PonyFans.comBoard IndexAround the HilltopFootballRecruitingBasketballOther Sports

Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby Mustangs_Maroons » Wed Mar 08, 2023 11:10 pm

Ask the B10, Pac12 and the ACC if academics don’t matter.
User avatar
Mustangs_Maroons
Heisman
 
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:03 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby mtrout » Thu Mar 09, 2023 1:26 pm

Arizona State, Oregon State, Washington State... trash trash trash
Nebraska, Louisville... tt ttttt ttttrash

"All good schools" as my dad would say (I never heard him say any school was not a good school...)

Rice to Pac12. They blow us away in academics and actually won a football conference championship in 2013. We get 5th literally every year.
mtrout
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2293
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2016 9:36 pm

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby EastStang » Thu Mar 09, 2023 1:51 pm

Yes, but despite lots of begging the ACC would not admit WV. They didn't want VT but were forced to do so by the VA Gov. Funny, in football VT has had the better program. I am still surprised that they added Louisville. The TV suits must have told them that they moved the needle. FSU is certainly no ivy league school. In the ACC, UNC, Duke, UVA, BC, Syracuse are the bluebloods with maybe WF and the U. The rest are not.
UNC better keep that Ram away from Peruna
EastStang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 12393
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:01 am

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby Mustangs_Maroons » Thu Mar 09, 2023 2:51 pm

mtrout wrote:Arizona State, Oregon State, Washington State... trash trash trash
Nebraska, Louisville... tt ttttt ttttrash

"All good schools" as my dad would say (I never heard him say any school was not a good school...)

Rice to Pac12. They blow us away in academics and actually won a football conference championship in 2013. We get 5th literally every year.


I get it now, you are a troll. at least say something once in a while to not give you away as a consistent troller to SMU.
User avatar
Mustangs_Maroons
Heisman
 
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:03 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby mtrout » Thu Mar 09, 2023 9:26 pm

Maybe you're right. The academics angle is probably a pretty good one for us right now given that:
- SMU football has never finished higher than 5th (or tied for 4th?) in the 10 year existence of the AAC
- Our men's basketball team just finished a 22 loss season
mtrout
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2293
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2016 9:36 pm

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby ponyboy » Thu Mar 09, 2023 10:54 pm

It takes a special kind of jackas$ to selectively produce the most negative angles on his own school.
ponyboy
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 15134
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 4:01 am
Location: University Park,TX US

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby redpony » Fri Mar 10, 2023 8:36 am

p-boy facts are facts- sometimes the truth hurts. even most optimists see reality with our past history and failures.
redpony
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 10965
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:44 am
Location: on the beach,northern Peru

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby EastStang » Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:35 am

We all know about our past failures and our past infractions. We are reminded often. We've had multiple winning seasons in football for the first time since the death penalty. We showed that we belonged on the field with UH, TCU, MD, BYU and Cincy, all now P5 teams. I suspect we would be competitive in any conference except the SEC and to some degree the Big Ten. Yes, basketball took a step back this year, but historically has been a successful program. Our non-revenue sports continue to shine, equestrian, soccer, volleyball, swimming, tennis and golf. We have more US Open golf champions than any school in the Pac 12 except Stanford (Tiger beats us all by himself). We may have more US Amateur champions as well. Think about what a P12 membership would do for swimming and volleyball. Our academics are excellent, and that sells presidents. I do think there is some fear that our ability to step up in NIL may be both a positive and a negative (schools may fear that we might get too good). So, we'll see. As I've said all along, the TV suits are now the power brokers, not the NCAA, not the conferences.
UNC better keep that Ram away from Peruna
EastStang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 12393
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:01 am

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby orguy » Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:59 am

Aztecgolfer wrote:
orguy wrote:Aztecgolfer: UTSA is perceived as a junior college similar to Boise. As such
it's unlikely the PAC is interested.



Really? Nearly 35K students and an R1 rating and considered a junior college. I guess it's true, in Texas everything is bigger.


Attention to detail is not your forte. Notice I used the word perceived.

BTW: here in northern Cali, SDSU and the other Cal States are correctly
known to be inferior to the UC system schools because by most measures
they are. SDSU is only of interest to the PAC because of the LA Tv market
and it's brand new stadium. Long Beach State has 60k students. If they
had a not dropped football and played in a good G5 then schools like
SDSU/Fresno would not be in the conversation.
orguy
All-American
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:02 am
Location: SF bay area

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby Aztecgolfer » Fri Mar 10, 2023 12:20 pm

orguy wrote:
Aztecgolfer wrote:
orguy wrote:Aztecgolfer: UTSA is perceived as a junior college similar to Boise. As such
it's unlikely the PAC is interested.



Really? Nearly 35K students and an R1 rating and considered a junior college. I guess it's true, in Texas everything is bigger.


Attention to detail is not your forte. Notice I used the word perceived.

BTW: here in northern Cali, SDSU and the other Cal States are correctly
known to be inferior to the UC system schools because by most measures
they are. SDSU is only of interest to the PAC because of the LA Tv market
and it's brand new stadium. Long Beach State has 60k students. If they
had a not dropped football and played in a good G5 then schools like
SDSU/Fresno would not be in the conversation.


