MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: MUchamp22 on September 29, 2015, 09:16:27 AM
-
SMU has been hit with a postseason ban for this year and Larry Brown has been suspended for 30% of this season's games. Anyone surprised?
-
Nic Moore?
Also, I believe it was 10 games, so 30% of the season.
-
Nic Moore?
Also, I believe it was 10 games, so 30% of the season.
You are right I changed it. And I don't know about Nic Moore, but that is also the first thing I thought of. Could be an amazing get if he is available, but it could rock the boat a little too much team chemistry wise. Wojo might not want that
-
I meant he might have been surprised by this since he stuck around there. I think it's too late for him to transfer now.
-
I meant he might have been surprised by this since he stuck around there. I think it's too late for him to transfer now.
I'm not 100% sure though, NCAA has weird rules when it comes to stuff like this
-
Nic Moore?
Also, I believe it was 10 games, so 30% of the season.
Nic Moore is a senior and Marquette has already started their academic year. He can't transfer here unless he waits until January but then isn't eligible until 2016. So he can play this year but no post season...or he can sit for another 15 months and play a half season.
Too bad the NCAA couldn't have figured this out earlier.
-
Gotta love SMU's defense.
https://twitter.com/lukewinn/status/648878724134346752
Good lord...
-
Gotta love SMU's defense.
https://twitter.com/lukewinn/status/648878724134346752
Good lord...
The best part is the implication that 25 years ago initially lying to an NCAA investigation into academic fraud was acceptable.
-
.
Too bad the NCAA couldn't have figured this out earlier.
And the beat goes on.
-
Just wait and watch UNC get a fraction of this penalty for 15 years of fake classes for athletes.
-
Just wait and watch UNC get a fraction of this penalty for 15 years of fake classes for athletes.
UNC will get a slight slap on the wrist. When you pack arenas the way they do the NCAA tends to be a tad more lenient.
-
Just wait and watch UNC get a fraction of this penalty for 15 years of fake classes for athletes.
Obviously the NCAA is so pissed at UNC they hammered SMU because of it.
-
Nic Moore is a senior and Marquette has already started their academic year. He can't transfer here unless he waits until January but then isn't eligible until 2016. So he can play this year but no post season...or he can sit for another 15 months and play a half season.
Too bad the NCAA couldn't have figured this out earlier.
This is true. As a follow-up, Moore and Kennedy actually could still transfer to schools that haven't passed the final official day to register for classes (i.e. Oregon, UCLA, and other schools on the quarter system). SMU is likely to appeal this and given the NCAA's history, there's a fairly decent chance the appeal stretches on long enough that March Madness will have already been played before a final decision reached. At this point, I'm sure Larry Brown is trying to convince the duo that will be the case.
-
SMU President was the co-chair of the Knight Commission on athletic reform. The guy who hired Larry Brown despite his past. The guy who just gave his "full support" to Brown despite the fact that athletic staff willfully engaged in academic fraud and Brown lied about it.
-
SMU golf team also receiving penalties. How corrupt does an institution have to be for a golf team to get penalized?
http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/smu-golf-sanctioned-unethical-conduct-recruiting
-
SMU golf team also receiving penalties. How corrupt does an institution have to be for a golf team to get penalized?
http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/smu-golf-sanctioned-unethical-conduct-recruiting
That's fantastic.
-
Obviously the NCAA is so pissed at UNC they hammered SMU because of it.
Perfectly describes my thoughts about the NCAA.
-
Just wait and watch UNC get a fraction of this penalty for 15 years of fake classes for athletes.
SMU as a religious institution must be held to a higher standard than UNC , a state institution.
-
SMU golf team also receiving penalties. How corrupt does an institution have to be for a golf team to get penalized?
http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/smu-golf-sanctioned-unethical-conduct-recruiting
This priceless...
What are the penalties? A two martini limit on the 19th Hole?
-
I was working in Dallas back during the Pony Express days (Dickerson/James). At a party, some well heeled, highly lubricated SMU alums started talking about/bragging on their teams success...and all there laughed, arrogantly enjoying the open bribery pay for play system.
Quotes like "best team money can buy", and "we're finally out paying the others" kind of stunned me.
