Discussion: If you had to pick...

[EP Pony Fan]

You present a hell of a case on that one, Stallion.

[PlanoStang]

ED from our salaried teams, or a tie between chunkin Chuck Hixson, and Jerry Levias from our more amateur teams to go with our new offense.

[mrydel]

You are totally mistaken by classifying Chuck and Jerry as amateurs. The only difference was they were not on a school sanctioned payroll. I was tempted to name both of them in my earlier post, but I still can not come up with a better answer than Dickerson.

[PlanoStang]

You are totally mistaken by classifying Chuck and Jerry as amateurs. The only difference was they were not on a school sanctioned payroll. I was tempted to name both of them in my earlier post, but I still can not come up with a better answer than Dickerson.

I qualified that with "more" amateur. Jerry, and Chuck probably got lawn mowing money. ED was probably investigated by the IRS at least for not reporting the car from A$M

[Charleston Pony]

hard to argue with the Dickerson nomination, but the original question that was posed was who would you like to add to this year's roster, so you have to look at our weaknesses and look for an impact player. We appear to have some decent RBs and it appears we really need an option QB to make things go. I wonder whether a Gary Hammond or Ricky Wesson (from my era) would really be a difference maker for SMU in 2004?

[mrydel]

Hammond would may a positive impact in any era as would Louie Kelcher.

[jtstang]

We appear to have some decent RBs and it appears we really need an option QB to make things go.

What about Little Lance? He could work magic with the pitch. I know he's from the 80's, but he would not affect the payroll very much at all--although his car was purchased by an SMU alum, it was his dad!

This Phillips kid might actually become serviceable as a running QB, anyway. Who knows?

[Charleston Pony]

Lance had the benefit of playing behind an all-SWC OL and had outstanding skill guys to get the ball to. Looking at this team, there is good reason we went 0 for 2003. Gary Hammond was tough as nails and was one of the more versatile athletes I've ever seen come through SMU. He saw time as a RB, flanker and finally QB, which he played by default because he was simply the best athlete on the field. Hammond also played 5 years in the NFL as a journeyman type player. He gets my vote over Lance.

[jtstang]

Fair enough--although I consider myself one of those bitter old men that people sometimes complain about on this board, Hammond nevertheless was before my time. I actually was in school in time to see Lance play. Also in time to attend not one, but two soccer homecoming games (hence the bitter part).

[PK]

...although I consider myself one of those bitter old men that people sometimes complain about on this board...

Old man in deed, bitter maybe, but old (?)...don't talk to me about being old, you're still wet behind the ears kid.

[BUS]

Dam... I never thought 35 to 40 was soooo old.

I must ready fro the grave! Ha Ha

[jtstang]

Old man in deed, bitter maybe, but old (?)...don't talk to me about being old, you're still wet behind the ears kid.

Thanks, PK, but save it for November when I'll be trying to fight off 40. I'll REALLY need it then.

[ponyte]

Putt Choate

Dickerson was great there is no doubt. But we need a leader and one tough son of a gun one the team. A guy that knows how to work hard hit hard and plays hard. Choate Someone that can pull the defense together and make the interior O-line work harder in practice.

Other possibilities would be Don Meredith. We need a strong QB and one would be hard press to find a better SMU QB. Yes, Lance was wonderful with super backs and stellar O-line and a superb defense, but Dandy Don proved his value with less talent surrounding him. Leadership, gamesmanship, a great passer and cool under fire. Dandy Don had it all. One could say Hixon but Hixon wasn't very mobile and mobility is a key to QB survival on the current team.

And if one is pressed for a great running back, I would pick James. He ran tough inside and didn't fumble. Dickerson wasn't as strong an inside runner and he was more prone than James to leave the ball on the ground. At this point, the less turnovers the better.

Now all this is based on assumption that we have our current team and coaches and have to build a team facing the current weaknesses.

[EastStang]

Boy when you're talking whether you'd prefer ED, Hixson, LeVias, Berry, Ball, Carter, Kelcher, Whittington, James, Gregg or Walker, etc. as the guy to turn this team around, it makes you remember how many great players have graced SMU. My choice believe it or not would be Arthur Whittington. I never saw another player with the absolute ability to turn a game around in a nanosecond. If the other team had to punt in the last minute, watch out. He pretty much single-handedly turned two losses into a win and a tie my senior year. Given that we lost a few games last year by a touchdown or less, it would have been nice to have that kind player on the field.

[jtstang]

Funny you mention Whittington (he was intrumental in helping the Raiders to their first Superbowl win, too, as I recall)--I was helping my folks pack their attic for their move to the new house and found a box of my old SMU fan stuff (including the front and sports pages of the Jan. 2, 1983 DMN), in which I found my 8th grade football banquet program autographed by Arthur Whittington and Champ Dickerson.

But I've changed my mind. Since this program needs nothing short of a miracle to help, I'm going with Bobby Leach.