PonyFans.com

For National Championships

That is why June must go

Forgot to ask: Does anyone agree that we CAN, as an institution, compete for national championships?

In basketball, yes.

In football, no.

CalallenStang wrote:Forgot to ask: Does anyone agree that we CAN, as an institution, compete for national championships?

Yes.

SMU can compete and should focus upon making a BCS bowl the goal for the program. Anyone who says we cannot, is deluding themselves as to our potential. Of course, the unanswered question is what is SMU's strategy?

As long as were in the American and don't have an IPF, we don't really stand a chance of competing with Tech, TCU, and Baylor for recruits, which is what we need to be doing to make the next step as a program.

Teams like Boise that were BCS busters did it with marginal recruiting but they also had a bunch of JUCO guys and others that couldn't qualify academically at bigger programs. We can't really get those guys in.

So no, at the current time, I don't think we can compete for national championships in football.

GoMustAAngs2007 wrote:In basketball, yes.

In football, no.

I agree; in bball everyone has an opportunity. In football, no longer the case. Boise could have run the table 4 consecutive years but they would never have had an opportunity to play for the title based on a (legitimate) strength of schedule argument. I never like to say never, but it would take a 16 team playoff and our being in one of the "chosen" conferences to ever have a shot at a football national championship again.

Charleston Pony wrote:

GoMustAAngs2007 wrote:In basketball, yes.

In football, no.

I agree; in bball everyone has an opportunity. In football, no longer the case. Boise could have run the table 4 consecutive years but they would never have had an opportunity to play for the title based on a (legitimate) strength of schedule argument. I never like to say never, but it would take a 16 team playoff and our being in one of the "chosen" conferences to ever have a shot at a football national championship again.

Not sure about that. In 2010 (I think) they were like preseason #3 and beat at top-ten VT team in DC to start the season. If they don't lose to Nevada they would have been in the discussion although Auburn and Oregon both were undefeated that year. Under the new playoff rules in effect next year they would've been in contention

East Coast Mustang wrote:

Charleston Pony wrote:

GoMustAAngs2007 wrote:In basketball, yes.

In football, no.

I agree; in bball everyone has an opportunity. In football, no longer the case. Boise could have run the table 4 consecutive years but they would never have had an opportunity to play for the title based on a (legitimate) strength of schedule argument. I never like to say never, but it would take a 16 team playoff and our being in one of the "chosen" conferences to ever have a shot at a football national championship again.

Not sure about that. In 2010 (I think) they were like preseason #3 and beat at top-ten VT team in DC to start the season. If they don't lose to Nevada they would have been in the discussion although Auburn and Oregon both were undefeated that year. Under the new playoff rules in effect next year they would've been in contention

the problem is that Boise could have started pre-season # 1 or #2 but strength of schedule would have allowed other unbeatens to pass them, not to mention a 1 loss team from the SEC

Charleston Pony wrote:The problem is that Boise could have started pre-season # 1 or #2 but strength of schedule would have allowed other unbeatens to pass them, not to mention a 1 loss team from the SEC

I dont know if a one-loss SEC team would have gotten in over them after they beat Va Tech and Oregon State. There would have been outrage throughout the land if that happened (except in the southeast)

East Coast Mustang wrote:

Charleston Pony wrote:The problem is that Boise could have started pre-season # 1 or #2 but strength of schedule would have allowed other unbeatens to pass them, not to mention a 1 loss team from the SEC

I dont know if a one-loss SEC team would have gotten in over them after they beat Va Tech and Oregon State. There would have been outrage throughout the land if that happened (except in the southeast)

I seem to remember some outrage when Bama got the re-match against LSU for the championship, but it didn't prevent it from happening. beating VT and OSU is fine, but Boise would have needed another 5-6 similar wins to get in (IMO) and their schedule just doesn't allow it. Not saying it's fair, but it's the reason I don't think we are going to compete again for a national championship in football

I see what you're saying. This is why it drives me up a wall that we will only schedule two "marquee" games in the future (TCU & Baylor). We need a third game against a P5 team OOC and we need to win it

Why, for the life of me, we don't try to play Notre Dame, USC, or someone like that at the Cotton Bowl during the State Fair is beyond me. Yeah, we'll probably lose but it's great exposure for the program and would at least get fans and recruits excited about SMU football.

East Coast Mustang wrote:Why, for the life of me, we don't try to play Notre Dame, USC, or someone like that at the Cotton Bowl during the State Fair is beyond me. Yeah, we'll probably lose but it's great exposure for the program and would at least get fans and recruits excited about SMU football.

future schedules are going to make it more and more difficult as conferences expand. Some have already gone to 9 conference games and with the unpopularity of those lopsided 70-7 games, it's going to get tougher for us "little guys" to schedule the big boys. Remember that Notre Dame is having to alter their schedule and drop some traditional games to accomodate 4 ACC schools every year as part of their "associate" membership in ACC football

Charleston Pony wrote:

East Coast Mustang wrote:Why, for the life of me, we don't try to play Notre Dame, USC, or someone like that at the Cotton Bowl during the State Fair is beyond me. Yeah, we'll probably lose but it's great exposure for the program and would at least get fans and recruits excited about SMU football.

future schedules are going to make it more and more difficult as conferences expand. Some have already gone to 9 conference games and with the unpopularity of those lopsided 70-7 games, it's going to get tougher for us "little guys" to schedule the big boys. Remember that Notre Dame is having to alter their schedule and drop some traditional games to accomodate 4 ACC schools every year as part of their "associate" membership in ACC football

Yeah, but at the same time you don't want to play 12 powerhouses a year. And if you're going to play a team outside the P5, why not play a team that gives you great exposure in a recruiting hotbed?