SMU -- The Clock is Ticking

[Otter]

PerunaPunch is completely misinformed about the School of Education and their treatment of student-athletes. Any suggestion that athletes don't have access to classes is completely inaccurate. June Jones and Orsini simply want athletes to get a free ride when it comes to academic performance (Tutors doing football player's homework, looking the other way on poor classroom performance), and that doesn't fly with senior admin at SMU. We don't want to stoop to Ohio State's level. While JJ doesn't seem to care about SMU's academic reputation, but many of us who have an SMU degree on our wall do.

[westexSMU]

Otter, if you support high admissions for athletes, go support an Ivy League School. Don't start that up again here. SMU did that for the past 20 years until 2009, and we had one of the worst football programs in D1 for years for doing that. If SMU is going to compete in D1, like we are starting to do, the recruiting model had to change. The football program is being rebuilt right, and it is a program our school and our fans are now proud of. SMU is now trying to take the program to a BCS conference....Total applications for potential students are up and that means SMU will take the best students, outside of athletics. SMU is becoming a better university almost every year in all respects...and just ask your friend former Coach Mike Leach whether he thinks Coach Jones is right in changing the recruiting model at SMU as he has done...You think Mike Leach would want a job where the admissions for athletes were like SMU's were a few years ago ?

[PerunaPunch]

PerunaPunch is completely misinformed about the School of Education and their treatment of student-athletes.

Think so? I'll put my sources up against yours any day NOOB.

We have plenty of SMU diplomas on the wall (7 degrees in the immediate family, 9 in extended family), and i'm quite sure we're just as proud them as you are -- thank you vey much. And no, we don't want them to be given away in a Cracker Jack boxes.

But from the rhetoric I read, it seem like a lot of people believe that by easing admissions requiments and by adding a School of Education, we have solved all our acedemic issues pertaining to student-athletes. Those who think that just because we've added a School of Education that SMU is now oon competitive footing with other schools in terms of breadth of curriculum and the support services we offer our student-athletes are deluded.

Otter, I think you may not understand the difference between "dumbing down" the university and providing services that will not only make us more competitive, but will also improve our graduation rate and the quality of those graduates. if you'd like to discuss, I'd be happy to talk to you about it offline. Feel free to PM me if that's the case.

[Otter]

Your sources? Please. All I know is that Turner has SMU at something like 56th nationally. The $$ that flow to the school from proud alumni dwarf any of the contributions that football-related JJ donations could do.

There is a balance that needs to be struck between academic integrity and competitiveness athletically. At this point, it would make little sense to compromise the academic integrity of the school for one more win against - say UAB or UCF. Until we become relevant (hello marketing for fb and bb Orsini), we cannot let a coach who effectively threatens to resign every year to determine the academic agenda of the school.

If JJ cannot recruit for SMU without compromising academic integrity, then we need to get a coach who can do so. Otherwise, it is just an excuse.

[PerunaPunch]

All I know is that Turner has SMU at something like 56th nationally...

There is a balance that needs to be struck between academic integrity and competitiveness athletically... Otherwise, it is just an excuse.

All you know indeed... Let me clarify for you. It is evident that "all you know" is what you read in the press releases and from form letters entitled "SMU Unbridled". You obviously haven't spoken to either the students or the staff, and you obviously don't work for the university.

I completely agree with your second point, but it's clear from your post that you don't fully understand the issues. What, for example, would you do with a student-athlete who scores in the the superior range on an IQ test but has a reading disability? What about a student-athlete who is plenty smart, but is struggling because they come from a background where they never had to deal with time management or learn study skills?

For example, I know of a kid who suffered a traumatic brain injury in his youth, so he needed certain accommodations like extended time on taking tests. SMU does not offer some of the accommodations he needed. He is currently enrolled at Harvard, and doing just fine I might add.

