DMN: SMU at crossroads moment with football

by **floridianstang** » Mon Sep 15, 2014 6:34 pm

First one is negative and hopeless, second one is looking at the positives and the bright side.

by **smumustang1980** » Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:15 pm

"[N]ever give in... except to convictions of honor.... Never yield to force... to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy." Sir Winston Churchill

by **JasonB** » Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:37 pm

LA_Mustang wrote:
JasonB wrote:WHat the author is not aware of is that we are committed to paying stipends and keeping up with the P5 schools from that aspect.

Are you certain we are committed to that?

I have heard from two good sources that not only did we commit to it but the entire AAC did as well in order to make a case to be included in the P5 discussion.

by **GiddyUp** » Mon Sep 15, 2014 9:06 pm

EastStang wrote:While we moved to late to get into this party. I do think that if we sustain solid records in hoops and make strides in football, we might get a bone. Why? Because the P5 conferences can't mess with March Madness. They know that is a non-starter. If SMU, UConn, Memphis, Cincy and Temple can knock on the door of the Final Four every year, that takes money out of the mouths of the P5 conferences, and makes our games more viable. Heck, I think the BE Catholic schools may rethink their aversion to us if we show the success we had last year on a consistent basis. The P5's put up with UNC, Maryland, UVA, Wake Forest, Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, (and for the last decade UCLA) because they have success on the hardwood floor and sucked on the football field. Add in Louisville and probably WVA to that definition as well in the future. I know that was Pye's vision, but that's in my view the only chip left to play.

thats the great divide - fball and hoops. Almost wish they would separate them completely from conf affiliations.

by **PonyKris89** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 3:06 am

Treadway21 wrote:He said absolutely not one thing that hasn't already been said here 1000 times. Just cause he writes for the morning news doesn't make him connected or more knowledgable about our situation or the future of college football. Some scrub writer has no real idea how things will play out. Nobody really knows how the conference realignment will ultimately play out, and I am sure as heck sure Mike Hashimoto has no idea based on anything other than his opinion. And you know what they say about opinions.

His article is just more of the same. Why don't we wait as see who we hire and how that changes the direction of the program. Most here thought that if June left we would be labeled a coaching graveyard and that we would not even be able to find a coach who would be interested. That hasn't happened, so how the hell are we going to predict where we fit in realignment especially given our recent turnaround of our b ball program.

YEAH!!... Kick his [deleted] Sea Bass!

by **smusportspage** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 8:58 am

LA_Mustang wrote:
JasonB wrote:WHat the author is not aware of is that we are committed to paying stipends and keeping up with the P5 schools from that aspect.

Are you certain we are committed to that?

Yes.

by **Ponymon** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 9:45 am

smusportspage wrote:
LA_Mustang wrote:
JasonB wrote:WHat the author is not aware of is that we are committed to paying stipends and keeping up with the P5 schools from that aspect.

Are you certain we are committed to that?

Yes.

We shouldn't have ANY problem raising the money for "stipends". I seem to recall 6 alumni that were committed to paying the players. As a matter of fact, they were all banned from SMU after they were caught! :oops:

by **friarwolf** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 9:49 am

All but 2 of the power conferences has 14 members. Big 12 has 10 members and Pac 12 has 12 members. Notre Dame and BYU get in which leaves 4 spots. That is it fellas - 4 open spots. The power conferences are not going to expand beyond this - would you want to split the pie more ways if we were in? Hell no, and neither do they. There is no market share available to gain in real terms by bringing in more teams. Oh, and by the way, Texas is not going to let us join the Big 12 so there is that as well.

And as far as March Madness goes, that will become the tournament for the Power Conferences. ESPN or Fox will create a tournament for the have nots - they need content. They'll do the same for football.

by **lwjr** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 9:53 am

friarwolf wrote:All but 2 of the power conferences has 14 members. Big 12 has 10 members and Pac 12 has 12 members. Notre Dame and BYU get in which leaves 4 spots. That is it fellas - 4 open spots. The power conferences are not going to expand beyond this - would you want to split the pie more ways if we were in? Hell no, and neither do they. There is no market share available to gain in real terms by bringing in more teams. Oh, and by the way, Texas is not going to let us join the Big 12 so there is that as well.

