Knee-jerk reaction - are we finished?

[Pony81]

I think Max and JasonB are right.....
The P5 know that they need a bigger universe of schools than 64 to A) win games and B) not have the perpetual losers lose interest and effectively have a semi pro league.

We weren't competitive in recruiting against P5 teams and our only hope was to join the P5 to be more relevant.

I think impact is the lower tier of D1 will drop out our down to D2. So you will go from 124 teams to around 80. Over time those 80 will atop to the 64. Then the privates in the 64 will drop out because they see it as futile and the money hamster wheel it is.

[peruna81]

the other alternative that has been talked about is the formation of a association (separate from the ncaa) that would agree to not play the P5 in football. The potential reduction in season games (think SMU scheduling UTA back in the day) for the P5 would wreak a degree of scheduling havoc.

My thought is that this too would not work, primarily because a P5 school would just throw enough scratch out there to entice the breakup by one team of the have nots, and the association collapses. We are the new Div. 1 AA

[mrydel]

We need to at least adopt the Rydel Rule of letting student athletes transfer from P5 to G5 without having to sit a year.

[PonySnob]

Would it be so bad to dominate the non P5 teams? Outside of a few years, it's not like SMU has ever dominated its conference in the last 50 years playing against the "big boys".

Personally not a fan of being king of the midgets

But it would be okay to .500 or less the majority of the time? What is our overall w-l record from the the Doak days to 1986?

[SMU89]

P5 schools already get a nucleus of talent. This change won't get them better players.

Any of the non p's who implement the changes will increase their nucleus of talent by taking from the ones who don't

[Pony81]

If SMU were to get into the P5 we would be relevant and draw sell out crowds. But like TCU, we wouldn't be competitive over the long haul.

Really this NCAA announcement is just one more turn of the crank. Now lower D1 schools will drop out due to cost, leaving 80ish teams ....... Until the next turn when it will drop further.

Sorry but I'm of the mind that college athletics as an amateur sport is doomed.

[blackoutpony]

Would it be so bad to dominate the non P5 teams? Outside of a few years, it's not like SMU has ever dominated its conference in the last 50 years playing against the "big boys".

Personally not a fan of being king of the midgets

But it would be okay to .500 or less the majority of the time? What is our overall w-l record from the the Doak days to 1986?

Being worried about that is just embracing a losers mentality, which I'm also not a fan of

[Topper]

Would it be so bad to dominate the non P5 teams? Outside of a few years, it's not like SMU has ever dominated its conference in the last 50 years playing against the "big boys".

How old are you? Have you watched "Pony Excess?"

[PonySnob]

Would it be so bad to dominate the non P5 teams? Outside of a few years, it's not like SMU has ever dominated its conference in the last 50 years playing against the "big boys".

How old are you? Have you watched "Pony Excess?"

That's great that we had a couple of great years in the early 80's.........yes I've seen Pony Excess and it said that since the 30's we had not exactly been and SWC powerhouse prior to the couple of years when Sherwood was in control.

[jpe747]

What are the chances of getting Sherwood back?

[Treadway21]

Basically, we were 30 years ahead of our time.

Beat me too it. +1

[ideal]

ESPN did a cynical number on us, continually pounding us with half truths to promote their sinister agenda, and worse not paying royalties, bastards.
We were the scapegoat for all the garbage that now is unfolding.
Where is the go-go 80's context, where is the supervailing political intrigue to use us to bring down the Republican Party in Texas.
We always were very competitive. The SWC was the SEC of its time. UT was king of the hill at the time, like Alabama, and controlled a mega state apparatus to promote the whorens.
As always, we attracted the best kids, and we believed in the academic ideal.
Have no doubt, we were targeted to bring low. The dp was put in to kill us. Because Charles Alan Wright and friends were afraid we would continue to dominate and destroy their plans.
We are unique, not because of what we did, but because of what they hung on us.
It is naive to believe we were the only school helping players. Everyone did that, incl. ut, am, lsu, ark, and ND. We did not drop the dime on other programs for complex reasons.
Continuing to blame us and use us as a posterboy is criminal.
The Big12 commish said 35% of the top schools now cheat, and he used that to promote the idea they have to legalize it to avoid "problems", well these schools have been doing the same thing for 50 years. That is how they built their dynasties, which ncaa countenanced.
Now the reality has been exposed for all to see, we can mix it up with the best of them, as long as we have an equal shot at the tv money, as a source for marketing bucks.
The only question is, has the dp actually killed us, or do we maintain the energy and will to win.

[fifty]

As long as we have an equal shot at the TV money? Don't hold your breath.

[ideal]

that's called restraint of trade, my friend

[sbsmith]

As long as we have an equal shot at the TV money? Don't hold your breath.

We already have an equal shot at the TV money, we're getting exactly what is fair for the eyeballs (or lack thereof) we bring to the table. Want more money then bring more eyeballs.