DMN: SMU-UNT in 2006?

[gostangs]

hoop - I understand what you are saying - and although the best way to handle OSU is to win - that strategy has not paid off since 1983 - on the contrary - everyone throws up their hands and gives up by Oct 1, we can't get even the 10 year olds to stay interested, the students disappear, and we build no fan base. Quality wins would be great - but cheap wins will build this program - nobody cares about who they were - they just want a winner - just ask TCU.

Abe - sorry miss fusspucker - I'll review my posts more carefully in the future. (you might want to remove your archeological howard dean tag line before you critique anyone elses posts).

[Peruna_Ate_My_Rolex]

I bet Mean Green Gem and his minions are creaming in their pants at the thought of this game.

[overcusser]

This game just makes too much economic sense not to play it. There is enough local interest that it should be able to put close to 30K BIS (butts in seats) at either Fouts and Ford.

But the most sense this matchup makes is in dollars. Whomever the 'road' team is will have almost zero travel cost for the road game. Since SMU is losing TCU, they need to replace that low cost road game every two years.

[GoRedGoBlue]

Remember? Bennett wants to drop TCU.

Also, Bennett was looking to get out of NWestern and Wake LAST year.

This year, he wanted to get out of OSU to spare us the gauntlet, but it couldn't be worked out.

[Charleston Pony]

I've been saying for years that I'd much rather play UNT than someone like Northwestern or Wake Forest. Of course, I hope we also continue playing TCU. The 3 metroplex teams should be playing each other each and every year for the "Metroplex Mayors' Trophy". My expectation is that the three programs will all be very competitive with one another soon and these games would easily draw 30k or better.

Here's the article for those who missed it:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... 2cf91.html

[abezontar]

it wasn't a critique so much as a desire to share with others something I found amusing

[MeanGreenGem]

I bet Mean Green Gem and his minions are creaming in their pants at the thought of this game.

Sorry about your watch...

No, there are some of us who do not want to tee it up with SMU based on comments and attitudes made from the Hilltop in the last 4-6 weeks on all this CUSA business.

FWIW, NORTH TEXAS has had a good run of football seasons without SMU nowhere near our schedule. Many of us just as many of you can live without such a football series, but it is neither of us who lose on this, really, but rather it is the Metroplex college football fan who eats up such a game (and will buy full price tickets) when they perceive there is no love lost between 2 schools who just happen to be playing each other on a particular Fall Saturday.

Some schools make all the aforementioned description work to their advantage--and some just choose not to, but I'd say very few.

SMU vs UNT? At this juncture, personally, I can take it or leave it, just like some of you have said the same.

[gostangs]

MGM - Your actions speak so loud I cannot hear what you are saying.

[PonySoprano]

What a gavone, this MGM is. What comments from the Hilltop? The fact that Turner supported a current conference mate that another CUSA school was vouching for and introduced to the other schools as "a friend of mine"? Never once did any comments come from the Administation publically saying that UNT should not get their CUSA button.

The nut is that this MGM and his UNT crew are a bunch of empty suits - all talk - but no follow through.

[MeanGreenGem]

What a gavone, this MGM is. What comments from the Hilltop? The fact that Turner supported a current conference mate that another CUSA school was vouching for and introduced to the other schools as "a friend of mine"? Never once did any comments come from the Administation publically saying that UNT should not get their CUSA button.

The nut is that this MGM and his UNT crew are a bunch of empty suits - all talk - but no follow through.

OK, once more and a moot point since UTEP apears to be the grand prize winner:

YET......SMU told our officials they would not block our attempts to lobby for a CUSA slot. All this (quite frankly) happened much sooner than UNT athletic officials ever expected as we wanted to have more of our new 200 acre Mean Green Village (including new football stadium) finished, but it was TCU who moved that time-table up by going to the MWC.

Anyway, CUSA consultant Chuck Neinas has 2 most favorable and impressionable visits to our campus and then suddenly, WALA, your prez' Gerald Turner is in the DMN not mentioning a school 45 mintues away from his campus for CUSA consideration but rather a non Texas school yall never knew existed 3 years ago before they entered the WAC (least of all never scheduled in football prior to that).

What Turner said between the lines in that DMN article spoke volumes and one would have to be extremely naive to not pick up on its intent. So we knew what had already apparently began to take place among CUSA private schools because (after all) we've seen this movie before.

If SMU had had what you suggests as any problem with UNT getting into CUSA, why didn't your school take the next step with a show of sponsorship for a fellow Texas school instead of one yall have no history with whatasoever prior to La Tech's WAC entrance 3 years ago? NOTE: Do you realize that SMU and UNT played their first football game as foes in about 1916 plus many, many times after that in most of the decades that followed? But some of you say you have a history with La Tech after 3 years in the WAC with the Bulldogs?:(

But come on now, we are all big boys and know what this is really all about; that is, all the reasons about this that never gets discussed as that would put your school in a not so positive light. Yet all this is still SMU's choice because the last time I checked this is still America.

