ORSINI'S HANDS TIED?

[bagice]

Well,

I think the fact that we can even debate this means that the two seasons were pretty close.

In my mind, last year we played A&M, Baylor and TCU in our Non Conference Schedule, this year we played Tech, North Texas, and Arkansas St. Last year we went 1-2 in non conference play, we did the same this year with much lesser competition.

Throw out Sam Houston and that gives us Identical Records of 5-6 both years. Our conference record was identical.

As far as looking at stats, they are widely scewed because of the difference in competition, A&M hung 70 points on us making the defense look worse than it was, and our blowouts of Sam Houston and Arkansas state made our offensive and defensive numbers this year look better than they really were.

As far as Romo goes, he was a pretty damn good qaurterback that wasn't given the job till late in the season and he led us to some big wins when he took over. So yeah, I was excited about his play.

To me it all comes down to conference play. Everyone is giddy about almost making a bowl this year, does anyone remember that we were 7 points away last year from winning the West and being in the championship game, if we would have beaten Tulsa.

Look at our end run last year, wins against Houston, Rice and UTEP. This year we lost to all three of those teams. Last year we beat TCU, our biggest win in years. This year we lost to UNT, our worst loss in years. Enough said in my mind.

I will cave in and say that we are about equal to the team last year, but I don't see any valid argument that we were better this year, and certainly not MUCH better as some people with short memories seem to think.

[SMU_is_bowling]

CONFERENCE GAMES ONLY (if I subtracted right)


SCORING OFFENSE 05 = 22.1
06 = 27

SCORING DEFFENSE 05 = 22
06 = 26.5

So the D gave up more, but the O scored more, about the same amount of increase.

5 points on 0

4.5 points on D

There is a start for you guys, not sure I can get all the numbers crunched for the rushing/passing from each individual game, but we will see.

[perunapower]

Well,

I think the fact that we can even debate this means that the two seasons were pretty close.

In my mind, last year we played A&M, Baylor and TCU in our Non Conference Schedule, this year we played Tech, North Texas, and Arkansas St. Last year we went 1-2 in non conference play, we did the same this year with much lesser competition.

Throw out Sam Houston and that gives us Identical Records of 5-6 both years. Our conference record was identical.

As far as looking at stats, they are widely scewed because of the difference in competition, A&M hung 70 points on us making the defense look worse than it was, and our blowouts of Sam Houston and Arkansas state made our offensive and defensive numbers this year look better than they really were.

As far as Romo goes, he was a pretty damn good qaurterback that wasn't given the job till late in the season and he led us to some big wins when he took over. So yeah, I was excited about his play.

To me it all comes down to conference play. Everyone is giddy about almost making a bowl thsi year, does anyone remember that we were 7 points away last year from winning the West and being in the championship game, if we would have beaten Tulsa.

Look at our end run last year, wins against Houston, Rice and UTEP. This year we lost to all three of those team. Last year we beat TCU, our biggest win in years. This year we lost to UNT, our worst loss in years. Enough said in my mind.

I will cave in and say that we are about equal to the team last year, but I don't see any valid argument that we were better this year, and certainly not MUCH better as some people with short memories seem to think.

We beat Houston and UTEP because they overlooked us. Had we beaten Tulsa, no way they would have overlooked us. Especially had we gone into the UTEP game battling for the West. But we're arguing what ifs. No woulda, coulda, shouldas. If you're going to argue that we were 3 plays (most likely) from winning the West. But we didn't.

The reason most people are arguing that we have improved is the youth of many of the players at key positions. QB, RB, CB, WR, etc. For these RS-freshmen and sophomores to be able to compete at or surpassing the levels of upperclassmen in years prior is an accomplishment and bodes well for the future.

[SMU_is_bowling]

My short memory remembers 0-12 . . . 3-8, so I will take this agruement over 6-6 any day over that! Thanks for letting me voice my opinion without getting defensive like some other half-empty folks on this board! I see where we may not be any better off, I guess my rose colored glasses just don't want to see it any worse. Hope to see you at the games next year (I will be front row like always).

