why smu will never be BCS

by **magnolialeague** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:57 pm

I think Vanderbilt has already chosen that name for its program.

We have until August to discuss the Magnolia League, and then by October we can argue that at least in a Magnolia League, SMU would perform better. And if SMU misses a bowl, we can discuss why a Magnolia League is better.

All of this of course comes after the usual fire the coach, the OC, the DC, the special teams, and lower standards to accept better players.

by **McClown27** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:27 pm

magnolialeague wrote:All of this of course comes after the usual fire the coach, the OC, the DC, the special teams, and lower standards to accept better players.

This is a fan message board. That is what we do. It is fun to have opinions, talk to other alums, etc.

by **magnolialeague** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:32 pm

I know McClown...I know...been a Vandy fan since 1991...some day the messiah coach will come to us and we will defeat our oppressors.

by **McClown27** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:54 am

magnolialeague wrote:I know McClown...I know...been a Vandy fan since 1991...some day the messiah coach will come to us and we will defeat our oppressors.

Please let us all know when you have that meeting with Copeland and Pres. Turner. Please ask Turner if it would be okay if someone from this board could videotape the conversation (preferably Stallion or PK).

Can we do video posts?

by **magnolialeague** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:39 am

I would love to have video of you fellas when the President listens to the presentation, pauses, stands up and walks to the window, puts his left hand high on the wall, rubs his chin with his right hand and scratches his head, winces, turns around with his right hand pointed, wagging his index finger and says, "What the hell let's do it. Sounds like fun and puts us in good company."

Don't worry, hopefully you, Stallion and any others will awake to the words "CLEAR!!!".....ZZZZzzt......"CLEAR!!!!".......ZZZZzzt

by **abezontar** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:51 am

lol....the scene will more likely involve Turner picking up his phone and calling security, and an insane asylum.

by **ponyplayer** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 10:10 am

I have already called them..........we can put his chipmunks on another ranch.........

by **No Cal Pony** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:00 pm

I would have settled for a model where our rivals in a storied conference didn't forsake history and tradition for the almighty dollar. Our situation only exists because the powers of two other schools in particular decided to run after the money. Instead of building on a long history and tradition, they traded it away to run. To chase more money. To me the opposite exists in looking at the acc. They have never given up on the tradition that has existed. The smaller schools have responded by making sure they can excell in at least one sport, and in this basketball land, we see what that sport is. Instead of unc, uva, nscu, betraying the history of acc sports, they were aggressive in adding to the conference. They got to enhancing their $$ in another way. No hard core carolinian would let unc/duke/wake/ncsu (uva too) linkage break. Heck, it even seems like in the sec, that having vandy go away would be unthinkable.

We are stuck in the middle now, and SMU ought to make the best of it. I don't like where we are, but it is, unfortunately, what it is.

Go Ponies!

by **magnolialeague** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:09 pm

Only a few years ago Tennessee requested that the one-and-one with Vanderbilt be changed to a two home (UT)-to-one-away (Vandy).

UGA has requested something similar and has asked not to share their gate as Vanderbilt is costing the other schools lots and lots of $$.

Heaven forbid Vanderbilt actually win...Had they beaten the Gators it could have cost the SEC just as when Vandy defeated Tennessee and cost the Music Bowl, Nashville, the SEC, and the State of Tennessee lots and lots of $$ by making UT bowl inelligible.

Something is going give. Unplug from the arms race.

by **jtstang** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:50 pm

No Cal Pony wrote:I would have settled for a model where our rivals in a storied conference didn't forsake history and tradition for the almighty dollar. Our situation only exists because the powers of two other schools in particular decided to run after the money. Instead of building on a long history and tradition, they traded it away to run. To chase more money. To me the opposite exists in looking at the acc.

Wait a minute--didn't the ACC just admit a bunch of football-saavy schools? If not for the money, then why? As for the SWC, Arkansas and Texas I presume you mean, but they did not do it in cahoots, now did they? Arkansas just pushed over the first domino.

by **magnolialeague** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:31 pm

If Pres Turner doesn't agree to go along with the Magnolia League, than I may have to show him some Reason....

Pres Turner, meet Reason

Yes you said?....Yes...I thought that was your answer.

[img]http://www.magnolialeague.com/images/ready.gif

by **No Cal Pony** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 1:04 pm

That was my point jt. yes the acc is chasing $$, but they didn't get there by dumping traditions and rivals. They didn't dump and run from a wake. They were proactive. ark. left, but ut and a$m just stood by, then decided to forsake the swc, and leave.

And yes, maybe in the sec vandy gets bullied, but i don't think uga or tenn really mind having a "patsy" or two on the schedule.

by **magnolialeague** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 1:24 pm

During the Magnolia League seasons, the ACC/SEC/Big12 (TX & OK teams) get 16 patsies that won't count as conference games but would count as Div1A games (assuming the Div1AAs get special status during Magnolia League seasons). This is perfect for the new 12 game schedule.

You are right, the big schools want patsies which is why I want the Magnolia League to lock the big schools in for at least two games per big school (or games per Magnolia League team) from here to eternity before the second tier schools grab that spot forever. If we allow the second tier schools to edge us in scheduling these games then we might as well become the Ivy League.

Baylor/Duke/Wake/Vandy would drop from 8 BCS games to 3 (not counting when they play each other of course). The other Magnolia League teams fill the void and hence spreads the wealth.

One every four years is not going to kill anyone. Each Magnolia League team gains something and each loses something. That seems fair.

by **jtstang** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 2:02 pm

No Cal Pony wrote:That was my point jt. yes the acc is chasing $$, but they didn't get there by dumping traditions and rivals. They didn't dump and run from a wake. They were proactive. ark. left, but ut and a$m just stood by, then decided to forsake the swc, and leave.

Depends on the point from which you are looking--I'll be the Big East saw the exodus as "dumping traditions and rivals" when it happened. Bottom line, playing the intellectual game where it is possible to divorce the business of college football from the sport of college football is an exercise in futility. If SMU had the chance to join the Big 12 back when, we'd have done it without a second thought, so I can't blame the other guys either.

by **EastStang** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 3:39 pm

I don't blame Baylor and Tech because they were knew what was coming if they didn't join, but UT, A&M and Arkansas could have stuck it out and tried to make the conference work. Our administration clearly had their heads up their you know whats at the time, but clearly Arkansas, A&M and UT really did nothing to try and build on a great name brand conference. There were lots of choices for the SWC to think about had it been proactive. Instead it just disbanded. As much as it would have hurt there could have been some revenue concessions to the bigger schools regarding bowl and tv revenues and the like.

why smu will never be BCS

Who is online