Page 2 of 2

Re: A new Southwest Conference.

PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 4:45 pm
by NavyCrimson
you're right - that is strange...but, i have to admit, you made my day!

naaaaaa, for smu, you made my year!

Re: A new Southwest Conference.

PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 6:12 pm
by PK
I, for one, would love to see Arkansas back on our schedule. Their fans travel well and love to come to Dallas. Ford would easily be sold out. We always seemed to get up for them and played a good game against them. We probably would have beat them one other time if Flanigan had not broken his hip on the first offensive play of the game that year. Unfortunately, their coaches and AD don't seem to want to take the chance of getting beat by us again...so we probably won't ever see them on our schedule again.

Re: A new Southwest Conference.

PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 6:17 pm
by Stallion
we did beat them the year Flannigan got hurt-that was the only game we won all year under Genius Tom Rossley.

Re: A new Southwest Conference.

PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 6:22 pm
by PK
My age is catching up with me...and the memory banks are becoming memory blanks. Image At least I had the right game...just wrong outcome. Thanks for setting the record straight.

[This message has been edited by PK (edited 05-07-2003).]

Re: A new Southwest Conference.

PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 6:28 pm
by mrydel
Playing high school ball in Arkansas and playing college ball at SMU, I can ditto all said by Ponyte. I love being a SMUer in Arkansas. Even with the big rivaly Ark had with Texas, SMU is the one they always fear. There is no doubt in my mind that had SMU beaten Houston Nutt in his first game as head coach, Broyles would have fired him on the spot, just before he would have been hung by the fans. All one need do in this state to start a lively conversation is walk up to someone and say "it was not pass interference". They will go ballistic. I truly thought the "fumble" in the Tennessee game a few years back would have stopped some of the fanatical attitude towards that one play, but it did not. And do not even mention that we won after losing our quarterback on the first play of the game. Yes, Arkansas does not want SMU even though the gap has grown very wide in the past few years. They may consider football again if we would do a home and home on basketball, however.

Re: A new Southwest Conference.

PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 6:41 pm
by ponyte
I would like t be clear. Ark wants to beat SMU. I hope we never play them again unless in a bowl. Ark. does not recruit as well in Texas now as they did in the SWC days. I don't want to help them become more visible in the state of Texas. I don't want to give them a reason to play in Dallas ever again (unless they earn a bowl game).

Ark doesn't really add to our needs at this time. We need solid showings in Texas against Texas teams or solid showings against strong opponents outside Texas were we could recruit.

Yes, we have had great players from Ark but as a rule the bulk of our talent comes form Texas. Lets keep that talent in Texas and the best talent at SMU. Not to the University of Huge Inferiority Complex Arkansas.

Re: A new Southwest Conference.

PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 6:46 pm
by mrydel
U HIC of Arkansas. Kind of a fitting name.

Re: A new Southwest Conference.

PostPosted: Thu May 08, 2003 1:34 am
by virginiapony
I'd also LOVE to see SMU get out of the WAC. However, getting into a more "regional" conference is no reason to play teams like Arkansas St, because in the long run, it won't help out our programs. I mean, does Arkansas St. even have a basketball team? (Or are we just talking football). In the long run, I've always been in favor with SMU joining C-USA. C-USA has more quality teams and more bowl opportunities for SMU. I doubt very many of us PonyFans would mind a C-USA bid, but we'll probably won't get one in a while. sooo, we gotta win the WAC right now.

Re: A new Southwest Conference.

PostPosted: Thu May 08, 2003 10:45 am
by OldPony
Ark fears SMU? It is a no win position for Ark. If they beat us, they should have. If not, their a bunch of losers. That is a problem we have in spades in b'ball right now. A new SWC confernce without at least 2 of the BIG 12 (UT, A&M, TT and Baylor) is a bunch of losers looking to a small future. That would be the death knell for SMU sports. Independence is better and that isn't a good option either.