Go SMU

Beat <whoever we play first next year>

[bagice]

Heh,

OK, I'm on board then. Those numbers are pretty close and our record was identical, so that is why I draw the conclusion we were about the same. I am not thinking about the players we had last year as compared to this year, I was just stating that for all practical purposes we were 5-6 both years and had the same amount of conference wins, therefore we were no better than last year.

One thing I do take exception with is the claim that the only reason we beat Houston and UTEP last year was because they overlooked us, to me that is an absurd conjecture and an insult to the '05 team. No way you can state that for sure. To claim that if we beat Tulsa last year, UTEP and Houston would have beat us is a real stretch.

[perunapower]

Heh,

OK, I'm on board then. Those numbers are pretty close and our record was identical, so that is why I draw the conclusion we were about the same. I am not thinking about the players we had last year as compared to this year, I was just stating that for all practical purposes we were 5-6 both years and had the same amount of conference wins, therefore we were no better than last year.

One thing I do take exception with is the claim that the only reason we beat Houston and UTEP last year was because they overlooked us, to me that is an absurd conjecture and an insult to the '05 team. No way you can state that for sure. To claim that if we beat Tulsa last year, UTEP and Houston would have beat us is a real stretch.

But you see, you have to compare the players' maturity. That is part of what makes the football team. If you have freshman coming in and matching what the seniors did the year prior, you are improving. Of course that is extremely subjective. By the way, I am not trying to slight the abilities and performance of the 2005 team. They were essential to getting SMU this far. Had they given up at 2-6 last year, there is no way this year would even had been remotely successful. I can't claim anything but hard facts. It's stupid to argue what ifs.

There are three things that held this team back: immaturity (which caused key mistakes (turnovers, penalties, etc.)), conservative (and sometimes even moronic) playcalling, and injuries. Now the players will continue to mature and get better, we can only hope for the same with playcalling. Injuries happen to every team. We have to escalate beyond the injuries and still be able to win.

[ALEX LIFESON]

I don't know if Orsini had his hands tied or not, but it does make you wonder. Steve said numerous times Phil had to have a winning season and make it to a bowl, he did neither one. With the weak schedule, and a veteran team, these goals should have been met. SMU missed out on a big opportunity this year.

[MrMustang1965]

I don't know if Orsini had his hands tied or not, but it does make you wonder. Steve said numerous times Phil had to have a winning season and make it to a bowl, he did neither one. With the weak schedule, and a veteran team, these goals should have been met. SMU missed out on a big opportunity this year.

[Ponymon]

I don't know if Orsini had his hands tied or not, but it does make you wonder. Steve said numerous times Phil had to have a winning season and make it to a bowl, he did neither one. With the weak schedule, and a veteran team, these goals should have been met. SMU missed out on a big opportunity this year.

That three year extension that Copeland gave to PB didn't exactly make it easy on Orsini to make a change. It will be a lot easier next year if this team doesn't pull it together at the beginning of the year. And that means FINALLY beating Tech. I'm tired of losing to those clowns. To make it into the top 25, which is Orsini's ANNUAL requirement and goal, PB had better start beating Tech and the horny Toads on a REGULAR basis. If that ever starts happening, maybe we could start upgrading our schedule by playing the USC's and Ohio State's, which is the only real way to bust into the top 25 and BCS bowl picture for SMU!

[perunapower]

I don't know if Orsini had his hands tied or not, but it does make you wonder. Steve said numerous times Phil had to have a winning season and make it to a bowl, he did neither one. With the weak schedule, and a veteran team, these goals should have been met. SMU missed out on a big opportunity this year.

That three year extension that Copeland gave to PB didn't exactly make it easy on Orsini to make a change. It will be a lot easier next year if this team doesn't pull it together at the beginning of the year. And that means FINALLY beating Tech. I'm tired of losing to those clowns. To make it into the top 25, which is Orsini's ANNUAL requirement and goal, PB had better start beating Tech and the horny Toads on a REGULAR basis. If that ever starts happening, maybe we could start upgrading our schedule by playing the USC's and Ohio State's, which is the only real way to bust into the top 25 and BCS bowl picture for SMU!

