|
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 03Mustang » Wed Aug 31, 2016 10:12 am
I just don't see how any of this is an upgrade for the conference....I don't think they expand.
Replacing games with Texas and Oklahoma with Houston and SMU (or Memphis, Cincy, or whoever) isn't going to make a lot of programs happy.
-
03Mustang

-
- Posts: 4238
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:47 am
- Location: Allen, TX
by Rebel10 » Wed Aug 31, 2016 10:23 am
If SMU did make the cut it would probably be good put shovels in the ground on the performance center to show that SMU is getting started on it quickly and not just putting out a press release on it with no time table.
#HammerDown
-
Rebel10

-
- Posts: 12534
- Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:20 pm
by Grant Carter » Wed Aug 31, 2016 10:26 am
03Mustang wrote:I just don't see how any of this is an upgrade for the conference....I don't think they expand.
Replacing games with Texas and Oklahoma with Houston and SMU (or Memphis, Cincy, or whoever) isn't going to make a lot of programs happy.
Of course in some cases they would replace games with Iowa state and Kansas.
-
Grant Carter

-
- Posts: 2791
- Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:40 am
by Grant Carter » Wed Aug 31, 2016 10:28 am
Rebel10 wrote:If SMU did make the cut it would probably be good put shovels in the ground on the performance center to show that SMU is getting started on it quickly and not just putting out a press release on it with no time table.
Do you think they should start by digging up the soccer field or the football practice field?
-
Grant Carter

-
- Posts: 2791
- Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:40 am
by 03Mustang » Wed Aug 31, 2016 10:39 am
Grant Carter wrote:03Mustang wrote:I just don't see how any of this is an upgrade for the conference....I don't think they expand.
Replacing games with Texas and Oklahoma with Houston and SMU (or Memphis, Cincy, or whoever) isn't going to make a lot of programs happy.
Of course in some cases they would replace games with Iowa state and Kansas.
I think that's a neutral move at best in the eyes of many in the conference and nationally.
-
03Mustang

-
- Posts: 4238
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:47 am
- Location: Allen, TX
by PonyTime » Wed Aug 31, 2016 10:46 am
The UCONN thing makes no sense at all. If ESPN has anything to say about this - I would think that they would not want UCONN only for football in the B12 as that would mean that all of UCONN's other sports would go BigEast (including BBall).
Doesn't the Big East Basketball have a 10 year deal with FoxSports1?
ESPN would not want UCONN to go into the Big East unless they owned that Basketball contract...
Last edited by PonyTime on Wed Aug 31, 2016 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Moral Victories Make Me Sick" - TR 
-

PonyTime

-
- Posts: 3985
- Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2002 4:01 am
- Location: The Green Elephant
by Puckhead48E » Wed Aug 31, 2016 10:46 am
Grant Carter wrote:Rebel10 wrote:If SMU did make the cut it would probably be good put shovels in the ground on the performance center to show that SMU is getting started on it quickly and not just putting out a press release on it with no time table.
Do you think they should start by digging up the soccer field or the football practice field?
How about announce a date and that funding is at 100% of the required level to commence. Is that easy enough for you? They can definitely make public moves to reassure any doubters and emphasize the move. Then again, there may be an even bigger announcement that Turner has up his sleeve. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Puckhead48E

-
- Posts: 1989
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 9:39 pm
by Rebel10 » Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:06 am
Puckhead48E wrote:Grant Carter wrote:Rebel10 wrote:If SMU did make the cut it would probably be good put shovels in the ground on the performance center to show that SMU is getting started on it quickly and not just putting out a press release on it with no time table.
Do you think they should start by digging up the soccer field or the football practice field?
How about announce a date and that funding is at 100% of the required level to commence. Is that easy enough for you? They can definitely make public moves to reassure any doubters and emphasize the move. Then again, there may be an even bigger announcement that Turner has up his sleeve. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I concur Puck.
#HammerDown
-
Rebel10

