Critical factor in not selecting SMU...

[smusic 00]

I understand that Selection Committee was formed before the AAC. I would think that the AAC would have taken that into account when they decided to form a new conference? Why wouldn't the AAC Commissioner and AAC College Athletic Directors make sure that there was representation from the conference in the Selection Committee?

What?!?

[PK]

i'd like a buy a vowel, please

[gostangs]

standup has a point. when AAC got left or peeled off or whatever it should have said you are making room for us on the selection committee or there will be legal action. We let ourselves get pushed around therefore we get pushed around.

[PonyKris89]

I prefer to focus on how stupid the committee looks, not just blaming it on politic as to why we got screwed. Of course it was politics, and the only thing that can be done about it is for our Conference to be proactive.

But in the mean time, I just want to roast the SOB for assuming the we are all That Stupid and Gullible
His comments were ridiculous any way you try to explicate it. I appreciate the media, fans and experts siding with SMU on this injustice, but I just wish some of these media types would come out and actually call him to the carpet on these absurd excuses he made.

[Smu97186]

We will be fine without Louisville as long as we violate the no-no squares of everybody we play. Figuratively of course

[StandUp]

Does anyone have any idea what the AAC Commissioner and the SMU AD are planning to do moving forward to prevent what happened to SMU (next year and beyond)? From the looks of it our the AAC will be weaker without Louisville and SMU will be seen as a good team playing in a weak conference with no representation on the NCAA Selection Committee.

[smustatesman]

Obviously - the 'committee' has existed many years before the AAC. However, IMO it was incumbent on Aresco to see that we were represented after the split from the BE. IIRC some conferences had more than one member (maybe ACC)?

ACC technically had 3 committee members is you include Mike Czkwesezki (no idea how to spell it)

Not looking it up...Krzyzewski. Am I close?

It's easier to just call him "Rat Face".

[ponyinNC]

[Pony Fan]

Obviously - the 'committee' has existed many years before the AAC. However, IMO it was incumbent on Aresco to see that we were represented after the split from the BE. IIRC some conferences had more than one member (maybe ACC)?

ACC technically had 3 committee members is you include Mike Czkwesezki (no idea how to spell it)

We were represented and it was Orsini.......

[Charleston Pony]

when all is said and done, the committee didn't have much respect for the AAC because all of SMU's "quality" wins are against AAC teams. Otherwise, Wyoming was arguably our best win and that's not saying much. Of course, if I'm arguing FOR SMU, I could argue that we won AT Wyoming, something SDSU couldn't do. I could also argue the AAC owns non-conference wins against Florida, Pitt, Okie State, NCSU & Harvard suggesting our good teams are pretty strong. Then again, if I'm arguing AGAINST the AAC's top teams, I could point to the fact we had opportunities but lost games to UNC, KY, New Mexico, Xavier, Okie St, FL & Stanford.

It starts tonight - the opportunity for the AAC teams playing in the post season to earn a little respect. We are set up to make it to MSG and need to make that happen