Name SMU's Collegiate Allies

[DallasFrog]

Agreed Normal, when you're on the ouside looking in on the BCS, you gotta do what you can. Don't be mad that we jumped to CUSA and you didn't get in, you would have done the same. And right now, we have to find the best case scenario for us, and considering the alternatives, no matter how far-fetched some of them may be, joining a regional conference with SMU isn't at the top of the list. Should we take a step back, just so you guys can call us an ally? No because in 2-3 years, when Bennett gets things turned around, SMU will be looking for greener pastures also.

[gostangs]

Thanks Normal and Dallas for the (relatively) kind words. Most of us don't blame TCU a bit for any of this - at least I don't - each school has ot do whats best for themselves - we just believe TCU and SMU belong in the conference, just as much now as we did when our football fortunes were reversed. We share you view of the direction of our program. It is time for us to join CUSA, if chosen, and deliver the rest of this T.V. market to that conference, along with some of the best facilities and game day festivities in the country. The on field quality is clearly on the way.

If CUSA tears apart and TCU has to chose between the UTAH mafia and a watered down regional, the regional will be the only real choice. Hopefully for us both it won't come to that.

[DallasFrog]

Agreed, we'd love to be in the same conference as SMU. But if that means joining a conference with Tulsa, UTEP, La Tech, Rice, etc., one that has the least likely opportunity at BCS inclusion, then we don't see any reason at taking a step back. When the dust settles, hopefully SMU has stepped up its game, TCU is continuing to put out 9-10 win seasons, and we can configure a reputable conference together. Until then, we'll keep each other on the non-conference slate.

[gostangs]

Mountain, CUSA and WAC all have the same chance at BCS inclusion - 0 - no matter what the reconfiguration. They will not split the pie any more ways then they do now until there is a legal requirement to do so. In fact it is more likley to get smaller then larger.

[Stallion]

that statement may no longer be true with the surprising announcement concerning Virgina Tech. IF ,and I still think the BB powers of the BE may actually have more clout than the FB powers of the CUSA, CUSA stays together and then adds Pitt and West Virgina along with TCU, Tulane, Cincy, Louisville, Southern Miss, East Carolina and the rest of CUSA then the door may have been locked to Big Time college FB while TCU is a member of a helluva conference with the teams worthy of BCS consideration. Both schools would then have what their respective administrations deserve. TCU-Big Time SMU-Division 1-AA.

[FloridaMustang]

Stallion, what would we do without yah buddy.

[Charleston Pony]

the truth hurts

[SoCal_Pony]

Personally, I think Stallion is too lenient towards our administration.

If this was a business, and you had to present SMU’s pathetic athletic accomplishments to a sophisticated Board of Directors, you would last less than 2 years before being mercifully terminated. And during those 2 years, you would be unmercifully tarred and feathered at every meeting. Trust me.

[MeanGreenGem]

Yeah, and a few of those Board of Directors would ask you what happened to the aggressive (non-condescending SMU) from the Russ Potts era that would not have a problem scheduling a school you can draw twice as many fans any day of the year than any of your present WAC or WAC East schools.

A normal functioning Board of Directors would want the bottom line and would tell some that they simply don't want to hear anymore of the garbage or excuses to not play any school that can help out toward that bottom line of which the SMU athletic budget is at the top of that list. "Fellas, we are going to have to do some things to make up for TV revenues that the BCS is not going to share a dime with us." That might come from the lips of one of your SMU Board of Directors (or Trustees I believe yall really call them).

Those Board of Directors would ask, "if UT, TAMU, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, etc, etc, etc, have no problem scheduling them, what (then) is SMU's "REAL" problem here?" Anyone want to tell that Board of Directors the real answer to that question? Bottom line, the board would demand, bottom line$!$!$!$!$

This Board of Directors might even suggests that this is no longer their grandfather's SMU and that SMU is simply going to have to adapt to that because of that.

That would be just one of many things that "Board" would highly suggests to the person in charge of that SMU bottom line, and that being your Mr. Copeland. Bottom line, man, bottom line.

But...nevertheless, play or no play, schedule or no schedule, the beat goes on now doesN'T it?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by SoCal_Pony:
<B>Personally, I think Stallion is too lenient towards our administration.

If this was a business, and you had to present SMU’s pathetic athletic accomplishments to a sophisticated Board of Directors, you would last less than 2 years before being mercifully terminated. And during those 2 years, you would be unmercifully tarred and feathered at every meeting. Trust me.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



[This message has been edited by MeanGreenGem (edited 06-20-2003).]

[EastStang]

CUSA won't stay together. Louisville is wetting itself to leave. Cincy would be out of there in oh a minute if asked. I think the BE has the chips here and will ask who they want to ask. By the way, I think at least for the next two years Pitt alone will help keep them in the BCS by placing in the top 15, they have a heck of a football team. If they add Louisville, S. Florida, they might find another team that could crack that the top 15. The only "western" city that they recognize is Chicago and that will be it. By the way, what are the chances that Tranghese gets fired.

[gostangs]

The only for sure thing on this board is that MeanGreenGem has WAY too much time on his hands, and a burr under his saddle on our scheduling preferences. Every post is basically War & Peace revisited, including omnipresent references to SMU alumni spouses college backgrounds. Things must be slow up in ol Denton.

[EastStang]

I guess the septic tanks aren't overflowing out there.

[MeanGreenGem]

Actually, Parker/Tarrant County and you're right, things are slow right now.

I'll try to take a chill pill with SMU because yall are going to do what yall are going to do and UNT is going to do what it is going to do and (quite frankly) we're quite happy with our present directon; but on these smack boards, I will rebutt what I think are grossly exxagerated misrepresentations of our school like I am sure you would do the same for SMU.

UNT/SMU? A game that has never drawn less than 22,000 in modern times makes sense to us but your games with WACsters that you know in your heart of hearts will never draw maybe even half of that many real authentic butts in seats (not counting all tickets sold with those who show up) apparently makes more sense to yall and to that I say, que' sera, sera.

<>*<> I think that is the main gist of all this with us UNT'ers more than just the actually scheduling and playing of SMU but more of a what that game has done for the now suddenly important butts in seats part of today's NCAA and their seriousness about home attendance figures.

Also, the undeniable fact that such games between our 2 schools have produced some real positive "black ink?" type revenue because of there being absolutely no need to schedule charter airlines or make hotel resevations; as we know, it just is not that far from Dallas to Denton.

TV revenues that will fill our coffers are no longer available to any of us in the non-BCS. Such revenues now only help us toward just breaking even with our budgets or just reducing athletic budget deficits. So I guess some in the non BCS are now doing other creative things to make up for that terrific shortfall that TV used to more than accomodate for many schools.

Peace out...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by gostangs:
<B>The only for sure thing on this board is that MeanGreenGem has WAY too much time on his hands, and a burr under his saddle on our scheduling preferences. Every post is basically War & Peace revisited, including omnipresent references to SMU alumni spouses college backgrounds. Things must be slow up in ol Denton. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



[This message has been edited by MeanGreenGem (edited 06-20-2003).]

[Stallion]

I agree the average NTSU super fan cares way too much about what SMU thinks or wants. SMU has about 9,000 students even less undergraduates. NTSU has what 30,000. Quit worrying about SMU and instead focus on your own school. With the recent success and a little bit of promotion NTSU can prove without a doubt that it belongs just by energizing your own fan base.

[gostangs]

I rest my case (see above)