Break Up the SWC

[Stallion]

3 teams in the Top 11-better than any traditional pre-BCS Conference in the Country

[Rayburn]

God bless the old SWC.

[PonyTime]

Rice (9-3), TCU (10-2) and Houston (7-5) going Bowling along with Texas and Texas Tech - makes this the strongest 5 teams out of the former SWC in a long. long time.

Arkansas, A&M, SMU and Baylor are keeping the group down.

[PonyTime]

SWC Standings:

11-1 Texas
11-1 Texas Tech
10-2 TCU
9-3 Rice
7-5 Houston
5-7 Arkansas
4-8 Baylor
4-8 Texas A&M
1-11 SMU

Bowl Bound

Now let's see how they actually do in the Bowls . . .

[Rebel_Pony]

Wonder what these records would look like if these teams all played each other in conference. I think Rice & Houston would have roughly equal records to Arkansas or Baylor, while the other teams might be about the same. (SMU stays 1-11, unfortunately).

[PonyTime]

My guess is that TCU would not be 10-2 (Losses to at least Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma - out of conference).

Rice would not be 9-3 - perhaps 7-5 (losses to Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Vanderbilt, and perhaps Arkansas) but would still be bowling.

Houston would not be bowling and Arkansas perhaps would be 7-5 (with wins over SMU, Baylor, A&M, Houston, Rice, plus two non conference wins).

If SMU had Arkansas on their Schedule you never know - they could have won 2 games this year (woooooo PIG SUEEEEEYYYYYY!)

[Rayburn]

I bet Baylor would have beaten Arkansas.

[bagice]

Speaking of the Breaking up of the SWC.....I was always wondering, why was SMU, TCU, Houston and Rice so quick to abandon ship? Was it all financial? Why didn't we just keep the SWC name and history and reload...say with Tulsa, UTEP, Louisana Tech and Tulane....hell, even throw UNT in there if ya want.

Would have been a more interesting conference than any we have been in since the SWC and I think could have been financially feasible. I bet we coulda come up with something to make it attractive to those schools to form a regional conference.

[The XtC]

[quote="bagice"]Speaking of the Breaking up of the SWC.....I was always wondering, why was SMU, TCU, Houston and Rice so quick to abandon ship? Was it all financial? Why didn't we just keep the SWC name and history and reload...say with Tulsa, UTEP, Louisana Tech and Tulane....hell, even throw UNT in there if ya want.

Would have been a more interesting conference than any we have been in since the SWC and I think could have been financially feasible. I bet we coulda come up with something to make it attractive to those schools to form a regional conference.[/quote]

Because none of those teams would have left their previous conference to join 3 private schools in a drastically weakened SWC, except perhaps UNT. La. Tech might have thought about it, but Tulsa had a few options, and joining a league with no attractive ( to television) properties would not have been a reasonable choice. There's no way UTEP would have left the WAC at that stage, New Mexico was their strongest rival. Houston was on their way to C-USA, and Tulane was already there, along with most of their longtime rivals from the old Metro conference. The 3 remaining SWC schools had nothing to offer new schools to draw them in, no attendance, no TV revenue, the Cotton Bowl tie was lost when the conference roster changed, there was nothing to make trying to maintain the SWC a viable option.