June Planning to Coach about 5 More Years

[Stallion]

My point has always been that SMU does not have high academic standards for admission. I'm sure that if June Jones was in charge of academic curiculum he would have al kinds of Cupcakes for Jocks. But he's not. I'll stand up for the University against academic fraud. SMU should not offer curiculum that does not provide a legitimate course of study. If they need to add academic resources then I've always been fine with that. SMU hasrecently kept its "promise" to June Jones and addressed legimate courses that appeal to athletes in the College of Education.. I also don't think there is any real proof that SMU flunks out more athletes than other schools of SMU's caliber-just because SMU fans don't pay attention to athletes flunking at other schools doesn't make it true. TCU definitely has had more academic casualties than SMU in recent years. Tech an annual problem. UT has them too. All NCAA schools are going to have academic casuaties under recent and future APR, Academic Progress and other acadmic standards-they are designed to flunk out athletes who are not on track to graduate-at all schools. This isn't 1980 or even 2000-there are consequences to recruiting the same players that used to be able to waltz through school.

[ponyscott]

SMU is like any other academic institution in it’s efforts at pushing
the University to consider re-evaluating its relationship between the
school's academic side and its revenue sports. The usual centerpiece of
the debate is the idea of adding majors that are more athletic-friendly than the ones we have now.

One caveat which is usually thrown in the debate and which is usually little more than a
straw man is that "any new major must benefit the academic community at
large." This distracts from the issue as a good football team is a
real benefit to the school. A good football team brings in publicity and
publicity brings in money and more qualified students because the volume of applicants is increased. The University of Texas and the University of Michigan; two of the finest state schools in the country and two which have benefited tremendously from having
powerhouse football teams. But aside from that, it's a slap in the face
to the football players and it runs counter to the notion of a
student-athlete, to suggest that they are in a separate category from
the rest of the students. They are only here to play football, after which we're
done with them. If the Perkins School of Theology needed renovating, it'd be
ridiculous to ignore it because it benefits only those Theology majors
that wanted an Christian immersion program and not the "academic community at
large." You wouldn't let the house disintegrate because it doesn't benefit engineering majors either, and is a lot smaller in size than the football team and the related supporters in the university athletic department.

The traditional usual major for a football player is anthropology, sociology, or psychology. It's quite the charade to pretend football players are going to be anthropologists when they graduate. The point is not to set it up so that football players can coast through. The point is to offer relevant majors, not easy majors. Usually, a football player's best skill is - get this -......football. And that's true even for most of those who have no shot at the NFL. Quite a few of them will want to use that skill of theirs to earn a living, though, even if its not on the field. Why not offer a field of study that will help that out? We're not talking about "general studies" here. If a player wants to be a strength and conditioning coach, a kinesiology degree is what he needs. If he wants to go into the media, try communications.

Stanford offers communications, and how many of us think their academic reputation suffers for it? Michigan has a School of Kinesiology, and still manages to be a top academic school. U-M's School of Kinesiology has roughly 800 undergrads; adjusting for the relative sizes of the two universities, a similar program at SMU could attract perhaps 250-300 people when it gets up to speed. The football team isn't even that large.
Neither is the landscape architecture program or the Social Studies program, but we maintain them as well.

Of course, the benefits of new programs could be debatable. I do think it would make SMU more attractive to potential recruits; certainly, it would help with the negative recruiting our coaches have to deal with. (Of course, coaches that use the "Why would you go where you can't graduate?" line are setting themselves up to have to tell a kid, " June Jones may think you're too stupid to graduate from SMU, but we don't.") But how many recruits, how many wins it'll result in, sure....that's always debatable. Here's what the addition of a potential new "athletic friendly" major won't do:

- Cheapen existing or future degrees.
- Damage existing or future research endeavors.
- Cost SMU its top professors.
- Cost SMU its reputation.
- Cost SMU its SAT rankings.....quite the contrary.