Settle down there, sparky. We have a long road ahead of before we can bust into the top 25 and the BCS.

[Ponymon]

I don't know if Orsini had his hands tied or not, but it does make you wonder. Steve said numerous times Phil had to have a winning season and make it to a bowl, he did neither one. With the weak schedule, and a veteran team, these goals should have been met. SMU missed out on a big opportunity this year.

That three year extension that Copeland gave to PB didn't exactly make it easy on Orsini to make a change. It will be a lot easier next year if this team doesn't pull it together at the beginning of the year. And that means FINALLY beating Tech. I'm tired of losing to those clowns. To make it into the top 25, which is Orsini's ANNUAL requirement and goal, PB had better start beating Tech and the horny Toads on a REGULAR basis. If that ever starts happening, maybe we could start upgrading our schedule by playing the USC's and Ohio State's, which is the only real way to bust into the top 25 and BCS bowl picture for SMU!

Settle down there, sparky. We have a long road ahead of before we can bust into the top 25 and the BCS.

No [deleted] Sherlock! Just remember what Orsini's goal is. The road map is to upgrade the team's talent and make the top 25. I don't think Orsini is banking another 20 years to do that, do you? I think he wants it in the next 5 years, which is why PB is most likely on the hot seat next year. Or do you really think he will settle for a 6-6 record against mid-level competition impertuity?

[perunapower]

I don't know if Orsini had his hands tied or not, but it does make you wonder. Steve said numerous times Phil had to have a winning season and make it to a bowl, he did neither one. With the weak schedule, and a veteran team, these goals should have been met. SMU missed out on a big opportunity this year.

That three year extension that Copeland gave to PB didn't exactly make it easy on Orsini to make a change. It will be a lot easier next year if this team doesn't pull it together at the beginning of the year. And that means FINALLY beating Tech. I'm tired of losing to those clowns. To make it into the top 25, which is Orsini's ANNUAL requirement and goal, PB had better start beating Tech and the horny Toads on a REGULAR basis. If that ever starts happening, maybe we could start upgrading our schedule by playing the USC's and Ohio State's, which is the only real way to bust into the top 25 and BCS bowl picture for SMU!

Settle down there, sparky. We have a long road ahead of before we can bust into the top 25 and the BCS.

No [deleted] Sherlock! Just remember what Orsini's goal is. The road map is to upgrade the team's talent and make the top 25. I don't think Orsini is banking another 20 years to do that, do you? I think he wants it in the next 5 years, which is why PB is most likely on the hot seat next year. Or do you really think he will settle for a 6-6 record against mid-level competition impertuity?

Such hostility, dear Watson. I remember plenty well what Orsini's goal is. I'm fairly certain that 6-6 is unacceptable. We're going to have trouble breaking into the top 25 unless we have immaculate seasons. Which, by the way, is do-able. (At least you're labeling our competition as mid-level, some would like to convince themselves we are playing the worst teams in NCAA)

[SmartAsymptote]

well next year we will be playing one of the worst in Memphis lets just hope that they dont find their todd graham next year........

[MustangTu]

IMHO there were several reasons Orsini didn't fire Bennett. 1 Finances. 2. Bennett did not have much in the pantry when he signed on. 3 Other than a couple of Jr C transfers none of his good recruits have reached there college maturity (Senior Year). His first year was a wasted effort he didn't have time to really recruit. 4. Nobody wants another 5 year plan. 6. Because of number 1 he didn't have a minimum $1m to 1.5 M to hire a coach that would do any better. 7. Coaches like Barnet and Coker have luggage that wouldn't fly at SMU. 8. To do the job right he needed $4 to $5 Mil and lesser academic restrictions to get a big bang. None of this is yet available. As stallion says we don't have a level playing field yet.

[ponyte]

Not opening a debate on Bennett, but when was the last time we had back to back .500 record in conference play? In the two years we have been in CUSA, we have not come close to being the conference doormat. Sure, we all have expectations of being much better especially this year. However, I for one am glad I no longer dread going to ESPN's Bottom 10 site. Are we to the point we want to be? No. Are we out of the cellar? Yes.