Conference preference

[Nacho]

Here's a record for you: SMU is 27-3-1 all time against UNT. Go away. You are not making any friends and are antagonizing the very people that could help you.

[untgrad88]

Nacho, this is my last post for a while--until we all hear some more definitive news on conference realignment, which is how I came over here any way.

I leave all of you with this little prophecy. SMU will be back in the world of college football--not in a BCS conference--that door has been forever closed by the BCS, and ain't no BCS conference gonna come knocking at any of our doors any time soon. UNT and SMU are sure to form a working partnership in the near future to bring about a regional conference that is going to have true regional appeal and that will develop at least two regional bowls (the NO bowl for one) and will get an attractive regional TV package. In addition, regional rivalries will develop among the so called mid-majors that will attract a lot of fans and media interest--I can already feel the healthy hatred on this board, can't you?

So, talk to all of you soon--I hope. Go Stangs and Go Mean Green!


[This message has been edited by untgrad88 (edited 06-03-2003).]

[PerunaPunch]

In addition, although football is admittedly the top attendance and revenue sport, it is merely one of the D1A sports at SMU. SMU is perennially a top team in soccer, track and field, swimming, diving and other Olympic sports. We're also quite respectable in golf and tennis. I don't have the figures right at hand, but we're consistently once of the top schools in NCAA sports and this years' WAC Commissioner's Cup winner.

We also have more than 80 years of football tradition on the Hilltop, numerous conference championships and bowl championships (back when that actually meant something), and a national championship. At last glance, SMU is tied for #5 for most former players in the NFL Hall of Fame.

So it's going to take more than a few flash-in-the-pan moderately successful seasons for UNT sports to interest anyone here. And that's why a regional alliance with UNT will (at least in the foreseeable future) be a less attractive alternative to us.

[This message has been edited by PerunaPunch (edited 06-03-2003).]

[This message has been edited by PerunaPunch (edited 06-03-2003).]

[MrMustang1965]

UH plays in Robertson Stadium in one of the WORST neighborhoods in Houston. The stadium itself is less attractive than many high school stadiums throughout the region. And if you park there, you'd better have a permit for a concealed handgun! Forget tailgating, too! It's downright sad.



------------------
"Winning ain't everything...but it's a lot more fun than the alternative!" S.M.U. SPIRIT: IT STARTS NOW!

[Hoop Fan]

From worst case to best case:

1.CUSA holds together, MWC adds 4 western WAC teams, SMU=Sun Belt or Independent.
2. WAC stays as is, but adds UNT and New Mexico State, goes to divisions.
3. TCU, Houston and Tulane join SMU, Tulsa, La Tech and Rice to form compact regional league that may include Utep, UNT, UAB or others.
4. Memphis, Southern Miss and East Carolina are left out of Big East, leaving enough quality football programs to make a 12 team, two division CUSA viable: East: Memphis, USM, ECU, Tulane, UAB, South Florida/Marshall West: TCU, SMU, Rice, Houston, Tulsa and La Tech.
5. Louisville only program to leave CUSA, they invite SMU. I actually like #4 better, but if Cincinnati is left in CUSA, I think the bball league is much stronger. I think its doubtful, that SMU would be their first choice over Marshall, Tulsa, but we have danced with them before so never know.

[Stallion]

Correctamundo Hoop Fan-and those should be SMU's preferances too. BTW there is a chance SMU would be the choice over Tulsa and Marshall. SMU wasn't really considered for the last spot in the CUSA because it wanted full membership for all sports while CUSA was looking for FB only membership. With Louisville leaving a full membership spot opens up. If people had been running this program the way it should have been run SMU would be the overwhelming choice.

[Charleston Pony]

You're right, Hoop Fan. This round of realignment is going to be all about building strength and hoping for a sniff of that BCS money. The key will be what the Big East leftovers do. If they try to put together that 12 team all sports conference the Memphis A.D. says is already being discussed, then ECU, Memphis, S.Fla, Marshall, C.Fla and everybody else east of the Mississippi will be hoping for an invite.