Only been here a week and my first insult, Nice!

Not sure there is much difference between the word "perceived" and "considered" but you go on bud. You are right, however. I'm not much into details unless I am working on my CAD drawings. I've always been more of a "big picture" guy and leave the details to others when I can.

Nice to call SDSU an inferior school, makes you come across as arrogant and, from the rest of your post, that seems to be an appropriate description. So I will proceed accordingly

As CSUs go, SDSU is the best of the bunch. Its acceptance rate (between 37-39% on average the last 5 years) is lower than many of the PAC schools and some of the UC Schools. Yes, the UC schools lobbied in the 60s to ensure that CSU schools could not independently award PhDs, so we have to partner with schools like UCSD and UCI to award 18 of the 19 PhDs we do offer. We also offer 6 or so independent doctoral level degrees in audiology, education and physical therapy. Currently, we are allowed to independently award PhDs in public health. SDSU is on pace to be classified a R1 university before we are admitted to the PAC. I have heard that we already meet the requirements for that designation. We're doing pretty well considering the artificial barriers put in front of us, though those barriers are slowly being chipped away. The UC system does not want to add campuses while the demand for graduate degrees continues to rise. Our campus expansion, which includes our new stadium, is geared towards increasing our research capabilities. We will see that part of the Mission Valley development begin in early 2024. The campus expansion will allow us to increase our student enrollment from 35K to up to 50K, which would be the largest enrollment among the CSU schools. Sorry, but LBSU has an enrollment of 40K, not 60K. Were we to hit 50K, we would have the largest enrollment of any college in California. SDSU is the second oldest CSU university and its main campus size has been a limiting factor for growth, though the university owns much of the property surrounding the campus and continues to buy properties as they become available. A buddy of mine sold one his apartment buildings near the campus a few years ago .

Had LBSU not eliminated football 32 years ago, they may have been considered for PAC expansion if their academics had tracked along with SDSU. But, they dropped football and their academics are not up to the level of SDSU so that point is moot. I don't understand your logic for even bringing that up. You may as well said that UCSD would be considered if they had football given they recently made the jump to Div. 1 sports and is a fine academic institution. Neither Fresno, UNLV nor Boise St. have gotten a serious look from the PAC because of academics.

SDSU is not being considered because of the LA market as San Diego is a completely separate from LA. Thank God we have Camp Pendleton as a barrier to expansion from the north or it would be solid development from LA to the border. SDSU is being considered because of its own market of 3.3M people, one that the PAC currently claims via USCLA. I know it is routine for NoCalers to lump San Diego together with LA but that is out of ignorance. Not only do we have a new $350M stadium as part of our $3B campus expansion but we have invested nearly a half billion dollars in our athletics infrastructure in the last 25 years. Over the last 40 some odd years we have worked hard to improve ourselves both academically and athletically and that work is now paying off.

SDSU is the PAC's first choice for expansion and we got our offer back in October. Sorry, SMU is not the PAC's first choice though I can understand why they are in the conversation despite being a R2 research institution.

Please feel free to respond so I can educate you further. I don't mind.
Aztecgolfer
Newbie
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2023 11:17 pm

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby redpony » Fri Mar 10, 2023 12:51 pm

Welcome to PF. :)
love your location. have been to San Diego a number of times. Plus your fball coach is Brady Hoke. Have followed his career as I used to watch his father John play ball in h.s. and later at Miami. Hope you all do well next season. Hopefully we will get to play you at some point in the future.
redpony
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 10965
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:44 am
Location: on the beach,northern Peru

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby Mustangs_Maroons » Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:24 pm

Aztecgolfer wrote:
orguy wrote:
Aztecgolfer wrote:
Really? Nearly 35K students and an R1 rating and considered a junior college. I guess it's true, in Texas everything is bigger.


Attention to detail is not your forte. Notice I used the word perceived.

BTW: here in northern Cali, SDSU and the other Cal States are correctly
known to be inferior to the UC system schools because by most measures
they are. SDSU is only of interest to the PAC because of the LA Tv market
and it's brand new stadium. Long Beach State has 60k students. If they
had a not dropped football and played in a good G5 then schools like
SDSU/Fresno would not be in the conversation.


Only been here a week and my first insult, Nice!

Not sure there is much difference between the word "perceived" and "considered" but you go on bud. You are right, however. I'm not much into details unless I am working on my CAD drawings. I've always been more of a "big picture" guy and leave the details to others when I can.