In the decades since I have come to know many more SMUers. There remains a small remorseless, wealthy faction that never has had a problem in "doing what it takes" to quickly assemble and enjoy a winner.
Whether its buying June Jones to kick start football, or grabbing Larry Brown, this group of oddies supporting SMU are happy to enjoy the quick success, and they take the NCAA slap arounds in stride...as one them said to me smiling..."its just a cost of doing business...and if business gets too good they'll come after us"...
I will admit this is just the Houston in me, here. It seems all Dallas pro teams are into buying the "quick expensive add on ", as opposed to drafting and developing. Texas Rangers almost every year sign some FA for crazy $$, and always have somebody on the MLB list of overpaid players. The Mavs eschew the draft (believe it or not Jae Crowder was their best pick in last 10 years) and annually the Mavs go for big splashy FA's. The Cowboys, under Jerry Jones (and post Jimmy Johnson) are an annual ...look who we signed this year to put us over the top...splashy signings. The pattern of the resulting failures of these teams gives me a very warm Shadenfruende (sp?). I shed no tears for SMU, either.
-
UNC will get a slight slap on the wrist. When you pack arenas the way they do the NCAA tends to be a tad more lenient.
Is that what happened with Syracuse? They are #1 in attendance every year and they didn't get a slap on the wrist. I think UNC will get hit and hit hard
-
Fake classes and a department secretary handing out grades... Sounds like an internet diploma mill.
-
The best part is the implication that 25 years ago initially lying to an NCAA investigation into academic fraud was acceptable.
Well, of course, that was unacceptable 25 years ago, but who knows, maybe the rules changed since then.
-
dont know much about SMU so i read their wiki page of notable alumni.
Jeff Skilling!
Pretty bad ass group of alums:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Southern_Methodist_University_people
-
dont know much about SMU so i read their wiki page of notable alumni.
Jeff Skilling!
Pretty bad ass group of alums:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Southern_Methodist_University_people
This is why I could never figure out why they sucked at sports. Tons of wealthy alums...right in the middle of Dallas. They really should be the Methodist equivalent of Notre Dame.
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25323860/observations-landing-miles-bridges-would-be-big-for-michigan-state (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25323860/observations-landing-miles-bridges-would-be-big-for-michigan-state)
SMU MUSTANGS
SMU's postseason ban is a significant blow to the AAC
This conference has gotten one less team in the NCAA Tournament than its deserved in each of the last two years and looked primed for a breakout season in 15-16. That will be hard to achieve now. Following the NCAA's decision to slap a postseason ban on SMU for the upcoming season along with a 9-or-10 game suspension for head coach Larry Brown, the AAC will now again likely be forced to push a boulder up a hill in its efforts to gain national credibility as a league.
The NCAA selection committee will still potentially view the Mustangs as a quality victory for in-conference opponents just as it viewed UConn as one when the Huskies missed the 2013 postseason due to APR issues, but these sanctions severely hurt the conference because it means a proven team with a proven coach won't be playing for an NCAA bid. SMU was viewed as potential Top-25 team entering this season along with UConn and Cincinnati. Now they're going to likely be an afterthought. That's not good for a new conference struggling to carve out its place in the college basketball landscape.
Entering year three, the AAC is still trying to fight perceptions that it is not a power basketball conference. Having one of its top (recently) basketball programs banned from postseason won't do anything to fight that perception. At what point does the number of bids the league receives become the norm?
-
Is that what happened with Syracuse? They are #1 in attendance every year and they didn't get a slap on the wrist. I think UNC will get hit and hit hard
Syracuse didn't even get a postseason ban.
-
I thought they did. Weren't they banned last season? Not that it mattered all that much.
-
I thought they did. Weren't they banned last season? Not that it mattered all that much.
Self imposed a ban during the season when it was clear they weren't good enough to qualify for the NCAAs.
-
SMU making the Big East look better and better each day. I actually feel bad for UConn. Not so much Cincinnati or Memphis. The Big East will welcome you with open arms UConn, just drop that tire fire of a football program.
-
This is why I could never figure out why they sucked at sports. Tons of wealthy alums...right in the middle of Dallas. They really should be the Methodist equivalent of Notre Dame.
