PonyFans.com

I'm hoping this kid is our Jason Phillips at TCU. Projecting to the future we are looking pretty strong at LB with Inside LBs like Bordano, Beard and speed guys like Jagared Davis, Taylor Reed, Brandon Thornton and Uchenna Nwabuike. Bryon Brown may be the fastest of the group but we've seen less of him. Forgot about Brandon Henderson too. Then if the Beck Coulter hype is legitimate and he is admitted then we should have the best corps of LB prospects we've had since the 1980s-

Totally agree with you Stallion. Now we need another RB and DT to round out this class.

I think if we want to raise our game and compete with BCS schools on our future schedule I'd like to see SMU also get the big OLM we are after. We got the inside guys but I think we could improve at OT projecting into the future.

I agree, and maybe we get Parker Mack. I worry that after next year, we only have two RB's and DT's on the roster, and I don't really want to play with a freshman

Stallion wrote:I'm hoping this kid is our Jason Phillips at TCU. Projecting to the future we are looking pretty strong at LB with Inside LBs like Bordano, Beard and speed guys like Jagared Davis, Taylor Reed. Brandon Thornton. Bryon Brown may be the fastest of the group but we've seen less of him. Then if the Beck Coulter hype is legitimate and he is admitted then we should have the best corps of LB prospects we've had since the 1980s-

I was thinking almost the same thing.

We will also have to get taller/bigger safeties. What we have will work for now...but if we start upgrading our schedule we will need some run stopper safties - and that means 6-1 minimum with some size who would rather hit you like a truck then breath.

we are working on that

SMU 86 wrote:

ponypunk wrote:News is not proprietary. Moveover, while your opinion of yourself, based on your comments, is quite entertaining, I do not feel the need to justify myself to you. Nevertheless, your ego is amusing.

There is such a thing as intellectual properties and yes that is proprietary info.

Please tell me that you don't really think a name or even a breaking story is proprietary. Please explain to all of us how a name or breaking story is intellectual property. Am I to understand that it is your position that the first news outlet to break a story has a proprietary interest in said story? If I read a story from a Sports Illustrated magazine am I prohibited from then discussing that story with anyone else who has not purchased the same magazine? There is no proprietary information or intellectual property involved in my posting. Please save the mistaken beliefs for the NTSU board.

ponypunk wrote:

SMU 86 wrote:

ponypunk wrote:News is not proprietary. Moveover, while your opinion of yourself, based on your comments, is quite entertaining, I do not feel the need to justify myself to you. Nevertheless, your ego is amusing.

There is such a thing as intellectual properties and yes that is proprietary info.

Please tell me that you don't really think a name or even a breaking story is proprietary. Please explain to all of us how a name or breaking story is intellectual property. Am I to understand that it is your position that the first news outlet to break a story has a proprietary interest in said story? If I read a story from a Sports Illustrated magazine am I prohibited from then discussing that story with anyone else who has not purchased the same magazine? There is no proprietary information or intellectual property involved in my posting. Please save the mistaken beliefs for the NTSU board.

First of all, I work for a company that deals with intellectual property so I have knowledge of what I am taking about. Second, it was not public info yet. Third, why don't you go post on the rivals board where you got the info from and see how the publisher feels about you doing that?

smu86
how good is this KID

indianmustang wrote:smu86
how good is this KID

Really good.

SMU 86 wrote:

indianmustang wrote:smu86
how good is this KID

Really good.

How do you know?

Junior Year Highlites-almost all against the run. He plays RB at the end

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0GA0HFQzeY

Tough kid, interested to see him play in space, does bring some lumber though.

First of all, I work for a company that deals with intellectual property so I have knowledge of what I am taking about. Second, it was not public info yet. Third, why don't you go post on the rivals board where you got the info from and see how the publisher feels about you doing that?[/quote]


I am sure your employer is very proud of the work you do on ponyfans. Do your postings earn you extra stars at work?

The information is public as soon as the recruit tells someone about it. Are you now trying to say that when a recruit talks to a reporter, that information is somehow private just because the reporter has a pay site, but if the recruit instead spoke with a reporter who has a free site, then the exact same information, which originated from the recruit, is private and protected. Alternatively, if one was to read something on a pay site about a recruit, then call the recruit to confirm, then post information - that would get around the intellectual property that you seem to think exists. You still haven't explained what you think is intellectual property in this scenario. A report wasn't reprinted. Is it the recruit's words? Do you think his statements of an oral commitment is intellectual property or is it a report on what a recruit said that is the intellectual property? Again, nothing has been reprinted. A breaking story is not intellectual property. Information about Watergate was first published in a newspaper that readers had to pay for, was it therefore an infringement on the writer's intellectual property for someone who paid for and read the newspaper to talk about it with someone who had not paid for the newspaper? Isn't the goal of any reporter to inform the public and get people to talk and think about what they are reporting? Your misguided beliefs concerning intellectual property are simply inconsistent with the idea of reporting.