New South Western Conference

[wardog]

The best situation for SMU in my opinion would be a new SWC. It would have:

1.SMU
2.TCU
3.North Texas
4.Houston
5.Rice
6.UTEP
7.Tulsa
8.Tulane
9.Louisiana Tech
10.Baylor
11.Arkansas State
12.New Mexico State

With the schools being so close together, bitter rivalries would form. Which in turn would be great publicity for the schools. Also, with the schools being all on the same level as far as talent, the conference championship would come down to the wire every year. Which equals publicity. Rivalries, equal playing field, and a conference championship game would do wonders for these schools, and build them into future powerhouses.

[MustangKurt20]

Athletically it looks like a good conference, but academically there is a huge gap in the quality of schools. Schools like Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, and Baylor (all private schools) have much better academic reputations than North Texas, Houston, Lousiana Tech, and UTEP. But I do like the conference from an athletic standpoint. And honestly the WAC isn't much better academically than your proposed New SWC. In the end its all going to come down to economics and whats going to be the most cost effective alliance we can muster up. TCU, whether they like it or not, doesn't have the BCS clout and would be better served by joining in a regional alliance w/ SMU.

Kurt

[Nacho]

Whether they like it or not TCU is stuck with us. MWC is not going to take them. No place to go in C-USA. They have to join us in the private school conference (PSC).

[LA_Mustang]

Dont forget about Texas State and UTA, as soon as they add football. You know Ford Stadium would get out of control for conference tilts between SMU and Arkansas St/NMSU/UNT. I'm certain those matchups would bring the SMU alums back and draw in the average Metroplex football fan. Sounds like a great idea to me. Lateral or lower moves like this one are exactly what we should exploring.

[Stallion]

i'd like to suggest Tarelton St and Austin College too.

[wardog]

small schools like tarleton st.,austin college,UTA,and Texas State would not draw any fans.

[FloridaMustang]

I'm pretty sure Stallion was being sattirical

[MeanGreenGem]

Not going to get into a pissin' contest here, LA_Mustang, but who do you realllllly think would draw the most fans among the following matchups at Gerald D. Ford Stadiuim?

Even in today's FW Star Telegram in a feature story about Cowtown's new Fort Worth Bowl it mentions that the UNT/TCU game was the largest Amon Carter crowd in that stadium last Fall and that a crowd that was closing in on 34,000; while in the same article pointing out that about 27,000 was the largest the Frogs drew against any CUSA conference opponent and that was even the game that clinched a CUSA Co-Championship and a Liberty Bowl berth for the Horned Frogs.

So of the following, who would bring out the most total "BIS" total attendance to SMU's on-campus football stadium?

SMU vs San Jose?
SMU vs La Tech?
SMU vs Reno?
SMU vs Fresno?
SMU vs Tulsa
SMU vs University of North Texas?

Your probable answer will sort of be a test to show your fellow Mustangs how so unrealistic you sometimes are in these discussions concerning today's non BCS as it exists in the NCAA now.

Hey, I wish UNT could be in a group of state assisted schools in a league with UT, TAMU, TTech, OSU, OU, etc, etc, etc, BUT being the realists that I am, I know that is likely just not going to happen in my lifetime (if ever).

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by LA_Mustang:
<B>Dont forget about Texas State and UTA, as soon as they add football. You know Ford Stadium would get out of control for conference tilts between SMU and Arkansas St/NMSU/UNT. I'm certain those matchups would bring the SMU alums back and draw in the average Metroplex football fan. Sounds like a great idea to me. Lateral or lower moves like this one are exactly what we should exploring.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>




[This message has been edited by MeanGreenGem (edited 06-15-2003).]

[originaloverthehilltop1]

baylor is not going to leave the big $ conf for a new conf w/those names in it. remember when rice was dormat of the swc, they weren't looking to join the southland conf all the time. when the swc broke up and wac approached houston, they dissed smu badly, saying they weren't interested in being in a conf with us-because they wanted to play in front of a crowd. this gets you down to 10, and there is no "anchor tenant" in the whole bunch. it's a lot more likely conf usa will cherry pick to replace whatever they might lose. your new swc needs something to make it more attractive--sorry wardog.

[Garland Green]

MustangKurt20,

There certainly are differences academically, but there is no "huge gap" in the quality of schools of those listed by Wardog. Actually, there is greater disparity between Rice and SMU than between SMU and all of the others.

As an example, following are the SAT scores of incoming freshmen in 2001. I find no one averages the scores for all students but the following is the 75th percentile scores for the twelve listed:

Rice 1520
Tulane 1410
Tulsa 1370
Baylor 1280
SMU 1260
TCU 1260
North Texas 1220
Arkansas State 1180
Houston 1150
Louisiana Tech 1150*
New Mexico State 1150*
UTEP 1020

* La Tech and New Mexico State use ACT primarily and those are the scores of comparable universities that use both.