Nice to call SDSU an inferior school, makes you come across as arrogant and, from the rest of your post, that seems to be an appropriate description. So I will proceed accordingly

As CSUs go, SDSU is the best of the bunch. Its acceptance rate (between 37-39% on average the last 5 years) is lower than many of the PAC schools and some of the UC Schools. Yes, the UC schools lobbied in the 60s to ensure that CSU schools could not independently award PhDs, so we have to partner with schools like UCSD and UCI to award 18 of the 19 PhDs we do offer. We also offer 6 or so independent doctoral level degrees in audiology, education and physical therapy. Currently, we are allowed to independently award PhDs in public health. SDSU is on pace to be classified a R1 university before we are admitted to the PAC. I have heard that we already meet the requirements for that designation. We're doing pretty well considering the artificial barriers put in front of us, though those barriers are slowly being chipped away. The UC system does not want to add campuses while the demand for graduate degrees continues to rise. Our campus expansion, which includes our new stadium, is geared towards increasing our research capabilities. We will see that part of the Mission Valley development begin in early 2024. The campus expansion will allow us to increase our student enrollment from 35K to up to 50K, which would be the largest enrollment among the CSU schools. Sorry, but LBSU has an enrollment of 40K, not 60K. Were we to hit 50K, we would have the largest enrollment of any college in California. SDSU is the second oldest CSU university and its main campus size has been a limiting factor for growth, though the university owns much of the property surrounding the campus and continues to buy properties as they become available. A buddy of mine sold one his apartment buildings near the campus a few years ago .

Had LBSU not eliminated football 32 years ago, they may have been considered for PAC expansion if their academics had tracked along with SDSU. But, they dropped football and their academics are not up to the level of SDSU so that point is moot. I don't understand your logic for even bringing that up. You may as well said that UCSD would be considered if they had football given they recently made the jump to Div. 1 sports and is a fine academic institution. Neither Fresno, UNLV nor Boise St. have gotten a serious look from the PAC because of academics.

SDSU is not being considered because of the LA market as San Diego is a completely separate from LA. Thank God we have Camp Pendleton as a barrier to expansion from the north or it would be solid development from LA to the border. SDSU is being considered because of its own market of 3.3M people, one that the PAC currently claims via USCLA. I know it is routine for NoCalers to lump San Diego together with LA but that is out of ignorance. Not only do we have a new $350M stadium as part of our $3B campus expansion but we have invested nearly a half billion dollars in our athletics infrastructure in the last 25 years. Over the last 40 some odd years we have worked hard to improve ourselves both academically and athletically and that work is now paying off.

SDSU is the PAC's first choice for expansion and we got our offer back in October. Sorry, SMU is not the PAC's first choice though I can understand why they are in the conversation despite being a R2 research institution.

Please feel free to respond so I can educate you further. I don't mind.


Welcome to PF as well. I think SDSU made a lot of sense for the Pac12, and location is clearly probably the most important reason. I also love the city of San Diego, one of the best cities in the U.S. in my opinion to live in and visit as well. I think it's a great addition and not surprised it was the first option after the loss of UCLA and USC.

I think sometimes people confuse R1 research with being a top-ranked school, and it is not necessarily the same thing. SMU should absolutely be R1 and it's a shame that our administration did not emphasize this earlier, but hopefully we get that classification soon because I think it means more for a private institution to reach it than a large public university that automatically receives federal research funding. The very top echelon of universities in the U.S. are all R1, but not all R1 universities are top academic schools. There is a distinction. UTSA, UTEP, Texas Tech and UNT are examples here in Texas of schools that are R1 that are not considered top academic schools.

In any event, I would love for SMU to be part of the Pac 12, and while SDSU is not UCSD, UCSB or UCIrvine, those schools don't have D1 football. I think SMU is probably closer to a pepperdine comparable in California in that they're both private universities and tend to attract top candidates with more affluent backgrounds. We are a smaller version of USC to a certain degree for similar reasons, and that I'm sure is attractive to the Pac12. We have a lot of work to get there but a well-run SMU has very strong potential. SMU does have an actual history of D1 success, and while we have been hit with the death penalty and many self-induced institutional blunders from our current and previous administrations, SMU from an academic prestige perspective that also offers D1 football in a metropolitan location, has an upside potential that is about as good as anyone can provide the Pac 12 given where we currently are at vs where we can be if we're part of a P5 conference.

Anyways, let's hope that the Pac 12 schools stand together and bring both SMU and SDSU on, and it quickly cements to become the top of the second tier of P5 programs (given it's clear the B10 and SEC will remain as the two key juggernauts for the foreseeable future).
User avatar
Mustangs_Maroons
Heisman
 
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:03 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby panhandle_pony » Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:47 pm

Well stated MM !
panhandle_pony
All-American
 
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 9:47 am
Location: Regatta Bay Golf and Yacht Club; Destin, FL

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby Nedward » Fri Mar 10, 2023 4:24 pm

https://kslsports.com/499432/opinion-ma ... ts-rumors/

Excellent piece although it will upset the trolls because it's informed, reasonable and thoughtful.
Nedward
Junior Varsity
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 6:48 pm

Re: Third PAC Target "Confirmed"

Postby Dukie » Fri Mar 10, 2023 4:37 pm

Nedward wrote:https://kslsports.com/499432/opinion-making-sense-of-the-latest-pac-12-media-rights-rumors/

Excellent piece although it will upset the trolls because it's informed, reasonable and thoughtful.

I’m not a troll but I don’t love articles that talk about the value of the 10 schools and say nothing about expansion.
Dukie
Heisman
 
Posts: 1918
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2000 3:01 am
Location: Austin, Texas

PreviousNext

Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 24 guests