Let me offer this change in perspective. If the university admits a student-athlete and invests several hundred thousand dollars in his or her education, doesn't the university deserve to receive the full benefit of that athlete's participation for a full 4-5 years? Isn't it a huge waste for all parties when that student flunks out? Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to give that student-athlete some support (support that our academic competition readily provides BTW -- from TCU to Harvard) so that they can graduate and enter the workforce with the exact same skills and knowledge as any other SMU graduate?

[westexSMU]

This is the newbie guy talking up Mike Leach to SMU on another post. Otter, we are NOT looking for a new coach, and nobody in their right mind, certainly not Mike Leach, would want to coach here if we went back to high admission standards for athletes here again.

[Otter]

From the two previous posts, I guess that I am to assume that one's opinion is only valid if they've been on this forum for 5-10 years?

With respect to admission standards, there are plenty of schools (including Rice, Cal, Notre Dame, Stanford, and Northwestern) with admission standards tougher than what we have here at SMU. I think that it is unfair for any school to admit a student-athlete who has little chance to succeed (graduate) once they are here. Creating an environment where athletes are not required to have a certain level of competency upon arrival will do nothing to help our reputation as a school, regardless if it is accompanied by 2-3 wins in an irrelevant conference.

JJ has made it clear that he values winning over education. Check out his track record before SMU and since he has arrived here.

[ericdickerson4life]

From the two previous posts, I guess that I am to assume that one's opinion is only valid if they've been on this forum for 5-10 years?

With respect to admission standards, there are plenty of schools (including Rice, Cal, Notre Dame, Stanford, and Northwestern) with admission standards tougher than what we have here at SMU. I think that it is unfair for any school to admit a student-athlete who has little chance to succeed (graduate) once they are here. Creating an environment where athletes are not required to have a certain level of competency upon arrival will do nothing to help our reputation as a school, regardless if it is accompanied by 2-3 wins in an irrelevant conference.

JJ has made it clear that he values winning over education. Check out his track record before SMU and since he has arrived here.

Do some research on wins/bowl appearance (or in the case of basketball tournament/sweet 16 appearances) and the effects that has on the school (through admissions to money raised).

[redpony]

A lot of comments on this topic are Otter-ly ridiculous.

GO PONIES!!!

[smupony94]

A lot of comments on this topic are Otter-ly ridiculous.

GO PONIES!!!

bad redpony, bad

[Otter]

Sorry to cloud this discussion board with the facts RedPony.

[PonyKai]

The second anyone cites Rice as part of their argument involving athletics, just tune the rest out because they're on another planet.

[Water Pony]

Sorry to cloud this discussion board with the facts RedPony.

Unfortunately, newbie, claiming something is a fact, does not make it a fact. My first reaction is that you are trolling this site and intentionally trying to stir up a family fight that no one is buying., i.e. drop JJ for Leach. I'm betting you are not an SMU fan. Fact or ficton?

[PerunaPunch]

I think that it is unfair for any school to admit a student-athlete who has little chance to succeed (graduate) once they are here. Creating an environment where athletes are not required to have a certain level of competency upon arrival will do nothing to help our reputation as a school, regardless if it is accompanied by 2-3 wins in an irrelevant conference.

The point you are ignorantly trying to argue is analogous to not admitting a nearsighted student because a school has no provision for optometry.

Last I heard, the purpose of SMU was to educate. The issue is not admitting students who have no business being here (for the most part, we do not). The issue is inadequate services for students who have the intellectual horsepower to graduate, but who may either have learning differences, speak English as a second (or third or more) language, or were not privileged to come from an educational background that adequately prepared them for a school like SMU.

[Topper]

Sorry to cloud this discussion board with the facts RedPony.

Unfortunately, newbie, claiming something is a fact, does not make it a fact. My first reaction is that you are trolling this site and intentionally trying to stir up a family fight that no one is buying., i.e. drop JJ for Leach. I'm betting you are not an SMU fan. Fact or ficton?

It seems odd that someone who sees absolutely nothing positive about Orsini, Jones, or SMU athletics in general could believe that Leach would be a positive for our community. I cannot think of anyone who whose personality could be a worse match for SMU or the City of Dallas for that matter.