And as far as March Madness goes, that will become the tournament for the Power Conferences. ESPN or Fox will create a tournament for the have nots - they need content. They'll do the same for football.

Heck yea. Let's beat to death the "SMU is going to the (chose the conference of your choice)" fantasy again.

by **floridianstang** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 10:16 am

friarwolf wrote:All but 2 of the power conferences has 14 members. Big 12 has 10 members and Pac 12 has 12 members. Notre Dame and BYU get in which leaves 4 spots. That is it fellas - 4 open spots. The power conferences are not going to expand beyond this - would you want to split the pie more ways if we were in? Hell no, and neither do they. There is no market share available to gain in real terms by bringing in more teams. Oh, and by the way, Texas is not going to let us join the Big 12 so there is that as well.

And as far as March Madness goes, that will become the tournament for the Power Conferences. ESPN or Fox will create a tournament for the have nots - they need content. They'll do the same for football.

I don't see them changing basketball. And Football won't ever go to an "end game". I see autonomy as a tool against lower G5 and FCS schools that want to prevent them from doing stipends and other things that smaller schools can't afford. AAC committed to be a power conference so they will fight for inclusion and revenue equity...but the battle has to be fought on the field where it counts. SMU coming back from the dead helps exponentially, along with a resurgent UCF, a strong ECU, UH, Cincinnati, and if Temple, South Florida, UConn and Tulane can step up.

by **Johnny Utah** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 10:27 am

Has the following been explored?........... If the power 5 opted out of the NCAA, can we also do the same but take it one step further and be innovative by legally paying players.... and I don't mean paying $2,000 as mentioned in the article but pay a player real money i.e. $100,000 per year plus share of merchandise ? Why do we have to be hindered by the NCAA?..... The power 5 wants to move college football to become a pro sport, the players want compensation for putting thousands in the stands and selling billions in television rights and merchandise, ... so why doesn't SMU just beat them to the punch? Seems like following the train will get us no where. Being innovative/controversial/or preemptive seems the only way to go..... If the fans knew they could give money to SMU with the designation that it go to pay players "LEGALLY", SMU would have no problem competing. Too bad college sports can't become more like the NFL where the playing field is leveled monetarily...

by **SMU 86** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 10:34 am

Here is a Rivals (free) practice report.

https://smu.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1681987

by **Stallion** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 10:40 am

Johnny Utah wrote:Has the following been explored?........... If the power 5 opted out of the NCAA, can we also do the same but take it one step further and be innovative by legally paying players.... and I don't mean paying $2,000 as mentioned in the article but pay a player real money i.e. $100,000 per year plus share of merchandise ? Why do we have to be hindered by the NCAA?..... The power 5 wants to move college football to become a pro sport, the players want compensation for putting thousands in the stands and selling billions in television rights and merchandise, ... so why doesn't SMU just beat them to the punch? Seems like following the train will get us no where. Being innovative/controversial/or preemptive seems the only way to go..... If the fans knew they could give money to SMU with the designation that it go to pay players "LEGALLY", SMU would have no problem competing. Too bad college sports can't become more like the NFL where the playing field is leveled monetarily...

I don't know where this idea comes from but I see it everywhere. The Stipend will be set by agreement among all P5 program this fall. Nothing stopping SMU from matching it but any inducement in excess of the authorized stipend would be an NCAA violation. So to answer question-No SMU can't LEGALLY get into a bidding war on stipends.

by **Johnny Utah** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 11:17 am

Like I said, why does SMU or any AAC school still need to be in the NCAA if the power 5 opted out? Can't AAC opt out and start paying players now....Why wait? Get the advantage now? Or can the non power schools go the NCAA and have them change their regulations to allow for payment in an effort to be competitive and keep the NCAA semi-relevant?? Regardless, if SMU opted out of NCAA, paid players, and the Power 5 refused to play SMU, it would seem like the making of a major claim for antitrust violations...At that point, there would be no hiding the power-5 as a monopoly or more properly described....CARTEL.

by **Stallion** » Tue Sep 16, 2014 11:36 am

Because no NCAA team is allowed to play a non-NCAA accredited team (there are some exceptions for exhibitions). You would have to convince teams to leave the NCAA and start other leagues whereupon you've already made yourself a minor league. If you were successful you would have voided all TV contracts, bowl affiliations and rights to all Basketball and other sports revenue