Could B-Ball Be Our Golden Ticket to P5?

by **StallionsModelT** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:34 am

I was thinking about this yesterday. We all know that football and TV are going to be the primary factors regarding conference realignment. However, I do think academics, location, and basketball are going to be additional factors that could be important as well. Given our meteoric rise this year in basketball and the expectation that our team will keep improving, I think a truly elite national title contending caliber basketball program could elevate SMU in potential conference realignment scenarios. With the recent stability of the ACC and Big 12 it is doubtful that realignment happens in the next 3-5 years but if there is another major shift I could see SMU being an attractive option.

by **SMU 86** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:36 am

Possibly so.

by **GiddyUp** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:37 am

Its all about fball unfortunatey

by **ponyfan37** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:38 am

Ask UConn

by **CalallenStang** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:42 am

GiddyUp wrote:Its all about fball unfortunatey

Not really. See: Syracuse, Pitt to ACC. That was basketball + market access. Same with Maryland to B10. And Rutgers to B10 was only about market access.

It is not always about football. But it is always about money.

by **CalallenStang** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:44 am

ponyfan37 wrote:Ask UConn

UConn was frozen out of the ACC by Boston College

http://articles.courant.com/2011-10-10/ ... nn-sources

by **StallionsModelT** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:51 am

Yeah UConn, Memphis, and (to a lesser degree) Cincinnati certainly do not help our hopes that elite basketball schools will be at the front of the pecking order. My thinking is this:

SMU will have all of the bullet points needed for realignment (location, academics, money, brand recognition) EXECPT top notch football and football attendance. Realignment is not going to happen for the next 3 years anyway. By then June will be gone and (HOPEFULLY) we are moving in the right direction with football. You would have to think Rick Hart and the CoC are seeing what is possible at SMU this year with SMU basketball. Find a coach and coaching staff with the same sort of passion and commitment (RECRUITING!) that Larry Brown and his staff have and we can be Top 25 in football also. Maybe by the time the next major shift happens we are perennial contenders in basketball with continued sellouts and football is emerging as one of the top G5 programs in the nation. If we do that maybe we've got a shot at being first in line.

by **GiddyUp** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:16 am

CalallenStang wrote:
GiddyUp wrote:Its all about fball unfortunatey

Not really. See: Syracuse, Pitt to ACC. That was basketball + market access. Same with Maryland to B10. And Rutgers to B10 was only about market access.

It is not always about football. But it is always about money.

Rutgers and Maryland are still a head scratcher to me for the Big 10.

by **TidePony** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:24 am

It's really some of all three factors: football (1), market (2), and yes basketball (3). If realignment had happened 50 years ago there would be only one Mississippi school in the SEC, and there are other cases close to the same in other conferences like for example Duke, Wake, and Washington State.

What we do know is that Dallas will support SMU and so does ESPN. This is happening (and it's more than just the Dallas area because of the great TV package). A winning football team, with improving attendance (including students) and upgrades to facilities will seal the deal.

Football needs to step up and now. My two cents...

by **SMU 86** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:34 am

TidePony wrote:It's really some of all three factors: football (1), market (2), and yes basketball (3). If realignment had happened 50 years ago there would be only one Mississippi school in the SEC, and there are other cases close to the same in other conferences like for example Duke, Wake, and Washington State.

What we do know is that Dallas will support SMU and so does ESPN. This is happening (and it's more than just Dallas area because of the great TV package). A winning football team, with improving attendance (including students) and upgrades to facilities will seal the deal.

Football needs to step up and now. My two cents...

Good points.

by **Pony^** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:37 am

GiddyUp wrote:
CalallenStang wrote:
GiddyUp wrote:Its all about fball unfortunatey

Not really. See: Syracuse, Pitt to ACC. That was basketball + market access. Same with Maryland to B10. And Rutgers to B10 was only about market access.

It is not always about football. But it is always about money.

Rutgers and Maryland are still a head scratcher to me for the Big 10.

Big markets, lots of B1G grads in those markets who would like to see their teams play and AAU status.

by **blackoutpony** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:54 am

No, it's all about FB

Syracuse and Pitt were added for the TV markets and fan base

by **SMULaxer** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:08 am

A lot could change in three to five years. We go as coach LB goes.

The sooner realignment happens, the better. Add six teams big 12!

by **PonyKai** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:12 am

Couldn't hurt

by **SMULaxer** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:14 am

blackoutpony wrote:No, it's all about FB

Syracuse and Pitt were added for the TV markets and fan base

Syracuse was added to ACC for lacrosse. Duh.