PonyFans.com

Pony up

Samurai Stang wrote:

b_caesar wrote:It only takes money.

And university support. Without Turner's backing for a practice facility, money is useless.

And I highly doubt that money is the issue.

You really think that if someone walked into RGT's office on Monday with $5 mil for an IPF he would pass it up?

b_caesar wrote:

Samurai Stang wrote:

b_caesar wrote:It only takes money.

And university support. Without Turner's backing for a practice facility, money is useless.

And I highly doubt that money is the issue.

You really think that if someone walked into RGT's office on Monday with $5 mil for an IPF he would pass it up?

Hopefully they would not go to him. Someone needs to fund the second century campaign as that is when he will leave

b_caesar wrote:You really think that if someone walked into RGT's office on Monday with $5 mil for an IPF he would pass it up?

One must only ask himself which is more likely:

1. Turner hinders the athletic department
2. SMU has a shortage of wealthy alumni

Samurai Stang wrote:

b_caesar wrote:You really think that if someone walked into RGT's office on Monday with $5 mil for an IPF he would pass it up?

One must only ask himself which is more likely:

1. Turner hinders the athletic department
2. SMU has a shortage of wealthy alumni

Is that all? How easily fixed, then.

Pony_Fan wrote:Other than not having a IPF, how do our current facilities stack up against Baylor, Texas State, A&M, Houston, Rice, etc?

Weight room, locker rooms, meeting rooms, practice fields, etc...

Sterling Moore posted this on his FB page a while back - overview of Missouri - pretty cool facility

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2hVcebRA2E

If you are interested in what BU has you can find the football facilities at the following links.
Stadium & Locker room- http://www.baylorbears.com/facilities/casey.html
Weight Room at the on campus facility: http://www.baylorbears.com/facilities/weight.html
Indoor Facility- http://www.baylorbears.com/facilities/allison.html

SMU's:
http://smumustangs.cstv.com/sports/m-fo ... ities.html


You guys have a good setup and while I feel our practice facilities and weight rooms can hold up against anyone not named Oregon I don't think any gap between our schools is going to cost recruits either way.

We have a big edge with the indoor facility, you have a newer & nicer venue for your stadium. Both schools are probably going to build on which one they don't have in the next few years.

With limited space it makes it difficult for SMU vs someone like UCF.

Baylorfan, thanks for the links.

Glad to hear we are upgrading our locker rooms - our stuff is already 10+ yrs old now.

Sammy 11 wrote:You guys have a good setup and while I feel our practice facilities and weight rooms can hold up against anyone not named Oregon I don't think any gap between our schools is going to cost recruits either way.

We have a big edge with the indoor facility, you have a newer & nicer venue for your stadium. Both schools are probably going to build on which one they don't have in the next few years.

we are in dallas, you are in waco.

Samurai Stang wrote:

b_caesar wrote:You really think that if someone walked into RGT's office on Monday with $5 mil for an IPF he would pass it up?

One must only ask himself which is more likely:

1. Turner hinders the athletic department
2. SMU has a shortage of wealthy alumni

Yawn! Your posts are a broken record. Turner is not the issue.

Water Pony wrote:

Samurai Stang wrote:

b_caesar wrote:You really think that if someone walked into RGT's office on Monday with $5 mil for an IPF he would pass it up?

One must only ask himself which is more likely:

1. Turner hinders the athletic department
2. SMU has a shortage of wealthy alumni

Yawn! Your posts are a broken record. Turner is not the issue.

I presented the two possibilities for why it has not happened. If not one, then it must be the other. It is a matter of logic.

All you have done is make a claim with no factual basis, instead drawing only upon your blind love for Turner. I understand that you somehow blame me for your consistent idiocy, but that is not my doing. Your poor attempts at belittling me will not make you any wiser.

SStang you having a bad week?.....really?.....bad comments and no basis behind the statements. You are too far behind way too many time zones.

Samurai Stang wrote:I presented the two possibilities for why it has not happened. If not one, then it must be the other. It is a matter of logic.

Then your logic is fatally flawed. One of your assertions cannot absolutely override the other, or vice-versa. I believe it is much, much more complicated than that. Boiling it down to one or the other is short-sighted.

b_caesar wrote:

Samurai Stang wrote:I presented the two possibilities for why it has not happened. If not one, then it must be the other. It is a matter of logic.

Then your logic is fatally flawed. One of your assertions cannot absolutely override the other, or vice-versa. I believe it is much, much more complicated than that. Boiling it down to one or the other is short-sighted.

I understand your position. A third option of 'both' would have been more correct in regards to logic purposes.

Even so, SMU has no shortage of wealthy boosters that have demonstrated a willingness to spend money. It is far, far more likely that the problem is not financial.

Samurai Stang wrote:

b_caesar wrote:

Samurai Stang wrote:I presented the two possibilities for why it has not happened. If not one, then it must be the other. It is a matter of logic.

Then your logic is fatally flawed. One of your assertions cannot absolutely override the other, or vice-versa. I believe it is much, much more complicated than that. Boiling it down to one or the other is short-sighted.

I understand your position. A third option of 'both' would have been more correct in regards to logic purposes.

Even so, SMU has no shortage of wealthy boosters that have demonstrated a willingness to spend money. It is far, far more likely that the problem is not financial.

Agreed. Nor can it exclusively be the fault or hindrance, whether perceived or real, of RGT.

b_caesar wrote:
Agreed. Nor can it exclusively be the fault or hindrance, whether perceived or real, of RGT.

That, however, I disagree upon. As president, Turner possesses a number of powers, enough to hinder the building of such a practice facility. He is entirely capable of directing the building situation in either direction.