MUSTANGS clinch CUSA soccer title

by **EastStang** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:01 pm

That time of the month?

by **jtstang** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:02 pm

Phil_Bennett's_Mustache wrote:isn't there a board on this site titled "other sports"?

I've been under the impression that soccer would fall under that category, unless the person who posted this happens to be from a country other than the United States and might have confused Football, a sport played by men, with soccer or futbol.

Well, our "men" on the gridiron leave something to be desired in their performance. Maybe somebody just wanted to talk about a winner on this board for a change.

by **Dutch** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:14 pm

i'm not trying to take away from the accomplishment of the soccer team. it's great that we have success in all of our sports. I would have said the same if it was a basketball post. it has no place on this board. recruiting can slide a little if it's about a football player. the reason all the boards exist is so that people can find the subject that they want to read about and comment on in an orderly fashion.

same reason the "around the hilltop" board was started - to get the clutter off the football board. this isn't the only place to post on the site. and i'm sure that everyone of you guys that post on this website, just like me, read the paper and were already fully aware of the success of the soccer team.

by **jtstang** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:18 pm

Phil_Bennett's_Mustache wrote: it's great that we have success in all of our sports.

And since this you're hung up on this being the football board, what success is that again?

by **PonySnob** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 5:52 pm

jtstang wrote:And since this you're hung up on this being the football board, what success is that again?

Next year....remember....we are recruiting better players!!!! :twisted:

by **Mickey** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:22 pm

PBM- I am in agreement with you. This is a football board. Basketball belongs under basketball and soccer belongs under "other sports'.

I think the reason soccer posts of DMN articles keep appearing on the football board is that no one cares about the "other sports" and that site does not get much traffic.

Soccer will never be popular in this country. The SEC and Big 12 do not even have men's soccer as a sport. That is why we do so well in men's soccer- the big boys don't care about it.

by **PonyFan** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:57 pm

Not true -- every sport has its "big boys" .... and we're traditionally among them. We stumbled a little at the beginning of this season, but surely you can't suggest that Notre Dame, Virginia, UCLA, Indiana, etc., aren't "big boys" -- and the Ponies have beaten all of them. We got beat at the beginning of this season (badly) by IU and ND, but this team is loaded with talented players. South Carolina debacle aside, we're playing damn well going into next week's C-USA tournament at SMU.

(See what you did bringing it up again? :wink:

)

by **SoCal_Pony** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 1:20 pm

SMU excels at soccer because we are located at a hotbed of talent, Dallas is a great city to live in, SMU has a solid academic reputation, and we have one terrific HC. Most importantly, we donâ€™t have to pay players to come here.

In summary, put us on equal footing and SMU can compete against anyone.

by **Caballo** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:10 pm

SoCal_Pony wrote:SMU excels at soccer because we are located at a hotbed of talent, Dallas is a great city to live in, SMU has a solid academic reputation, and we have one terrific HC. Most importantly, we donâ€™t have to pay players to come here.

In summary, put us on equal footing and SMU can compete against anyone.

This is why this thread is appropriate on the Football Board. Based upon all the points SoCal makes above, we should have a decent football team. What is missing?

One of these things, is not like the other . . .

by **BRStang** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:47 pm

Caballo wrote:

This is why this thread is appropriate on the Football Board. Based upon all the points SoCal makes above, we should have a decent football team. What is missing?

Answer: TV exposure and the chance to play for REAL championships/no one wants to play for a loser.

SMU did not build its reputation in soccer overnight...same as football.

You asked.

by **PonySnob** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:18 pm

BRStang wrote:SMU did not build its reputation in soccer overnight...same as football.

It did not take too many years to get the "loser" reputation in football after 1987......and right now, it doesn't look like it will stop anytime soon.

by **Caballo** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:37 pm

BRStang wrote:Caballo wrote:

This is why this thread is appropriate on the Football Board. Based upon all the points SoCal makes above, we should have a decent football team. What is missing?

Answer: TV exposure and the chance to play for REAL championships/no one wants to play for a loser.

SMU did not build its reputation in soccer overnight...same as football.

You asked.

BR, I was referring more to the list of reasons that SoCal listed as why the soccer team was successful, ie. located in a hotbed of talent (like football), Dallas is a great city, academic reputation, and that "we have one terrific HC." I believe PB to be a good recruiter, but the jury is still out on his game day coaching.

We have TV exposure, it's just that no one watches. Except for dyed in the wool Pony fans. If we would allow ourselves to recruit on the same basis as other schools with our "comparable academic reputation" we would be head and shoulders above our C-USA peers.

by **Charleston Pony** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:00 pm

who says we can't talk about european football (futball) on the football site. This might get you more interested (hope the link works):

http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/confusa/i ... 02f7f781fc

by **EastStang** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:23 pm

However, there are no other Division I Men's soccer programs in the State of Texas. So, we pretty much have our pick of any player who wants to play soccer and remain in State. But notice we have picked up players from Florida, Central America, and other hotbeds of soccer.

by **Mickey** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:41 pm

PonyFan wrote:Not true -- every sport has its "big boys" .... and we're traditionally among them. We stumbled a little at the beginning of this season, but surely you can't suggest that Notre Dame, Virginia, UCLA, Indiana, etc., aren't "big boys" -- and the Ponies have beaten all of them. We got beat at the beginning of this season (badly) by IU and ND, but this team is loaded with talented players. South Carolina debacle aside, we're playing damn well going into next week's C-USA tournament at SMU.

(See what you did bringing it up again? )

PonyFan:
You missed misunderstood my message. The points that I was trying to make:

1. I agreed with PBM. why is soccer being posted on the football site? Answer- Soccer is not a popular sport and the football site gets more views. Is there any other reason?

2.You have got to be kidding me if you think the Big Boys are playing this sport. There are some, but a lot of the real successful athletic schools are not palying Mens Soccer. The sport is seriously diluted when the SEC and Big 12 conferences don't even compete in the sport. Don't even try to suggest that the sport is missing a lot of major athletic schools like Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Aa&M, Georgia, Fla, Tenn, LSU, Ala, Auburn, Ark, CU, KU, KSU, Ill, Minn, Iowas, Mizzou, Purdue, etc.

3. I agree with you, SMU is a BIG BIG boy in this sport. There are just not as many boys though.

MUSTANGS clinch CUSA soccer title

Who is online