For folks upset with the nonconference schedule...

[PlanoStang]

I just hope the 15000 butts in seats rule goes away, or is ignored. We're going to get bit by it scheduling these cupcakes followed shortly by us moving to their league.

[me@smu]

All that matters now is getting the wins. Only time it matters who you beat is for national championships which we won't be winning anytime soon anyways. Lets get an above .500 team playing whoever we can

[EastStang]

Actually they are doing away with the 15K BIS rule. It seemed that those big programs that scheduled cupcakes risked losing bowl eligibility by having the rule stay in effect.

[OldPony]

Ponyte- Arkansas under Broyles never scheduled tough enough competition to win a national championship? Better check your facts. Maybe ask jerry Jones about it or maybe just look at U of A's rankings throughout the 60's under Broyles.
Yes Ark scheduled people like hardin Simmons but the usually had one tough OOC game.
There is a difference in scheduling easy OOC games if you play in a tough conference like Ark or KSU did. Our conference games are the soft competition for those schools. I personally do'nt care if SMU beats Highland Park, Pearce and Lake Highlands to start the year and I wouldn't walk across the street to see it. Now Plano might be a different deal because they could beat ASU on most years

[gostangs]

Man OP, you really are old. Arkansas has not scheduled tough in 30 yrs, and plano (wildcats that is) has not been good in a VERY long time.

The only thing wrong with scheduling soft is that we have waited sooooo long to do it. Finally an idea that has some sense - people will show up for a winner and they will not remember nor care who they beat - try to get 2-3 wins in the OC, and you only need 4 in the conference to have a shot at a bowl - at the same time make sure you recruit without disadvantage to your conference - then more people, more money, better recruiting, then scheudule a little tougher later - it just is not that tough a model to understand.

[Stallion]

and some on this board are about to learn that very few SMU fans will ever show up for Texas State, Arkansas St et al even if we are 9-2. After 40 years of watching SMU football I can say quite confidently that victories over those schools will not help our overall attendance whatsoever. In fact, it will lead to some embarrassing 5,000 attendance figures. You know this is one argument that I bet cuts along age group. Any fan over 45 thinks its an embarrassment to play (and lose) to teams we would never consider scheduling in our past while those under 35 don't know any better. I have little doubt in my mind that SMU can achieve the success it is looking for by simply making the Commitment that is necessary without resorting to this kind of scheduling. There are simply enough cupcakes on our schedule ever year as it is. I have no problem playing a few extra cupcakes in 2006 since that will be an important year but otherwise these schools should not be on our schedule.

[Charleston Pony]

While we "older" Mustangs will always remember a different day and time in SMU football history, times have changed and in today's world, TCU and North Texas should be on our non-conference schedule every year (Metroplex Mayors Trophy challenge?), leaving one or two addt'l dates, depending on whether we get 11 0r 12 games in a given year. As for that 11th or 12th game, give me a date with an old SWC rival (TTech, Baylor or UT, A$M & Ark if they'll have us) or Navy/Army.

I like Hayden Fry's old scheduling theory...play one you SHOULD win, one very competitive game and one you'd like to upset. We need to get competitve again before we can get there.

[Dooby]

For the past 9 years, we were in a BS conference. There is no difference between the Arkansas States of the world and the San Jose States. And before someone argues that it was better attended because it was a conference game, I have never once thought, "Hey, it is a conference game so I have more reason to go."

Everyone knows the Ark State game is gonna be the first or second home date of the year. Again, official attendance for the second home game last year was over 17k. The reason attendance drops off as the season goes on is because the losses start to mount. If we start winning, people will (a) keep coming; or (b) start to show up.

I go to the games by myself because my wife (with multiple degrees from SMU) doesn't want to come after the first game. She doesn't know Arkansas State from Arkansas, she doesn't want to watch SMU lose. We have been losing for 20 years, I thought some of you would have figured out it wasn't fun by now.

[youngalumpony]

Wow Stallion, I agree with alot of what you say on here, but this is a subject that I couldn't dissagree with you more. I'm not gonna take an hour to type out an essay about this, maybe we should meet up sometime so I can bring you over to the right side of this issue lol

[ponyte]

One can debate the pros and cons of a weak schedule as opposed to a strong schedule. Unfortunately, I know too many folks whose kids excluded SMU as a potential school simply because the football program sucked. The kids want excitement in the fall and a winning team. We need wins to help attract students. One is hard pressed to think the new Organic Chem lab is going to be a strong student-recruiting tool.

As to Arkansas’ National Championship*, a little history is in order. The pool of Division I teams was much more restricted in the early 60s. And the NCAA was not inclined to allow Division I to play Division II teams. Once the NCAA allowed this, Broyles quickly shredded the tough teams to pick up the cream puffs.