How dare you compare No Dick to any other program! ND fans know that no other program can compare to theirs. Ask them, they will tell you in no uncertain terms. Remember the Gipper and Knute!
-
SMU making the Big East look better and better each day. I actually feel bad for UConn. Not so much Cincinnati or Memphis. The Big East will welcome you with open arms UConn, just drop that tire fire of a football program.
UConn tied its athletic future to football, right or wrong. Until their football situation improves, to the point where they are not celebrating victories over the likes of Villanova and Army, the B1G and ACC will not come knocking on the door asking them to join. Until that day, however, UConn students, student-athletes, and alumni can look forward to facing off against conference foes like Tulane, Tulsa, East Carolina, Houston, SMU, UCF, USF and Memphis for sports.
In other words, college athletics purgatory. ;D
-
UConn tied its athletic future to football, right or wrong. Until their football situation improves, to the point where they are not celebrating victories over the likes of Villanova and Army, the B1G and ACC will not come knocking on the door asking them to join. Until that day, however, UConn students, student-athletes, and alumni can look forward to facing off against conference foes like Tulane, Tulsa, East Carolina, Houston, SMU, UCF, USF and Memphis for sports.
In other words, college athletics purgatory. ;D
And yet they won a national championship just over a year ago.
-
And yet they won a national championship just over a year ago.
Very true, and without question a great accomplishment, but, disregarding that the championship was won with Calhoun's (not Ollie's) recruits and players, and that the AAC still had Louisville at the time, how many schools win national championships and have their entire fan bases (students, coaches, alumni, administrators) openly complain about their conference membership and their current standing in the landscape of college athletics?
Make no mistake, UConn desperately wants out of the AAC. In a couple of years, the NCAA tournament credits that UConn/Cincinnati/USF received from the Big East separation agreement will have run out and dried out. Their (AAC) TV deal is absolutely atrocious - $1.5 per school per year. The Big East schools, who don't even play football, are receiving $5 million per year (over 3x the annual value). Many UConn supporters are sweating hard because, if they don't get a call-up to a P5 conference (either the B1G or ACC), they will be stuck in the G5 long term.
UConn's attendance since joining the AAC has gone down, as no respectable basketball fan wants to see Tulane, East Carolina, Tulsa, Houston, SMU, UCF and USF on the home conference schedule. Calhoun, Geno and Manuel have all been on record stating how imperative it is for UConn to move out of the AAC and into a power conference, and it's not hard to see why.
-
I understand all of that. But they have two choices.
1. Stay dedicated to football, try to improve their overall athletic program, and get more attractive to a P5 conference for the next expansion go around. In the meantime, remain relevant nationally as a college basketball program.
2. Drop football and join the Big East. Remain relevant nationally as a college basketball program.
There is no reason to assume that staying relevant nationally will be easier in the BE. There is also no reason to assume attendance will be significantly better in the BE. So why not stick with football?
-
I personally believe there is an option #3 - moving all sports to Big East, while going independent in football. As an independent, they can schedule more regionally compelling games (UMass, Boston College, Buffalo, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Maryland, Penn State, Cincinnati and Temple), games with other independents (BYU, Notre Dame, UMass), and/or even create unofficial scheduling alliance with certain AAC schools for both football and basketball (offering OOC basketball games for OOC football games).
Fox Sports could easily make an offer worth more than what UConn is currently receiving. UConn would then have all of its non-football sports competing against not just former conference competition in Providence, Seton Hall, St. Johns, Georgetown, and Villanova but, and more importantly, closer competition for those sports as well.
Playing more games against Georgetown, Villanova, St. Johns, Marquette and Providence would absolutely be worth more to UConn, long and near term, than Tulane, East Carolina, Tulsa, UCF, USF and the rest of the Conference USA call-ups.
Bottom line, I view UConn's membership in the AAC, long-term, as unsustainable. Something will happen, either UConn gets called up, or UConn voluntarily leaves the conference. UConn has very little, to anything, in common with those schools - academically, location-wise and athletically.
-
And yet they won a national championship just over a year ago.
Actually, they won one this year.
