|
Bowl EligibleModerators: PonyPride, SmooPower
25 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Bowl EligibleCongrats to the team on an important milestone. I think we will get 7 or 8, but this a very needed step. Lots of hard work needs to be recognized.
Re: Bowl EligibleWe swept the 3 games I thought in the preseason we're the keys to making a Bowl-Arkansas St, Cincy on the road and Tulsa who played very well tonite. Great job-got it done despite trailing almost entire game
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris
When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
Re: Bowl EligibleThat was a rough game to watch
All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand
Re: Bowl EligibleAwesome win! That was brutal to watch especially with the Astros World Series game going on. Hopefully we can upset a couple teams and beat Tulane so we can win the most games in a long time in the history of the program.
Re: Bowl Eligible
It really was. Seemed we didn't play that well or that hard but found a way to win. Or Tulsa found a way to loss. Not sure.
Re: Bowl Eligible
The big difference I see is we ALWAYS lost these games. This is now two games that SMU found a way to win. I was on the replace Hicks bandwagon, but he has made strides in the past few games. He is definitely improving. I am still on the replace Malone bandwagon, but the defense has come up big late in games after looking completely dreadful. We'll see if this continues...
Re: Bowl EligibleCongrats to the team and these coaches. Have to feel especially good for the seniors who have had so little to celebrate at SMU
Re: Bowl Eligible
I agree. How many times in the last several years have we been on the opposite side of these games? We are definitely seeing a change in the program I hope will continue. Looking forward to defensive strides next year which should put us solidly at the top tier of the AAC. All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand
Re: Bowl EligibleLoved the classy comment (DMN article on SMUmustangs) from Morris re: parents got to see their trust in staff's promises and their son's decision play ball at SMU pay off. I hadn't thought of that, but it is a good point.
Re: Bowl EligibleSnippy article in the Arkansas paper today about the call against the Tulsa receiver for prancing. I am sure it is in the DMN and others. Makes it sound like we would have lost had it not been made and that it was a nitpicking call.
While I believe the rule should be changed, I do not concede the win just because of the call. All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand
Re: Bowl Eligible38
- 34 = 4 I'm assuming a touchdown is 6 points with a possibility of missing the additional point. Just based on the facts without the gift from the refs yes this is a loss.
Re: Bowl Eligible
They kicked a field goal on the possession, so it was a 4 point swing, not a 7 point swing... if you are really going down that path, it is an OT game...
Re: Bowl EligibleYou can say the rule is bad, but the call was correct. It would have been a gift to Tulsa had it not been called . Technically correct - but agree it is a weird rule. yardage should be applied to the kickoff, not take points off the board.
25 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 0 guests |
|