Article on SEC Network/future of realignment

[Stallion]

Ha! be careful about those Dexter Manley shots now because he was at one time headed to SMU.

[mrydel]

Ha! be careful about those Dexter Manley shots now because he was at one time headed to SMU.

But he could not spell SMU to look up directions.

[East Coast Mustang]

To quote Jim Delany the Big Ten Commissioner: " It's not about butts in the seats anymore.....it's about eyes on the screen." Or something very close to that.........which explains Rutgers and Maryland to the Big Ten.

That's true, and something that bodes better for us than some might think. IF we ever get back to being a Top 25 team in football, I think the city of Dallas would rally around us to some extent. Already with basketball I've got friends around Dallas with no ties to SMU asking me to take them to a game. If you'll remember, our 30 for 30 was one of the highest rated shows of the entire series- people are still intrigued by SMU's story nationwide and I think, from what I've gathered from meeting random people, interested in how we're doing moreso than say Houston or Tulsa or some of our current "peers."

[feelthehorsepower]

To quote Jim Delany the Big Ten Commissioner: " It's not about butts in the seats anymore.....it's about eyes on the screen." Or something very close to that.........which explains Rutgers and Maryland to the Big Ten.

That's true, and something that bodes better for us than some might think. IF we ever get back to being a Top 25 team in football, I think the city of Dallas would rally around us to some extent. Already with basketball I've got friends around Dallas with no ties to SMU asking me to take them to a game. If you'll remember, our 30 for 30 was one of the highest rated shows of the entire series- people are still intrigued by SMU's story nationwide and I think, from what I've gathered from meeting random people, interested in how we're doing moreso than say Houston or Tulsa or some of our current "peers."

SMU is a special case, and we are definitely a school with a lot of upside for whichever conference decides to add us. I don't doubt SMU becoming a Top 25 program again. Let the program develop and grow. We have been targeting for 7 wins at least, with the extension we can hope that we move up to 8 wins and then 9 and then 10 so on so forth etc...I prefer we grow steadily into a solid BCS program rather than have one top 25 year and then sink back into the bottom.

[orguy]

http://outkickthecoverage.com/sec-network-aims-for-500-million-a-year-launch.php

Clay Travis is a [deleted], but he's also been pretty spot-on on predicting conference realignment trends and the "business" of college football. He predicts (as I have before, prematurely) that because of the absolute boatload of money SEC schools are going to make from the SEC Network (estimated at around $28.5M per year per school- that's just for SEC Network, doesnt include their CBS deal) that more schools will eventually join the SEC to get it to 16 teams, likely from VA and NC, and likely Virginia Tech and NC State. Of course, the ACC (and Big 12) schools just signed that Grant of Rights which supposedly prohibits any schools from leaving the conference until after 2026-2027 season. Of course, how ironclad is that GoR? Would a school be brazen enough to break it in search of SEC riches? See here: http://outkickthecoverage.com/myth-of-t ... rights.php

Point is, SMU needs to get their [deleted] together in football, and fast. Basketball is progressing along nicely, but of course football is what steers the boat.

My prediction is that the next round of realignment will see Va. Tech and NC State going to the SEC, Notre Dame and UVA joining the Big Ten, and Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State going to the Pac-12, with the "best of the rest" from the Big 12 and ACC joining together, which would look something like this:

East- UNC, Duke, Wake, BC, Syracuse, Clemson, FSU, Miami
West- Clemson, WVU, Louisville, TCU, Baylor, KSU, Kansas, Pittsburgh

Looks like Iowa State could be the odd man out. Now, does UCF, Cincinnati, or even a resurgent SMU get consideration in this conference over the likes of somebody like Wake Forest? How bound together will the leftovers of the Big 12 and ACC be to each other? Even if there is an opening (wishful thinking) there will be a lot of people clamoring for that last seat on the lifeboat. Time to get serious. I think Rick Hart is a good AD and is cognizant of the situation. Hopefully our next university President will have a vision for getting SMU into a better conference.

Sorry for the 4,683rd realignment thread. It's January, and it's not like there's much to discuss with respect to recruiting.

Football at SMU does NOT "steer the boat". Certainly not amongst recent alumni (a few in my own family) who could care less about football but are very excited by Basketball.

