San Antonio Express Article - SWC II

[SMUstang]

I like that Southland. But I'm not sure that UAB would be any better than UTEP and they surely wouldn't draw as well in Ford. JMHO

[Southland]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by SMUstang:
<B>I like that Southland. But I'm not sure that UAB would be any better than UTEP and they surely wouldn't draw as well in Ford. JMHO</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My preference order:

Memphis-USF
Memphis-UAB
USF-UCF
USF-UAB
UCF-UAB

The media will always favor the East, so that's where we need to be.

[PK]

I know everyone has visions of sugerplums dancing and BCS inclusion...but short of a major lawsuit, the BCS is not about to start including small private universities in their money sharing circle beyond those already in the mix. If C-USA can survive and invites us, that would be fine with me. If on the other hand C-USA and the WAC both fold, SWC-II would not be all that bad depending on who would finally end up joining. I think it is telling that not only the sports columnist have been talking about it (slow news days), but that the DMN editorial staff and others have been talking about it too. I think there is a good number of people who miss the "SWC" or at least the local in state and regional rivalries and would love to see a new SWC come into being. We could have the possibility of being involved with four or maybe five bowls...Cotton Bowl, Fort Worth Bowl, the bowls in Shreveport and New Orleans and the Sun Bowl. Probably not all of them, but the possibilities are intriguing.

[TCU_backer1]

Come on guys. If you associate with the bottom feeders, you become a bottom feeder. If the face of Confernce realignments alters the face of college athletics, I for one can say that TCU would not join any form or shape of the SWC II conference being thrown around... You are building a good program at SMU, don't throw it away by joining an awful conference.

[LA_Mustang]

TCU_backer and Southland are right. The ONLY Texas schools that we should consider joining in a conference are TCU, Rice, Houston, and maybe UTEP.

[PK]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by PK:
<B> If on the other hand C-USA and the WAC both fold, SWC-II would not be all that bad depending on who would finally end up joining. ...people who miss the "SWC" or at least the local in state and regional rivalries and would love to see a new SWC come into being. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Come on guys...read the post. I never said that it should be only Texas schools and I also qualified it in that both the WAC and C-USA would have to have folded as was mentioned as a possibility in some one elses post.

[SMUstang]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Southland:
<B> My preference order:

Memphis-USF
Memphis-UAB
USF-UCF
USF-UAB
UCF-UAB

The media will always favor the East, so that's where we need to be.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm still not sure I agree with you. Maybe the eastern sports writers would favor UAB over UTEP but I'm still betting there would be a lot more fan support for UTEP at all of the WAC schools and at UNT and NMSU. Of course not at Tulane and maybe not at Houston. So do you build a conference based on what some eastern sportswriter likes, or do you build it based on what the fans want?

[gostangs]

Netiher - you build based on what T.V. wants.

[Southland]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by gostangs:
<B>Netiher - you build based on what T.V. wants. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

exactly

[SMUstang]

It's a new day. We were very fortunate that TV wasn't around when the SWC was formed. And it thrived for some 80 years until TV came along and screwed everything up.