PonyFans.com

I was listening to a couple of the ESPN analysts debating the SMU basketball sanctions. One of them had essentially this take: Think about it, SMU still has a lot to play for. They're going to be a really, really good team that has a chance to be ranked and take out some strong opponents. They're not being banned from TV, so they will still have all the exposure and will get a lot of attention. Then when the tournament comes around, there will still be discussions about the SMU team and how far they might have gone. So in short, we are talking about a couple of weeks of basketball without them. But if they take care of all their business, everytime Cincinnatti, UCONN, Memphis gets mentioned, it will be "but of course, SMU beat them......"

That gave me a good feeling that this team, if it handles this adversity correctly, can basically take the position of : YOU CAN KEEP US OUT OF THE TOURNAMENT, BUT YOU KNOW HOW GOOD WE ARE!

So just like season before last

Maybe the AAC lets us play in the conference tourney and we have a PF.com outing to Orlando. lol

Remember when OSU went undefeated in football? No you don't because they weren't in the championship

SMU claims a National title for a season we weren't even on TV much less the post-season-1981 and it was a helluva lot of fun beating the crap out of almost every one on our schedule-actually 2 seasons since the 1935 season went untelevised

We just may need to come up with our own Polyester Bowl ("Next Best Thing to Cotton")

Perhaps "February Madness-We're Going On Spring Break in March"

Does the post-season ban include the AAC tournament as well?

1983 Cotton Bowl wrote:Does the post-season ban include the AAC tournament as well?

I'm pretty sure it does. Even if it didn't though, the AAC would be crazy to let us play and potentially steal a tournament slot from someone else.

Agree with this silver linings approach. If we win 25+ games this year, we look great and end the season on a high, while the NCAA looks bad for excluding a top-15 team from the tournament. If an appeal would truly risk postponing our penalty to 2016-2017, I would hate to mortgage our future for a sweet sixteen run, before returning to mediocrity and irrelevance. Let's just kick [deleted] this season, say screw the tournament, and continue building a year-in, year-out competitive program.

it may suck-but it also may suck less than the previous 50 years of SMU Basketball if the team stays together. Winning is better than irrelevance

texasmustang10 wrote:Agree with this silver linings approach. If we win 25+ games this year, we look great and end the season on a high, while the NCAA looks bad for excluding a top-15 team from the tournament. If an appeal would truly risk postponing our penalty to 2016-2017, I would hate to mortgage our future for a sweet sixteen run, before returning to mediocrity and irrelevance. Let's just kick [deleted] this season, say screw the tournament, and continue building a year-in, year-out competitive program.

Do you realize that if we do not appeal that Nic, MK and possibly even Tolbert could be gone? Also, most of the high level recruits in the 2016 class that SMU was recruiting have committed elsewhere. So if the ban were moved to next year it would not hurt the class as much as you think because the 2016 won't be filled with as much talent as LB probably wanted. They are going to have have a really good 2017 class which won't have a post season ban wither way. Oh, and don't forget we have major recruiting restrictions for some time to come. I am with OBF in that the best thing we can do is make a run in the Big Dance this year.

SMU Section F wrote:

1983 Cotton Bowl wrote:Does the post-season ban include the AAC tournament as well?

I'm pretty sure it does. Even if it didn't though, the AAC would be crazy to let us play and potentially steal a tournament slot from someone else.

It's up to AAC officials. And even if we win the conference tourney, the runner-up would receive the automatic bid.

Edit: question came up in 2014 SWAC tournament. Granted, those postseason bans were for APR reasons

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... tournament

Pony147 wrote:

SMU Section F wrote:

1983 Cotton Bowl wrote:Does the post-season ban include the AAC tournament as well?

I'm pretty sure it does. Even if it didn't though, the AAC would be crazy to let us play and potentially steal a tournament slot from someone else.

It's up to AAC officials. And even if we win the conference tourney, the runner-up would receive the automatic bid.

Don't see any positives in us playing from an AAC perspective. Every game we are in, the focus becomes us and our infractions; and at any time during the tourney, what if we knock off a bubble team, a very real possibility given how few at-large bids the AAC receives.

SoCal_Pony wrote:Don't see any positives in us playing from an AAC perspective. Every game we are in, the focus becomes us and our infractions; and at any time during the tourney, what if we knock off a bubble team, a very real possibility given how few at-large bids the AAC receives.

Fair point about the bubble teams, but could you imagine the media coverage the conference title game would get if we were in it?

Pony147 wrote:

SoCal_Pony wrote:Don't see any positives in us playing from an AAC perspective. Every game we are in, the focus becomes us and our infractions; and at any time during the tourney, what if we knock off a bubble team, a very real possibility given how few at-large bids the AAC receives.

Fair point about the bubble teams, but could you imagine the media coverage the conference title game would get if we were in it?

Oh, I'd love it from an SMU perspective.

SoCal_Pony wrote:
Don't see any positives in us playing from an AAC perspective. Every game we are in, the focus becomes us and our infractions; and at any time during the tourney, what if we knock off a bubble team, a very real possibility given how few at-large bids the AAC receives.

Then again we would provide a strong resume win for any team that managed to beat us.