You could argue that the creation of new programs will cost money and take up space that might have to be diverted from other programs, and that's a consideration. But here's another one: the University has expanded admissions to the point where it's now 1,000 undergrad students larger than it was when I entered SMU years ago. That's about $50 million per year in extra tuition and living expense dollars, and it'll be expanding even faster in the next decade with new majors, the new Bush Museum and Sophomore housing. So, the school's cash flow is not shrinking.

Anyone who thinks SMU should not try for excellence in football and basketball is in the wrong place. The ideals of the Ivy League out East are those of sacrificing sports in favor of academic.....I guess you'd call it "purity" or Academic purity. However you put it, it's an attitude that academics are the only thing worth pursuing to the pinnacle. Fine for them, but I prefer a University that achieves excellence in everything it sets out to do. Even Oxford and Cambridge and Harvard try like heck to beat each other in damn rowing. If I agreed with the Ivy League approach, I'd have applied to an Ivy League school; anyone who feels SMU should cut corners in football and basketball because it might risk what we've achieved in the academic world would have done the same. SMU doesn't exist to serve football, but an investment in academics designed to improve performance on the football field is the correct acknowledgement of what football can do for the school.

[Stallion]

SMU has Applied Physiology-I'm tired of posting this but its basically another name for KINESIOLOGY. Many school call their programs Kinesiology and Applied Physiology.

[Stallion]

SMU has an undergrate Communication degree

http://www.smu.edu/Meadows/AreasOfStudy ... nStudiesBA

[ponyscott]

No problem Stallion....just pointing out what can be done. I didn't know that Applied Physiology is the same course of study as Kienesology, but new majors open up every year that are important to new student/atletes, SMU just needs to be able to adapt.

[JasonB]

we lost several players over the last couple of years who couldn't stay in school past freshman year. all the way back to Gamble and Mconico, and then a couple of receivers from the last two classes (Kitchens rings a bell?)

That is the reason we have been lacking up to now at WR and secondary. Secondary issue should be fixed next year, but WR still hurting.

[Rebel10]

No problem Stallion....just pointing out what can be done. I didn't know that Applied Physiology is the same course of study as Kienesology, but new majors open up every year that are important to new student/atletes, SMU just needs to be able to adapt.

One thing about it Ponyscott and that is it is definitely not PE like SMU used to have before the DP.

[orguy]

If we are losing athletes then perhaps their advisors are partially responsible. SMU has always had some easy Mick majors.

Yes, SMU has a communications degree in Meadows. Most universities do for the non academically motivated student. 90 percent of the students in any given class receive an A or so it was rumored when I was an undergrad. A similar MO to the college of Education. Wasn't it shrubs wife who donated money to revive this program for either the lazy or academically unprepared student? fitting.

If an athlete is academically unprepared to major in Physics/German/Engineering for instance, there are certainly less rigorous options.

[ClickClack]

Who has flunked out? I know TW had problems and DJ has been borderline. Any others now in jeopardy?
What has been mentioned is lack of tutors and academic support for athletes.

It's pretty simple June, recruit better.

Darryl Fields, Kevion Gamble, JR McConico, Deonte McDade

[PerunaPunch]

My point has always been that SMU does not have high academic standards for admission ... SMU hasrecently kept its "promise" to June Jones and addressed legimate courses that appeal to athletes in the College of Education ... I also don't think there is any real proof that SMU flunks out more athletes than other schools of SMU's caliber.

Stallion, I don't mean to rag on you, but I would suggest you doing a little investigative research on this. Start with looking into the admissions requirements for the "promise" and then also loo at the newly implemented curriculum changes/requirements and report your findings back to this topic.

TCU definitely has had more academic casualties than SMU in recent years.

They also have vastly superior support services. I also support SMU's high academic standards, but it is decidedly unfair to make athletes (who spend hours a day in practice and training) compete with the general student population for a half dozen openings in the School of Education.

[Mexmustang]

As to why June wouldn't make those comments in a Dallas paper? He is making progress with members of the board and with President Turner. Don't embarrass those people he is trying to win over.

On admissions, we still aren't completely at the same level as other schools that finally "get it", such as Vanderbilt, Cal, Notre Dame, in that junior college transfers are limited to those that effectively qualified when they graduated from high school and their JC transcripts are thoroughly reviewed. The internal politics setup by design, within the school is still a major problem.

