SMU Endowment

by **EastStang** » Wed May 25, 2005 8:54 am

If you think the liberal bent of these professors doesn't impact football at SMU, you are missing the true point of this discussion. Remember, some of these guys went to Harvard or Oberlin skipped the football games and truly believe that the Harvard or Oberlin model will work at SMU for everything including intercollegiate sports.

by **Dooby** » Wed May 25, 2005 9:29 am

I think the high and mighty notion that SMU is some superior academic institution is kind of funny. I love SMU and think I got a great education, but the fact is that SMU is not at the same level as many of the academic institutions we claim to be our peers. Not to belittle my alma matter, but we accept 2 out of 3 people that apply. In 1989, there was a 90% acceptance rate. Yet, for some reason, we expect our football players to be rhodes scholars.

by **NavyCrimson** » Wed May 25, 2005 9:35 am

it takes a lot of moola to be high & mighty, if @ all, #1, is get that endowment in the billions & things will take care of themselves

by **Water Pony** » Wed May 25, 2005 10:07 am

Who do I make the check out to?

:wink:

by **No Cal Pony** » Wed May 25, 2005 10:42 am

Ponymon, like Lake highlands, you don't know me so don't get personal. I merely made a point that you still couldn't really refute. As for the LA Times, they were owned by the Chandler/Otis family. Folks who were anything byt "socialist." Now they are owned by the Chicago Tribune Co., yet another company harly anything but "socialist." I too could go on and on, very windbag like, but don't really see the point. And like Lake Highlands, you miss the fact I live in NORTH CAROLINA. I used to live in Folsom, CA. Hardly a bastion of liberalism. Get a clue before you attack me.

This whole thread has gotten way far from the fact that SMU's endowment isn't what it ought to be. Neither is the funds for Mustang Club to aid our athletes. Why don't we stick to the matters of SMU???

Go Ponies!

SMU Endowment

Who is online