why smu will never be BCS

[MustangStealth]

The BCS is all about $$$ and that is why Notre Dame and Ohio State round out this year's games rather than an arguably more deserving Oregon team. The fact is that only west coast people and PAC 10 fans care about Oregon whereas Notre Dame and Ohio State have a much braoder appeal.

Actually all of the BCS teams this year earned automatic bids. There was no choosing of the teams, only the locations. ND earned an automatic bid by finishing 6th as an independent (the same rule that got Utah in last year) and Ohio State earned an automatic bid by finishing in 4th as a BCS conference non-champion. As far as who is more deserving, that is definitely arguable.

[ponyplayer]

First as I've said about a million times-there is no such thing as a non-qualifier before August.
Second to be fair to TCU I don't think they have admitted a single non-qualifier.
Third, SMU should admit EXACTLY the same players as TCU does today.
Fourth, TCU has a higher graduation rate than SMU during the last recorded period.

Do we know which programs they are getting their degrees in?

[EastStang]

Let's also talk apples and apples here. In February, when those 16 (usually 4 star) players were signed, they did not have qualifying test scores and/or grades. If those players were not offered, TCU's aggregate scores would have been what in terms of Rivals recruiting? I suspect they would have been only marginally better than SMU's. It was only because TCU rolled the dice and won that they actually had better recruiting classes on paper. Had a majority of those players not made grades by August, TCU would have wasted those scholarship signings because it would have been too late to offer anyone decent at that point. This is of course assuming that these players actually took the tests themselves. Given SMU's luck the last 18 years, I suspect the ones we offered would not have gotten qualifying grades.

[Stallion]

and you are drawing a complelely irrelevant and immaterial distinction about "players not qualified by signing date" that only SMU seems to care about. That's the point-SMU handicaps itself for no reason whatsoever by drawing irrelevant, immaterial distinctions that are not in the NCAA rulebook and nobody else follows.

[smu01]

i think you all have great points...however i like the harvard model.....great turn outs....all the support in the world.. and no bcs.......lets support the stangs...if all the fans support and we sell out.....we will be succesfull.......come to the games to have fun regardless of who wins...cheer your [deleted] off and just love the fact that your on the hilltop and your spending your saturday supporting not only smu but dallas one of the greatest cities in the country...let the athletic department worry about all the details and lets all just drink, socialize on the boulivard and have fun...football is fun!!! period!! so enjoy the atmosphere..if we all just show up and have fun it will give smu's atmosphere a huge boost....support them when there down and support them when there up....thats something i failed to do in the past but from here on out i back them 100%...except the strength and conditioning department...simply because i know more then them!!! hahahahah go stangs all the way..

[McClown27]

however i like the harvard model.....great turn outs....all the support in the world.. and no bcs.......lets support the stangs...if all the fans support and we sell out..

1) SMU is not Harvard and could never be similar to Harvard. Do not listen to Magnolia League. Even when Ford was opening, there were almost as many Kansas fans at the game. Oh yeah, that year there were more N.C. State fans at Ford than Mustangs (maybe that was year two of Ford). Winning against our natural rivals would bring back fans.
2) If it were possible, people like yourself would no longer get athletic scholarships. Although the Ivy League is technically Division I, none of the players receive scholarships. The current athletes would be rudely awakened to reality.
3) And Finally, for a private university, SMU has the material to be good in Division I football. Dallas is a great launching pad for recruiting. SMU has a strong tradition.

[magnolialeague]

McClown, maybe you have misunderstood me. Re-read my posts.

I pointed to the Ivies merely as a model that supports there team regardless but never said that had to be the direction for SMU. The Ivies are not caught up in the BCS aura which has led so many programs to be disappointed each year. Div1AA fans of successful schools are happier than lower to mid level Div1A schools.

The C-USA is really a good model for the Magnolia League. It is Div1A (85 scholarships) and not in the BCS conference mix. Navy is an even better model because they actually play a Magnolia League schedule. The BCS is BS. And I do not support dropping to Div1AA (which is up to 63 scholarships), so they are not all in the Ivies position. However, if tuitions keep rising at a dramatic pace, you might start to see some small private schools start to move towards Div1AA.

However, I am in favor of a Div1AA like playoff amongst Magnolia League teams. That can be achieved with a 16 team conference as opposed to 12. If SMU won the west and had a home playoff game, you can bet that this would be a bigger buzz than a mid-level bowl game.

The only real difference that I propose for SMU is that your conference foes be natural rivals (small, mostly private, strong academic schools and service academies) and you would play 1 to 2 more money games against BCS teams for $$ to support the program.

And why not compare SMU to Harvard? SMU is an excellent school academically and ought to be proud of its academic tradition. The Magnolia League is a race to the top, and not like the current progression of college sports, which has for some time now been a race for the bottom.

