How can our boosters be so clueless?

ponyscott · Post by **ponyscott** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:14 pm

mrydel wrote:It is about time for Petrino to be itching to move. Just sayin'.

To move Up from the ditch on a Arkansas Highway?

Mexmustang · Post by **Mexmustang** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:50 pm

I am not defending June, just pointing the spotlight where it should have been for 16-17 years.

SMU's answer since the DP has been "fire the coach", not change the process. Stallion, I respect much of your criticism of June and his staff. But, both coaches (Brown and Jones) know that without an athletic friendly major, "general studies" we can't compete. We may get it this year, we may not. Get that major and even JC transfers may increase their ability to get their necessary credits and be admitted into SMU.

I suspect that progress is finally being made. Why? June has been quiet and Larry Brown after his comments at Ozona a few weeks ago has also gone silent. Also, a lot of important alumni and members, not the leadership, of the Letterman's Club are turning up the heat. Too often, their leadership has more interested in not rocking the boat--that is getting Gerald to their cocktail parties and criticizing our coaches rather than fixing the problem. These guys are former friends of mine; I like to call them the "go along, get along" crowd.

I may never convince any of you how dysfunctional our administration has been toward athletics, but I have been there, been lied to and we are finally pointing the spotlight on the one person that has been ducking and passing responsibility for a very long time.

I don't believe we would have ever gotten Johnson to come to SMU instead of Georgia Tech, just my feeling, not based upon fact. June surprised everyone with his interest. Only a senior head coach with a reputation and track record could have forced the changes made in admissions. Believe me the administration went kicking and screaming into that process.

Sure, I like the idea of hiring an aggressive talented coaching staff, but that young offensive coordinator you want to promote could not have possibly gotten the changes that needed to be made. Did any of June's predecessors make any progress? Leopards don't change spots--unless they see that their coat maybe skinned.

But, who would you hire? I've seen the list, but they all went to better football schools in the last month. We would have been in the one of the most difficult positions in years to hire a name coach--too many openings, the profession wouldn't understand firing a coach that has taken this "loser" to four consecutive bowls, the profession knows and understands the administrative problems here--just like the coaches that turned us down in the basketball search, they didn't believe they would be allowed to compete.

Before you run June out on a rail, you better change the landscape and have some names in mind--and Bobby Petrino isn't one of them.

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 4:09 pm

The landscape changed before June set foot on campus. We have the evidence based on DMN story on the profile of June Jones' first 2 classes at SMU v Phil Bennett. We have had boatloads of JUCOs-most of which were nonqualifiers out of high school- in FB and BB that squirmed past minimum NCAA JUCO requirements when they were lowerer than they are today. We just aren't going to let kids in with fraudulent correspondence and ping-pong transfer credits. Its not a matter of lowering JUCO admission standards any more-the NCAA already did that with the 2.5 GPA minimum (formerly 2.0 GPA) starting this year on Wednesday's signing date. We also have added at least 2 majors in the College of Education where plenty of SMU athletes are presently admitted-I've identified double digits recognizable SMU athletes in Football, Basketball and more. Sorry, the present standards really aren't that big a deal and you can't identify a single SMU recruit we didn't admit who has started a game of Division 1A Football at another school.

Mexmustang · Post by **Mexmustang** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 4:20 pm

Stallion, I am sorry but you haven't a clue...the DMN is not a resource, it is a place for young graduates to intern in journalism. Once again, you confuse letting an athlete in and keeping him in. You also confuse interpretation of the rules (Vicky Hill) on admissions. You are old enough to know that their is "objective" and "subjective", the administration can cooperate or be an obstacle, and that is where we are.

You are absoulutely wrong on the timing of the changes in admissions and you are wrong on this silly notion that average SAT scores predict classroom performance. I won't even go there. I scored over 1300 on the old method and look at me (I still can't spell)! Of course I went to Vanderbilt, not SMU as an undergrad; where they did change the rules seven years ago, with an entire program of athletic friendly majors (Peabody). Three of my fraternity brothers are on the board, played football, and forced the changes. They are still laughing at SMU thinking we rank with them academically--by the way they include all colleges in their ranking, like Davidson and MIT, rather than excluding them which puts SMU out of the top 100! They are also in the SEC and finally doing quite well, thank you.

You need to change your "signature", "Forrest, Tom, Mike Cavan and Phil "didn't have a chance to win...The system was not set up to win. I really think I'm the only Coach since the Death Penalty that's been given an opportunity to truly be on a level playing field" Coach June Jones.

