0-46-1 vs. "Big 12 South"

[newshound]

Sine 1989, against the ORIGINAL Big 12 South, SMU is 0-46-1. No wins in 47 tries. And, the losses average -- STILL average -- 30 points per game (1989-580 in total points). This does not include TCU (although the record vs. the Frogs (6-17) is abysmal, too).

Baylor (0-10; Avg. margin of defeat: 29.8 ppg)
Oklahoma (0-1; Avg. margin of defeat: 14.0)
Oklahoma State (0-3; Avg. margin of defeat: 44.7)
Texas (0-7; Avg. margin of defeat: 30.0)
Texas A&M (0-10-1; Avg. margin of defeat: 32.2)
Texas Tech (0-15; Avg. margin of defeat: 26.6)

In 38 of those 47 games, SMU has scored 19 or fewer points.
SMU has never scored more than 27 points in those 47 games over now 25 seasons.

Meanwhile, those six opponents have scored:
40-49: 17 times
50-59: 7 times
60-69: 4 times

... and have never been held in single digits. Not one time in 47 games.

Maybe it's time to revisit our scheduling strategy? And, I don't mean playing North Texas for the next 16 years. Stop playing A&M, Tech and Baylor. Period. If you are going to get blasted, get paid to get blasted and go somewhere nice to play (i.e., not College Station, Lubbock or Waco).

[sbsmith]

We need to revisit our recruiting strategy before we chicken out of any more series against Texas P5 programs.

[BIGHORSE]

It seems like we are still in 1989, we still get crushed by all our former S.W.C. mates.

[newshound]

We have not chickened out of anything. The Baylor game this year was mutual as Baylor wanted a sixth home game (they gave one up to play Tech in Arlington). Yes, we wanted out, too, but Baylor had no issue with it. They had TWO opponents lined up. Media doesn't do its homework sometimes.

[Grant Carter]

We have not chickened out of anything. The Baylor game this year was mutual as Baylor wanted a sixth home game (they gave one up to play Tech in Arlington). Yes, we wanted out, too, but Baylor had no issue with it. They had TWO opponents lined up. Media doesn't do its homework sometimes.

Both teams wanting to get out of a game does not mean one of the teams did not chicken out. You said Baylor wanted to get out to play 6 home games. What do you think is the reason SMU wanted to get out of the game?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[sbsmith]

The story that has been floated on this and other boards is that we first wanted to chicken out of the A&M game but they wouldn't let us so we (desperate to weaken our schedule to cover the talent deficiencies from June's failures in recruiting/development) decided to give up a home sellout versus Baylor. Baylor may have agreed to it but (who wouldn't want an extra home game) but it was still cowardice on our end. Look at the deeper reasons for why we're not competitive in those games. Fix those and we can compete (see TCU).

[SMU_Alumni11]

Yeah no kidding we need to stop this "oh we never win so let's play someone crappy" crap. Just get prepared, get ready to win, and if we don't have a coach that can (like now) then go find someone who wants it. Gary fattersom was always on the underdog side but he perserve and wanted the wins especially the big non-conference wins.

[ponyte]

than Jones, those numbers show how devastating the DP really was. Yes, we have been crushed by the old SWC teams since the DP. However, we also found ways to lose to not so good Bayor teams under Caven and Bennett.

And we use to have dang near a similar record agins ALL teams, including the non SWC teams (Think WAC, CUSA).

Add in the schools desire to lose post DP and the years of futility really add up.

Stupid mistakes and stupid palys dominated SMU football for dcades. Many of us remember SMU founding ways to loss and loss by blowing big leads. And that wasn't all that long ago.

Decades of being the worse team in the country show with the record above. WE have moved beyond the worse team. Now we need to get the talent to move into the up 1/3 of college football.

[stc9]

...And we use to have dang near a similar record agins ALL teams, including the non SWC teams (Think WAC, CUSA).

Add in the schools desire to lose post DP and the years of futility really add up.

When the DP occurred the administration made a conscious decision not to compete on the same playing field as our former conference mates. They made the decision that they were exceedingly risk averse to negative exposure in the Athletic Department from the football scandal. For example a player needed a much higher than qualifying SAT score to even have a paid recruiting visit to our campus.

