PonyFans.com

SMU Fan Site
http://www.ponyfans.com/phpBB3/

SMU National Rankings

http://www.ponyfans.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25569

Page 1 of 1

SMU National Rankings

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 10:26 am
by MustangIcon
FYI, of the 120 teams in D1a (or whatever it is called now) SMU ranks:

#71 in total offense
#89 in scoring offense
#105 in scoring defense
#108 in total defense

Rice and Tulsa are the CUSA teams (both divisions) ranked below us in scoring D and total D (not that they are that far back considering there isn't much room to be any worse). However, Rice has played Tech and UT. Tulsa has played OU and BYU. Those might help explain their poor ranking.

Total offense we fair a little better as UTEP #78, Tulane #96, Rice #110 are all teams on our schedule ranked below us. Tulane #96 and Rice #111 are both behind us in scoring offense.

Purely based on rankings alone, it would confirm our thoughts that we have a very good chance of beating both Tulane and Rice at home. Utep is a very possible win for us (in fact, I would guess we will be favored by a couple points). We should be underdogs in every other game this season.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 10:30 am
by MustangIcon
UTEP/SMU is a pick 'em on the lines site I just visited, FYI.

Re: SMU National Rankings

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:26 pm
by Mu$tang
Where these rankings after TCU?

Re: SMU National Rankings

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:49 pm
by MustangIcon
Mu$tang wrote:Where these rankings after TCU?


These rankings are current as of today and include the TCU/SMU game and the rest of the games from this past weekend.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:23 pm
by The PonyGrad
Our overall defensive stats / ranking look bad but we held TCU to 250 yards. That is half of any other game we played. If we can build on that in conference play we will do well.

First we have got to stop panicking. We went for it on 4th four times. Good decision when we have been dismal on 3rd all year long. :roll: Five field goals and we win the game. Going for it, espically with our track record, is not what you call putting the team in a position to win.

Justin has got to first, not lose the game with poor decisions and ball handling, then go out and win.

There is a lot of desire to win and get the job done but that starts with being smart. 8)

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 4:49 pm
by MustangIcon
The PonyGrad wrote:Our overall defensive stats / ranking look bad but we held TCU to 250 yards. That is half of any other game we played. If we can build on that in conference play we will do well.

First we have got to stop panicking. We went for it on 4th four times. Good decision when we have been dismal on 3rd all year long. :roll: Five field goals and we win the game. Going for it, espically with our track record, is not what you call putting the team in a position to win.

Justin has got to first, not lose the game with poor decisions and ball handling, then go out and win.

There is a lot of desire to win and get the job done but that starts with being smart. 8)


TCU is #96 in offense in the nation, which may help explain our "fantastic" defensive performance.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:20 pm
by PK
MustangIcon wrote:
The PonyGrad wrote:Our overall defensive stats / ranking look bad but we held TCU to 250 yards. That is half of any other game we played. If we can build on that in conference play we will do well.

First we have got to stop panicking. We went for it on 4th four times. Good decision when we have been dismal on 3rd all year long. :roll: Five field goals and we win the game. Going for it, espically with our track record, is not what you call putting the team in a position to win.

Justin has got to first, not lose the game with poor decisions and ball handling, then go out and win.

There is a lot of desire to win and get the job done but that starts with being smart. 8)


TCU is #96 in offense in the nation, which may help explain our "fantastic" defensive performance.
So what was their ranking last week before they played us? Maybe we pulled them down some more.

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:45 am
by MustangIcon
Believe it or not they stayed just the same. I posted this during the SMU/TCU game thread when someone was applauding about our defensive performance...

TCU is the #96 ranked offense in scoring so its not all that impressive. Plus their D and special teams scoring has taken two opportunities from their O.

Re: SMU National Rankings

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 8:30 pm
by SoCal_Pony
MustangIcon wrote:FYI, of the 120 teams in D1a (or whatever it is called now) SMU ranks:

#71 in total offense
#89 in scoring offense
#105 in scoring defense
#108 in total defense



Average of the above rankings...93

Rivals average ranking of our last 4 recruiting classes...91

BTW, I was at the TCU game and was pleasantly surprised by the SMU fan turn-out.

I thought the SMU team showed plenty of heart, but simply lacks the players.

I also believe TCU will not go far this year due to their QB play.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:45 pm
by The PonyGrad
MustangIcon wrote:Believe it or not they stayed just the same. I posted this during the SMU/TCU game thread when someone was applauding about our defensive performance...

TCU is the #96 ranked offense in scoring so its not all that impressive. Plus their D and special teams scoring has taken two opportunities from their O.


Actually
TCU is averaging 324 yards per game even after playing us. We held them to 250. That is pretty good. 74 yards under their average.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:42 pm
by MustangIcon
The PonyGrad wrote:
MustangIcon wrote:Believe it or not they stayed just the same. I posted this during the SMU/TCU game thread when someone was applauding about our defensive performance...

TCU is the #96 ranked offense in scoring so its not all that impressive. Plus their D and special teams scoring has taken two opportunities from their O.


Actually
TCU is averaging 324 yards per game even after playing us. We held them to 250. That is pretty good. 74 yards under their average.


Also largely a result of the fact they had 2 non offensive TD's, which took away two offensive drives their team would have had otherwise.

And it is their ranking, #96, that did not move after the game. Obviously other teams' rankings did, which is why TCU's YPG managed to come down, yet they remained ranked the same.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 8:17 pm
by Pony Soup
The PonyGrad wrote:
MustangIcon wrote:Believe it or not they stayed just the same. I posted this during the SMU/TCU game thread when someone was applauding about our defensive performance...

TCU is the #96 ranked offense in scoring so its not all that impressive. Plus their D and special teams scoring has taken two opportunities from their O.


Actually
TCU is averaging 324 yards per game even after playing us. We held them to 250. That is pretty good. 74 yards under their average.


Let's please not measure our team in yards for or against. The only stat that matters anymore on the hilltop is W's. Get 10 of them and then we can argue about whether or not we should be impressed that we held a terrible tcu team to less yards than their avg but still managed to lose.