NEW COACH - BOWDEN? SPURRIER?

[smu'06]

Steve Spurrier Jr. or Terry Bowden may have the names to turn around the program. Spurrier is up in Norman, as Stoops' QB's Coach and Offensive Coordinator - hell bring him in.
Terry Bowden is up in New York bullsh*ting on ABC, while you know he really wants to coach.
What about Norv Turner in San Diego -sure he sucked in the NFL as a head coach, but he had to put up with Daniel Snider. All sorts of bad NFL head coaches are turning around college football programs into contenders.

Any other suggestions?

[MrMustang1965]

Good suggestions! Too bad we can't get Hayden Fry back! Or...could we?

The question is: will SMU fork out the dough to pay a high-caliber, nationally recognized football coach like the ones you suggest? At this stage of the game, I don't think anyone within the SMU administration gives a hoot or holler one way or the other.

It's going to take the FANS DEMANDING IT to make it happen!!!

------------------
"Winning ain't everything...but it's a lot more fun than the alternative!"

[click]

I will repeat for the umptenth time,and as most posters on this board know.It is not a money issue,NO COACH,at least no good coach will come to SMU with the restrictions that are on this coaching staff.Things must change at the admin. level.There is not a coach in the country that could be successful at SMU the way it is now structured.I do know that things are in the mix to allow SMU to recruit on the same level as all D-1 schools,but in true SMU form it will probably be too late.

[PK]

It's going to take the alumni with deep pockets hooting and hollering to make it happen.

[PerunaPunch]

Throw Gene Stallings' name into the ring. The guy lives in Dallas, was an assistant under Landry, and rolled out top ranked teams all the time in Alabama.

We need a coach who's name will electrify the media and potential recruits. Show the word we don't just want to be competitive in the WAC (as suggested by today's DMN article), but we fully expect to be national continders like we have been in the past.

I fully understand that our recruiting is hampered by strict admission policies. But certainly we're not unique. Don't other programs like Notre Dame have more elevated admissions standards?

[NavyCrimson]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by click:
<B>I will repeat for the umptenth time,and as most posters on this board know.It is not a money issue,NO COACH,at least no good coach will come to SMU with the restrictions that are on this coaching staff.Things must change at the admin. level.There is not a coach in the country that could be successful at SMU the way it is now structured.I do know that things are in the mix to allow SMU to recruit on the same level as all D-1 schools,but in true SMU form it will probably be too late.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well said...
if the administration had any sense they'd realize that these restrictions won't keep violations from occurring...just look @ the malin debacle and the student-card foul-up in the early 90's or late 89 when those occurred (or whatever happened that caused additional violations).....

they tried their little experiment of rediculous restrictions & they only made it worse!!!! SO EXPERIMENT OVER!!!

it takes personal responibility & obligation not rules!!!!

[click]

PerunaPunch.No!they don't,not when they recruit football players. They still recruit using the NCAA 820 sliding scale.SMU must use a 950 scale.They have had camps for the past 25 years,SMU was allowed to have one for the first time last year.They have freely brought their recruits on campus w/o a pre-screening,SMU was not allowed until Jan of this year. SMU was limited as to the number of paid visits so the coaching staff had to be very select as to who to bring on campus.SMU coaches were not allowed to visit campuses of prospective athletes until Nov long after the date many of the top athletes have already committed,and finally ND has always offered athletes early ,yhis is trhe first year SMU has been allowed to do so.So please do not compare SMU to ND.,it will take us three years to see the benefit from this years improvement.But we are still not on even recruiting ground. GO MUSTANGS

[ponytalk]

I would love to see Stallings. I heard him speak last year and was sooooo impressed. Unfortunatly, I think he is through with coaching.

[PerunaPunch]

Click: I didn't mean to imply the we've been on even ground with other teams in the past. My assumption was that with the recent recruiting modifications, that we were now on par with other programs except that we require an SAT that's at least comparable to that of your average peach.

So yes, I fully EXPECT our recruiting opportunities to improve.

So other than SATs, are there any other REAL inequalities that we have to overcome?

[PK]

PerunaPunch: We still do not allow any partial qualifiers although I think that we will look at each case individually....what ever that means. There still may be one or two other differences, but this is one that came to mind.

Another thing that comes to mind that is not a recruiting restriction, but affects recruiting is that we really don't offer any degree/study programs that many athletes would like which would help them pursue coaching careers, etc.

[This message has been edited by PK (edited 09-12-2001).]

