So I guess SMU should have stayed in the WAC

by **jason54858** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 4:50 pm

http://www.idahostatesman.com/sports/story/827341.html

They would be in a BCS Conference. :cry:

by **NickSMU17** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:33 pm

You should read the article...neither is going to be in the BCS now for at least until 2013, and my guess is never

by **D1Football** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:35 pm

Big fan of the WAC. Sorry SMU left for CUSA. I enjoyed the trips to San Francisco, Lake Tahoe and Hawaii. Now I get to go to Mississippi.

by **PonyKai** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:20 am

I'm sure the school's checkbook misses those enormous paydays to Idaho, Hawai'i, California, and the huge tickets the home games brought.

by **jason54858** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:46 am

NickSMU17 wrote:You should read the article...neither is going to be in the BCS now for at least until 2013, and my guess is never

Never? They'll get in. With all the media attention and congress pressure the BCS will try everything they can to shut up their critics

by **EastStang** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:29 am

Let's see New Orleans, Orlando, Houston, Memphis vs. Hawaii, Northern CA. with more schools in driving (road trip distance). All conferences have their crappy locales. We have USM (also within driving distance), Birmingham, Greenville, NC (which is of course near Pinehurst and great golf), and Huntington WV (almost heaven- just kidding). That pretty much matches, Boise, Reno, Ruston, and Fresno, but they are east of us and geographically closer. Adding UH helps attendance and local coverage.

East coast television slots vs. games starting 10 p.m. central, 11 p.m. eastern time.

by **RednBlue11** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 9:27 am

im pretty sure the wac just signed on that they "wouldnt" be a bcs school because of the pressure to get tv revenue....if they hadnt signed they would be losing lots of money.

So I guess SMU should have stayed in the WAC

So I guess SMU should have stayed in the WAC

Who is online