We should just shake hands and part friends and as neigbors who just have very little to do with each other. Yet it's just we in Mean Green Country marvel at who SMU will befriend to avoid us and some who couldn't hold our jock straps now or certainly in our future.

Peace....

[EastStang]

There's a difference between having no problem and owing someone a favor. We owed Tulane for getting us in and backed them up. Apparently the rest of CUSA didn't think much of our opinion or Tulane's since they appear to be leaning towards UTEP. So, our support of UNT would have been equally irrelevent.

[William Hung @ Cal]

Mr. MeanGreen,

You are sort of like me. Everyone is making fun of us but we still keep fighting the fight. We are both going to make it big, I just know it. GO WILLIAM HUNG and GO NORTH TEXAS STATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MeanGreenGem]

There's a difference between having no problem and owing someone a favor. We owed Tulane for getting us in and backed them up. Apparently the rest of CUSA didn't think much of our opinion or Tulane's since they appear to be leaning towards UTEP. So, our support of UNT would have been equally irrelevent.

Firstly, to answer the above post from, uh, one William Hung @ Cal, I don't see anyone in the non BCS making any more fun of us than anyone else on these non BCS smack boards. In fact, most unbiased observers of NORTH TEXAS (including CUSA consultant Chuck Neinas) like the direction our athletic program is headed. I'll take that kind of KUDO from a Chuck Neinas any day of the year.

I know that many of the lower echelon schools in NCAA D1-A feel like they have to play "who's your daddy" to someone, but that seems a vast waste of time and energy to me.

EastStang, as I posted earlier (and as you have added) this is all a moot point now, but was merely suggesting how things may have been if the politickin' and lobbying had had a much different tone in the very beginning of when CUSA started its push for a 12'th member.

I smack, rattle and roll a lot but as a true college sports purist, I'd like to see college football in the Metroplex thrive at all 3 area campuses. Looks like all 3 of us are definitely on our own in how we each plan to meet our respective goals and objectives in doing that, but that is fine, too.

[jtstang]

Man you are just sad. I read the DMN article you mentioned, posted the relevant quotes of Turner in this forum a couple of weeks back, and again there was no conspiracy (go back and read his last quote again--there is nothing "between the lines" except what your paranoid delusions allow you alone to see). Why would NT even want to rely on SMU to go to bat for them, when as you have pointed out time and time again, NT has the vastly superior program? Maybe you lost face with CUSA relying on an inferior "buddy" to prop you up. How much pull do you think Turner, the president of the new conference whipping boy, really has? Maybe you should have been pumping yourselves up instead of whining that we didn't do it for you.

[MeanGreenGem]

Man you are just sad. I read the DMN article you mentioned, posted the relevant quotes of Turner in this forum a couple of weeks back, and again there was no conspiracy (go back and read his last quote again--there is nothing "between the lines" except what your paranoid delusions allow you alone to see). Why would NT even want to rely on SMU to go to bat for them, when as you have pointed out time and time again, NT has the vastly superior program? Maybe you lost face with CUSA relying on an inferior "buddy" to prop you up. How much pull do you think Turner, the president of the new conference whipping boy, really has? Maybe you should have been pumping yourselves up instead of whining that we didn't do it for you.

MERELY A RESPONSE BECAUSE WE'RE CLOSE TO BEATING A, uh, DEAD HORSE...

I know more to this story than I will ever indulge and so do some of your alums; but come on man, SMU was in the SWC for a long enough time that most of its alums would know that any prospective new member for the SWC needed to have a sponsor (or 2). Then those sponsors would start their lobbying and politickin' for the school they agreed to sponsor. Now your apparent lack of knowledge of the history of the now defunct SWC is what is sad here.

DMN and Turner? Usually when any member-in-waiting school president says much about anything in a league they are still 1 year away from being official is out of the norm; but in spite of that, your prez' did mention La Tech in that article--not UNT. WHY? Because your 2 or 3 Big Donors told Turner to just endorse anyone except UNT. Hell, I'm sure they've even been to Denton if they could get thru all the construction on and near campus.

Does anything written or said about all this the last few decades knowing the "on again--off again" football scheduling and the history of our 2 schools suggest I am wrong? Certainly nothing delusional about that and nothing delusional about the fact that schools who wanted in the old SWC had to start with an official sponsor that usually came out publicly for said school and then started their behind the scenes lobbying for that school.

Amazing how that "vastly superior" school from Denton you have so ably described did not even get a casual newspaper mention or endorsement from our good fellow Texas university neighbor , now isn't it?

Who "sponsored" SMU the first time yall didn't get in CUSA? How about the 2'nd time around yall did get into CUSA? Case closed...