|
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 RE Tycoon » Sun Jun 06, 2010 1:47 pm
03Mustang wrote:Stallion wrote:. That would be a pretty darn good conference competitively-or they could expand its footprint ( but split it 16 ways) by adding from among UH, Iowa St., Baylor, Nevada, Fresno and SMU.
I don't like our odds if those are the choices. Something tells me we are going to get left out in the cold again.
I too fear we don't win with that list of schools. I can't make a bullet proof argument that we should be listed in front of any of those schools. They all have warts, but so do we.
#NewLobCity
-

RE Tycoon

-
- Posts: 2873
- Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2002 4:01 am
- Location: Dallas, TX
by Water Pony » Sun Jun 06, 2010 1:56 pm
Stallion wrote:yeah we really needed the MWC to take a hit-which seemed very likely a few weeks ago. Of course, Baylor over Colorado would be very bad for us too because Colorado would fit very nicely in the MWC. I think the Baylor Legislative Initiative will fail. The PAC ain't taking a "Bible School" run by an idiot. PAC will simply call the bluff and the Texas schools will cave.
I agree. Remember the notion that the PAC10 should take Utah and BYU was rejected out of hand, due to religious issues. Just because Texas pols want it, doesn't mean the PAC10 has to accommodate them. Getting Texas is the only reason they would want five teams from the SW, but not at any cost. Like the Big Ten, the west coast elites have their conditions too.
Pony Up
-

Water Pony

-
- Posts: 5523
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 3:01 am
- Location: Chicagoland
by MustangIcon » Sun Jun 06, 2010 2:17 pm
expony18 wrote:ive stayed out of most of the conference talk, because no one really knows whats going to happen/when it will happen. As for the comment about KU, and for that matter K-State.... I hope both end up in a conference with us, new SWC or expanded CUSA. I have a hard time believing TCU will realign unless they are added to the Big 12, which most likely wont happen. I really hope when the dust settles we have a division or conference that includes: Houston, Rice, Baylor, Tulsa, KU, K-state, and maybe Tulane. Of course, I would love to have TCU in there but I don't see it happening.
I love this scenario. Take those 7 teams, plus TCU and make that one 8 team division. Then take Boise, Iowa State, and the 6 best remaining MWC teams (BYU, Utah, Airforce, Colorado St., UNLV, New Mexico) to make the other 8 team division. That would be a fantastic conference.
-
MustangIcon

-
- Posts: 2604
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 10:29 am
by PK » Sun Jun 06, 2010 2:24 pm
MustangIcon wrote:expony18 wrote:ive stayed out of most of the conference talk, because no one really knows whats going to happen/when it will happen. As for the comment about KU, and for that matter K-State.... I hope both end up in a conference with us, new SWC or expanded CUSA. I have a hard time believing TCU will realign unless they are added to the Big 12, which most likely wont happen. I really hope when the dust settles we have a division or conference that includes: Houston, Rice, Baylor, Tulsa, KU, K-state, and maybe Tulane. Of course, I would love to have TCU in there but I don't see it happening.
I love this scenario. Take those 7 teams, plus TCU and make that one 8 team division. Then take Boise, Iowa State, and the 6 best remaining MWC teams (BYU, Utah, Airforce, Colorado St., UNLV, New Mexico) to make the other 8 team division. That would be a fantastic conference.
So where does Wyoming fit in your scenario. MWC isn't going to oust anyone.
SMU's first president, Robert S. Hyer, selected Harvard Crimson and Yale Blue as SMU's colors to symbolize SMU's high academic standards. We are one of the few Universities to have school colors with real meaning...and we just blow them off.
-

PK

-
- Posts: 8805
- Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 3:01 am
- Location: Dallas, Texas 75206
by Water Pony » Sun Jun 06, 2010 2:27 pm
SDSU is missing too. Kicking members out is not realistic, unless the Aztecs voluntarily drop FB, as hinted.
Pony Up
-

Water Pony

-
- Posts: 5523
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 3:01 am
- Location: Chicagoland
by NickSMU17 » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:14 pm
The won't drop if the are in an auto bid conference....
Didn't think about MWC adding colorado if Baylor insisted....I don't see the Pac 10 agreeing to baylor either...
At some point the Pac 10 will say screw the Texas BS and take utah and col. and be done with it...
I hope...
-
NickSMU17

-
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 4:01 am
- Location: Hinsdale, IL
by Charleston Pony » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:39 pm
NickSMU17 wrote:The won't drop if the are in an auto bid conference....
Didn't think about MWC adding colorado if Baylor insisted....I don't see the Pac 10 agreeing to baylor either...
At some point the Pac 10 will say screw the Texas BS and take utah and col. and be done with it...
I hope...
might not really matter to the PAC 10. After all, Texas is the plum in this deal. If they have to carry Baylor once again, so what? Baylor has better basketball (for now) and a good baseball program and it's not like Colorado has been highly visible in recent years. I would expect the MWC to jump on Colorado, Kansas and KSU if both the PAC 10 and Big 10 expand to 16 as is being rumored
-
Charleston Pony

-
- Posts: 29006
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2000 3:01 am
- Location: Stonebridge Golf Club, NC
by NickSMU17 » Sun Jun 06, 2010 6:48 pm
problem with losing colorado and adding baylor is TV sets...
denver market means more $$$$s
Plus Cal and Stanford have serious problems with over-religious schools...i.e. BYU, Baylor....
-
NickSMU17

-
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 4:01 am
- Location: Hinsdale, IL
Return to Football
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests
|
|