-
- Posts: 12534
- Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:20 pm
by Digetydog » Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:06 am
West Coast Johnny wrote:PonyTime wrote:Why on earth would the B12 add in UCONN as a football only member
Looking at men's and women's combined, UConn is the best basketball school in the country. To suggest the big 12 isn't interested in UConn basketball suggests to me that the 'journalist' that wrote this story is full of [deleted].
You are 100% correct, but you are missing the fundamental issue/problem: if the B12 wants to add BYU for football only, does a football only "partner" school work and who would it be? Are they willing to have an odd number of schools for other sports? Because of its location and basketball program, UConn probably has the easiest path to finding a "good home" for its other sports (with or without basketball). If the B12 decided it wanted to add UConn Basketball, UConn would not object. BTW - I think adding UConn as a football only school is unlikely, but it is not out of the question.
Do unto others before they do unto you!!
-

Digetydog

-
- Posts: 3913
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:33 am
by Grant Carter » Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:23 am
Puckhead48E wrote:Grant Carter wrote:Rebel10 wrote:If SMU did make the cut it would probably be good put shovels in the ground on the performance center to show that SMU is getting started on it quickly and not just putting out a press release on it with no time table.
Do you think they should start by digging up the soccer field or the football practice field?
How about announce a date and that funding is at 100% of the required level to commence. Is that easy enough for you? They can definitely make public moves to reassure any doubters and emphasize the move. Then again, there may be an even bigger announcement that Turner has up his sleeve. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I was responding to a suggestion that we needed to get shovels in the ground right away with a question about which field being used by teams currently in season he thought we should dig up first.
-
Grant Carter

-
- Posts: 2791
- Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:40 am
by 03Mustang » Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:28 am
I think it's either none or Houston/Cincy. Hopefully we can add Colorado State and Rice to backfill, if not then USM.
-
03Mustang

-
- Posts: 4238
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:47 am
- Location: Allen, TX
by Dutch » Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:31 am
Ok this is getting ridiculous...I agree with Dutch on THIS ONE POST by him totally
-

Dutch

-
- Posts: 4377
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:56 pm
- Location: 75205
by Rebel10 » Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:34 am
Grant Carter wrote: I was responding to a suggestion that we needed to get shovels in the ground right away with a question about which field being used by teams currently in season he thought we should dig up first.
Quickly meaning as soon as feasibly possible. I never said right away. Or like Puck said that they should at least give a date.
#HammerDown
-
Rebel10

-
- Posts: 12534
- Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:20 pm
by Dutch » Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:35 am
Rebel10 wrote:Grant Carter wrote: I was responding to a suggestion that we needed to get shovels in the ground right away with a question about which field being used by teams currently in season he thought we should dig up first.
Quickly meaning as soon as feasibly possible. I never said right away. Or like Puck said that they should at least give a date.
unless you just wrote the check for it, they're not going to announce anything until they have the $. no reason to even get into this discussion now. 
Ok this is getting ridiculous...I agree with Dutch on THIS ONE POST by him totally
-

Dutch

-
- Posts: 4377
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:56 pm
- Location: 75205
by Rebel10 » Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:38 am
Dutch wrote:Rebel10 wrote:Grant Carter wrote: I was responding to a suggestion that we needed to get shovels in the ground right away with a question about which field being used by teams currently in season he thought we should dig up first.
Quickly meaning as soon as feasibly possible. I never said right away. Or like Puck said that they should at least give a date.
unless you just wrote the check for it, they're not going to announce anything until they have the $. no reason to even get into this discussion now. 
The reason being is to show the Big 12 that SMU is being more proactive. If the money is not there and SMU can't be more proactive then maybe SMU doesn't deserve to get in the Big 12.
#HammerDown
-
Rebel10

-
- Posts: 12534
- Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:20 pm
Return to Football
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 35 guests
|
|