PonyFans.com

To Stallion: This may have been answered...a number of times...but I don't have the luxury of perusing the forum at my leisure, so if you could humor me...

What does the admin (above Copeland, that is) and/or Board say of your suggestions when posed with similar arguments? Anything on record, officially or anecdotally? Just curious. You seem as if you have already posed this to them. I'm curious, if nothing else, to know their reaction.

Geno:
If your education went beyond the 12th grade, whereever you attended school there were athletes getting cars, apartments, money, etc. That is not the dicussion on this thread.

The DP was not due to poor academic performance by SMU athletes. It was due to repeated rules violations concerning reimbusement for performance.

One would like to think that those athletes were at least smart enough to cut a good business deal. :wacko:

Originally posted by Stallion:
Southland-you mean Jim Copeland is quietly pushing for these exact same changes that I've been pushing for 5 years and was being beaten over the head by every Mustang Club Member on this board. I'm SHOCKED-SHOCKED I tell you to hear that! Next thing you will tell me that Bennett is not philosophically opposed to JUCO players. As I told you before-my position is not radical and in fact is imminently reasonable-there has been a Conspiracy of Silence around here for too long by people who believe in the importance of athletics to this university but who have been too afraid to speak up and rationally articulate that position.

Yes... we forgot it's all about you.

The problem Stallion is you spend your entire day [deleted] on this site rather than rationally communicating with University leadership...

...and yes, Jim has pushed for a reduction in the restrictions, particularly the ability to redtag, since 1996. He addresses it annually at the AD review. He had no supporters until Ford was built, and even now it is a substantial uphill battle.

On second thought, you should spend you're entire day on the board; your self loathing keeps us entertained. :showoff:

Re "unqualified" entrants during the 70's and 80's:

I don't think it was much of a secret.

Any of you in school then who kept your general catalogue can see the policy spelled out. I suppose the catalogues are available for reference in the registar's office also.

I don't know how many academically challenged children of alums, especially those with money to donate, entered SMU on that basis. I know that some athletes entered with no special consideration. But I remember seeing the catalogue and thinking the numbers permitted would take care of restocking the basketball and football teams.

Originally posted by Stallion:
I wasn't focused on it until really after Pye came-we were successful in the 1980's so no one questioned what we were doing because we were doing the same as just about everyone in the country-our graduation rates were if anything toward the top of the SWC and I never remember embarrassing numbers at least in comparison the rest of the SWC. -and it bears repeating that the DP was for financial payments and cheating to athletes but did not involve academic fraud. I've posted this before but I think we had about 9-12 JUCOs on Championship teams about 4-5 who were starters-its questionable if we could have reached those goals without the JUCO kids.

No one is against your proposals. Copeland is all for it as well; the academic side of SMU was opposed to it in the past, to which it took time with Dr. Turner in there now to overcome.

Originally posted by Stallion:
there has been a Conspiracy of Silence around here for too long by people who believe in the importance of athletics to this university but who have been too afraid to speak up and rationally articulate that position.

I ain't afraid... tell me who these foo's are, tell me what to say... show me the jibba jabba talkin' suckas in person and I will throw them helluva far !

<img src="http://www.seanbaby.com/stupcom/images/t-call.jpg" alt=" - " />