This is how you do it

[MV pony]

We'll know one way or the other in the next 10 years.

[mrydel]

Some of us will not be alive in another 10 years and we would like to see some decent opponents before we die. The "we can't beat a good team" mentality is unbelievable. If we want to get in a big boy conference we had better start playing, AND BEATING some big boy teams. If Jones cannot do it, and apparently he cannot, we need someone who can.

[SMU2007]

If June would get us a NFL ready QB and some strong WRs then we wouldn't have so many fans afraid of a good OOC schedule. By the way, that mailbag notes that Louisville's schedule would likely leave them out of the title game even if they ran the table. We need better talent not a weaker schedule.

Let's worry about winning our conference before we get too caught up in making the title game.

[sbsmith]

If June would get us a NFL ready QB and some strong WRs then we wouldn't have so many fans afraid of a good OOC schedule. By the way, that mailbag notes that Louisville's schedule would likely leave them out of the title game even if they ran the table. We need better talent not a weaker schedule.

Let's worry about winning our conference before we get too caught up in making the title game.

You're right, the title game is the concern of schools that actually care about recruiting.

[MV pony]

We need higher ranked recruits and I don't think any coach can get them on the hilltop without a winning team. I see it as a vicious cycle. If you disagree, tell me this. If you were a high 3, or a 4 or 5 star recruit, what would make you choose SMU? Coaches, number of contacts, schedule, winning history, campus, what? We always blame reciting but if I was a highly ranked player, my deciding factors would be winning history first, then coach, contacts, campus, drinking age, etc.

[East Coast Mustang]

We always blame reciting but if I was a highly ranked player, my deciding factors would be winning history first, then coach, contacts, campus, drinking age, etc.

I love JJ and what he's done for SMU, but our next coach needs to be a DYNAMIC recruiter who can sell SMU in terms of a great education in a vibrant, exciting city. All the things you mentioned could have applied to Vanderbilt a few years back; now look what James Franklin has done there. He's taken what has long been perceived as a negative for VU in terms of recruiting (high academic standards) and turned it into a positive- recruiting guys who want a great education and options after college besides just the NFL. David Shaw is taking a similar approach at Stanford.

SMU has a beautiful campus in a great area of the city, and Dallas is one of the most exciting metropolitan areas in the entire county (if you're a 21 year old, would you rather go out every weekend in Dallas or Lubbock?); we need to sell the city and sell the strong academics and alumni connections in the DFW area as reasons that players can sign here and reap the benefits not just for four years, but for the rest of their lives.

Also, we need an IPF to compete with other schools in the state ASAP. And we need to keep scheduling relevant teams out of conference that will keep people interested in our program.

[AusTxPony]

Probably number one reason to go to a certain school is being a legacy of a close, respected family member. Next, reputation of a school and/or coach. Then probably how soon you can get on the field to show your stuff to the NFL and how hard the coaches recruit you telling you how good you're going to be. After those, things like facilities, conference, academics, attendance, other team members, family opinion, which team you grew up supporting, etc. all play a part in different importance for different players. Our next coach will be our most important hire for decades.

[Treadway21]

There seems to be two models. The established teams with a reputation and/or a good conference schedule patsies for OOC and the up and comers scheduling up against strong teams to get respect. We should fall in the later -which fits TCU five or so years ago. A soft schedule kills attendance irrespective of our wins and losses.

If we had a good conference and we were where we could draw against the Montana State's of the world, I wouldn't have a problem with how we schedule. But even if we go undefeated in the conference we won't draw well and people will use that against us. We not only need to win, but need people (notice I didn't say SMU fans) in our seats.

Respect comes not just with winning but winning against teams sports fans care about and know.

[East Coast Mustang]

There seems to be two models. The established teams with a reputation and/or a good conference schedule patsies for OOC and the up and comers scheduling up against strong teams to get respect. We should fall in the later -which fits TCU five or so years ago. A soft schedule kills attendance irrespective of our wins and losses.

If we had a good conference and we were where we could draw against the Montana State's of the world, I wouldn't have a problem with how we schedule. But even if we go undefeated in the conference we won't draw well and people will use that against us. We not only need to win, but need people (notice I didn't say SMU fans) in our seats.

Respect comes not just with winning but winning against teams sports fans care about and know.

Yep. I'd like to think we're starting to get it there. While UNT isn't a big name opponent, that series will generate interest in the Metroplex and boost attendance. We've got Baylor scheduled home-and-home from 2014-2019, that's a step in the right direction. Hopefully we can extend TCU past our current arrangement (2017) as well. Then add one more team that people have heard of before. I'd like to see us add an SEC team like Vandy, Ole Miss, or Miss. State, personally.

[Grant Carter]

We need higher ranked recruits and I don't think any coach can get them on the hilltop without a winning team. I see it as a vicious cycle. If you disagree, tell me this. If you were a high 3, or a 4 or 5 star recruit, what would make you choose SMU? Coaches, number of contacts, schedule, winning history, campus, what? We always blame reciting but if I was a highly ranked player, my deciding factors would be winning history first, then coach, contacts, campus, drinking age, etc.

Drinking age?

[sbsmith]

We need higher ranked recruits and I don't think any coach can get them on the hilltop without a winning team. I see it as a vicious cycle.

Our problem isn't winning (we've won enough to do a lot better than we're doing in recruiting) it's that we lack the staff necessary to sell what we have to offer. There's no reason we should be recruiting against either thin air or Sun Belt teams for most of our recruits. Basketball has given us a glimpse of what's possible with a real live staff, now we need the same for football.

[MV pony]

In my day, 18 was the drinking age in LA for everyone and in some states a women could buy beer at 18 (21 for alcohol) while guys had to be 21 for beer and alcohol. Of course well-endowed pretty women could buy whatever, wherever, whenever. I have fond memories of Stillwater, OK. Those were the days.

[blackoutpony]

In my day, 18 was the drinking age in LA for everyone and in some states a women could buy beer at 18 (21 for alcohol) while guys had to be 21 for beer and alcohol. Of course well-endowed pretty women could buy whatever, wherever, whenever. I have fond memories of Stillwater, OK. Those were the days.

Beer isn't alcohol???

[PoconoPony]

We are afraid to play Baylor, enjoy a sellout and put good $$$ in the athletic department. What makes anyone think we are going to get lucky and be eligible for a BCS bowl game. We cannot even recruit above a mid-level CUSA standard.

[Charleston Pony]

I remember Hayden Fry's non-conference scheduling philosophy as wanting to play "one you should win, one competitive game that could go either way and one you hope to win to make some noise"

I always agreed with that approach, but in these times with 4 non-conference games, I think 2 of those competitive games is the ticket. Right now, we are just a little over-scheduled, but needing credibility and recognition as much as we do (not to mention playing in a far flung conference), I like this year's schedule. Just wish we had UNT instead of Montana