PonyFans.com

So did the other 10 schools we played.

Hey Copeland should not be criticized for creating a "scheduling fiasco" by scheduling OSU. Pleeeezze. We are not playing in the Little Leagues-we used to actually have a nice program. Used to play and beat some of the Big Boys when OSU was a perrennial loser. Blame the people who created the damn Model that makes us so damn uncompetitive. Playing OSU and Tech is a great idea and a financial boon-having a pathetic Model that forces you to schedule teams like Army and Grambling to pick up a win is the problem. But that being said I have no problem delaying the series until we can be more competitive.

We can't schedule anyone weaker than us except Army. That's why we have to go to lesser divisions. I'm not sure how beating Grambling gives anyone any confidence. Hell, let's play Highland Park and Pearce.

Originally posted by OldPony:
We can't schedule anyone weaker than us except Army. That's why we have to go to lesser divisions. I'm not sure how beating Grambling gives anyone any confidence. Hell, let's play Highland Park and Pearce.

A few weeks ago, some on this board were lauding over Tulsa's turnaround. I don't recall too many people complaining about their win over a 1-AA opponent then and I doubt Tulsa's players cared that much when they were playing in December. But hey, they only won 1 game in 2002; were riding a 9 game losing streak dating back to that 2002 season when they played a 1-AA school and got a win and then won two more and ultimately finished 8-5, after losing in the Humanitarian Bowl. Maybe that win gave them a little confidence.

<small>[ 01-09-2004, 07:55 AM: Message edited by: Dooby ]</small>

I understand your point OldPony, but wouldn't you feel slightly better if we had won even one game last season? If that game had come early enough maybe we would have been able to find the strength to then beat Baylor, Utep and Nevada, and maybe even TCU. We had some close games and having the confidence that we can finish something out and get a win might have given us that last little oomph we needed to get a few more wins granted they would have been over other perennially weak teams, but I would rather 3 wins, against Baylor, UTEP and Grambling, then 0 wins against Baylor, UTEP and OSU.

Some of the posters on this board sound like Coach Buzzcut off of Beavis and Butthead.

"You wanna see a man boy. I'll show you a man. Kick me in the jimmy."

[Sadly, I looked for a photo and couldn't find one.]

I see nothing wrong with an easier game or two on the schedule and hopefully it is the first one. Kind of like when we played Navy. If we are paying money to achieve that though, that is different. Also, we are concerned about D-1 attendance issues. OSU will fill our stadium. Grambling? Maybe but I doubt it.
Our conference schedule is an easy one. We need to have some OOC opponents who are good.

Would many of us care if we had one game last year against a D 1-AA school? There isn't a big difference between 0-12 and 1-11 in my book.

My point is that it doesn't make a lot of sense to be paying over $100,000 to break contracts. Let's face it there should be several conference teams on our schedule that are more than beatbale and frankly we should have this year. I just think you get better by playing better teams and it also helps recruiting. We had a really young team this year that got pounded by OSU, well next year we should be more competitive.

Yeah, 1-11 ad 0-12 aren't a big difference. But if we beat the crap out of a lower division 2 school and get our confidence up going into the Baylor game, I think we win that game as well, and possibly UTEP. Confidence helps out a lot - Remember, Baylor scheduled us and a lower division school last year and that confidence sure helped them in the Colorado game.

When building a program, I have no problem playing weak opponents non-conference. Once the program is built, then you schedule games with the big boys.

It sounds like just about everyone is getting in on this one, so here's my two cents.

Playing a series against a vastly superior OSU program that hangs 55-60 points on us every time out serves no purpose. I think the theory of "if we play big-name regional opponents our attendance problem will take care of itself" is flawed. By getting grated into swiss cheese by these same opponents, we ensure that SMU fans and potential fans tune out early in the season and we end up with 5,000-10,000 at our last three or four home games. Look at TCU, they played a bunch of home games against schools from other parts of the country and were able to draw 25,000-30,000 per game. Why. . .because they were good!

Getting crushed by OSU is not going to help this team get better. Let's work on fielding a competative team, THEN we can schedule some tougher opponents. After all, no one on this board has even witnessed an SMU victory in football for over a year.

I'm sure that more than 10,000 will show up the last 3 games if we are 1-8 having beaten Grambling.

But at least we would have gotten 25,000 for Grambling and then I don't care as much about attendance at the last three games.

has Grambling ever drawn less than 45,-50,000 in Dallas in the last 30 years-at least 20 games? I don't think so. Grambling would be a sure sellout without a doubt-the problem might be that they will want more money to play us than we are willing to pay since they play Prairie View in the Cotton Bowl and split the gate. Even SJSU in California sold out for Grambling. The Band is worth the price of admission alone

I'm all for Grambling as an opponent at Ford. One problem that we are going to run into unless the ticket office addresses it is the price of our ticktets. Tickets to games in Grambling's conference are about half (or less) than ours. If you ever look at the pricing for the State Fair game they are incredibly cheap (e.g. $5 for the lesser quality, and $15 for the best seats).

IMO, our standard pricing would reduce the Grambling turnout substantially. That said, even with our standard pricing, it would be a far larger crowd than we typically see.

Actually, I agree. If we were a downtrodden State school in a small country town, then schedule the patsies...but, attendance = $$$, and big boys = attendance.

Originally posted by Stallion:
Hey Copeland should not be criticized for creating a "scheduling fiasco" by scheduling OSU. Pleeeezze. We are not playing in the Little Leagues-we used to actually have a nice program. Used to play and beat some of the Big Boys when OSU was a perrennial loser. Blame the people who created the damn Model that makes us so damn uncompetitive. Playing OSU and Tech is a great idea and a financial boon-having a pathetic Model that forces you to schedule teams like Army and Grambling to pick up a win is the problem. But that being said I have no problem delaying the series until we can be more competitive.