I think we had about 9-12 JUCOs on Championship teams about 4-5 who were starters-its questionable if we could have reached those goals without the JUCO kids.

[Stallion]

Southland-you mean Jim Copeland is quietly pushing for these exact same changes that I've been pushing for 5 years and was being beaten over the head by every Mustang Club Member on this board. I'm SHOCKED-SHOCKED I tell you to hear that! Next thing you will tell me that Bennett is not philosophically opposed to JUCO players. As I told you before-my position is not radical and in fact is imminently reasonable-there has been a Conspiracy of Silence around here for too long by people who believe in the importance of athletics to this university but who have been too afraid to speak up and rationally articulate that position.

[geno]

It's odd hearing about the "standards of the great 1980"s teams" when the "standard" turned out to be any really good player who was willing to accept cash/cars/apartments in return for playing for SMUt. Most people seem to forget that the "greatness" of the SMU program in the 80's led to the Death Penalty, and the current predicament.