PonyFans.com

this is not a Coaching thing. But I keep hearing so many on this board saying SMU's team is so much better than it has been in the past. Is it? Is it really? For the life of me I believe that is absolute BS. How many SWC teams could SMU beat this year.That would be ZERO just like in the old days. Now lets take a look at who SMU beat or shockingly lost to. NTSU(was Division 1AA in 1989), Sam Houston St.(Division 1AA), Arkansas St(Division 1AA in 1989), Tulane(vagabond team which had no spring football practice or offseason workout program), Marshall(1AA in 1989), UAB(no program at all in any Division in 1989)Tulsa(struggling independent 1989). Let me just propose that SMU's program in the big picture is no better off today than it was in 1989 or surely 1993-except for Ford Stadium. There have been significant changes in the curriculm and I think its fair to say Gregg had an impossible task as did Rossley. Cavan had it easier than Rossley and Bennett has had it much easier than any coach at SMU. I too am tired of that excuse when you look at the mediocre level of competition. In short I believe SMU is competitively no stronger on the field in 2006-SMU has simply found a mediocre level at which they can compete.

My first year was the first year SMU played football again. We did not win much but damn did we have fun at Ownby.

If you think this team isn't better than the team we trotted out 17 years ago -- and I will NEVER belittle what those brave, tough players went through, because they really were heroic -- then you know even less about football than I thought.

Those players had heart and I will never forget it. I almost got my as kicked when we beat Arkansas. My drunk [deleted] deserved it.

I thought that is what I just said-I don't think SMU is any more competitive in comparison to other Texas College Football teams than in the 1990s.

I agree Stallion, but also look at the results vs our natural rivals in the Bennett era. The Rice series really stands out.

Bennett vs Games Won Loss %
TCU 4 1 3 0.250
Rice 5 1 4 0.200
Baylor 2 0 2 0.000
Texas A&M 1 0 1 0.000
Texas 0 0 0 N/A
Arkansas 0 0 0 N/A
Texas Tech 4 0 4 0.000
North Texas 1 0 1 0.000
Houston 2 1 1 0.500
Tulane 2 1 1 0.500
Tulsa 5 3 2 0.600
UTEP 5 2 3 0.400
Total 31 9 22 0.290

For results vs our rivals all-time:

http://www.mcubed.net/ncaaf/series/smu/series1.htm

Why can't we beat Rice?

smupony94 wrote:Why can't we beat Rice?

Well, today I would say it came down to this...Willis was way off on way too many of his passes and we turned the ball over too many times. We had way too many penalties at the most inopportune times, such as every kickoff return and on Martin's 40+ yard run. Rice adjusted for our defense during half time and we did not adjust during the second half to make up for that. As a result, hardly ever heard Roger's name called out in the second half. Rice was completing 3rd down attempts at will. On the other hand, we rarely completed a third down attempt. Rice out played us today and that is that. Against Tulsa, Willis was able to use his feet to keep the momentum going. Rice was ready for that and kept Willis in check most of the time. In the end, Rice played the better game. Coaching? Maybe. Execution? Maybe. Perhaps the pressure of the magnitude of the outcome of the game worked against us. We have not been good this year on the road...and that is a fact. How you get beyond that problem is not clear to me. Coaching only goes so far...the players on the field have to execute...AND, you have to give the other team credit when they do a good job at what they do. Rice earned thier win today for the most part, although we did help them out some.

I agree. For whatever reason Rice was the better team today and throughout the CUSA season. The better team won and deserves the Bowl.

Does any body know what a sine wave is I know our buddies at Rice
do.

Problem is, if we fire Bennett, it says we keep firing our really good
coaches at the top of the sine wave at 5 or 6 wins since we didn't win the
national championship those years. Then we have to go downhill to the
bottom of the wave to take care of the learning curve of a new coaching
staff, and players that don't want to play for the new staff. See 0 -12.

We got our wittle hearts broke, and didn't go to a bowl game

PlanoStang wrote:Does any body know what a sine wave is I know our buddies at Rice
do.

Problem is, if we fire Bennett, it says we keep firing our really good
coaches at the top of the sine wave at 5 or 6 wins since we didn't win the
national championship those years. Then we have to go downhill to the
bottom of the wave to take care of the learning curve of a new coaching
staff, and players that don't want to play for the new staff. See 0 -12.

We got our wittle hearts broke, and didn't go to a bowl game

Stallion wrote:Let me just propose that SMU's program in the big picture is no better off today than it was in 1989 or surely 1993-except for Ford Stadium.

All that Ford has done is to ensure that SMU continues to have a football program. Otherwise, it is comparable to a high school football stadium. In terms of making the team competitive, it has done nothing. It has also failed to even marginally improve recruiting.

McClown27 wrote:

Stallion wrote:Let me just propose that SMU's program in the big picture is no better off today than it was in 1989 or surely 1993-except for Ford Stadium.

All that Ford has done is to ensure that SMU continues to have a football program. Otherwise, it is comparable to a high school football stadium. In terms of making the team competitive, it has done nothing. It has also failed to improve recruiting, despite that clamoring when it was being built..

You predicted a 3 win season. Go away and come back when you have grown some credibility.

I said 5-7 wins. There is plenty to attack me about, but I had a pretty decent handle on how good this team would be. That being said, I did predict wins against Rice and UNT.

McClown27 wrote:

Stallion wrote:Let me just propose that SMU's program in the big picture is no better off today than it was in 1989 or surely 1993-except for Ford Stadium.

All that Ford has done is to ensure that SMU continues to have a football program. Otherwise, it is comparable to a high school football stadium. In terms of making the team competitive, it has done nothing. It has also failed to even marginally improve recruiting.

What high school did you go to