PonyFans.com

"Winning delivers markets," he said. "If a team is in a great market and doesn't win, it doesn't deliver the market. We have the market but we need to win and win now. It is that simple." Per former BCS commish, now BCS wannabe Mike Tranghese. He was talking about the leftover BE schools, but could have as easily been talking about SMU. The only lovable loser in the history of sports is the Chicago Cubs. Nobody likes a loser.

That's a good call. I hope we can deliver this year.

If we make a bowl game, I am there. I don't care where it is, I am there!

Hoop fan I would love to win, but an optimisitic approach is to be thrilled with a 6 win season this year, and be happy with 5 wins.

Bennett's recruiting has been marvelous, the marketing of the program has improved, sponsorships of SMU athletics are up, graduation rates continue to hold atop the nation, our conference affiliation is looking as though it may change for the better...

...what I'm saying in a long-winded way is don't get upset if we lose more than we win in 2003. Things are on the upswing, and the program has not been this healthy in a very long time. Several winning seasons are on the horizon.

Southland, I agree with you, but one of the things I like most about Bennett is that every time he talks with the media he says that SMU needs to win NOW. Not in two years, or four years, but now. He makes no excuses. That's the kind of leadership we need.

Southland is right on. Success needs to be measured in improvemnt. We saw none last year but I am optimistic of a 5 win season and 6 would be great. I'm glad that Bennett is preaching "Win Now" but that is expected too. Recruiting becomes harder each year that we don't win under Bennett and I am sure that he realizes that. He needs to show continual improvement in the wins column to keep the recruiting successes building.

I'm patient, but we need to show something tangible sooner than later. That may not mean an 8 win season, but we do need a good win or two over a good opponent and/or rival. And we need to be able to at least be in the hunt for the WAC title every year. We cannot continue to be out of the race by the end of October, the WAC is just not that strong.

Remember when we slip out of the SWC and consoled oourtselves with being able to win against programs that were more on our level. All we did was slide to a lower level. When does this elevator go up?

Soon baby, soon!

the WAC may not be strong but the talent on the top 3-4 teams is and has been much better than the talent on SMU's team since the inception of SMU in the league. We have one year of recruiting foundation where that might not be true. We need at least 2 more years of that type of recruiting success to even talking about legitimate shots at bowls.

We have 5 opportunities to win the kind of game that will boost this program to the next level, i.e., competing for WAC championships and bowl games. To keep recruiting going well and attract that "next level" recruit, we eventually have to prove we can win important games. This year, that means beating TTech, Okie St, Fresno, Boise or TCU. Winning any of those games will mean this year will have been a big improvement (assuming we also beat the lower level WAC teams and maybe Baylor). Hey, beating Baylor would be an improvement. We haven't even scared them since the death penalty!

the steps we need to take this year are beating Rice and Baylor to bolster our recruiting against those schools in Texas. Then add in victories against Tulsa, UTEP and one or two of among Nevada, San Jose, Loisiana Tech. As modest as that seems that would be a big step in the right direction. I don't see SMU coming within 7-10 points of Boise, TCU, Oklahoma St. Fresno St or Tech. All will be favored by at least twice as much as 7-10 points. And another thing-pray for the health of Alan Adami because if we have to rely on untested DLM like Denman, Karrington or the freshman then we might be lucky to win 3 games because schools are going to drive the ball down our throats in that event.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 07-31-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 07-31-2003).]