PonyFans.comBoard IndexAround the HilltopFootballRecruitingBasketballOther Sports

Not Good for SMU

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby Nacho » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:04 pm

Baylor was ranked 5. Tcu wasn't getting in anyway. Don't suck up to those jack wagons.
Nacho
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6043
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 4:01 am

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby StallionsModelT » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:04 pm

I think he's talking Big 12 not Big 10.
Back off Warchild seriously.
StallionsModelT
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 7800
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby CoxMustangFan » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:05 pm

StallionsModelT wrote:I think he's talking Big 12 not Big 10.


Oh, my bad. Cincy could happen...
Pony up!
User avatar
CoxMustangFan
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2432
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 3:02 pm
Location: Frisco, TX

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby StallionsModelT » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:06 pm

I personally think there will be a greater push to have an 8 team playoff instead of 4. 4 is too inclusive even for the P5. There will be one mad P5 program every year. That will change.
Back off Warchild seriously.
StallionsModelT
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 7800
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby Treadway21 » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:08 pm

StallionsModelT wrote:I personally think there will be a greater push to have an 8 team playoff instead of 4. 4 is too inclusive even for the P5. There will be one mad P5 program every year. That will change.

Agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
An atheist is a guy who watches a Notre Dame-SMU football game and
doesn't care who wins.
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower
User avatar
Treadway21
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6586
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:14 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby CoxMustangFan » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:11 pm

StallionsModelT wrote:I personally think there will be a greater push to have an 8 team playoff instead of 4. 4 is too inclusive even for the P5. There will be one mad P5 program every year. That will change.


Agree 100%. It adds two games and makes it a bigger event. Plus, SEC will push hard as it's a virtual lock that they would get 2+ teams.
Pony up!
User avatar
CoxMustangFan
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2432
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 3:02 pm
Location: Frisco, TX

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby Nacho » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:13 pm

If Baylor had Texas on the front of their jersies they woud be in.
Nacho
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6043
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 4:01 am

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby DanFreibergerForHeisman » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:13 pm

At some point they realize the money trumps trying to keep some tie-in to the existing bowls and it goes to 8, right?

Would they still be OK with making the existing bowls quarterfinals and then add two more weeks of playoffs?
Shake It Off Moody
User avatar
DanFreibergerForHeisman
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 16485
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2000 3:01 am

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby Nacho » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:16 pm

8 is a foregone conclusion. Too many power brokers left out.
Nacho
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6043
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 4:01 am

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby Treadway21 » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:18 pm

Nacho wrote:If Baylor had Texas on the front of their jersies they woud be in.

Same for TCU.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
An atheist is a guy who watches a Notre Dame-SMU football game and
doesn't care who wins.
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower
User avatar
Treadway21
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6586
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:14 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby SoCal_Pony » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:22 pm

CoxMustangFan wrote:
StallionsModelT wrote:
SoCal_Pony wrote:Oh, and 1 last thing.

With the loss of A&M, I think the odds of Coog High getting B10 membership are 10x greater than ours.

Cincy & Coog High to B10 is our nightmare scenario.



If that were indeed to go down then yes....ultimate nightmare scenario.


Why is it even being discussed? Neither school is -- or will be within the next 50+ years -- an AAU member. I have a better chance of becoming the starting center for the Mavs.


Because I miss typed. Should have said Big12, not Big10
User avatar
SoCal_Pony
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 4:01 am

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby SoCal_Pony » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:30 pm

StallionsModelT wrote:I personally think there will be a greater push to have an 8 team playoff instead of 4. 4 is too inclusive even for the P5. There will be one mad P5 program every year. That will change.


Add to it that the only undefeated team came from the perceived weakest conference = recipe for disaster.

Plus I strongly suspect they want representation from all corners of the US. That's somewhat accomplished by having each P5 conference winner represented. Last thing TV networks want is a KC Royals / Milwaukee Brewers WS.
User avatar
SoCal_Pony
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 4:01 am

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby stc9 » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:43 pm

Nacho wrote:8 is a foregone conclusion. Too many power brokers left out.

The current bowl format plus 4 team playoff maximizes revenue for the P-5 conferences. As fans all we think about are the 4 teams, but there are bowl games attached to this as well. I am willing to bet that the SEC is raking in the cash this season with 'Bama, Ole Miss and Miss St. in the playoffs/$$$ bowls faster than they ever did in the past. They couldn't do this during the BCS. Max 2 teams per conference in the BCS.

Because the P5 is making more $$$, don't expect change for years. If you stop and think about it, the Big XII got snubbed and is still doing better $$$ under the new system.

Nothing to see here... Move along.
Some rise by sin, and some by virtue fall
stc9
Heisman
 
Posts: 1157
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:37 am
Location: Jax Beach, FL

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby Mustangs_Maroons » Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:54 pm

Tcu would have gotten in if they had a conference championship and had beaten baylor in that game. As it stands they didn't and don't have a stronger case than Alabama, Oregon, the defending (and only undefeated team) champs or OSU who blew out the other team in their championship game.

The b12 tried to game the system and loses in the 4 team playoff. There's no conspiracy theory or bias against a private school. The committee made a huge mistake ranking tcu third going into the last week. They should have been 5th at best.
User avatar
Mustangs_Maroons
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:03 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Not Good for SMU

Postby CalallenStang » Sun Dec 07, 2014 8:02 pm

TCU got passed because Baylor, FSU, and Ohio State all added a quality win to their resumes yesterday. TCU did not. That has nothing to do with TCU being private and everything to do with TCU playing Iowa State
User avatar
CalallenStang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 19359
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:43 pm
Location: 25 feet from the Hillcrest track

PreviousNext

Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], peruna81 and 16 guests