S.M.U. Looking to Future

by **HB Pony Dad** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:42 am

From NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/24/sport ... aafootball

S.M.U. Looking to Future

"Southern Methodist did not lose this week, but that was because the Mustangs were idle.

Ã¢â‚¬Å“You always win those,Ã¢â‚¬

by **J.T.supporta** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:48 am

it would sure be great to knock So. Miss out of bowl consideration

by **jkflamebo** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:26 pm

J.T.supporta wrote:it would sure be great to knock So. Miss out of bowl consideration

southern miss is a lock to beat us

by **SmooBoy** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:38 pm

J.T.supporta wrote:it would sure be great to knock So. Miss out of bowl consideration

It would be even greater to stop having to see the words "SMU" and "looking toward the future" in the same story.

by **J.T.supporta** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:50 pm

SmooBoy wrote:
J.T.supporta wrote:it would sure be great to knock So. Miss out of bowl consideration

It would be even greater to stop having to see the words "SMU" and "looking toward the future" in the same story.

i know right

by **StallionsModelT** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:00 pm

I think that we are going to see a vastly improved team next season. We were playing a bunch of kids who are just a few months removed from their senior prom this year. An entire offseason program, spring ball, and all the valuable experience they've gained this season will translate into success. If we can manage to win 4 or 5 games next season I think that is really promising for what the future may hold for this bunch. As disappointing as this season has been from a W-L standpoint, but I've been pleased with some of the things we've been able to do.

by **J.T.supporta** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:08 pm

StallionsModelT wrote:I think that we are going to see a vastly improved team next season. We were playing a bunch of kids who are just a few months removed from their senior prom this year. An entire offseason program, spring ball, and all the valuable experience they've gained this season will translate into success. If we can manage to win 4 or 5 games next season I think that is really promising for what the future may hold for this bunch. As disappointing as this season has been from a W-L standpoint, but I've been pleased with some of the things we've been able to do.

we say this every year but i sure hope youre right

by **SmooBoy** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:13 pm

It's time for the future to look toward us.

by **HB Pony Dad** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:33 pm

At least we got some National Press in the NY Times without them (Liberal Rag that they are) attaching the "Bottom Ten" moniker!

BE HAPPY

by **OR-See-Nee** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:34 pm

Of all the possible stories the NYT could have printed, why did it print this one? As much as I love SMU--sorry, Southern Methodist--there are approximately 1,237 other college-football related stories that could have been printed, all with more relevance to a NYT audience.

My gosh, are we part of the liberal mainstream media? Who at SMU--sorry, Southern Methodist--has such clout with the NYT?

by **SmooBoy** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:40 pm

OR-See-Nee wrote:Of all the possible stories the NYT could have printed, why did it print this one? As much as I love SMU--sorry, Southern Methodist--there are approximately 1,237 other college-football related stories that could have been printed, all with more relevance to a NYT audience.

My gosh, are we part of the liberal mainstream media? Who at SMU--sorry, Southern Methodist--has such clout with the NYT?

PonySoprano.

by **OR-See-Nee** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:46 pm

SmooBoy wrote:
OR-See-Nee wrote:Of all the possible stories the NYT could have printed, why did it print this one? As much as I love SMU--sorry, Southern Methodist--there are approximately 1,237 other college-football related stories that could have been printed, all with more relevance to a NYT audience.

My gosh, are we part of the liberal mainstream media? Who at SMU--sorry, Southern Methodist--has such clout with the NYT?

PonySoprano.

Well, that's quite impressive. I suppose any news is good news, and the ol' grey lady did manage to spell the university's name correctly, although I was under the impression the university desired to be known by SMU instead of Southern Methodist, So. Methodist, or, as is on my caller id when someone calls for $$$, "So Meth U".

by PK » Mon Nov 24, 2008 2:17 pm

HB Pony Dad wrote:At least we got some National Press in the NY Times without them (Liberal Rag that they are) attaching the "Bottom Ten" moniker!

BE HAPPY

...and without any reference to the DP!!!

by **PoconoPony** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:03 pm

SmooBoy wrote:
OR-See-Nee wrote:Of all the possible stories the NYT could have printed, why did it print this one? As much as I love SMU--sorry, Southern Methodist--there are approximately 1,237 other college-football related stories that could have been printed, all with more relevance to a NYT audience.

My gosh, are we part of the liberal mainstream media? Who at SMU--sorry, Southern Methodist--has such clout with the NYT?

PonySoprano.

Many powerful alumni live and work in NYC. You might be surprised to see who they are , where they work and the positions they hold.

by **RGV Pony** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:36 pm

NYT stuff has been going on awhile. As I've mentioned before, Bobby Collins wondered how we got more press in the NYT than in the DMN when we were #2 in the nation.

S.M.U. Looking to Future

S.M.U. Looking to Future

Who is online