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 4:29 pm

Everytime you open your mouth on this subject you show you don't understand what you are talking about:

Let's keep it simple-show me how this program has been hampered by minimum standards

List all football recruits that we have offered that have not been admitted to SMU and yet have met NCAA qualification standards and actually started a game at a Division 1A university:

ANSWER:
---------
---------
---------

smumustang1980 · Post by **smumustang1980** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 5:53 pm

Wow, Stallion and MexMustang mixing it up on the board... Gentlemen, let's remember we all love the Ponies. Some of us may know more or less than others, and we all may be wrong some of the time, so let's keep this in mind. And, please forgive me for the lecture.

While I am here, I have one question MexMustang: You mentioned earlier that you are (or were) well connected with the administration, correct?

Best wishes.

78pony · Post by **78pony** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 5:55 pm

Good back and forth gentlemen.

Water Pony · Post by **Water Pony** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:52 pm

Stallion could never be confused with a Sunshiner on this Board, but he appears to be more balanced in his assessment. Despite our confusion and justifiable disappointment in the most recent BE events, administration has navigated some especially difficult circumstances for the last 6 years. While on performance on the FB field appears to have leveled off, our impatience actually reflects greater expectations from the positives in many areas of athletics during this transformational time, from hopeless to renewed pride to a demand to perform at the highest levels.

As reported above, Turner and Athletic Department have improved SMU sports, but we still have much to do. We did not create the current instability in BCS and non-BCS conferences, but in some respects we may be able to survive and flourish better than some, due to our renewed commitment to athletics, FB bowl games, Brown's hiring, Moody renovations, etc. We are in a better (though fragile) conference which, along with the ACC, needs to stop the bleeding. In this case, SMU should be part of the solution and not the problem.

For now, let's improve our performance and will be rewarded. We are hardly to a position to demand anything until we demonstrate from our FB results and attendance, that we deserve a seat at the big boys table. In this regard, Turner has spun a good tune for SMU, despite our challenges. Six years ago, our future seemed uncertain, if not bleak.

Rayburn · Post by **Rayburn** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:45 pm

Stallion has aptly summarized the situation.

PoconoPony · Post by **PoconoPony** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:09 pm

If we tend our own ship we will be ready for the next step or conference. Our problem is that we have still not made enough progress in football or basketball to even think about future opportunities. We simply need bigger, stronger and faster athletes to better compete. We can recruit these athletes and still have credible academic standards. I am tired of everyone wanting to settle for academically marginal athletes and blaming admissions for our failures. My experience, which includes dealing with a variety of world class athletes, is that the best athletes are also very academically bright. The reason they are world class is that they use their intelligence to train, understand, follow coaching, understand the science of their sport and have the ability to use their intelligence to perform under pressure. People who are academically marginal will never have the ability meet those standards.

Rayburn · Post by **Rayburn** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:14 pm

PoconoPony wrote:If we tend our own ship we will be ready for the next step or conference. Our problem is that we have still not made enough progress in football or basketball to even think about future opportunities. We simply need bigger, stronger and faster athletes to better compete. We can recruit these athletes and still have credible academic standards. I am tired of everyone wanting to settle for academically marginal athletes and blaming admissions for our failures. My experience, which includes dealing with a variety of world class athletes, is that the best athletes are also very academically bright. The reason they are world class is that they use their intelligence to train, understand, follow coaching, understand the science of their sport and have the ability to use their intelligence to perform under pressure. People who are academically marginal will never have the ability meet those standards.

I agree. SMU is a university with a football team, not a football ball team with a university (like Oklahoma).

dbone · Post by **dbone** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:43 pm

What's the problem with this back and forth?

Good stuff...I'm learning...and I'm waiting for the superior argument to prevail. I'm not reading any cheap shot B.S. arguments...my default postion is going to be over and over...Death Penalty and Turner's "lack of support" are not the problems...our problems lie elsewhere...

SMU_Alumni11 · Post by **SMU_Alumni11** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:27 pm

Charleston Pony wrote:the word I got was that they want to build the indoor practice facility for football where Wescott currently sits. Need to find a home for soccer and also the natatorium/equestrian center. I'm told they are looking on east side of I-75 so there is still plenty of fund raising to be done to "get it right"

I think peruna field (baseball) needs to be built where the old dr pepper place was

Grant Carter · Post by **Grant Carter** » Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:04 am

SMU_Alumni11 wrote:
Charleston Pony wrote:the word I got was that they want to build the indoor practice facility for football where Wescott currently sits. Need to find a home for soccer and also the natatorium/equestrian center. I'm told they are looking on east side of I-75 so there is still plenty of fund raising to be done to "get it right"
I think peruna field (baseball) needs to be built where the old dr pepper place was

Are you suggesting they should tear down the grocery store or the apartments next to it? One or both would have to go.

SMU_Alumni11 · Post by **SMU_Alumni11** » Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:13 am

Meh apartments aren't that great however buying out the store would be cheaper and the Kroger sucks. Maybe they can actually make Greenville normal

How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?

Re: How can our boosters be so clueless?