[orguy]

Academics will be important, certainly for the PAC 12 academics will matter when they expand. USC, Stanford, Cal all are going to insist on schools that have a solid academic reputation. They don't want Okie State or the Sand Aggies. Dexter Manley stayed eligible for 4 years at OSU and was illiterate. So, as weird as it sounds, a deal may be brokered to get OU/UT, they may insist upon SMU and either TCU/Baylor. Baylor may give the Pac 12 Presidents the same gas that BYU does, a religiously conservative school, I think TCU may have the same problem to a lesser degree. SMU does not. So, it may very well be a school that gets a hard look from the PAC 12. I don't see us as a candidate anywhere else.

Oklahoma State has a fine Engineering school. Many of their programs are ranked ahead of SMU Engineering (which is a good school and far ahead of the SMU business school in terms of student quality regardless of what some on this board like to think). Yes, in general the student body at Oklahoma State is not as strong overall as at a school like SMU but in certain fields and majors your generalizations ignore critical facts. Historic land grant universities often have very strong Engineering and Science programs though enrollments are small because these are difficult majors (as opposed to business or communications arts which often have BOTH motivated and unmotivated students because they are academically a "cakewalk"). FYI: lots of prominent NASA engineers in Houston back in the day were graduates of OSU's EE department so I would be careful about dissing this school.

[gostangs]

you are kidding right? OSU's engineering school is in no way even close to as good as SMU. If you want to talk about NASA in the 70's then fine - but i am talking relevant mid range history. OSU is one of the worst academic schools in the SW - and that is a tough bar to get under.

[feelthehorsepower]

http://outkickthecoverage.com/sec-network-aims-for-500-million-a-year-launch.php

Clay Travis is a [deleted], but he's also been pretty spot-on on predicting conference realignment trends and the "business" of college football. He predicts (as I have before, prematurely) that because of the absolute boatload of money SEC schools are going to make from the SEC Network (estimated at around $28.5M per year per school- that's just for SEC Network, doesnt include their CBS deal) that more schools will eventually join the SEC to get it to 16 teams, likely from VA and NC, and likely Virginia Tech and NC State. Of course, the ACC (and Big 12) schools just signed that Grant of Rights which supposedly prohibits any schools from leaving the conference until after 2026-2027 season. Of course, how ironclad is that GoR? Would a school be brazen enough to break it in search of SEC riches? See here: http://outkickthecoverage.com/myth-of-t ... rights.php

Point is, SMU needs to get their [deleted] together in football, and fast. Basketball is progressing along nicely, but of course football is what steers the boat.

My prediction is that the next round of realignment will see Va. Tech and NC State going to the SEC, Notre Dame and UVA joining the Big Ten, and Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State going to the Pac-12, with the "best of the rest" from the Big 12 and ACC joining together, which would look something like this:

East- UNC, Duke, Wake, BC, Syracuse, Clemson, FSU, Miami
West- Clemson, WVU, Louisville, TCU, Baylor, KSU, Kansas, Pittsburgh

Looks like Iowa State could be the odd man out. Now, does UCF, Cincinnati, or even a resurgent SMU get consideration in this conference over the likes of somebody like Wake Forest? How bound together will the leftovers of the Big 12 and ACC be to each other? Even if there is an opening (wishful thinking) there will be a lot of people clamoring for that last seat on the lifeboat. Time to get serious. I think Rick Hart is a good AD and is cognizant of the situation. Hopefully our next university President will have a vision for getting SMU into a better conference.

Sorry for the 4,683rd realignment thread. It's January, and it's not like there's much to discuss with respect to recruiting.

Football at SMU does NOT "steer the boat". Certainly not amongst recent alumni (a few in my own family) who could care less about football but are very excited by Basketball.

Those "recent alumni" care less about football because we don't have an elite team yet and we aren't winning 11 games each year...that's why.

[ponyscott]

Academics will be important, certainly for the PAC 12 academics will matter when they expand. USC, Stanford, Cal all are going to insist on schools that have a solid academic reputation. They don't want Okie State or the Sand Aggies. Dexter Manley stayed eligible for 4 years at OSU and was illiterate. So, as weird as it sounds, a deal may be brokered to get OU/UT, they may insist upon SMU and either TCU/Baylor. Baylor may give the Pac 12 Presidents the same gas that BYU does, a religiously conservative school, I think TCU may have the same problem to a lesser degree. SMU does not. So, it may very well be a school that gets a hard look from the PAC 12. I don't see us as a candidate anywhere else.

Oklahoma State has a fine Engineering school. Many of their programs are ranked ahead of SMU Engineering (which is a good school and far ahead of the SMU business school in terms of student quality regardless of what some on this board like to think). Yes, in general the student body at Oklahoma State is not as strong overall as at a school like SMU but in certain fields and majors your generalizations ignore critical facts. Historic land grant universities often have very strong Engineering and Science programs though enrollments are small because these are difficult majors (as opposed to business or communications arts which often have BOTH motivated and unmotivated students because they are academically a "cakewalk"). FYI: lots of prominent NASA engineers in Houston back in the day were graduates of OSU's EE department so I would be careful about dissing this school.