Let's play what if?
If SMU came back from the DP and committed to both play by the rules and compete, would the SWC fallen apart? (Let's say we were a perenial 8-4 or 7-5 team). I say no. Where would we be now? One of the reasons the conference fell apart is that there was only 2 teams of note (A$M & UT and they seemed to be alternating on successful seasons at the time). Having a consistent 3rd team would have made the conference viable.

If the conference did fall apart, then we would have been one of the original members of the Big XII. We have a good market and were competitive. We probably would have replaced Baylor (and their political connections - because friends of SMU Football wouldn't have had to hide in shame). Or perhaps one of the Big XIII schools would have gotten dumped in the merger.

Instead, the university is just now making the changes needed to get recruits onto campus 20+ years after the punishment. I know why they did it... I just wonder if those people in their ivory, vine covered towers now regret it.

[RGV Pony]

Staying with the what if game... What if all the above happened and we never moved out of Texas Stadium.. Would smu and jerrrah have collaborated with the city of Dallas for the fair Park stadium? Where would we currently be playing?

[stc9]

Staying with the what if game... What if all the above happened and we never moved out of Texas Stadium.. Would smu and jerrrah have collaborated with the city of Dallas for the fair Park stadium? Where would we currently be playing?

To my knowledge, SMU has never had a huge fan base. We were certainly better than we are now, but never a massive following. So in that what if... My guess would be the cotton bowl - just based upon price.

[PonyTime]

Sine 1989, against the ORIGINAL Big 12 South, SMU is 0-46-1. No wins in 47 tries. And, the losses average -- STILL average -- 30 points per game (1989-580 in total points). This does not include TCU (although the record vs. the Frogs (6-17) is abysmal, too).

Baylor (0-10; Avg. margin of defeat: 29.8 ppg)
Oklahoma (0-1; Avg. margin of defeat: 14.0)
Oklahoma State (0-3; Avg. margin of defeat: 44.7)
Texas (0-7; Avg. margin of defeat: 30.0)
Texas A&M (0-10-1; Avg. margin of defeat: 32.2)
Texas Tech (0-15; Avg. margin of defeat: 26.6)

In 38 of those 47 games, SMU has scored 19 or fewer points.
SMU has never scored more than 27 points in those 47 games over now 25 seasons.

Meanwhile, those six opponents have scored:
40-49: 17 times
50-59: 7 times
60-69: 4 times

... and have never been held in single digits. Not one time in 47 games.

Maybe it's time to revisit our scheduling strategy? And, I don't mean playing North Texas for the next 16 years. Stop playing A&M, Tech and Baylor. Period. If you are going to get blasted, get paid to get blasted and go somewhere nice to play (i.e., not College Station, Lubbock or Waco).

Know they are not Big 12, but I love how there is no mention of Arkansas in all of this. Convenient for your stats. Perhaps we need to get the Hogs on our schedule again. Perhaps they don't want to continue playing Rutgers in New Jersey and would prefer another DFW game...

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

The SWC broke up for a lot of reasons, only one of which was the DP. There is no "but for the DP, the SWC would still be around." That conference was doomed.

[smusportspage]

We have not chickened out of anything. The Baylor game this year was mutual as Baylor wanted a sixth home game (they gave one up to play Tech in Arlington). Yes, we wanted out, too, but Baylor had no issue with it. They had TWO opponents lined up. Media doesn't do its homework sometimes.

Both teams wanting to get out of a game does not mean one of the teams did not chicken out. You said Baylor wanted to get out to play 6 home games. What do you think is the reason SMU wanted to get out of the game?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Maybe the reason is this....Why play 4 Big 12 teams without getting credit for being in the Big 12? Seriously not a hard concept. The schedule is plenty tough without the fourth. These games are simply warmup for the games that really matter.

[PK]

Staying with the what if game... What if all the above happened and we never moved out of Texas Stadium.. Would smu and jerrrah have collaborated with the city of Dallas for the fair Park stadium? Where would we currently be playing?

To my knowledge, SMU has never had a huge fan base. We were certainly better than we are now, but never a massive following. So in that what if... My guess would be the cotton bowl - just based upon price.

During the Doak Walker days SMU had a huge following, thus the statement in reference to the Cotton Bowl..."the house that Doak built." They had to significantly increase the seating capacity of the Cotton Bowl to keep up with the demand for fans wanting to watch SMU football. With the addition of two pro football teams in Dallas back in the sixties, the Dallas fans turned to following the pros instead.