PonyFans.com

No. He shouldn't. SMU is a football school. Always has been and always will be and last time I checked, Orsini is doing just fine in that regards.

I think SO has done a good job. SMU athletics has come a long way since he got here. I was on board with the Doh hire and unfortunately it didn't workout the way we all had hoped. Now the pressure is on SO to find the right guy with the BE looming in the near future!

Don't lose sight of the fact that Orsini hired Doh when he was still AD at Central Florida. He hadn't even started our gig yet. Steve was winding things up at UCF when the job opened, and Turner asked him to take a week of vacation and find the new coach. It was an extraordinary situation, and you can hardly blame Orsini when it didn't work out exactly as planned. This is the truer test, and all indications are that we'll be very pleased with the outcome.

CoxBizGrad wrote:I can't believe that Orsini's press release had his, "Top 25 in everything we do," quote. Give it up Steve O., that quote is wearing thin and seems ridiculous as we finished in last place in CUSA.

Are you proposing we should lower our goals to reflect past results?

Years 1-6: Has done a lot for SMU. All the accomplishments have been mentioned.

Years 6-10: This is when this job gets even more challenging. Getting into a BCS game, going to the NCAA tournament, being a fixture in the Top 25...Getting our President and school to balance out academics/money/sports

I think Steve has done what he can here, the resume is more impressive than 2008 for the 2nd run at the Notre Dame AD job...

Before condemning SO, can you honestly say that you felt this way from day 1 with Doh? From what I recall, almost everyone was excited he came here. Hindsight is 20/20.

I think the mistake was extending his contract. But that, from everything I've heard, was driven by the people behind the money, not necessarily by SO. If people are willing to fund the buyout, then I have no problem with it.

Overall, I still think SO has done a lot better job than any of his predeceesors the last 20 years.

"Overall, I still think SO has done a lot better job than any of his predeceesors the last 20 years." - Junior

You are so correct, Junior. Orsini is highly regarded around the country as a fabulous Athletics Director. He has improved the SMU department dramatically since arriving in 2006.

Stampede wrote:"Overall, I still think SO has done a lot better job than any of his predeceesors the last 20 years." - Junior

You are so correct, Junior. Orsini is highly regarded around the country as a fabulous Athletics Director. He has improved the SMU department dramatically since arriving in 2006.

Probably with the glaring exception of marketing the programs.

I think the mistake is actually reading some of these posts.

Maybe Gary Patterson will find it in his purple heart to help us out.

Two words - Jim Copeland (may he rest in peace). SO had a lot of work to do in a lot of areas when he tool over.

We are all entitled to our opinions, but I still think Steve Orsini has been lackluster. I'm not saying anybody could have done any better but he hasn't really done anything.

The athletic department is gutted - no marketing, minimal sports information, etc. - No rip on the SIDs since they are all forced to cover multiple sports and give us the best information they can (most of the time limited by what the coaches will actually share with them when the coaches don't want to hide bad results)

The football team is a ton better, but only because June was hand-delivered to Orsini - and even though the past three seasons have been a lot of fun and the bowls have been awesome we are still basically a .500 team (even though a lot of people don't like to hear that).

Men's basketball (the only other sport that brings in money) is a total disaster.

Some of the other sports are doing ok, but most of them are total disasters as well - and Orsini doesn't give any indication whatsoever he gives a flip about any of them even though that is part of his job.

We got into the Big East because they needed teams and we are in a great market and have respectable football. I know 95% of SMU fans think that is enough but I sure don't.

I obviously hope we make a great basketball hire and the Big East money helps the rest of the sports reach the levels they deserve, but I will believe it when I see it.

I guess I shouldn't say he hasn't done anything because we did get money for the Moody renovations, but I imagine any AD could have pulled that off.

The perceived indifference to non rev sports and the lack of a marketing department is rooted in the fact that the athletic department runs a hugh annual deficit. It is expensive to run a Div I program and the lack of fan support for our revenue programs puts us deep in the hole. Hopefully a new infusion of Big East money will help in solving our athletic department financial problems. In addition, I understand that the University will begin making all of its vast resources available to help market our athletic programs and the number one priority of the athletic department going forward is to fill Ford and Moody. SO has done a wonderful job in keeping the ship afloat although we are no where near where we need to be. Hopefully we will see all our athletic programs grow and prosper over the next 5 years.

mustangbill67 wrote:The perceived indifference to non rev sports and the lack of a marketing department is rooted in the fact that the athletic department runs a hugh annual deficit. It is expensive to run a Div I program and the lack of fan support for our revenue programs puts us deep in the hole. Hopefully a new infusion of Big East money will help in solving our athletic department financial problems. In addition, I understand that the University will begin making all of its vast resources available to help market our athletic programs and the number one priority of the athletic department going forward is to fill Ford and Moody. SO has done a wonderful job in keeping the ship afloat although we are no where near where we need to be. Hopefully we will see all our athletic programs grow and prosper over the next 5 years.

I totally agree, which is why I said I don't think anybody could have done any better.

But to be fair, just about every school runs an athletic deficit, but we still seem to make less chicken soup than we should be able to.

It's a culture problem that runs through the department and the alumni and I honestly don't know how to fix it.

The perfect example is during the track and field championships last spring. The top six discus throwers were declared All-American (including our Simone du Toit).

The other five schools all had articles on their web sites that night. It was the top story on the home page for four of them, and two of them even had full-page splashes.

We didn't even have an article for two days.

It's all of those simple little things we don't do that drive me nuts about our athletic department and it wouldn't take much to fix them (and wouldn't take any money either!). In my opinion, Orsini should be on top of that kind of stuff and he hasn't been anywhere close.

If you think Steve hasn't done a good job, you're [deleted] [deleted].

Think about the abyss this program was in under Copeland.

Think Copeland could have gotten us in the Big East? Please.

Agree with Stanley on this one...


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?fug22a