|
PonyFans.com •
Board Index •
Around the Hilltop •
Football •
Recruiting •
Basketball •
Other Sports
This is the forum for talk about SMU Football
Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower
by SoCal_Pony » Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:37 pm
WAC
Fresno St #29, Hawaii #50, Boise St #61, San Jose St #90, Nevada #96, LA Tech #100, Rice #102, Tulsa #106, SMU #107, UTEP #110
Non-Conference
OSU #25, TCU #28, TTech #74, Baylor #85
While I am surprised at TTech’s low ranking, I think they will be very difficult to beat in Lubbock.
My bold prediction: This is the last year SMU starts the season in triple digits for a very long time.
-
SoCal_Pony
-
- Posts: 5900
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 4:01 am
by PonyTales » Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:38 pm
Great prediction - and I think you're right.
Can't believe Boise's ranked that low. They're really tough.
-
PonyTales
-
- Posts: 1271
- Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2000 3:01 am
- Location: Garland, Texas
by Charleston Pony » Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:02 pm
that lack of respect for SMU is going to help us one of these years, when we become the surprise team of the year.
These pre-season predictions can come pretty close to picking the top 10-15 teams, but after that there is a fine line between good and bad seasons.
If we can find some offense this year, I'd like to think we can at least compete with everyone on our schedule. Keep in mind that four of our five toughest opponents come to Ford this year. If we can get more than 10,000 people out to support these guys, they just might find it inside of them to overachieve THIS YEAR.
-
Charleston Pony
-
- Posts: 27921
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2000 3:01 am
- Location: Stonebridge Golf Club, NC
by KnuckleStang » Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:03 pm
Is it just me, or do Texas Tech and Hawaii look a little low as well?
So Cal noticed the TT thing, sorry, didn't see that at first.
[This message has been edited by KnuckleStang (edited 08-11-2003).]
-
KnuckleStang
-
- Posts: 2605
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 4:01 am
- Location: Lynchburg, VA, USA
by JasonB » Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:27 pm
Baylor is ranked too high.
Tech, Hawaii, us, and SJS are not rated high enough.
Boise lost a lot of players, they will not be as good this year. 61 is a bit of a slight though.
-
JasonB
-
- Posts: 7185
- Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2001 3:01 am
- Location: Allen, Tx, USA
by Water Pony » Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:30 pm
I'll say it again, several teams "exceed" expectations every year. Who will beat these predictions? I say SMU in 2003 will surprise.
Who else?
Pony Up
-
Water Pony
-
- Posts: 5478
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 3:01 am
- Location: Chicagoland
by Sam I Am » Mon Aug 11, 2003 10:38 pm
Bennett has been able to develop a rushing game for SMU. In college football that is usually a sign of strong, winning team. Although I am not expecting a great leap forward, the team is developing the righit fundamentals to win big eventually. I think we are grossly under rated based on what we see developing, but based on our past records the triple digits are fair before the season begins.
Sam I Am
-
Sam I Am
-
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:01 am
- Location: Jacksonville, Texas
by WreckEm16 » Mon Aug 11, 2003 11:57 pm
Sagarin has Tech at #28. That seems much more realistic to me.
And when I die<BR>You can bury me<BR>In Lubbock, Texas,<BR>In my jeans.<P>-Mac Davis
-
WreckEm16
-
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2003 3:01 am
Return to Football
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 126 guests
|
|