View From Denton

MeanGreenMachine · Post by **MeanGreenMachine** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:02 pm

First, you guys are in meltdown over nothing. The same paths to the access bowls remain viable to SMU even after the jesuit order took their toys and went home. From a football perspective (and realignment has taught us that is what matters) you are just fine. If anything, you now have opportunities to create a new conference that will be better in football than before. I wouldn't be looking to leap from the Hunt Bridge or anything like some of you intend to.

Second, this is an even better opportunity to end your incessant wanderings from Boise to Providence and refocus on what you know works for you: strong regional ties with natural rivals based upon geographic proximity. It only makes sense that you want to be rivals with folks you see at the water cooler, not folks you might be in a conference call with in Hartford. Cease your wandering eye and refocus on your existing rivalries with Tulsa, UTEP and Houston. You have benefited from them in the past and they will serve you well in the future.

SMU has real chance to lead here and form a 21st century Western Conference. Here is the way I see it:

EAST:
SMU
Houston
Tulsa
North Texas
UTEP
Tulane (or maybe La Tech)
WEST
Air Force
UNLV
BYU
San Diego State
Boise State
Colorado State

The MWC schools would be thrilled to leave the crappy MW TV deal in their rearview. The new conference would probably get a decent TV deal itself because it delivers markets. Dallas, Houston, Denver, Albuquerque, Vegas, Boise, Oklahoma City, New orleans, San Diego, and a national BYU following. The excellent regional matchups gives ESPN or Fox solid inventory of games. The schools keep their travel expenses at a minimum. Moreover, it would be well positioned to pick up a Baylor or Tech if the Big 12 implodes. Last, it has a great mix of large state schools with big alumni bases (like North Texas, Houston, UNLV) and prestigious academic schools (like SMU and Tulsa). Best, natural geographic rivals can foster and grow (such ours only 30 minutes away)

So CHIN UP!!! The future could be great, if you just can see what is right in front of you.

BigT3x · Post by **BigT3x** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:08 pm

SMU2007 · Post by **SMU2007** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:10 pm

Tulsa is a prestigious academic school now?

PK · Post by PK » Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:24 pm

SMU2007 wrote:Tulsa is a prestigious academic school now?

Consider the source.

MustangStealth · Post by **MustangStealth** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:45 pm

SMU2007 wrote:Tulsa is a prestigious academic school now?

It's only slightly below SMU on the US News list. It's pretty good.

smumustang1980 · Post by **smumustang1980** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:51 pm

While I have no real desire to denigrate the football program at North Texas, I can assure you Mean Green that UNT and SMU will never be in the same conference. North Texas lost its way when Hayden Fry left.

Go Mustangs.

PonySnob · Post by **PonySnob** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:41 pm

MeanGreenMachine wrote:First, you guys are in meltdown over nothing. The same paths to the access bowls remain viable to SMU even after the jesuit order took their toys and went home. From a football perspective (and realignment has taught us that is what matters) you are just fine. If anything, you now have opportunities to create a new conference that will be better in football than before. I wouldn't be looking to leap from the Hunt Bridge or anything like some of you intend to.

Second, this is an even better opportunity to end your incessant wanderings from Boise to Providence and refocus on what you know works for you: strong regional ties with natural rivals based upon geographic proximity. It only makes sense that you want to be rivals with folks you see at the water cooler, not folks you might be in a conference call with in Hartford. Cease your wandering eye and refocus on your existing rivalries with Tulsa, UTEP and Houston. You have benefited from them in the past and they will serve you well in the future.

SMU has real chance to lead here and form a 21st century Western Conference. Here is the way I see it:

EAST:
SMU
Houston
Tulsa
North Texas
UTEP
Tulane (or maybe La Tech)
WEST
Air Force
UNLV
BYU
San Diego State
Boise State
Colorado State

Hard to see any real "rivalries" with any of those schools.........

SMU_Alumni11 · Post by **SMU_Alumni11** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:32 pm

Not to pounce on someone who was giving SMU compliments but I don't see any benefit in making rivalries with UTEP Tulsa NT etc... Plus Espn or fox won't give us anything I can assure you. Big East had a shot because of name and locations like Madison square garden. If big east is over than we are screwed til the big conferences decide to kill each other like PAC trying to rip away texas. Our best tv deal would be 2 mil a team because we would be labelled as mid to low major FBS teams. We are standing in the lines hoping to get the golden ticket. Unfortunately TCU got the ticket and I'm pretty sure that only a miracle a big conference will want us just so they can have "Dallas". Only way to dig out is keep trying to play tough teams and win, when we win to spread the news and hopefully generate excitement.

Cougar King · Post by **Cougar King** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:18 pm

As much as I hate to admit it, these ponies have a point. If we barely want anything to do with Tulane, who has AAU academics and lots of money along with New Orleans. What makes you think we want to hang out with UNT, UTEP, La Tech or Tulsa?

leopold · Post by **leopold** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:22 pm

SMU2007 wrote:Tulsa is a prestigious academic school now?

Yes. It's a solid, small private school about the size of rice.

Do not for a second compare Tulsa - who, if you haven't been paying attention to has won the conference title in football AGAIN - to those schools. Their only problem is their size.

Insane_Pony_Posse · Post by **Insane_Pony_Posse** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:27 pm

MeanGreenMachine wrote:It only makes sense that you want to be rivals with folks you see at the water cooler

You are so right...
it makes so much sense to have rivals you can drive to
rivals like Baylor, TCU, Houston, that have alums you cross paths with
but college football has changed
I wish we could just go back to the SWC,
but that probably isn't happening. I do like the idea of
close geographic rivalaries and whether we end up in
a conference with UNT or not....I still think we should
play you guys often. We'll see how it shakes out....

tristatecoog · Post by **tristatecoog** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 12:38 pm

Tulsa is basically like TCU in terms of academics, just smaller.

Insane_Pony_Posse · Post by **Insane_Pony_Posse** » Sun Dec 16, 2012 2:53 pm

tristatecoog wrote:Tulsa is basically like TCU in terms of academics, just smaller.

I didn't realize Tulsa has the smallest undergraduate enrollment of
any FBS school with a total undergraduate enrollment of 3,004.

GiddyUp · Post by **GiddyUp** » Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:36 pm

Funny how he lumps UNT in his new conference.

Cougar King · Post by **Cougar King** » Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:03 pm

GiddyUp wrote:Funny how he lumps UNT in his new conference.

Lol I noticed that but I wasn't going to say anything. They're rooting for UH and SMU to fail and beg to come back to C-USA. they're mad that neither of us will allow them into the nBE/wherever we end up. So they're throwing around the terms "warped" "disillusioned" and "chasing a train that left them in 1996". I'm surprised that there aren't more NTSU guys who post on here.

View From Denton

View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton

Re: View From Denton