Norm on the SMU situation

jtstang · Post by **jtstang** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 1:18 pm

Enough. I think we can all agree, even Norm, that SMU's record since the death penalty has been nothing short of pitiful, whatever the percentages or how you slice them.

ponyboy · Post by **ponyboy** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 1:23 pm

Our win percentage for the 30 years immediately prior to the death penalty wasn't that great either: 43%

Of course we were playing a higher level of competition.

SoCal_Pony · Post by **SoCal_Pony** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:01 pm

you are correct JT...this can be over-analyzed...

My main point here is that among 119 schools we are at DEAD BOTTOM with only a handful of others...most of whom have had success these last 20 years in BB that we could only dream of.

That is why I call us the WORST PROGRAM IN AMERICA

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:05 pm

I think its funny we have fans that can look at these types of figures and seem to suggest-"ah its not so bad-let's keep doin what we've been doin" No its absolutely horrible-an embarrassment

PK · Post by PK » Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:28 pm

SoCal_Pony wrote:PK,

17 of SMU's victories over the past 19 years have been against teams who had a combined W-L record during the season we played them of 25-167-1.

That means these opponents had a combined winning percentage of 13.2%, a winninger percentage lower than the worse college football team over the past 19 years, which is Temple.

Add your 5 victories against D-1AA teams and you have 22 of SMU's 58 victories against amazingly weak opponents.

These 22 wins represent ~40% of all of SMU's victories.

I hope that makes sense...to me it speaks loudly of institutional problems over personnel, especially since the same thing can be said of BB.

Thanks.

ponyboy · Post by **ponyboy** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:38 pm

SoCal_Pony wrote: That is why I call us the WORST PROGRAM IN AMERICA

Your data is incomplete and you have no grounds to be presenting this as fact. See my post above.

SoCal_Pony · Post by **SoCal_Pony** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:41 pm

Stallion wrote:I think its funny we have fans that can look at these types of figures and seem to suggest-"ah its not so bad-let's keep doin what we've been doin" No its absolutely horrible-an embarrassment

EXACTLY...

Plus, if you look at our performance during the Gregg/Rossley/Cavan years and compare it to the PB years....

The Gregg/Rossley/Cavan years were MORE successful

which means we are trending down...

SoCal_Pony · Post by **SoCal_Pony** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:15 pm

ponyboy wrote:
SoCal_Pony wrote: That is why I call us the WORST PROGRAM IN AMERICA

Your data is incomplete and you have no grounds to be presenting this as fact. See my post above.

What are you possibly talking about...my data is incomplete????

I am taking ALL W-L's over the past 19 years...exactly how MORE complete can you get than that?

Are you disputing the fact that SMU's record from 1989 to today is 58-149-3?

That is the most important fact anyone needs to know about SMU football...your ridiculous post earlier is exactly what JT was referencing...data overkill...hey, some of mine come close as well...

We are at the bottom with Duke / Kent State / Temple...3 schools with enormous success in BB...that is why I call us the Worst Program in America...that is my OPINION...but I support it with facts.