[saguarostang]

Guys amd Gals, I'm going to break it down like this and you pretty much already know it. SMU does not give a flying flip about its athletics. We can pat people on the back for a stadium and various other horse@$#% things SMU has done but when it comes down to it, SMU will not go the extra mile. We ARE the NCAA's whipping boy and that will not change until someone with some balls comes in here and starts standing up to the higher powers and say enough is enough. Some try and be positive and say oh, so and so did this and that and they are really trying. Let me tell you something, I came to SMU in '95 with the desires of other recruits before and after which was to build a program. For five years I saw nothing of significance done and this continues. And people are always talking about the "Malin disaster," well guess what guys I don't consider what he did even worth taking a leak on. That was so insignificant as to what everyone else around the country is doing that I'm embarrassed that we make such a big deal about it. Notre Dame maybe 2 years earlier got busted for much worse and I think they even got a lighter slap on the wrist. Yes, yes, it is Notre Dame and we are SMU but the difference is that they have support and good people in administrative roles. They know they are a good school and aren't trying to prove themselves so they do recruit players who by some opinions aren't always the brightest. The same goes for every other D-1 school. SMU is afraid. Afraid that if they truly throw their hat in the ring that the NCAA will go to the closet and get the belt like daddy and give us a whuppin. Well, thats what we are getting every Saturday. If we're going to go down I would rather go down fighting. I just don't want these guys feeling like I do. I love SMU and cherish many of my memories and times there but not a Saturday goes by that I wish maybe I would have gone somewhere else so I could have truly experienced the college football atmosphere and the support that goes along with it. Call me not a dedicated fan but I gave a lot of sweat and blood and a tendon or two for the hilltop and I am just sick of the continuing lack of forward progress.

[PerunaPunch]

saguarostang,

TOTALLY understand and applaud the the emotions behind your sentiments. And I wholeheartedly agree that NCAA went way beyond all reason with the death penalty, and even today, doesn't give SMU a fair shake.

But I think as a '95-2000 student and football player, you may be the victim of a lack historical perspective (I have officially crossed over in oldfartdom). My dad, a 4-year letterman, graduated in '61, my mom (who tutored Don Meredith by the way) in '62. My uncle, a shotput-er, around '64. My sister in '88 and myself in '89. So I've been following Mustang athletics for about 3 decades.

Even though you and I are probably both heavily biased toward football, SMU is perennially among the top colleges in NCAA athletics. We're great on the track, field a respectable Bball team, world renown in swimming/diving and at the pinnacle in soccer.

I had to live through the death penalty, sure. But I also got to benefit from decades of superlative football teams. Look at the rich, rich football tradition at SMU. Someone pointed out the other day that SMU was tied for 5th most inductees into the pro football hall of fame. That's incredible for a little private school with undergraduate enrollment of less than 10k. Add to that a string of SWC championships and even a national championship.

We have a serious, serious problem to address here. But once we get through this, it'll be just a little roadbump on the glorious history of our program.

So keep the faith bro. Be proud to be a Mustang. We'll turn this thing around!

[Peruna04]

Let's get one of those names in here. I know all of you guys would agree that those are recognizable names and there are plenty of top recruits in the country willing to play for them. Get a coach like that in here, kids wanna come play, and we get some exposure.

[saguarostang]

PerunaPunch, I am glad that you somewhat agree with me and by past posts I can tell you are a true fan and do know quite a bit about SMU athletics. My problem however is this, everyone keeps bringing up "well we are good at these other sports." Thats great and I am happy for those who participate in those, I know many of them and they work very hard. However, football is king. I don't meen this in a way that it is better than the other sports but that it is the sport on college campuses along with BB. Football is going to put us on the map, not soccer or swimming and I meen all respect to those athletes. We always say "but we are so good in the other sports," great but football at this school sucks. Football makes for many benefits for the university and other sports. I am glad these other teams do well but quite honestly it doesn't mean crap. Sears Cup can kiss my rosey pink #%@. I'm tired of SMU hiding behind that. It is great I know, but when the dust settles how many people remember who won the Cup, but how many remember who won the conference or national championship in football. I had never even heard of it before I got to school. It is just a way to make us feel better about our football and BB woes. Think where we would be if we had competitive football teams to complement our BB and other sports. The Cup might just sit on our doorstep because we will be in the hunt every year. I really don't want you to think I'm getting into a shouting match or anything but after talking to my friends back in Dallas about the team I am so embarrassed. Hopefully something will be done. If I had any money at all I can tell you where it would be going and that is bringing in a name who carries as much weight as I do when I step on a scale. A little fatman humor.

[PerunaPunch]

saguarostang,

Guess you got me there. In the last 10 years. Track events attended: O. BB games attended: 3 or 4. Swimming/diving: 1. Home football games: just about all of them.

No doubt football is king. What's worse, is that football is the revenue generator that allows the other sports to flourish.

I guess my point was that SMU is a great school for college athletics and that should be a point of pride. Alumni don't return to campus because of SMU's high academic standards. Everybody likes to stop by the old frat house now and again to bore the youngsters with lies. Every once and awhile, you'll make it over to campus to catch a lecture or hear the concert orchestra or something. But nothing else brings back thousands of alumni every week but football. AND SMUs ADMINISTRATION SHOULD THINK LONG AND HARD ABOUT THAT FACT!

Historically, SMU has been a football powerhouse. Something must be done to return the program to national prominence. I can't judge Cavan. I'm sure very few, if any, of us have his football credentials. But to some degree that's irrelevant.

The program needs something major to kickstart the program. We have the stadium. We relaxed the visitation rules. What else can we do?

The answer seems obvious.

As a final thought. Anyone else glad that the UNC game was cancelled? I AM! Barring injuries, I think we'll be a much improved team by the end of the year as the offense has time to gel under Luker. I think we'll be much better after being able to punch around some of the WAC teams and build a little confidence.