Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

Post Reply
User avatar
mrydel
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 32038
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2003 4:01 am
Location: Sherwood,AR,USA

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by mrydel »

Did you catch the post on their board saying that Dickerson is their guest speaker at their spring banquet?
All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand
User avatar
couch 'em
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 9758
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 3:01 am
Location: Farmers Branch

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by couch 'em »

Gotta give some respect to a town named Booze-Man
"I think Couchem is right."
-EVERYONE
tristatecoog
PonyFans.com Legend
PonyFans.com Legend
Posts: 3007
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2000 3:01 am
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by tristatecoog »

Solid financial hit by SMU to make this move. Must be trying to get one more win to be bowl eligible. Risky move if you don't get six wins. BU would take this so they can schedule a one and done or two for one in Waco. They get a greater chance of win too and more revenue. Aggy isn't giving up a high chance at a win and a HOME game -- big payday.

Hope Ponies get six wins. Montana State is a much worse draw than BU for that game and potentially for season tickets or game plans.
User avatar
mrydel
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 32038
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2003 4:01 am
Location: Sherwood,AR,USA

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by mrydel »

That is also the name of one of Arkansas' US Senators. A good conservative against whom I played high school football.
All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand
User avatar
horsemanx
All-American
All-American
Posts: 561
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:40 am

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by horsemanx »

tristatecoog wrote:Solid financial hit by SMU to make this move. Must be trying to get one more win to be bowl eligible. Risky move if you don't get six wins. BU would take this so they can schedule a one and done or two for one in Waco. They get a greater chance of win too and more revenue. Aggy isn't giving up a high chance at a win and a HOME game -- big payday.

Hope Ponies get six wins. Montana State is a much worse draw than BU for that game and potentially for season tickets or game plans.

Yeah. If this gets us from five to six wins it's worth it.

If it gets us from three to four wins it's a disaster.
An object at rest cannot be stopped!
User avatar
Treadway21
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 6586
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:14 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by Treadway21 »

We just lost 10-15k in attendance with this move.
An atheist is a guy who watches a Notre Dame-SMU football game and
doesn't care who wins.
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Stallion
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 44302
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 4:01 am
Location: Dallas,Texas,USA

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by Stallion »

12-17k with high side probability.

15,000
$65 tickets, parking and concessions per ticket(guesstimate-could be higher for premium game)
--------------------
$975,000 plus any buyout of NDSU ($100,000)
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris

When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
User avatar
East Coast Mustang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 7434
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 8:35 am

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by East Coast Mustang »

I was pissed at first but now I get why we did it. You need one or two (at least) easy Ws on your schedule, unless you're in the Sun Belt. Going 0-4 to start the season would not have been good and put us in a real bind going into BE play.
2005 PonyFans.com Rookie of the Year Award Recipient
User avatar
East Coast Mustang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 7434
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 8:35 am

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by East Coast Mustang »

That's assuming, of course, that MSU is an "easy W"
2005 PonyFans.com Rookie of the Year Award Recipient
User avatar
Mustangs35SMU
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 13007
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 3:01 am
Location: Garland, TX
Contact:

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by Mustangs35SMU »

East Coast Mustang wrote:That's assuming, of course, that MSU is an "easy W"

We're coming off a season that involved a loss to Tulane.......there is no easy W (unless the game is in Hawaii of course).
Image
User avatar
CenTXpony
Heisman
Heisman
Posts: 1961
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 11:19 am
Location: Temple, TX

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by CenTXpony »

"I was [deleted] at first but now I get why we did it. You need one or two (at least) easy Ws on your schedule, unless you're in the Sun Belt. Going 0-4 to start the season would not have been good and put us in a real bind going into BE play." ECM

I agree with the idea of dropping one of the 4 non conference games for a "sure win," however I really wish that it would have been A&M that we were dropping and adding a Texas based I-AA team, or someone like UNT as well. (I know it was out of our hands concerning the A&M game).

However, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to schedule 2 major conference bottom dwellers (someone like Kansas, Colorado, Boston College, Illinois, etc.) TCU (a quality opponent), and a lower level Texas school (Texas State, UNT, UTSA, SHSU). Assuming we pulled out W's in 3 of those 4 (wishful thinking), I think would catch the attention of recruits, and attract a few more fans because it's an opponent from a major conference. Not saying that would be the ultimate solution, however I think it could be a step for long run improvement. I think it would be a tough but manageable schedule, not too weak but not too strong. I think we all can agree that scheduling the Aggies, Bears, Techies, and such bring much higher attendance to Ford, but I don't think getting humiliated by them necessarily helps in the long run. If we were to actually beat teams like A&M, Baylor, or Tech then sure it would pay immediate dividends, but I truly believe getting slaughtered by them unveils where we're really at and deters recruit's interest. I think if we can beat a few teams from AQ conferences year in and year out (even though they're teams that don't make bowl games) then we'd see noticeable improvement each year, though it wouldn't be the immediate improvement that many of us want, I still believe that route would get us to where we want to be quicker as opposed to gettin walloped by the big dogs early in the season, and finishing 7-5, 6-6, or any record that's around the .500 mark. Once we can do that, then schedule stronger opponents and try to duke it out with them. Many of you may think it's cowardly, but how many times do we need to get our faces smashed before we have brain damage?
Last edited by CenTXpony on Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:56 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Mustangsabu
PonyFans.com Legend
PonyFans.com Legend
Posts: 4438
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:34 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by Mustangsabu »

SMU_Alumni11 wrote:Wow this is BS why of all the teams did we cut Baylor... Hell if we cut the aggies we would have a better chance at a better record and we could of had more home games since those are the only games we can win... I bet no one but a measly 5k fans at the most shows up to this game...


We cut Baylor because we couldn't cut A&M. We have the best shot at Texas Tech, and TCU is our rivalry game. All this moaning and feigning outrage. It makes sense. If we couldn't drop the Aggies this was the only way to go.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
Mustangs Abu!
West Coast Johnny
All-American
All-American
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:30 pm

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by West Coast Johnny »

How much is this costing SMU? Every season ticket holder got a $15 credit ($150,000). You have to pay Montana State for a one & done ($450,000). How many fans would Baylor bring to Ford? 15,000 fans at $50 per butt-in-seat = $750,000 - total cost of this financial boondogle of $1.35 million? What about next year when season ticket holders who got treated to the bait & switch are asked to "pony" up again....
User avatar
PK
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 8805
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 3:01 am
Location: Dallas, Texas 75206

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by PK »

West Coast Johnny wrote:How much is this costing SMU? Every season ticket holder got a $15 credit ($150,000). You have to pay Montana State for a one & done ($450,000). How many fans would Baylor bring to Ford? 15,000 fans at $50 per butt-in-seat = $750,000 - total cost of this financial boondogle of $1.35 million? What about next year when season ticket holders who got treated to the bait & switch are asked to "pony" up again....

Ahhhh...but the coach is happy. :roll:
SMU's first president, Robert S. Hyer, selected Harvard Crimson and Yale Blue as SMU's colors to symbolize SMU's high academic standards. We are one of the few Universities to have school colors with real meaning...and we just blow them off.
User avatar
East Coast Mustang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
PonyFans.com Super Legend
Posts: 7434
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 8:35 am

Re: Montana State announcing SMU added to 2013 schedule

Post by East Coast Mustang »

not to mention how much more we could stand to lose if MSU is our sixth win and makes us bowl eligible...how much did we lose on Hawaii Bowl last year, any figures?
2005 PonyFans.com Rookie of the Year Award Recipient
Post Reply