*The 1964 national championship was historic not so much for who won but for when the title was awarded. In 1964, seven different entities named a mythical national champion. The two most notable polls to fans at the time- The Associated Press and the United Press International - did not wait until after the bowl games to award their champion. Because of that, the AP, UPI, and Litkenhous groups named Alabama the national champ. However, the Crimson Tide went on to lose, 21-17, to Texas in the Orange Bowl and finish 10-1 on the year. Arkansas remained the only undefeated team in the country at 11-0 with its victory over Nebraska. Two groups who waited until after the bowl games to name their champion - The Football Writers Association of America and the Helms Athletic Foundation - named Frank Broyles; Razorbacks as national champs. Both the AP and UPI changed their procedure the next year, choosing to wait until after the bowls to announce their final polls. NationalChamps.net recognizes this tribute to the great Arkansas team of 1964.

Arkansas was not the over whelming choice at the time for the national Championship. Ark has scheduled Texas the last 2 years and USC this year. We will see how strong the Razorbacks are now that they are shedding the Broyles model of the last 4 decades to return to the Broyles' model of the 1964 glory days.

[gostangs]

Stallion - you are wrong on this one - winning against the Ark states of the world will help our attendance late in the year - we have all forgotten what it is like to have the press actually start covering our team in Oct because there is a reason to write about it instead of pointing out it is 0 and 4 - again. Plus lets face it - we are acting like a W is for sure there and that is not the case.

Besides - we have tried the other way ad nauseum - we can't do any worse by scheduling this way.

[Dooby]

Oh, and another thing, Stallion, you don't think that going O'fer on the nonconference schedule has an impact on recruiting? Maybe if we had a couple of wins going into NOVEMBER or, God forbid, a winning record with a chance of going to a bowl, then we might be in on more guys than we have been.

I vaguely recall Chriss Hall making some comment to Rivals about SMU getting crushed by OSU as helping him realize he didn't want to come here.

The more I hear from you lately, Stallion, the more I think you are just a contrarian. It was your coherent, unwavering message that won you points on this board, the mere fact that you are whining doesn't make you look smart. I still agree that there are lots to be done on the admissions policy front, but it is starting to sound like you are [deleted] for the sake of [deleted].

[Stallion]

everytime I read one of you little turds, who probably have never seen SMU play in a bowl game, explain how SMU's schedule in the WAC is "TOO HA-RD" and how we've got to play Arkansas St or Texas St just to have a winning season I realize my job of explaining EXACTLY the reasons that SMU SUCKS is not complete. I don't know why you are so emotional about this issue but this is simply another smokescreen [deleted] explanation trying to explain SMU's ineptitude. If we can't turn things around against schools like NTSU, Rice, UTEP, Baylor, Tulsa, TCU, Tulane and UH then I'm not really interested in victories over Sul Ross and Hardin Simmons.

[Dooby]

I'm sorry, the last time SMU went bowling, I was 11. Of course, that year SMU played UNT, but I bet they were really, really good for a I-AA team that year. Same thing with Grambling the year before.

I did not get the memo that said unless I used to watch SMU games in Texas Stadium, I am not allowed to have an opinion or that my opinion is worth less than someone who can recall the stunning win over OU in the Bluebonnet bowl in 1968.

Even though the freaking DMN quotes head coaches that say the same thing, I guess I am not allowed to agree with them, because a bunch of season ticketholders from the 1964 1-9 season disagree.

I cowtow to you.

On second thought, here's an idea: let's win a few games over poor competition and do better than .500 in conference play and go to a bowl game. If you are so upset about it, you can stay at home. And then you can say that SMU doesn't travel well on top of everything else.

Losing makes you a loser. Winning makes you something else. I don't understand why what we are doing now is good enough for Tulsa, UNT, UTEP, TCU, Tulane and Houston, but it isn't good enough for us. But from what I can tell, all those teams went to bowl games in the last few years, and we haven't.

Edit: Please tell me what it takes to get some street cred on this board. I guess I have to borrow Uncle Rico's time machine and go back to 1982. Or maybe I will go all the way back and watch Doak play/ If I don't, I guess I am going have to spend the rest of my days sucking up to people who are longing for the glory days of the SWC.

[OldPony]

I think Stallion is right in that this is an age deal. I don't care if we beat ASU. Yes- we played some cupcakes in the past. It didn't matter as much because we thought of TCU and Rice as breathers on a schedule with Ark, UT, A&M, Houston, TT and, yes, even Baylor who was pretty good then. Now we play those cupcakes as part of our conference or regular schedule and you guys think that is too tough. Please don't make me play those tough old Owls and Frogs. They are among the elite of football.That speaks volumes about who attends SMU today and their expectations for sports. We are going to "excuse" ourselves to D-2.