-
I personally believe there is an option #3 - moving all sports to Big East, while going independent in football. As an independent, they can schedule more regionally compelling games (UMass, Boston College, Buffalo, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Maryland, Penn State, Cincinnati and Temple), games with other independents (BYU, Notre Dame, UMass), and/or even create unofficial scheduling alliance with certain AAC schools for both football and basketball (offering OOC basketball games for OOC football games).
Fox Sports could easily make an offer worth more than what UConn is currently receiving. UConn would then have all of its non-football sports competing against not just former conference competition in Providence, Seton Hall, St. Johns, Georgetown, and Villanova but, and more importantly, closer competition for those sports as well.
Playing more games against Georgetown, Villanova, St. Johns, Marquette and Providence would absolutely be worth more to UConn, long and near term, than Tulane, East Carolina, Tulsa, UCF, USF and the rest of the Conference USA call-ups.
Bottom line, I view UConn's membership in the AAC, long-term, as unsustrightble. Something will happen, either UConn gets called up, or UConn voluntarily leaves the conference. UConn has very little, to anything, in common with those schools - academically, location-wise and athletically.
UConn going independent in football would be bad. Very bad. There is no relevance to being independent unless you are Notre Dame. They have no access to either P5 or Group of 5 bowl games. It would be a long term disaster for their football program.
-
UConn going independent in football would be bad. Very bad. There is no relevance to being independent unless you are Notre Dame. They have no access to either P5 or Group of 5 bowl games. It would be a long term disaster for their football program.
Isn't splitting just 1.5 million of TV revenue between football and basketball while trying to build up your football program to be P5 ready also a disaster?
-
UConn going independent in football would be bad. Very bad. There is no relevance to being independent unless you are Notre Dame. They have no access to either P5 or Group of 5 bowl games. It would be a long term disaster for their football program.
They are already screwed. Their continuation of football shows poor logic and is pissing away good money after bad. No conference wants them. They are not going to be able to recruit and build a team to their current conference.
They should simply quit doctoring the attendance numbers so they get kicked out of the big boy club and they can save face that it wasn't their choice.
-
They are already screwed. Their continuation of football shows poor logic and is pissing away good money after bad. No conference wants them. They are not going to be able to recruit and build a team to their current conference.
They should simply quit doctoring the attendance numbers so they get kicked out of the big boy club and they can save face that it wasn't their choice.
Why do you think that no public university has dropped football in recent memory? Even the UAB decision was a political one that was reversed. And everyone rejoiced despite being in an arguably worse position than UConn.
Are all these university administrators showing "poor logic?" Or could it be that you don't really understand that the importance of football to a school like UConn is more than the bottom line. Athletics is way more a PR expense than it is a profit driven exercise.
-
Why do you think that no public university has dropped football in recent memory? Even the UAB decision was a political one that was reversed. And everyone rejoiced despite being in an arguably worse position than UConn.
Are all these university administrators showing "poor logic?" Or could it be that you don't really understand that the importance of football to a school like UConn is more than the bottom line. Athletics is way more a PR expense than it is a profit driven exercise.
I know the University system, funding, and PR very very well. No public University has dropped football, because they will just bilk the tax payer for more money (and don't tell me it isn't coming out of tax payer dollars, I said I understand University funding very well, meaning I know how the accounting is done).
The Universities are showing poor logic.
-
So tell me, why are they making illogical decisions? Why are they all surveying the current landscape of largely decreasing state support and coming to the same conclusion that investing in football is a good idea? And why are we to believe a message board guy instead of those decision makers?
-
Why do you think that no public university has dropped football in recent memory?
Western Washington did just that in 2009
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/sad-day-as-western-drops-football-for-money-reasons/
-
I personally believe there is an option #3 - moving all sports to Big East, while going independent in football. As an independent, they can schedule more regionally compelling games (UMass, Boston College, Buffalo, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Maryland, Penn State, Cincinnati and Temple), games with other independents (BYU, Notre Dame, UMass), and/or even create unofficial scheduling alliance with certain AAC schools for both football and basketball (offering OOC basketball games for OOC football games).
Fox Sports could easily make an offer worth more than what UConn is currently receiving. UConn would then have all of its non-football sports competing against not just former conference competition in Providence, Seton Hall, St. Johns, Georgetown, and Villanova but, and more importantly, closer competition for those sports as well.
