GOAL: Working towards SMU becoming a P5 program by 2020

[78pony]

You have 2 years max for a miracle. None of the P5s believe SMU has either the money or commitment to take about 4 quantum steps up from where we are.

[SMUfrat]

SMU has 2 good options and 2 less good options.

the good:

Big12 sticks together, adds schools. PAC, looking to expand, picks up UHouston, SMU, Nevada, and UNM.

Big12 falls apart (to some level) and the leftover join up with SMU and play in a slightly more regional conference. SMU, TCU, Baylor, Houston, Iowa St. Kansas St. Cincinnati, Memphis type conference...

OR

SMU sticks it out for a long haul in an even more deluted AAC

SMU moves to the MWC...

I think SMU is one of the more attractive pick-ups left. I believe we get a call up. But not because we "earned it" but because we have potential, are a good school, and have a good market.

[Cougar King]

Main problem with SMU to the PAC, is that they don't want religious institutions. No matter how minimal it is now, SMU still has ties to the Methodist church.

[MV pony]

I think SMU is too Republican for the liberal PAC-12 schools. Can't see the PAC-12 ever inviting SMU to the table.

[East Coast Mustang]

Texas and OU will eventually go to the Pac-12 and have to bring Tech and OSU with them. This almost happened a few years ago and the $$$ will be too much for those schools to pass up. A conference spanning the West Coast adding the Texas TV markets would print money.

Baylor, TCU, etc. will be left holding the scraps and will invite us, UH, Memphis, maybe BYU and Cincy to join. That's what I think will happen.

When is that Big 12 grant of rights deal up? 2018?

[East Coast Mustang]

SMU will never go to the Pac-12. We don't deliver the TX market for them and they're too stuck up to add a conservative, private religious school (see BYU)

[Phxfan]

I don't think the PAC is crazy. SMU, is more liberal than part/most of the PAC. You guys have to look to the UMC, in a way. The PAC is more liberal than most conferences, it is the way it is. Like it or not.The UMC is one of the more liberal churches in the US, I honestly don't think the PAC would have a major problem with SMU//// Baylor, BYU, yes. The US population is key (could go into it, but way to long). SMU has had more liberal policies than most PAC schools. I saw the UT board about whores and faggots. Does the PAC want to hitch their wagon to this? Does USC, UCLA want this? Does Stanford, a conservative school, even want to deal with this? So, in my thinking, does SMU & Houston get in, hope UH, tries not to get crazy, watch your boards, UH. My thoughts are yes. I am truly amazed, totally amazed, that Pony Fans even lets me write. To who ever runs this thing, you have done well. The PAC has Utah, ASU, UA, Colo, Wash. St. way more right wing than SMU. The fan base will change if they play USC, UCLA, Stanford, Ore. You will fill the stands. The PAC knows this. So given the base. Let me explain. SMU has 11,000 students. ASU has 60,000. The attendance is about 60,000 at ASU. The attendance at SMU is about 20,000.So the percent is in your favor, it really is. I do admire you guy's that keep this thing going. You have done what most universities could never dream of. If we have had issues in the past, lets let them go. You have stuck with your school, through everything. There are a lot of Methodists, in the US that want you to win. They just can not make it to the stadium. But advertise in places you would think not to, or they would never have thought you would do it. By the way, GG ran this team last time, not JJ.

[GiddyUp]

That commitment was lied to us years ago. Should have had a plan in place in 2000 when Ford opened, I wonder where we would be now -- I just don't see it - like 78 said, you would need a miracle. Our fans have to be the worst in most of D1, why should we be included? seriously - Stallion is right - we are an entitlement university.

And don't tell me TV markets - The TV industry will go direct and cut out the cable and satellite providers within 5-10 yrs.

[East Coast Mustang]

I don't think the PAC is crazy. SMU, is more liberal than part/most of the PAC. You guys have to look to the UMC, in a way. The PAC is more liberal than most conferences, it is the way it is. Like it or not.The UMC is one of the more liberal churches in the US, I honestly don't think the PAC would have a major problem with SMU//// Baylor, BYU, yes. The US population is key (could go into it, but way to long). SMU has had more liberal policies than most PAC schools. I saw the UT board about whores and faggots. Does the PAC want to hitch their wagon to this? Does USC, UCLA want this? Does Stanford, a conservative school, even want to deal with this? So, in my thinking, does SMU & Houston get in, hope UH, tries not to get crazy, watch your boards, UH. My thoughts are yes. I am truly amazed, totally amazed, that Pony Fans even lets me write. To who ever runs this thing, you have done well. The PAC has Utah, ASU, UA, Colo, Wash. St. way more right wing than SMU. The fan base will change if they play USC, UCLA, Stanford, Ore. You will fill the stands. The PAC knows this. So given the base. Let me explain. SMU has 11,000 students. ASU has 60,000. The attendance is about 60,000 at ASU. The attendance at SMU is about 20,000.So the percent is in your favor, it really is. I do admire you guy's that keep this thing going. You have done what most universities could never dream of. If we have had issues in the past, lets let them go. You have stuck with your school, through everything. There are a lot of Methodists, in the US that want you to win. They just can not make it to the stadium. But advertise in places you would think not to, or they would never have thought you would do it. By the way, GG ran this team last time, not JJ.

