mrydel wrote:No. He compared G5s that made it to P5. It makes a lot of sense.
Both TCU and Utah did something that SMU hasn't. They won games that mattered. They won conference championships. They won matchups against Top 25 competition. They won meaningful bowl games. They had Heisman candidates.
We've got a few Hawaii Bowls and a loss to Army. Apples and oranges.
I agree. That is why we should be playing real teams and not unknown small time programs. Our attendance will not ever improve until we are in a meaningful conference (P5). That is what we need to work on even if it includes bribery.
0 and roughly 60 against teams that matter. We've been trying that and it hasn't worked out so well. Next year we have a home schedule that includes TCU, Houston, Memphis, and Navy. That's pretty darn good for SMU. A nice finish here to get to 7-5 and hopefully a bowl win and maybe we can ride some positive momentum into next season and see a tick up in attendance.
Stallion wrote:Once you stop comparing our program to leftovers and start considering what SMU would need to achieve to reach the next level-then you might be on the right track
I know this is not the reason for our attendance problems, but regarding ΓÇÿforward looking’ thinking, our school failed miserably on the design of Ford. Thought it the first moment I went there. Maybe there were construction/design limitations related to University Park that I’m not aware of, but Ford reeks of small-time FB.
Remember going to one of the first Laker games at Staples and thinking, wow, they get it. We didn’t.
Happy Thanksgiving everyone.
I believe Highland Park imposed both height (no part of stadium could be higher than HPUMC steeple) and parking restrictions that limited what could be done size wise, but hard to argue we needed more seating because we haven't come close to filling Ford without our visitors help. I think the height issue is why Ford was built partially below ground level
