Summary of SMU Football

[PK]

I don't think even the CFA (Coaches Football Association) has anything to do with TV rights any more. I think the BCS conferences do their own negotiating for TV contracts in some loose organizational way.

[ponyboy]

Every team should gravitate toward the top of the bell curve
aka mediocrity in a FAIR athletic association over a long
period of time

Mediocrity is by definition 50%. In the thirty season period from 1950 to 1979, we won 42% of our games. That's less than mediocre and to the left of the middle of the bell curve.

Now the thirty year period before that was pretty good. We won 62% of our games then. That places us in the Top 40. And, wow, did we ever do well from 1980 to 1984. But that's another story and the reason we've had a tough last few years.

[Stallion]

Just think how great SMU would be if we joined the Southland Conference!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ponyboy]

What?! Are you implying that I'm happy we've dropped from SWC to CUSA?

I really am starting to wonder if you're intellectually capable of understanding what I'm saying.

[Stallion]

I understand EXACTLY what you are saying-you are saying that those mean ole SWC teams are too too tough for poor ole SMU so now we need to compare ourselves to a watered down group of former junior colleges and Lifetime members of the Bottom 10. Just remember if you run away with your tail between your legs because you are too afraid to play the former SWC schools (minus UT who we have not played in 12 years and no future plans) then you are surrendering this schools goal of being a Top 25 program. FACT: No body cares about your giddy excitement about beating the Arkansas Hillbillies and Sam Houston State Monument. I tell SMU fans to stand up and demand we build a program that can actually be a team that Dallas and SMU actually care about. I'm fighting for RELEVANCE. TCU has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that SMU is just using empty excuses. TCU is relevant-TCU has proven its competitive with the Big 12 and a nationally competitive Top 25 like program.

[ponyboy]

Nope. I said that we were a below average SWC team and therefore the fall to our present state isn't as far as some on this board advertised. Am I wrong?

I never made a statement either way about playing former SWC schools. I DID say it's unfair to compare us now to those in the former SWC who are not now mid majors.

You really need to look up the term "straw man." See here: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

We actually don't disagree on much, it's more a matter of style. I am a more enthusiastic person than you would like -- a cheerleader, you call it (I call it being a loyal fan) -- but we don't disagree that much really.

Last thing: I have repeatedly given you credit for good ideas. You need to grow a pair and do the same. We were a BELOW AVERAGE team in the Southwest Conference after 1949.

[EastStang]

PonyBoy, we were consistently in the middle 3rd of the conference. Which meant that we usually won some conference games against the Big boys. We won the conference a few times. We were 4-3, 4-4 or 3-4 many times until the 1990s. Now we can't even beat Baylor!!! So, I guess my view in all this is that we alums want to see a football team capable of beating Big XII teams with some regularity at least 40-50% of the time instead of once (Kansas). We ought to expect a 4-0 sweep of our OOC schedule this year (or at least 3-1). TT and TCU are good teams, but are the types of programs that we should have a shot at beating year in and year out. That's the expectation and the frustration.

[ponyboy]

I understand that completely and agree completely. I don't believe I've ever suggested otherwise -- though I suppose that's the caricature that's been painted of me.

Changing the subject to what I do believe, I said late last week that no one with any competitive bone is his body ought to be satisfied with where we are now. I am NOT justifying or in any way condoning mediocrity. And if I could personally suit up then, by God, I would. But a consistent message of mine is that AS FANS, we need not to bash our team, that we owe support. That has nothing to do with accepting defeat and is entirely separate from the conversation about how we get to a bowl, then the Top 25, then the BCS game, then the National Championship. Cheering the team is our DUTY as fans. I think it's that attitude that raises the hackles on a guy like Stallion and several of his cronies. It's old fashioned and therefore worthy of ridicule. I guess that's what makes him hate me so. The other stuff he tries to pin on me falls right off. I support his excellent ideas.

[PlanoStang]

I understand that completely and agree completely. I don't believe I've ever suggested otherwise -- though I suppose that's the caricature that's been painted of me.

Changing the subject to what I do believe, I said late last week that no one with any competitive bone is his body ought to be satisfied with where we are now. I am NOT justifying or in any way condoning mediocrity. And if I could personally suit up then, by God, I would. But a consistent message of mine is that AS FANS, we need not to bash our team, that we owe support. That has nothing to do with accepting defeat and is entirely separate from the conversation about how we get to a bowl, then the Top 25, then the BCS game, then the National Championship. Cheering the team is our DUTY as fans. I think it's that attitude that raises the hackles on a guy like Stallion and several of his cronies. It's old fashioned and therefore worthy of ridicule. I guess that's what makes him hate me so. The other stuff he tries to pin on me falls right off. I support his excellent ideas.

You sir, are a BULSHIDARTIST

If you say we shouldn't bash our team, why do you call us "mediocre"
which sounds much worse than calling us "average" although it means
about the same

[PlanoStang]

Every team should gravitate toward the top of the bell curve
aka mediocrity in a FAIR athletic association over a long
period of time

Mediocrity is by definition 50%. In the thirty season period from 1950 to 1979, we won 42% of our games. That's less than mediocre and to the left of the middle of the bell curve.

Now the thirty year period before that was pretty good. We won 62% of our games then. That places us in the Top 40. And, wow, did we ever do well from 1980 to 1984. But that's another story and the reason we've had a tough last few years.

"Mediocrity is by definition 50%." Nope, sorry, you need to figure the
winning percentages of all the schools in the SWC over that period of
time. Then give us the rankings Plus championships, bowl games
All Americas, etc.

Don't think Baylor, Rice, TCU, Tech (newcomer), and A$M went to 3
bowl games, and won the SWC at least once during 50 - 79.
Dominated a lot by Arkansas, and UT.

[OC Mustang]

Couple of guys from UP and Plano disagreeing with each other. Go figure.
Ya'll are both still hung up on who's the baddest of the lot, the old money or the wish-we-were-old-money.

That's a joke, guys. Just trying to earn a post here or there. Get me up the rung a bit. You know, useless stuff.

Thanks for the opportunity.

[PlanoStang]

Hey, it gets really boring on here during the off season.

[ponyboy]

If you say we shouldn't bash our team, why do you call us "mediocre" which sounds much worse than calling us "average" although it means about the same

But "mediocre" is being generous, isn't it, for a team that won 42% of its games? I might have used the term "below average."

And I don't believe this is bashing. I'm simply trying to be truthful in order to prove a point that was long overdue -- a point, by the way, that I held off a long time in making for fear it would not help matters. But there it is: We were not very good in the SWC and therefore the fall was not as far as has been advertised. The glory years ended in 1949.

Continuing to dwell on this negative point, however, IS bashing. So I'm dropping the subject.

I'm ready for the Boulevard and it's only late February. Doesn't a cold one and some college football sound good?

[PlanoStang]

Being truthful

You didn't say where all the other SWC team's percentages ranked
during 50 - 79. With 3 bowls, and an SWC championship, SMU definitely
was above average

[ponyboy]

Winning Percentages 1950-1979

Texas 74%
Arkansas 66%
Houston 62% (joined 1972 so includes pre SWC)
Tech 53% (joined 1958 so includes pre SWC)
A&M 48%
Baylor 47%
SMU 43%
TCU 41%
Rice 35%