What do we add to the conference, though? Think about it from their perspective.

Also, Texas is a very liberal school and academically very good. The Pac-12 schools would welcome them with open arms, although the stench from Tech, OU, and OSU would be tough for them to bear. They'd do it for the money, though.

Remember, the Pac doesnt have many other good realignment targets. UNM, Nevada, Hawaii, Boise are non-starters. No schools will be added from current states in the Pac footprint. Texas and their three tag-a-longs make the most sense by a mile.

[East Coast Mustang]

And don't tell me TV markets - The TV industry will go direct and cut out the cable and satellite providers within 5-10 yrs.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. DirecTV, Dish, Comcast, TWC, etc have some pretty powerful lobbyists

[feelthehorsepower]

SMU has 2 good options and 2 less good options.

the good:

Big12 sticks together, adds schools. PAC, looking to expand, picks up UHouston, SMU, Nevada, and UNM.

Big12 falls apart (to some level) and the leftover join up with SMU and play in a slightly more regional conference. SMU, TCU, Baylor, Houston, Iowa St. Kansas St. Cincinnati, Memphis type conference...

OR

SMU sticks it out for a long haul in an even more deluted AAC

SMU moves to the MWC...

I think SMU is one of the more attractive pick-ups left. I believe we get a call up. But not because we "earned it" but because we have potential, are a good school, and have a good market.

SMU needs to get away from playing former SWC teams. We have to go to a conference like MWC and create our own reputation. The wins bring in the fans. Then when SMU has a 10-2 or better record consistently will we even be considered by a major conference. Out of all of them, we have a better chance at getting in the ACC and starting a reputation in the east coast.

Start with smarter OOC scheduling! We need to schedule games with teams from big conferences we can win. For example:
OOC schedule
1) winnable P5 team (Kansas, Cal, NC State, etc) in a neutral location. (NC state in the Carolina Panthers Stadium, Cal, ASU or Kansas in the Cowboys stadium)
2) FCS easy win game
3) TCU
4) non AQ FBS team (UNT, Texas State etc)

This will allow us to go 4-0 or 3-1 (losing to TCU)
But definitel stop scheduling Tech, TAMU or Baylor!

[Phxfan]

And don't tell me TV markets - The TV industry will go direct and cut out the cable and satellite providers within 5-10 yrs.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. DirecTV, Dish, Comcast, TWC, etc have some pretty powerful lobbyists

OK what does SMU add.
#1. A church following school that most could not happen in the PAC.
#2. Dallas. Same with Houston. Don't FU Houston.
#3 History, There is no school, none, that has this history NONE. MY GOD, they have played in the Rose Bowl more than UA. More National Campionships , more Hiesmans. At least 1.
# 4 SMU will pay their way.
OK, that is 4

[SoCal_Pony]

I think SMU is too Republican for the liberal PAC-12 schools. Can't see the PAC-12 ever inviting SMU to the table.

You think SMU is any more Republican than The University of Utah?, or materially more conservative than TTech, OU or Okie St?

[SoCal_Pony]

All you so called experts on conference realignment, just curious if you correctly called Rutgers to B10 a year ago???????, yeah, didn't think so.

Rutgers averaged 20k fans a little over a decade ago, began increasing attendance in part due to massive give-away ticket program. Won their 1st bowl game ever in 2005. Average ticket sales from 2004-2006 was less than $1.8M. Got passed over TWICE by ACC in conference realignment. Now sitting pretty in B10 in large part due to their TV market, even though some of our NY posters say they deliver the NY market as well as we do the Dallas market.

IMO, there are only a few untapped markets left. Catholic market, Mormon market, SD, Dallas, Houston, Philly being the most obvious to me.

ND can write their own ticket.
SD is too far on an island, their chances are about as good as us going B12.
BYU is ideal candidate for B12, that's about it, too conservative (and comparisons to SMU in regards to this is complete BS IMO).
Temple is so bad at FB.
Houston & SMU - If Rutgers can, it is not beyond the realm of thinking. To me it is critical that we don't allow Coog High to surpass us, as their enrollment is a big plus over SMU.

Long and Short, until we know know the final outcome, it would be crazy not to try. There is simply far too much at stake.

[Cougar King]

Houston & SMU - If Rutgers can, it is not beyond the realm of thinking. To me it is critical that we don't allow Coog High to surpass us, as their enrollment is a big plus over SMU.

Long and Short, until we know know the final outcome, it would be crazy not to try. There is simply far too much at stake.

If you wanna get technical with it, "coog high" surpassed smoo a while ago. As of right now, bigger fanbase, stronger football performance as of recently and yet another possible top 25 ranking on the way soon, bringing more attention. New and larger stadium on it's way, academics are now ranked on every major list and are continuing to rise, more supportive city and so on.