PonyFans.com

I have a few questions related to the SMU reaction to 4 teams leaving the SWC and in the WAC. No disrespect is ever intended, just some things I have wondered about.

1- Was there any effort to rebuild the SWC via expansion? Was this even discussed?

2- Why did UH split from SMU, Rice, and TCU if they were leaving the SWC as well?

3- What made CUSA take TCU from the WAC before the others? IIRC it was before their big 2000 season.

4- How did the expansion process after the 2003 BE Raid progress and what made CUSA push for SMU, Rice, Tulsa, and UTEP? Marshall was simple enough as they were a top mid-major and UCF would replace USF. Was it footprint in TX? Was it the desire for a championship game? Did UH have a role?
My understanding is they would have had UH, Tulane, UAB, USM, UCF, Memphis, Marshall, and ECU.

5- Who reached out first, SMU or CUSA?

Try wikipedia.

Are you wiring a term paper?

How do you wire a term paper?

Via telegraph. Very painstaking process.

I would suggest writing it instead.

_ _ _. _ _. _ _ _

Don't really have any answers for you, but just a couple of comments.

1. Don't know for sure, but I think the SWC was basically dissolved when half the teams left. I don’t even remember if there was fair warning with a year or two to make other arrangements or if it was just suddenly no longer a conference.

2. UH, SMU, Rice and TCU did not leave the conference…the conference ceased to exist.

I am going to try and answer your questions, mostly from bad memory and anecdotal information. If you want harder facts, ask others. When Baylor, TT, UT and AM joined the Big XII, I don't think any serious attempt was made to keep a new SWC together. UH had a dynamite basketball program in those days and CUSA with Louisville, DePaul, Marquette, was right up their alley. TCU and SMU eyed the WAC with attendance boosting teams such as BYU and AFA in the mix. And that was the ultimate downfall of the WAC, too many people wanted games with those two schools. After the Airport 5 met and secreted away, BYU, AFA, Wyoming, CSU, UNM, UNLV, SDS, and Utah, the WAC had to reload. They added La. Tech, Boise and Nevada. At that point SMU and TCU wanted out. They had nothing in common with schools like Fresno, Boise, SJS, and Nevada. The two schools approached CUSA. At that point only TCU was chosen because they were good in football and we stunk. Then, the BE raided CUSA and Army quit, and CUSA had to back fill and invited SMU, Rice, Tulsa, Marshall, and UCF. Tulane, UH and to a lesser degree TCU encouraged adding SMU and Rice who had a joined at the hip agreement at that point with Tulsa. At that point, TCU got an invite from the MWC and left. Leaving another vacancy in CUSA. At which point La. Tech, UNT and UTEP were the applicants. UTEP was chosen in part at the suggestion of SMU, Rice and UH because they travelled better than the other two schools and while they were a bit at the edge of the geographical footprint, they were the best applicant of the bunch. I hope this answers most of your questions.

Sammy 11 wrote:I have a few questions related to the SMU reaction to 4 teams leaving the SWC and in the WAC. No disrespect is ever intended, just some things I have wondered about.

1- Was there any effort to rebuild the SWC via expansion? Was this even discussed?

2- Why did UH split from SMU, Rice, and TCU if they were leaving the SWC as well?

3- What made CUSA take TCU from the WAC before the others? IIRC it was before their big 2000 season.

4- How did the expansion process after the 2003 BE Raid progress and what made CUSA push for SMU, Rice, Tulsa, and UTEP? Marshall was simple enough as they were a top mid-major and UCF would replace USF. Was it footprint in TX? Was it the desire for a championship game? Did UH have a role?
My understanding is they would have had UH, Tulane, UAB, USM, UCF, Memphis, Marshall, and ECU.

5- Who reached out first, SMU or CUSA?

1. No, not seriously. There were some schools looked at - there were rumors running wild in Memphis about UM, Louisville, and USM being brought in - but it was obvious very quickly the SWC was dead. Nobody serious wanted to join three small private school and a commuter school.

2. I don't think UH saw the WAC as a viable option, and the WAC I don't think was interested in many other schools outside of TCU in the first place. I've heard Pye had to beg to get us in. But I think it was simply a different vision on where to go between UH and the 3 others.

3. TCU figured out before the other three schools they were going to have to make a long-term commitment to athletics if it was ever going to be anything more than just a financial anchor to the school. I think C-USA and the MWC saw this in them and pursued them.

4. It's believed SMU, Rice, and Tulsa had an agreement between themselves that they were going to stay together. Similiar priorities, geography, and histories. If C-USA wanted one, they had to have all. I have heard UH wanted nothing to do with Rice, despite the fact that apparently Rice helped to get UH into the SWC. But a percieved need for more schools, and lack of other available options, is what drove it to begin with.

5. SMU had been lobbying to get into C-USA ever since the 16 team WAC split up. We reached out first, even if indirectly.

I am certainly not a historian on the subject, but EastStang's comments seem basically correct as I recall.

With respect to the SWC, it was a conference in decline for some years before it actually broke up. The SWC was a really odd mix of large public universities and small privates, with eight Texas members and only one school outside of Texas. Once SMU got the DP, half the other schools were put on some form of probation, and Arkansas left, it was bye bye to the SWC. A conference made up entirely of Texas schools had a very limited national appeal and was consequently of little interest to the networks.

Arkansas' departure has always been explained to me as a defensive move. From what I've heard, UT and A&M were looking for a way out of the SWC because they were tired of carrying the deadweight privates. The most likely scenario was a merger between the Big-8 and certain SWC schools to form a 12-team conference. That meant there would be 4 slots for SWC schools in any merged conference. Arkansas' fear was that Texas politics would result in UA getting left out in the cold. Considering what we witnessed when the merger did happen, and again this past summer, that sounds about right. As an Arkansas friend once told me, "Someone was going to get screwed. . .and we knew it wouldn't be Baylor!" So the invite to the SEC allowed Arkansas to preempt that fate.

I've never heard of any serious efforts to keep the SWC alive by expansion. The schools that remained were the small privates and UH, which at the time were not a credible core for a new conference. In addition, there were really no legitimate expansion candidates and the SWC was a tainted brand. Once UT and A&M bolted, it was over. . . plain and simple. Tech and Baylor got to go along for the ride, but they didn't drive the breakup.

With respect to the WAC breakup in 1998, that was personally a big shock for me. I was on vacation in California at the time and learned of the breakup by opening the sports page one morning. I had heard absolutely nothing about a breakup prior to that moment. I was stunned. That was a bad day for SMU athletics. The rump WAC that we played in for several years after that was a dog with fleas. Compared to that conference, playing in C-USA today is MUCH better.

Also note that the SWC historically was corrupt and politically failed to take stern enough measures with schools that broke the rules. I recall at the time of the break up there were 7 SWC schools on probation for recruiting violations. This corruption goes back in my frame of reference to the early 60s when every one was cheating. If the anyone spoke up or complained they got wacked by the conference to protect the others. I recall SMU got wacked in 1965 and put on probation for speaking up about serious transgression by 6 other member schools based on statements or offers made to at least 12 members of the SMU football entering class of 63. Obviously, the corruption did not cause the break up of the SWC, but it was a factor in the schools wanting to get away from the same ole scene and each other.

I know Houston preferred CUSA because it was a small group and that allowed them to schedule more non-conference "money" games.

it boiled down to Houston not wanting to be soiled by the "stank" of SMU, TCU and Rice which included some of the most naive, uninformed Presidents you could ever put in 1 room. TCU got the message and the change in their athletic admission model and spending on athletics was immediate. You could see it from Franchione's first recruiting Class that they were [deleted]' around