Playing more games against Georgetown, Villanova, St. Johns, Marquette and Providence would absolutely be worth more to UConn, long and near term, than Tulane, East Carolina, Tulsa, UCF, USF and the rest of the Conference USA call-ups.
Bottom line, I view UConn's membership in the AAC, long-term, as unsustrightble. Something will happen, either UConn gets called up, or UConn voluntarily leaves the conference. UConn has very little, to anything, in common with those schools - academically, location-wise and athletically.
U Conn will eventually go to the ACC on their next expansion. They were out maneuvered by the political connections in Washington of Louisville.
Just a matter of time before the expansion happens. With all their national championships in mens and womans basketball the ACC would be delighted to have them.
U Conn made a fundamental mistake of having their football stadium in Hartford. An on campus facility would have been much better. Would have captured the campus spirit more and great environment for a fall tailgate.
I don't feel sorry for them though as their President was constantly throwing the old Big East under the bus in her desperate attempt to get into the ACC.
-
So tell me, why are they making illogical decisions? Why are they all surveying the current landscape of largely decreasing state support and coming to the same conclusion that investing in football is a good idea? And why are we to believe a message board guy instead of those decision makers?
They all are subscribing to the idea that their alumni and donors will cease to be large donors without football; and that if they sink enough money into a football program they may be able to leverage that investment to move up into the big conferences where about 30-40 teams make a serious profit.
Third, they believe that the students want that football game experience.
On the first count, it is difficult to overcome the losses at many of these schools, through donations. Proper management of alumni relations can replace the football contact hours.
On the second count, they will not be successful. There will be further isolation of the non-BCS leagues now in regards to football.
On the third count, this generation of students don't care about football. They want the tailgate/party experience, football is just a vector for its delivery. One can easily replace the tailgate atmosphere with alternatives (aka concert series) at a profit instead of an expense.
Why should you believe me instead of the decision makers. There is nothing I can say to convince you that I am a more reliable source, so that question is impossible to answer.
-
Why do you think that no public university has dropped football in recent memory?
Fear. It's scary to be the first one to do something. We live in such a football focused world that its hard for a university to swallow the idea that dropping football might actually be better for the institution in the long run. It's what all the kids are into nowadays, how could having football be bad. Since no one has done it in years (was the Ives dropping to FCS the last time it happened?) no one knows how it will go over. I think once one fbs program has the guts to do it and it turns out okay or even good for them, I think we may see a few more programs follow suit. Assuming it does turn out well for that one. If it goes poorly, then we may need to wait years for it.
UConn's situation is interesting. If the choice is between the AAC and Big East, it seems like the Big East would be the more lucrative option. Its hard for me to imagine football making up the 3.5 million gap in Television revenue between the two television contracts. But then again, I have little to no understanding of the economics of college athletics. I could be completely off base.
Wait until 2020. The AAC's television contract will be up. If the ACC hasn't expanded by then (or has expanded and skipped over UConn...again) then maybe the Huskies will be more interested to the idea of rejoining the Big East. Again, no idea if it will happen, just making an observation.
-
No it isn't fear or groupthink. Its that many leaders at many institutions realize it is the cheapest way to provide PR for your institution and pride among a student and alumni group. That is why you can't look at it is a profit and loss. It is almost always going to be a loss. But there are perceived side benefits.
Really when you see literally dozens of people make the same decision in the same circumstances, it usually means they are being logical. It doesn't mean that time will show that Western Washington made the wrong decision. Who knows? They may be trend-setters. But I doubt it.
-
No it isn't fear or groupthink. Its that many leaders at many institutions realize it is the cheapest way to provide PR for your institution and pride among a student and alumni group. That is why you can't look at it is a profit and loss. It is almost always going to be a loss. But there are perceived side benefits.
Really when you see literally dozens of people make the same decision in the same circumstances, it usually means they are being logical. It doesn't mean that time will show that Western Washington made the wrong decision. Who knows? They may be trend-setters. But I doubt it.
So, the administrators of the Ivy League schools were the illogical ones when they dropped football to FCS?
-
So, the administrators of the Ivy League schools were the illogical ones when they dropped football to FCS?
They all have football and likely all lose money on athletics. So they really didn't choose a different path.