As you can see, there is a 260 point difference between Rice and SMU/TCU, two schools with strong academics. Tulane's scores are 150 higher than SMU/TCU but still 110 points lower than Rice. So Rice has no equal, at least among non-BCS colleges. North Texas is only 40 points lower; hardly a "wide" gap. The others, wxcept for UTEP, are within 110 points, or the difference between SMU/TCU and Tulsa.

The proposed conference would be stronger academically than the current WAC, primarily because no other WAC members except Rice, Tulsa and SMU exceed the scores of Tulane, Baylor and North Texas. Hawaii ranks fourth in the WAC, 40 points below UNT. Fresno State and UTEP are numbers 116 and 117, the only schools below 1100.

Perception dowsn't always correlate figures. Those schools that Warhog listed are close geographically and, at least, an improvement over the WAC.

Reality is that the only non-BCS schools that rank above SMU academically are the four listed above, the three service academies, Brigham Young and Miami of Ohio. They are the only ones that can fulfill your academic requirements. There is no perfect academic conference, although the current ACC comes very close.

[True Colors]

Another problem with having too many teams in the same location is that it compresses your national appeal.

That was one of the big reasons that the SWC folded up...... it carried the televisions in the state of texas, but that was pretty much it.

Of course, having NMSU, Tulsa, La Tech, etc. does help offset that some.

One other thing...... try to find some people who might possibly be on the upswing in the future--such as La Tech. Tulane looks like it's ready to implode, and does not show much potential for the years to come. Several years ago when they had that perfect 12-0 football season, even that was not enough to spark the interest needed to keep them out of the whole they find themselves in right now.

TC

[PerunaPunch]

Garland Green,

I'd like to know the source you pulled you SAT figures from, as I SERIOUSLY doubt their credibility.

I believe that the highest possible SAT score is 1600 (I have a nephew who scored a perfect 1600 and was the talk of the town academically). According to your data, you?d damn near have to score a perfect SAT to get into Rice. I know they have high standards, but there just aren?t enough kids who score high enough to populate an incoming freshman class at Rice if your figures are correct.

I wasn?t exactly what you?d call a great student, but I was fortunate in that I tested well. I scored high enough (in the top 1% nationally) on the SAT that I was given a scholarship from that test?s publishers. Yet you?re telling me that my test score wouldn?t get me into Rice these days? Give me a break! I?m pretty sure that given the finances, I could have gone anywhere I wanted.

Further, you mean to tell me that my wife (conversely, a great student) who pulled a 3.98 while getting a PhD couldn?t even get into UNT these days? Please!!

Growing up in North Texas, I have a bunch of friends who attended the local private schools and ended up going to TCU, UNT (or NTSU as it was in the olden days) and Baylor ? which is where TCA, St. Mark?s, Jesuit, Hockaday, and First Baptist Academy kids tend to migrate to ? and I doubt any of them were anywhere near a 1220 SAT. I?d guess they were all in the 900-1000 range. They certainly didn?t have any trouble getting into the schools you mention.

Unless the test has radically simplified in the last 15 years, I?m calling BS!

[MeanGreenGem]

Garland Green is one of the most reliable posters there are on GoMeanGreen.com. He doesn't estimate or create. I don't know where he got his stats but I'd take them to the bank knowing they came from him.

There are posters on GMG.com who are graduates who have said they couldn't get into present day UNT with its admission standards. One of those is an extremely successful business person, too.

For what its worth, some who enter our colleges are late bloomers academically. I'd hate to think what the USA would have missed out on culturally if we had kept all such late bloomers from getting into our schools to develop.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PerunaPunch:
[b]Garland Green,

I'd like to know the source you pulled you SAT figures from, as I SERIOUSLY doubt their credibility.


[This message has been edited by MeanGreenGem (edited 06-16-2003).]

[JayM]

Here's the North Texas admission standards from the UNT official web site.

<A HREF="http://www.unt.edu/catalogs/AdmReq02.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.unt.edu/catalogs/AdmReq02.htm</A>

[SoCal_Pony]

The Princeton Review gives Rice an academic rating of 93, the same score given to Harvard. SMU received an academic grade of 81, comparable to UT’s 82.
TA$M, Baylor and TCU all received grades in the upper 70s.

NTSU scored a whopping 62. UTArlington scored a whopping 62. The University of Texas at Tyler is viewed in such low regard that it was not given an academic rating, but its admission selectivity rating was a 63. Same with Richland Community College and Eastfield Community College, no academic ratings but both have admissions selectivity ratings of 59.

Conclusion – NTSU is a slug of an academic school that is considered only a step above a low-grade community college.

This is not my opinion, but those of the most highly-regarded Princeton Review. For anyone offended by this post, please feel free to contact 212.874.8282 and voice your displeasure. Understand this is not a toll-free call and it might cost you an hour or two of wages.