[No Cal Pony]

harvard and the ivy schools do not offer "athletic" scholarships. true. However, they do offer most of those "athlete/students" another form of scholarship. And while they do not recruit as most other schools, they do try to attract a decent "student/athlete" to have a least reasonable teams on the fields and courts.

Go Ponies!

[mrydel]

I was recruited by Yale and was told in kind of round about terms that funds for my education would be no problem. I would have had some sort of on campus employment that would have covered my education. I got the impression that I would not have had to work very long hours or very difficult tasks.

[McClown27]

harvard and the ivy schools do not offer "athletic" scholarships. true. However, they do offer most of those "athlete/students" another form of scholarship. And while they do not recruit as most other schools, they do try to attract a decent "student/athlete" to have a least reasonable teams on the fields and courts.

Ivy football players are better students than at a school like SMU, UT, etc. They do not have special classes, etc. They get financial aid, so what. At SMU, the program pays for the books, student fees, and also give some form of housing stipend.

Magnolia League, I agree that SMU is a fine school. I went there and have done fine. It is not Harvard, in a hundred different ways. Saying that is not a slap at SMU, it is just reality. It compares to Emory, U. of Miami, and Vandy.

There is nothing psychologically wrong with my unhappiness towards the program. It is because I have expectations that fail to be met. If SMU gave up and stopped trying to play big-time college football, living on the east coast, I would not fly there every year to watch a game or two. Attendance would go down even more.

[No Cal Pony]

27, I agree with you that as an alum, expectations have not been met. I went to SMU because of the mix of quality academics and athletics. I appreciated that SMU was in Dallas, that it had a rich history. It would be a shame to see SMU slip further.

ivy footballers are not always "better students." At harvard, a friend was recuited to play football. his cost was basically zero. How is that different than SMU? This is not of total importance, just facts. What I hope for is that those who might make a difference make room for more changes. That they might appreciate what was as you and I do.

Go Ponies!

[magnolialeague]

The expectations we all have for our football programs is where the problem lies. It is a cycle of permanent unhappiness. Fire the coach. Fire the DC. Fire the OC. Fire the Special Teams coach. Recruit more stars. Lower standards.....Is this what it is all about? Texas, Tennessee, Oklahoma, etc. will have 20 great years to our 1 break out. Then we all wait as though we broke out but it is really just one good season.

I vote for unplugging every so often and going to an occassional season where there can be real parity.

SMU and most of the Magnolia teams are in big cities and need to make a play for the fans o fthe game. The NFL has priced itself out of sight for most folks. When I go to William & Mary games, the fans I sit with went to Florida State and NC State. They love the game. They love that $500 buys them more than $5,000 gets you at the big schools.

I agree to disagree with you. You come across as though you know the facilities well and care about the SMU program. I appreciate that.

[EastStang]

There are schools where a move to Division 1-AA worked and William and Mary is a perfect example. But part of that was because its long term rivals, VMI, Richmond, Delaware, Davidson all went 1-AA. Sure games there are fun to go to, and I've been to quite a few since W&M is my other alma mater. And perhaps that is where Mid-major athletics is headed. SMU, TCU, Rice chose not to go that direction. They were dumped after 50 years of SWC football into the netherworld of mid-major. Duke, Wake, Baylor and Vanderbilt all have stayed in big money conferences but remain doormats for the most part in football. Note Duke and Wake are both in the top 25 in basketball. Tulsa and Tulane have been in the midst of mid-major football for a long time. The problem is one of history for SMU, not one of natural rivals. Our historic rivals are Rice, TCU, Baylor, Texas and TAMU. SMU and TCU have yet to come to terms with that loss. TCU has dealt with theirs by bouncing from conference to conference hoping to find a girl to love. SMU has merely tried to make the best of an ever worsening environment. But a Magnolia League would only serve to put a final nail in the coffin.

[jtstang]

Speaking of your other alma mater, I spent the weekend in the Richmond area and got to go to Williamsburg and to the campus and to the Colonial restoration site. Very nice time had by all....

[McClown27]

ivy footballers are not always "better students." At harvard, a friend was recuited to play football. his cost was basically zero. How is that different than SMU? This is not of total importance, just facts. What I hope for is that those who might make a difference make room for more changes. That they might appreciate what was as you and I do.

No, I agree, they are not always better students. Many of us Ponies are much smarter than those Ivy brats, but on average, I would say that Ivy league football players met higher academic admission standards than the SMU kids. Lord know that a lot of CEO's didn't do well on their SAT, and they are pretty smart.

MagnoliaLeague, I would prefer to play in the Liberty Bowl nect year than play in your league. All of us who spend time on this board and listen to the games on KTCK on the internet will gladly fly to any mid-major bowl. It would be a triumph for the program.