DMN Cowlishaw Chat Question

[mavsrage311]

Was moving to Conference USA a good or bad thing for SMU?

Tim Cowlishaw: As a former SMU beat writer many years ago, I have come to realize there are no good answers for the Mustangs. I don't think they will ever be much different from what they have become although I think they can be more competitve in men's basketball and I think Doherty can make that happen. Not talking about Final Fours here but this team hasn't so much as won an NIT game in more than a decade.

I guess he doesn't have much faith in the football program, at this point I can't say I blame him. You are what you are

[perunapower]

I think it was a great move for SMU. We get to play regionally (for the most part) in a conference that is filled with programs on the rise, some of which are old-SWC foes and/or a lot like us. We have six bowl tie-ins. I see lots of upside from us changing from watered down WAC to C-USA.

[ponyte]

Give him credit. At least he didn't blame Copeland for our move to CUSA. If I remember correctly, I do not believe I talked to one person or read one thing on this board to indicate that the move to CUSA was anything but wonderful for SMU. We have been more competitive in CUSA (.500 ball in football). We even had a possibility of winning the West last year. Imagine had our last game to win a bowl had been against San Jose State. How many folks would have made that trip? A trip to NO every other year has nothing on a trip to Nowhere Nevada every other year. A trip to Memphis certainly can't be as exciting as a trip to Fresno. The bottom line is that we have to perform and win regardless of the conference. CUSA does give us some options in bowls and regional play. Now we just have to win.

[mr. pony]

Yeah, I'm sure folks thought TCU would never go anywhere after 1-10 in '97.

Cowlishaw's a UT man and, as such, he's fine with keeping the little guys down - and out of the BCS.

[EmeraldCityPony]

If we would have stayed in the WAC and Rice, Tulsa, and UTEP gone to C-USA without us, we would have had no regional rivals left, other than maybe LaTech. TCU did it, but then again the WAC is no MWC. Okay, well technically it used to be.

I like playing Rice, Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, and UTEP every year. They may not be as exciting as the Big 12 matchups, but they get me riled up more than playing the Idaho States and San Jose States of the WAC.

Probably a lateral move prestige-wise, but a better fit for our school.

[jtstang]

Yeah, I'm sure folks thought TCU would never go anywhere after 1-10 in '97.

Cowlishaw's a UT man and, as such, he's fine with keeping the little guys down - and out of the BCS.

And I thought the little NTSU fantasy about SMU keeping them out of a better conference was pathetic. You're Cowlishaw is keeping SMU out of the BCS theory is remarkably more asinine.

[mr. pony]

Cowlishaw knows nothing about this team.

The question was about whether C-USA was a good move for SMU. Obviously, it is - for numerous reasons. Instead of talking about that, he basically says, "Who cares?"

He may be the only lead columnist in a D-I city who has no idea what's going on with the hometown team.

[Mustang98]

Cowlishaw knows nothing about this team.

The question was about whether C-USA was a good move for SMU. Obviously, it is - for numerous reasons. Instead of talking about that, he basically says, "Who cares?"

He may be the only lead columnist in a D-I city who has no idea what's going on with the hometown team.

Well said "Mr. Pony". I was at a party last weekend and a couple of my Big 12 friends were talking about the upcoming season. OU, Texas, A&M, Tech are all mentioned as I patiently waited to jump in. Then it's my turn. I remind everyone that our starting QB got some love on the front cover (even if it's small) of Dave Campbell's Magazine. Then I get that pompous question from my Big 12 friends, "What does SMU look like this year?" They have no idea what the heck is going on outside of a BCS conference. I tell them the upside and how things are so much better than they used to be and that we now allow athletes to commit to the school before they are academically accepted. People have no idea how far we have come since 1989. SMU is so under the radar that we could sign a few 4 star recruits and guys like Cowlishaw would have no clue. That's why Cowlishaw gave that lame answer in his chat because he just assumes it's business as usual with SMU. I am sorry to inform him, but those days are over. SMU's faculty and athletic department trust each other much more now than ten years ago. Cowlishaw needs to do his homework before he buries an entire school.

[EastStang]

If we win the conference, then we can start ranking on Cowlikker. At this point, its a good move for many intangible reasons. When we start showing up every game on the football field and beat teams we're supposed to beat and upset a favored team now and then, we can crow. Let's start by beating TT, UNT, ASU and TCU. Now that would get even the attention of Cowlikker.

[jtstang]

Cowlishaw knows nothing about this team.

The question was about whether C-USA was a good move for SMU. Obviously, it is - for numerous reasons. Instead of talking about that, he basically says, "Who cares?"

He may be the only lead columnist in a D-I city who has no idea what's going on with the hometown team.

Oh, I think he knows exactly what is going on with the "hometown" SMU mustangs, hence his answer. How many over-.500 seasons in the last 20 years again? Tim Cowlishaw is most definitely not keeping SMU out of the BCS.

[ponyboy]

Nobody's making that argument, jt. You bored at work these days?

[jtstang]

Nobody's making that argument, jt. You bored at work these days?

No, plenty of work, thanks for asking (but could always use more, so keep me in mind if you have legal needs), but the illustrious mr. p has said that Cowlishaw is working to keep SMU, oe of the "little guys", out of the BCS, so yes somebody is making that argument. And it is an idiotic one, and even worse than the one I love to bash NTSU folk about. So I've got to call him on it ponyboy. You know I can't just let that go.

[mavsrage311]

Probably a lateral move prestige-wise, but a better fit for our school.

I agree with that 100%. Maaaaybe CUSA is just a tiny bit more prestigious, but by a miniscule amount since it is still not a BCS conference.

Mustang98, nice post...but the reality of the situation with national media and guys like Cowlishaw are that until you get over the hump, and we're closer now but still not there, you won't get any credit. It's easy to predict that this is the year that you will do it, but until you do it, you're still going to be thrown under the bus.

[ponyboy]

mr. p has said that Cowlishaw is working to keep SMU, oe of the "little guys", out of the BCS,

I don't know that he's said that Cowlishaw's specifically targeted SMU.

[jtstang]

I don't know that he's said that Cowlishaw's specifically targeted SMU.

Please, now I know you are smart enough to read and understand his context. Or at least I thought you were.