Fire Copeland

by **Johnny Rock** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 9:37 am

The article in the DMN about Copeland overscheduling SMU says it all. Many of us have been saying it for the last few seasons. Copeland gives this team no hope of improvement. He should be fired. If he had any class at all, he would resign and go elsewhere. He is an absolute failure. It is a shame that we finally get OSU off our schedule but only to schedule another Big 12 team (A&M) in its place. What a moron! And this season...our first three games (two on the road) all against bowl teams. Unfuc*ing believable!!!!

by **Water Pony** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:18 am

Name calling makes you look worse by comparison. Classless

:evil:

by **Pony4Life** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:23 am

Agreed.

by **Johnny Rock** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:30 am

As usual, the SMU sympathizers (who are part of the problem) have no response to my post other than I am a name caller. Well, you know what, you bet your butt I am a name caller. You better be too. We have the longest losing streak in school history. We did not win a single game last season and we very well may not win one this season. We had a so-called "Commitment" implemented that has not done squat for our revenue sports despite several promises by Copeland. I guess I should sit tight and make excuses like you pathetic people.

by **PonyTales** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:34 am

No, but you should consider the factors that have resulted in the current state of the team. And keep calling people "pathetic" - it makes you sound like a real expert.

by **KnuckleStang** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:54 am

The article lists Kansas, Missouri, Navy, and TT among our future scheduled OOC opponents. All 4 of these schools are news to me.

Personally I don't have a problem with the proposed yearly formula of one Big 12 school, one low-level 1-A/high-level 1-AA school, and TCU every year. That sounds about right, a nice mix, assuming we actually improve.

by **Johnny Rock** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 12:08 pm

I would not call myself an expert but I know more than the folks running the athletic department. TCU should be our toughest non-conference opponent every year, at least until we have a few seasons with a chance of winning a game in September.

by **rich_alum** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 1:15 pm

I don't see any benefit in playing lower tier schools? Where is the benefit? Attendance? no. Help us for conf? no.

If we start improving in conf. you would be begging to play better teams. I am all for BCS schools out of conference......however we need to try and keep them all 1 and 1.

I can understand many complaints against Copeland, but this is not one of them.

by **Cheesesteak** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 1:21 pm

Johnny -

Let's review reality.

SMU is running an athletic department revenue deficit and needs to sell football tickets and men's basketball tickets.

Participation in D-1A (coaches, facilities, recruiting, travel, etc.) requires money.

None of the 2004 WAC teams visiting Ford Stadium will attract significant crowds (the NCAA has minimum average attendance standards - and SMU doesn't want to just clear the hurdle): SJSU is a CA school with virtually no appeal in Dallas; LA Tech has minor appeal in Dallas (a few thousand LA Tech fans might travel to SMU); Tulsa (small, private school) might send a few thousand fans to SMU; Nevada has virtually no appeal in Dallas.

SMU is moving to CUSA in 2005 - resulting in a better conference line-up (Houston, Tulane, Rice, Tulsa and UTEP are in SMU's division).

Without Texas Tech in Ford Stadium, SMU would likely not have a respectable crowd on the Hilltop all (2004) season. TCU visits SMU in alternating years and you want them on the schedule (as do most SMU fans). OSU could not be moved and attracted a needed crowd to Ford Stadium last season.

With (currently) only one or two non-conference games played in Ford Stadium per year, SMU needs the home game(s) to be a money-maker and an attendance builder.

I believe that SMU has to continue its recruiting and player development improvements - stay positive and mentally tough - and play appealing/respectable teams.

I love the fact that SMU has Baylor and Texas A&M on upcoming schedules. They are teams that HS players in Texas and fans in Dallas care about. They are part of SMU history and tradition.

Their trips to Dallas will sell tickets and a victory over them would be meaningful to the SMU community.

SMU should play TCU (every year), a Big 12 team (every year) and another D-1A team (for example, Navy, Army, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Stanford, etc.)( every year).

SMU is not attempting to schedule non-conference games against the very top-level of college football (Georgia, Miami, Ohio State, Florida, Florida State, etc.).

SMU football will be a winner again.

by **Governor Lepetomane** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 1:29 pm

rich_alum wrote:I don't see any benefit in playing lower tier schools? Where is the benefit? Attendance? no. Help us for conf? no.

If we start improving in conf. you would be begging to play better teams. I am all for BCS schools out of conference......however we need to try and keep them all 1 and 1.

I can understand many complaints against Copeland, but this is not one of them.

From a football standpoint, are there any other 1-A teams that are on tier lower than SMU? We can't schedule a patsy b/c we are one.

by **Stallion** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 1:32 pm

wah wah wah! our schedule ain't that tough-we just have an uncompetitive program right now. You know there once was a day we could compete with the likes of TCU, Baylor, Tech, OSU, Kansas, Missouri. Plus that's set off by generally playing about 3 teams in the Bottom 10. I say keep playing them and even the playing field. do you really get off on beating Florida A&M. I personally have no problem playing NTSU though.

by **rich_alum** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 1:43 pm

I don't understand why we don't play North Texas? This game would mutually benefit both schools? Its not like they are "beneath us".....well they as far as most standards...but certainly not in football.

They would probably be 10 point favorites...at least.

It could probably turn into a good rivalry.

by PK » Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:25 pm

I've heard several times now that we are working with UNT to schedule some games soon.

by **Higher Authority** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:35 pm

And it's a game fans from both teams could attend. Don't know if we could sell out Ford with some help from the green people, but it would sure help. Put them and A&M/TT on the schedule and we'll make the 15K average, even before we start winning.

by **GoRedGoBlue** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:17 pm

Johnny Rock wrote:The article in the DMN about Copeland overscheduling SMU says it all. Many of us have been saying it for the last few seasons. Copeland gives this team no hope of improvement. He should be fired. If he had any class at all, he would resign and go elsewhere. He is an absolute failure. It is a shame that we finally get OSU off our schedule but only to schedule another Big 12 team (A&M) in its place. What a moron! And this season...our first three games (two on the road) all against bowl teams. Unfuc*ing believable!!!!

We needed the attendance. Deal with it.

Fire Copeland

Fire Copeland

Re:

Re: Fire Copeland

Who is online