Page 5 of 5
Re: HART/SMU SID/SMU : IPF should be #1 infrastructure prior
Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:23 am
by feelthehorsepower
blackoutpony wrote:Stallion wrote:Note-I am now being lectured by FTH in 2013 about how TCU is the Model for SMU's program based on what they've done since 1998. I think I'll pass on responding
He's a troll. We need to stop feeding him
STFU and have more respect, man.
Re: HART/SMU SID/SMU : IPF should be #1 infrastructure prior
Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:25 am
by feelthehorsepower
Stallion wrote:feelthehorsepower wrote:Stallion wrote:Note-I am now being lectured by FTH in 2013 about how TCU is the Model for SMU's program based on what they've done since 1998. I think I'll pass on responding
You have got to be kidding me. Have more respect. It's true. They are doing all the right things.
Yeah and I was explaining exactly how it was going to happen and in fact how it did happen before it happened not a decade and a half later. That's why they say I'm a TCU homer even though I have no connection whatsoever to the university
I didn't mean to "lecture" or anything. I agree and TCU is the model we should follow in the short run. I would love to see SMU develop the Stanford model in the long run, though.
Re: HART/SMU SID/SMU : IPF should be #1 infrastructure prior
Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:30 am
by alyssa
Just build that damn thing!
Re: HART/SMU SID/SMU : IPF should be #1 infrastructure prior
Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:35 am
by Come and Take It
Stallion wrote:Note-I am now being lectured by FTH in 2013 about how TCU is the Model for SMU's program based on what they've done since 1998. I think I'll pass on responding
FTHP - you commented about reading more and posting less. Stallion has long championed the TCU model. Almost 1,000 posts in a little over 2 months. Nothing you've said or thought hasn't been stated on here many times before.
And if you say we have the money for an IPF, why is the CoC paying June? Why don't we have the money to buy him out? Getting rid of him is a lot cheaper than constructing a building.
I appreciate the tenacity and enthusiasm. We need more fans like you. But stating we need to become Dallas' team; we need an IPF; we need more students; those are dead horse issues.
Re: HART/SMU SID/SMU : IPF should be #1 infrastructure prior
Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:36 am
by NavyCrimson
Even if we had the IPF or not JJ STILL AINT GOING TO RECRUIT!!!
Re: HART/SMU SID/SMU : IPF should be #1 infrastructure prior
Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:39 am
by ftworthmustang
JJ thinks that the IPF will get better players to send in their game films for evaluation.
Re: HART/SMU SID/SMU : IPF should be #1 infrastructure prior
Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:05 am
by feelthehorsepower
Come and Take It wrote:Stallion wrote:Note-I am now being lectured by FTH in 2013 about how TCU is the Model for SMU's program based on what they've done since 1998. I think I'll pass on responding
FTHP - you commented about reading more and posting less. Stallion has long championed the TCU model. Almost 1,000 posts in a little over 2 months. Nothing you've said or thought hasn't been stated on here many times before.
And if you say we have the money for an IPF, why is the CoC paying June? Why don't we have the money to buy him out? Getting rid of him is a lot cheaper than constructing a building.
I appreciate the tenacity and enthusiasm. We need more fans like you. But stating we need to become Dallas' team; we need an IPF; we need more students; those are dead horse issues.
I am not saying the IPF is for June. It's for our new coach. And I don't think the becoming Dallas' team should be a dead horse issue. We can gain support from the city by winning! TCU did it by having more than 9 seasons with 10 or more wins. Can we say that about our program, and does it make too much sense of why TCU can pack 50k in their house, majority being FW people?
Forgot to add their conference championships and the Fiesta Bowl/Rose Bowl appearances, with a Rose Bowl win. That's winning a National Championship for a MidMajor.