PonyFans.com

Why do you people insist on dreaming up these [deleted] poor conference scenarios?? SMU with North Texas, La Tech, NMSU, Tulsa, Baylor, UTEP, etc. How would that be any better than the current WAC? It wouldn't. No disrespect to any of these schools but SMU is better than this. SMU has history (how many of these schools have ever played in a major bowl??), don’t roll your eyes and shake your head because that does mean something, name recognition, great academics, the Dallas media, great facilities, located in the middle of one of the best recruiting hotbeds in the country, and the overall appeal of the city of Dallas. If SMU could string together three or four years of success in football like TCU has we suddenly become a very attractive school. I think Bennett is getting us very close to that point.
This current shake up of the Big East/ACC is only the beginning to the major changes about to take place in conference affiliations. We just need to be patient and REFUSE to lower our standards. Otherwise, lets start getting real excited about that future late November conference battle with North Texas for the right to go the Whatever Bowl in Shreveport....yeah!

I agree with you. I think many fear that the shakeup is occurring two years earlier than predicted. If it does, my feeling is that whereever we end up, will be it, until probably 2008-2010. At that point, we might be the best looking girl at the dance. Right now, we have a few warts. 12 losing seasons in the last 13 years is not a good resume. That's why I said, that Turner and Copeland will be earning their paychecks now, or we'll all be calling for their heads.

LA MUSTANG, I don't think the BCS cares a great deal about your history as apparently was also the case for C-USA. I think we must deal with present day realities in this BCS world of college football. Otherwise, I guess we can all watch each other go down with our egos in tact.

First off LA Mustang don't come on here telling us what we can and cannot talk about I found your post very offensive and stupid.

Personally I don't care if we stay in the WAC and add say TCU and USM or if we form a regional conference with the WC-USA. I'm all about what is best for SMU.

If you don't like that post frankly I don't care.

[This message has been edited by Nacho (edited 05-20-2003).]

LA, the thing is the MWC can blow up the WAC at any moment. If that happens, and its very possible, what do you do? I say go independent in football and put together a regional basketball/olympic sports conference. I hope there are better opportunites but i am not holding my breath based on recent history.

I agree I don't understand how any poster could think of voluntarily placing SMU in a conference with the likes of Arkansas St, NTSU, NMSU, Lousiana Laffeyette, Middle Tennessee or any of the other lowlifes that some SMU fans seem willing to associate just to get a more regional conference. If you are talking Houston, TCU, Tulane and Southern Mississippi as the foundation then a more regional conference is probably more in our best interests than the WAC. That being said we ain't exactly the Belle of the Ball due to our own ineptitude and maybe be forced to accept what we probably deserve-a bottom tier conference. There are scenarios that can both reinvigorate and destroy the SMU football program as far as Division 1 status.

Nacho, did you get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? If you want what's best for SMU, then LA Mustang is dead on. We need to be patient and NOT lower our expectations.

I can almost guarantee that there is no way TCU comes back into the WAC. If C-USA implodes, there is probably a possibility of a new conference which would include TCU and SMU...but it won't be part of the WAC.

The WAC just dosen't make sense. It is too geographically spread out. Twelve plus team conferences only make sense if they are BCS conferences where TV money can be expected for a playoff game.

unt, I'm not bashing your school. I like UNT, I wish you guys the best. 20 years ago, which is NOT that long ago, SMU was battling for a national championship and playing in major bowls. Now, we are being linked to conferences with schools that weren't even D-1 10 years ago. While some on this board chose to accept that, I don't. Yes, we were shunned by the Big 8, MWC, and C-USA but we still have a lot to offer if and when we get the ship righted. Call it ego if you like, I just want the best for my school and I know that we are capable of getting back to competing at the major conference level.

LA Mustang and others: The fact is that in the absence of a major lawsuit from the nonBCS schools that legally forces a change, the BCS calls all the shots and that is a done deal for everyone involved. There will never be a day in which the "have nots" of college football get to join the "haves" again. We must rally around a regional conference that will give us all some stability and a a future. I realize that for some schools like SMU, that may be harder to swallow than others--given your proud SWC history. I am not kicking sand in anyone's face--I am just talking about what MUST occur if we are going to survive.

Granted, there may be some in the SMU fold that would rather SMU cancel football (as Tulane is getting ready to do) than to take the necessary steps of survival.

LA, I agree. My concern is with timing. ABSOLUTELY EVERYBODY associated with SMU understands what is going on with the NCAA and understands how critical it is that we improve NOW, not 5 years from now.

That being said, why didn’t Bennett actively recruit 4/6 established JC O/DL that could contribute immediately and potentially be difference makers being a winning and losing season. We all know he is plenty capable, yet it didn’t happen. I don’t know why but can only speculate it was not Bennett’s doing. That bothers me. Sorry, but that does not reflect a true commitment to SMU.

Who says he didn't. Its called transferable hours. No JUCO in his right mind is going to come to SMU without the ability to graduate. We all know he would have to pay his own way after his eligibility runs out. So, if you have a guy with a bunch of PE, kinseology hours, education hours, he loses those the minute he walks in the door. Those that want to major in business or liberal arts and have been taking business/liberal arts courses would have no trouble getting in and transferring hours from what I've heard.

SoCal, I agree about the JC situation. I have bought into the Stallion way of thinking.

Unt, I think it is very illogical to put SMU and UNT in the same category by saying "if WE are going to survive." Come on, I respect the pride for your school but don't get delusional on us.

The same people who won't let us take juco players are now going to decide our future conference affiliation. Yeah, I'm real confident in that.

SoCal, everyone anticipated the coming changes...I just don't think anyone expected them to happen now. Obviously the BE got caught unprepared and a lot of others, including us, are now having to adjust their thinking. 20/20 is a wonderful thing. Waiting as long as we did to let Cavan go sure didn't help any.

[This message has been edited by PK (edited 05-20-2003).]

PK, how’s this for 20/20 insight. 1 winning FB season (and 6-5 at that) post DP. Failure to compete for either a FB or BB title in even one season since joining the WAC.

I suspect you and I could formulate a better strategy for SMU athletics in one evening over a couple of beers than what we historically see from our administration, although I concede it is getting much better. (After Pye, of course, anything is better).

Wanna bet we could maintain academic reputation and still have those JCs in the trenches this year? It could have been done and rather than have 8,000 attend our Rice game this year it should be 20,000 in a late season game that matters.

Look, Bartel is something special. With Turner, Massey, Comet and last years’ running attack, we could have a great year; but now with our lack of OL/DL depth, I see another losing season. And God help us if we lose Adami.