That move would undoubtedly put the MWC into a 12 school expansion mode, leaving SMU with the new SWC group that would be the weakest I-A football group remaining. Actually, without Marshall & C.Fla, the MAC might be weaker, but the latter two would be excluded from any "play-in" game that might be set up between the Big East and MWC. I can absolutely see that scenario unfolding.

[SMUstang]

I posted a reply earlier but for some reason it never got out of my box.

I would favor any alignment that included SMU, TCU, Rice, Houston, Tulsa, La Tech, So. Miss., and any two from the following: UNT, UAB, USF, UTEP, and La. Laf.

I think the best chance for getting most of this group together is for SMU, Rice, Tulsa, and La Tech to join what's left of C-USA.

[Water Pony]

Guiding Principles for SMU and Conference Realignments:

1. Recent performance of SMU FB will not be the primary factor. The most of country gives us a "mulligan" for the DP.
2. We are on the ascent (trust me). Ford Stadium, Bennett, better OOC scheduling, etc.
3. Dallas market is important to any Mid-Major, especially Conf. USA-West or WAC-East.
4. I like Nacho's two teams pairs in Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston delivering those markets, despite obvious in-roads by Texas and A&M.
5. Regional model of at least 4 to 5 teams within 400 miles is key
6. Don't underestimate the role and contributions of Olympic sports, as well as the academic position of the schools. University Presidents in Big Ten, ACC, Pac Ten and Big 12 value it, so should we.
7. View this from the long term. This realignment will be chaos and won't be repeated in the near future. Lots of moves, good and bad.
8. Notre Dame will surprise everyone with a move of their own (replacing Miami in the BE with fewer required conference games and keeping their home game revenue. In doing so they protect their BB and non-revenue programs; thereby convincing Syracuse and BC to stay in BE.) Miami is a loss, but a GUD (Geographic Un-Desireable) anyway to BE.
9. Geography needs a bigger role in all conferences. Travel schedules and costs are killers to every team, men and women.
10. NCAA finally expresses a opinion and Presidents provide leadership that is meaningful. Hands off the BCS is a no win scenario.

[Water Pony]

The article below is my exact point on the NCAA needing to recapture control from the BCS. I love the reference to the "flying wedge" and Teddy Roosevelt. Friends, I am not optimistic aboutour future and that of all non-BCS schools, unless Brand and others recognize what is at stake. Either this is college sports serving student-athletes or its' not. We could be a winner in realignment and still lose to the BCS cartel.

<A HREF="http://www.abqtrib.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=FBCBARNETT03-06-03-03&cat=FF" TARGET=_blank>http://www.abqtrib.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=FBCBARNETT03-06-03-03&cat=FF</A>

[Hoop Fan]

Good article Water Pony. I dont expect to see any leadership from Brand or anyone else anytime soon. I just hope the BCS doesn't kill March Madness in the process. That would be the biggest crime of all. Football does have some practical realities that prevent replicating a broad playoff. In football, there is no alternative but do what it takes to get into the best conference possible as soon as possible and win games.

[EastStang]

For a playoff to work, you (1) honor conference champions. (2) create a frame work that works. For example you have six BCS conferences (PAC 10, SEC, Big East, ACC, Big XII, Big 10) and five non-bcs (WAC, MAC, CUSA, MWC, SBC), plus independents. The four top seeds get a bye. Then the bottom 8 play in. The four winners play the top four seeds. Then there can be surprise upsets, underdogs to root for, and the possibility however slight that a team could come out of the smaller conferences to win it all. Use existing bowl games for these various rounds. It would sure be better for the Humanitarian Bowl to host the WAC champion vs. Notre Dame, than the WAC champion vs. #6 ACC. But Brand and the NCAA Presidents don't have the stones. Instead, they'll probably let the BCS schools stay bowl eligible by playing two 1-AA teams and watch the mid-majors fold their tents.

[Nacho]

I keep wondering where the NFL is going to get their players if d-1 football is drastically reduced by up to 57 teams.