Oh well...

[Pony_Fan]

And, my fellow Mustang fans, this has all happened because there aren't enough of us.

CP -

You are correct about the SWC, we got left in the dust.....but I would have to say it has happened b/c Pye was a moron and the administration doesn't seem to give a damn. The Committment was a big farse.

[Stallion]

that argument about the breakup of the SWC as the cause of our problems is to a very great extent a Trojan horse and a cop out. SMU under Pye and Rice have never and would never have been competitive because they chose to play Division 1A football on their own Ivy League terms. Those schools have not even been to a bowl game in a combined 41 seasons. Its not fair to even include those two programs in the equation because they were not even trying to compete. TCU on the other hand has proven that a commitment, recruiting and quality coaching can allow these programs to have success. TCU has victories over OU(2), USC, OSU(I believe twice) and others that should have been considered in coming to that very conclusory theseis.

[SouthernMustang]

Romo did look sharp ... and those yankees from South Bend did lose so there is some sort of justice in the world.

Saddle up for next week ...

State is awful (Miss State) -- and Tulane is struggling, there is reason to be optimistic.

Also -- notice how the year we DON'T play Ok State they struggle to beat Arkansas State, a D-1AA team, and FIU/FAU (don't remember which) ... ohh the luck of SMU haha.

Let's just kick the crap out of the Green Wave next weekend and end September 2-2.

[Charleston Pony]

my point about being on the outside looking in at BCS is that we got there because we haven't shown the ability to put 50,000 butts in the seats at our games...and yes, it is a HUGE handicap in recruiting. TCU has done as good a job as any non-BCS program in Texas, but they will never CONSISTENTLY attract the same caliber athletes that Texas or A$M can. Even if SMU had returned from the Death Penalty and gone right back to truly competing with those programs (dare the NCAA to shut our program down for good?), I'm still not sure we could have avoided the end of the SWC. The truth is that the larger public schools just got tired of carrying us and saw an opportunity for larger profits in the Big XII. If SMU had the fan base Notre Dame has, things may be different...but ask those guys who played for our great teams in the 80's...even then we struggled to find fans. Even a winning SMU program won't guarantee Ford will be enlarged to seat the 45,000 the design allows. It takes UT/A$M/TTech visiting to have that demand for tickets to SMU football

[Stallion]

Well before we just "give up" it sure would be nice if we truly attempted the compete first. Look at our schedule-really is there a team on our schedule (other than A&M) that historically we should not be able to compete against if we are truly committed?

[MustangSally]

Attendance and a nice fanbase is definitely important, but we don't need 80,000 pony fans every week just to recruit well.

When U of Miami won their national championship in 2001, I think they averaged 43k at home...that wouldn't fill up TCU's stadium. Now, they have a lot more to fall back on for recruiting than just attendance, but it is possible to do well without the packed SEC or Big 10 stadiums.

If SMU beats Tulane, I think we'll see attendance climb, and we'll get boosts any time we play a regional opponent.

[SoCal_Pony]

Well done Mustang Sally, I was just about to post the same.

CP…I categorically disagree with your assessment. The University of Miami has been hands-down the most successful college football program over the past 30 years. Their enrollment is 9,700 versus our 6,100 and they have the same attendance issues we do. Are you really going to tell ponyfans that if SMU were in the BigXII they couldn’t compete with TTech and OSU???

[Charleston Pony]

don't get me wrong. I agree we need to compete and get to a point where we are DOMINATING CUSA. I also agree there's no reason we shouldn't be able to do that. We have considrable resources and play in a big time city and right under the noses of the Dallas Cowboys...America's team, right? No reason SMU shouldn't be able to attract quality student athletes.

As for the Miami comparison, remember Miami was crap when they decided to "do what it takes" to elevate their program. Don't tell me they ran a clean program to get there...but they jumped at an opportunity to join the Big East and gain a higher profile even when their closest conference opponent was 1,000 miles away...just as SMU would have to jump at any BCS offer...no matter what the travel costs. Miami recognized (and has continued to show their commitment by jumping to the ACC) what it was going to take to SUSTAIN their success. SMU has had some pretty impressive run in our history, too...but the wheels have always come off for one reason or another.

SMU was developing a Dallas following when we were competing with everybody and doing whatever it took to do so. Miami enjoys a decent following outside the university community. My perception when I lived in Dallas was that the community for the most part looked at SMU as somewhat aloof and that quite frankly has turned a lot of local sports fans off to SMU. All the posts we read after a loss telling fans of A$M or TTech to get back to their jobs flipping burgers or cleaning toliets just furthers that image. I'd love to see that change and clearly SMU is a school that needs every fan it can find, but maybe we have too many spoiled rich kids enrolled for that to ever happen. You know, these student athletes are also looking for a school that makes them feel comfortable, too. I know I'm preaching to the choir on this board, but if some of the top athletes in the DFW area saw more enthusiasm for SMU athletics, I'm convinced they might give us a closer look.