Surprised to learn that this was the last of the 30-for-30 docs, since it did not feel especially polished.The documentary was very "noisy" - a lot of short sound bites from various people, Skip Bayless and the like, the doc would cut away to someone else (saying the same basic thing) after every sentence. Jarring. The doc is nearly two hours long; you can do some long- form storytelling! It doesn't have to be ADD-compliant!Didn't seem like the filmmakers uncovered anything new. They talked to a bunch of people who were involved in the scandals, or covered them at the time, and used a ton of old news footage. The scandal was old enough where I didn't really know much about it, but they didn't seem to be seeking any new information about what was going on that wasn't already in the public domain.Related; it was implied that ALL the schools were involved in similar shenanigans; why not spend a little time looking into that? Talk to some people at Texas, or wherever. You know there were rumors about other schools; talk to some journalists who were looking into them, or see if you can find some disgruntled former players or boosters who might be willing to fill in some broader context.The doc never asked or considered the most important question; what was so bad about what the school and the players were doing? You had kids whose families were in very tough financial circumstances; is it really problematic that they took a little money being offered to them? The NCAA is one of the most hypocritical organizations on the planet; they're right up there with FIFA. Now, you obviously should not have players getting paid under the table by boosters, but shouldn't the question at least be asked; is it appropriate for players at these schools to BE compensated in some form? The filmmakers just seemed to implicitly assume that the NCAA's rules are unassailable, and that's just nonsense.The documentary was "too small." It did not consider the broader questions - Texas football culture and WHY these boosters have so much power. Whether there are issues with the NCAA's rules. Really looking into how prevalent these types of payments were at other schools, in the conference and across the country. Considering why, decades later, guys like Reggie Bush were still getting paid. Has anything really changed?

"Pony Excess" is about the notorious rules violations committed by Southern Methodist University in the early 1980s. Many incentives (money, cars and more) were given to create the best team in college football--though they eventually got caught.ESPN's "30 For 30" series is amazingly well made. I love the show even though I am not particularly a sports fan any more. It might sound odd, but I can appreciate the fine craftsmanship that has gone into making these films and the stories are generally very compelling. The episodes vary from about an hour to an hour and a half (give or take). "Pony Excess" is an example of a show that SHOULD have been a short episode but wasn't--clocking in at an hour and 46 minutes. Because of this, I found my interest waning after a while. Plus, I got really tired of hearing folks from SMU giving the 'everybody's doing it' excuse for the school's serious NCAA rules violations. It came off, to me, like a kid who is caught with his hand in a cookie jar and they tell their mother "I didn't do it"! Gimme a break. A decent but less than satisfying episode.

30 for 30: Pony Excess (2010) **** (out of 4) The final entry in ESPN's 30 FOR 30 series takes us back to the early 80s when Southern Methodist University had the best record in college football. You might ask yourself how SMU could have the best record and that's because they were buying the best players in the country. After being caught twice and put on probation, the boosters continued to pay players and this led the NCAA to put a "death penalty" on them, which got rid of the football program for two years and nearly twenty-years later it's still not restored. Clocking in at just under two-hours there's no doubt that the series goes out on an incredibly high not as this documentary perfectly explains and tells you everything you'd want to know. It's funny that ESPN shows this one just shortly after Cam Newton won the Heisman considering all the stuff floating around about his father taking money. This documentary shows that paying players has been going on for a very long time and it reminds younger people that the trouble Reggie Bush got USC in isn't nearly as bad as what happened to SMU. We get interviews with their coaches, players and even a couple of the boosters who were paying people. The interesting aspect of the story is that there were two newspapers in Dallas and both of them were trying to out do the other, which led to some famous writers to try and track down and get a player to talk, which they eventually did. The shocking thing is that the Texas governor was even involved in the paying. Sports fans are going to recognize every writer that was working in Dallas at this time so that just makes this film even more special when you notice you had famous people playing, paying as well as writing about the situation. Director Matula does a marvelous job at showing the atmosphere of college football in Texas and they also make it quite clear that SMU wasn't the only school paying players. When you watch a film like this you can't help but feel that this has been going on for decades and it certainly hasn't stopped as college football is still worth a lot more money than it was in 1981. Fans of college football are going to love this documentary but it also gives a great message to anyone that there are lines that can't get crossed and even something as big as a football program can be taken away in the matter of seconds.