Keeping kids in school is now the biggest problem. Those friends of mine from Chicago admit that ND finally had to admit that they couldn't keep their kids in school (and win) without several courses designed to keep them is school. They simple had to stop recruiting them. The limit on scholarships forced them away from these recruits. They suggest that Lou Holtz was the last coach given that latitude to both admit and keep them in school. It was only a couple of years ago, that those "old" rules were restored by a new President. That is singular change that has allowed the school to compete again. Coaching is important, but being able to recruit and having the confidence that these kids can stay in school is important to recruiting.

From Vanderbilt, to Stanford, to TCU, to Michigan, to Cal, they get it. Their academic rankings are unaffected by having such programs and with the exception of TCU; these are the schools SMU aspires to become. Things are changing now at SMU, although we have often seen promises made are not always promises kept often due our internal structure.

A general studies program that will allow a student/athlete that works over 4 hours a day at his profession, to at least sample those courses in our various schools, like business or education without formal admissions into the school (thus not affecting the schools almighty SAT averages--that most educators admit, really isn't a predictor of academic sucess in the first place).

Those of you that don't understand how slowly SMU changes and how uncompetitive we have been in retaining athletes will never spend the time considering how many recruits we simply pass on, knowing they can't stay in school or transfer from a JC with a major effort. It happens all the time. Remember the two kids that went to JC after committing to SMU and then we seemed to "ignore"? Remember how TCU seemed to step into our vacuum? Well, the coaches realized that these kids would never make it at SMU, because we couldn't admit them/keep them is school Yes, we do admit the odd JC transfer, but there are still limitations, including finding a course of study available at most schools to keep them in school.

As Larry Brown has found out, other schools use it against him in recruiting. LB was quite vocal about it, including that night at Ozona's. Suddenly he has gone quiet. Why? I personally believe progress is occuring, simply not the time to raise the issue again. June loses a couple of kids to grades and we can't remember their names, Larry loses two and chances are he losses 40% of his starting lineup. That is perhaps the biggest reason June wanted LB to come to SMU--together they can get these changes done.

As my friends at ND have said, we decided these kids were going to sign with someone, and having a program to lift their limited academic skills at our school, with our students and professors was their best option. They can justify it any way they want, but the facts are the school is relevant again in terms of football--after a long time in the wilderness.

[03Mustang]

Most positive post I've seen in a while regarding the school and RGT, Mexmustang. Unless I'm misinterpreting what you are saying, it sounds like good things may be happening behind the scenes.

Good day to be a Mustang! Nice to feel this way again after a very up and down season!!

[SMU21TCU10]

I hope he does. SMU is not an attractive school for coaches ( and recruits). I think June has done a great job in his time here. SMU games are about the same as a 3A high school game, and I don't blame June for that.

[Stallion]

The nonsense continues. Notre Dame hasn't had ANY problems keeping athletes eligible and has been at the top the APR just about every year.Same with Vandy. Mexmustang you are making this [deleted] up about Vandy, Cal and Notre Dame -seriously get a clue. --there is no comparison in the caliber of our recruits academically to Cal, Notre Dame and Vandy. So how can you compare our graduation rate or APR. We have very little admission standards AT ALL-low standards are going to mean that some flunk out. And Peruna Punch instead of telling me what I should investigate why don't you do that yourself. This is an independent site right? Just remember when you do I suggest you study up on the new NCAA rules as well.

[PerunaPunch]

And Peruna Punch instead of telling me what I should investigate why don't you do that yourself. This is an independent site right? Just remember when you do I suggest you study up on the new NCAA rules as well.

I don't do it myself for several reasons, but primarily because I have no desire to invest MY time to educate YOU.

I don't need to study up on the NCAA rules, because I don't get on PonyFans purporting to have any special knowledge of NCAA rules, unlike you who make erroneous statements about our admissions processes, the support programs available for our student-athletes, the facade known as SMU's School of Education, etc.

If you want to continue doing that, it's no skin off my back. As far I'm concerned, I have led Stallion to the proverbial water; it is your choice whether or not to drink.