Football Luncheon - Summary?

[OC Mustang]

But going after recruits from NTSU, Tulsa, & UTEP would not be competing with, to coin Stallion, "our natural & traditional rivals".

I guess it falls in the category of needing to crawl before walking before running before striking the Heisman pose?

But methinks based on his board musings that Stallion would not be satisfied.

[mr. pony]

I'm telling you, SMU is getting more and more attractive. We will get some of UT's guys, even if it's just one or two. And UT knows it.

[jtstang]

But going after recruits from NTSU, Tulsa, & UTEP would not be competing with, to coin Stallion, "our natural & traditional rivals".

I guess it falls in the category of needing to crawl before walking before running before striking the Heisman pose?

But methinks based on his board musings that Stallion would not be satisfied.

If Stallion thinks that we are "rivals" with UT anymore, then he's just wrong. Those days are gone forever.

Our "traditional" rivals list is dwindling as well, if you believe as I do that traditional rivals involve both a history and a continuing relationship, and currently include TCU, Houston, Rice, Tech (depending on whether we can parlay this few years worth of games into an actual non-conference series), and maybe Tulane (I recall we used to play them quite a bit in years past).

Our "natural" rivals I think would be measured in terms of locality and comparable facilities and funds and would include TCU, Rice, Houston, Tulsa, UTEP, NTSU (if we'd play them more often), Baylor (ditto, and they'd also be traditional, if...), and schools of that ilk.

Please note that in this system the only "natural and traditional" rivals we have now are TCU, Rice and Houston. Now Stallion can disagree with this if he wants, but if you look objectively at the current state of things, in my opinion this is the logical conclusion.

Oh, and one more thing...for a true "rivalry" to exist, both sides have to believe it. Hence the biggest reason we are no longer rivals with UT, A/M, etc.

[Peruna2001]

If Stallion thinks that we are "rivals" with UT anymore, then he's just wrong. Those days are gone forever.

A little defeatist. National Champs 2028!!!

[PonySnob]

Are Rice and Houston really "rivals"? How many Rice fans attend and SMU-Rice game in Dallas? They had maybe 3300-400 at the game last year. The prior year, SMU had only a couple of hundred at the game in Houston. The same could be said about "Cougar High". The only real rival that we have is TCU..which brings thousands to the game when come over to Ford.....however, SMU usually brings its customary 3-400 "die hards" over to ACS. Certainly, the potential is there for NTSU and SMU to become "rivals" at least in the Metroplex for football. Hopefully, SMU will bring a large crowd to Denton so that it could become a "home game" for SMU!

[ponyboy]

The only rivals we have are in Conference USA. They are our yardstick. Goal one is win the conference.

Have we fallen off from our days as a bottom to mid-level player in the SWC? Clearly. This point has been beaten into the ground. Right now we're a mid-level player in CUSA with upside. There's a lot of fun to be had if the bashers let us have it. Or we could continue to whine and talk about vinaigrette.

[jtstang]

Right now we're a mid-level player in CUSA with upside. There's a lot of fun to be had if the bashers let us have it.

Are you going to "give your heart" in song to this concept as well, you well-known loyalist?

[jtstang]

Are Rice and Houston really "rivals"? How many Rice fans attend and SMU-Rice game in Dallas? They had maybe 3300-400 at the game last year. The prior year, SMU had only a couple of hundred at the game in Houston. The same could be said about "Cougar High". The only real rival that we have is TCU..which brings thousands to the game when come over to Ford.....however, SMU usually brings its customary 3-400 "die hards" over to ACS. Certainly, the potential is there for NTSU and SMU to become "rivals" at least in the Metroplex for football. Hopefully, SMU will bring a large crowd to Denton so that it could become a "home game" for SMU!

Geez, if you are going to count fans in attendance as a measuring stick, then SMU has no rivals, and neither do the other teams I mentioned.

[PonySnob]

The only rivals we have are in Conference USA. They are our yardstick. Goal one is win the conference.

Do any of the teams in CUSA really see us as a "rival"?

[mrydel]

The only rivals we have are in Conference USA. They are our yardstick. Goal one is win the conference.

Do any of the teams in CUSA really see us as a "rival"?

No. We have no established rivalry at this time. Yes, CUSA is our current measuring stick, but that does not make a rivalry. I see only TCU as a potential for a rivalry but we must become competitive first.

[SMU Football Blog]

The only rivals we have are in Conference USA. They are our yardstick. Goal one is win the conference.

Do any of the teams in CUSA really see us as a "rival"?

In the West, I should think so considering that in the past two seasons, we have beaten every team save Tulane. We hung with every team in the East we played winning one, losing one in overtime and one close loss.

I see you are back to asking easily answered obnoxious and dumb questions again. I guess it is a cyclical thing because we are close to the season starting.

[ponyboy]

Do any of the teams in CUSA really see us as a "rival"?

By "rival" I mean "yardstick." You're right that we haven't had time to develop the requisite animosities with our fellow members of CUSA. But our goal is to win the CUSA. That's our yardstick, not comparison with former SWC members.

[ponyboy]

Are you going to "give your heart" in song to this concept as well, you well-known loyalist?

I'd be glad to sing. You bring the salad.

[OC Mustang]

jstang wrote:

Our "traditional" rivals list is dwindling as well, if you believe as I do that traditional rivals involve both a history and a continuing relationship, and currently include TCU, Houston, Rice, Tech (depending on whether we can parlay this few years worth of games into an actual non-conference series), and maybe Tulane (I recall we used to play them quite a bit in years past).

Our "natural" rivals I think would be measured in terms of locality and comparable facilities and funds and would include TCU, Rice, Houston, Tulsa, UTEP, NTSU (if we'd play them more often), Baylor (ditto, and they'd also be traditional, if...), and schools of that ilk.

Please note that in this system the only "natural and traditional" rivals we have now are TCU, Rice and Houston. Now Stallion can disagree with this if he wants, but if you look objectively at the current state of things, in my opinion this is the logical conclusion.

Good points all. I do agree with you. But we are still crawling. We walk every once in awhile, but we are still in rehab after the stroke in 1987.

[jtstang]

Good points all. I do agree with you. But we are still crawling. We walk every once in awhile, but we are still in rehab after the stroke in 1987.

You're right, and it would be foolish to discount the effects of our downfall on what used to be considered "rivalries"--I think that is reflected in the "both sides have to feel that way" concept, because Texas and A&M don't feel like they are rivals with 90 pound weaklings. It's the nature of things. However, even as we get better, we won't be rivals with those old members of the SWC because they have left us so far behind. For those of us who long for the old SWC days, that is a sad truth and hard to admit.