The Pac 12 will NEVER ever vote to allow OSU or TT in its grouping. Never....a trip to Stillwater or Lubbuck with limited academics will NEVER fly for those elitists out on the left coast.

[WordUpBU]

Academics will be important, certainly for the PAC 12 academics will matter when they expand. USC, Stanford, Cal all are going to insist on schools that have a solid academic reputation. They don't want Okie State or the Sand Aggies. Dexter Manley stayed eligible for 4 years at OSU and was illiterate. So, as weird as it sounds, a deal may be brokered to get OU/UT, they may insist upon SMU and either TCU/Baylor. Baylor may give the Pac 12 Presidents the same gas that BYU does, a religiously conservative school, I think TCU may have the same problem to a lesser degree. SMU does not. So, it may very well be a school that gets a hard look from the PAC 12. I don't see us as a candidate anywhere else.

Oklahoma State has a fine Engineering school. Many of their programs are ranked ahead of SMU Engineering (which is a good school and far ahead of the SMU business school in terms of student quality regardless of what some on this board like to think). Yes, in general the student body at Oklahoma State is not as strong overall as at a school like SMU but in certain fields and majors your generalizations ignore critical facts. Historic land grant universities often have very strong Engineering and Science programs though enrollments are small because these are difficult majors (as opposed to business or communications arts which often have BOTH motivated and unmotivated students because they are academically a "cakewalk"). FYI: lots of prominent NASA engineers in Houston back in the day were graduates of OSU's EE department so I would be careful about dissing this school.

The Pac 12 will NEVER ever vote to allow OSU or TT in its grouping. Never....a trip to Stillwater or Lubbuck with limited academics will NEVER fly for those elitists out on the left coast.

Not without the UT/OU combo pushing them in but if both schools demand it the PAC almost did vote those two in.

[East Coast Mustang]

Politically, Texas and OU can't leave OSU and TT behind. They will be a package deal

[orguy]

you are kidding right? OSU's engineering school is in no way even close to as good as SMU. If you want to talk about NASA in the 70's then fine - but i am talking relevant mid range history. OSU is one of the worst academic schools in the SW - and that is a tough bar to get under.

Get your facts straight!!! (a famous OSU alum said this eloquently)

US news and World report

Best Engineering Schools

SMU 125
OSU 113

I am sure for all indicators (standardized tests, PE exams etc..) this is a true reflection. The washout rate at big state schools is so high.

[orguy]

Politically, Texas and OU can't leave OSU and TT behind. They will be a package deal

Well put.

[orguy]

Academics will be important, certainly for the PAC 12 academics will matter when they expand. USC, Stanford, Cal all are going to insist on schools that have a solid academic reputation. They don't want Okie State or the Sand Aggies. Dexter Manley stayed eligible for 4 years at OSU and was illiterate. So, as weird as it sounds, a deal may be brokered to get OU/UT, they may insist upon SMU and either TCU/Baylor. Baylor may give the Pac 12 Presidents the same gas that BYU does, a religiously conservative school, I think TCU may have the same problem to a lesser degree. SMU does not. So, it may very well be a school that gets a hard look from the PAC 12. I don't see us as a candidate anywhere else.

Oklahoma State has a fine Engineering school. Many of their programs are ranked ahead of SMU Engineering (which is a good school and far ahead of the SMU business school in terms of student quality regardless of what some on this board like to think). Yes, in general the student body at Oklahoma State is not as strong overall as at a school like SMU but in certain fields and majors your generalizations ignore critical facts. Historic land grant universities often have very strong Engineering and Science programs though enrollments are small because these are difficult majors (as opposed to business or communications arts which often have BOTH motivated and unmotivated students because they are academically a "cakewalk"). FYI: lots of prominent NASA engineers in Houston back in the day were graduates of OSU's EE department so I would be careful about dissing this school.

The Pac 12 will NEVER ever vote to allow OSU or TT in its grouping. Never....a trip to Stillwater or Lubbuck with limited academics will NEVER fly for those elitists out on the left coast.

Its Lubbock FYI. Oregon State, Washington State, Oregon, Arizona, Arizona State. All schools that are not really that great academically FYI. Oklahoma State and Tech are not behind some of these schools. Do a little homework before posting this drivel.