Page 2 of 5
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:58 pm
by Alaric
ponyinNC wrote:i wonder if this was the "secret" reason that JJ had for coming to SMU?
my guess his unstated goal is to win the national championship here. he's not throwing it out there yet so he doesn't get laughed at...oh, the audacity of his hope
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:05 pm
by NorthEastMustang
Interesting article. We need to keep winning and increasing attendance. The rest will fall into place.
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:07 pm
by couch 'em
Is there any greater legacy he could leave, then to perform the greatest turnaround possible in college football?
Step 1: Dominate CUSA
Step 2: BCS Conference
Step 3: DOMINATE EVERYTHING.
I believe, June. Make it happen!
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:11 pm
by Paladin
You go, Steve-O ! Go Steve-O, go ! You da man....
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:20 pm
by ponyinNC
when conference realignment rolls around, I sure hope our big $, influential boosters/alumni make it their mission to get us in...Long live the circle of champions!
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:30 pm
by SMU 86
couch 'em wrote:Is there any greater legacy he could leave, then to perform the greatest turnaround possible in college football?
Step 1: Dominate CUSA
Step 2: BCS Conference
Step 3: DOMINATE EVERYTHING.
I believe, June. Make it happen!
That would be very good.
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:45 pm
by ponyinNC
SMU 86 wrote:couch 'em wrote:Is there any greater legacy he could leave, then to perform the greatest turnaround possible in college football?
Step 1: Dominate CUSA
Step 2: BCS Conference
Step 3: DOMINATE EVERYTHING.
I believe, June. Make it happen!
That would be very good.
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:53 pm
by EastStang
First, expect the PAC-10 to raid the MWC for at least one team. If that happens, the MWC is DOA. Expect that the BE has enough friends in the BCS to broker a deal which will put a knife in the BCS formula for the the MWC. Also, you have the Nevada issue. As I understand it, the MWC constitution requires unanimity to add a team. UNLV has to vote against anyone other than Nevada (remember UVA and VT in the ACC expansion) due to political pressures. That means that no one gets added unless Nevada is added. The Gang of Five apparently wants Boise. SDS wants Fresno and San Jose. But TCU won't vote for any additions unless its shopping list is completed and it wants UH. UH would jump at MWC (if they continue as they are now, but what if UT and BYU leave?). Enter SMU. SMU, Rice, Tulane and Tulsa have as I understand it a handshake agreement. They are now going to stick together through thick and thin. So, any MWC raid that does not include all four may be doomed to failure and if there is a PAC-10 raid, this leaves the paranoid CUSA split scenario. SMU, TCU, Rice, UH, UTEP, UNM, Tulane, Memphis, USM and AFA form a conference with perhaps two other MWC schools like UT or BYU and CSU or WAC teams like La. Tech and NMS. This actually would make ECU happy who pines after the likes of Middle Tennessee State and Western Kentucky. Marshall for some bizarre reason likes CUSA especially the western schools in it and fears a split. My view continues to be that we need to get our football and men's basketball programs into the next echelon as soon as practicable as should the rest of CUSA follow that program. If that happens, then we are relevant to any changes.
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:59 pm
by couch 'em
EastStang wrote: SMU, Rice, Tulane and Tulsa have as I understand it a handshake agreement. They are now going to stick together through thick and thin.
Screw that - that's Copeland era BS. We are now trying to win. They are not. We need align ourselves with a winner like TCU, and not losers like Rice, Tulane.
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:02 pm
by skyscraper
Biggest takeaway is that others are noticing SMU is getting its act together. That is a big part of the battle in any potential conference shifting.
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:18 pm
by 1983 Cotton Bowl
So it sounds like the MWC may need to make a move to pre-empt the PAC-10 and BIG-10. But even if the MWC goes to 12 with Boise, Nevada, and UH, what happens when the PAC-10 comes calling for BYU and Utah. That would be a tough deal for those schools to pass up.
I don't really see Missouri or Colorado going anywhere. Why would they? They are already in one of the two most prestigous and profitable conferences. I see the BIG-10 taking Syracuse or Pitt, and the PAC-10 taking BYU and Utah. That leaves the Big East scrambling for a new member (ECU or UCF?) and the MWC in a shambles.
WIth respect to the MWC, if they go to 12 teams with Boise, Nevada, and UH, then they turn back into a far-flung conference with the associated travel costs and other headaches. Sounds like they have some tough choices.
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:25 pm
by NavyCrimson
WIth respect to the MWC, if they go to 12 teams with Boise, Nevada, and UH, then they turn back into a far-flung conference with the associated travel costs and other headaches. Sounds like they have some tough choices.
Good point, '83.
And unless they get a BCS-BS bid, we're back to the 90's when it feel apart originally. Without BYU & Utah, they're not desirable - Period!!!
Then again, they just need to get rid of the bcs-BS. If the college presidents were to ever show some backbone, this would be the time. But then again, have they ever done anything in the past to give us an indicator that they will?????
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:26 pm
by Dooby
EastStang wrote:First, expect the PAC-10 to raid the MWC for at least one team. If that happens, the MWC is DOA. Expect that the BE has enough friends in the BCS to broker a deal which will put a knife in the BCS formula for the the MWC. Also, you have the Nevada issue. As I understand it, the MWC constitution requires unanimity to add a team. UNLV has to vote against anyone other than Nevada (remember UVA and VT in the ACC expansion) due to political pressures. That means that no one gets added unless Nevada is added. The Gang of Five apparently wants Boise. SDS wants Fresno and San Jose. But TCU won't vote for any additions unless its shopping list is completed and it wants UH. UH would jump at MWC (if they continue as they are now, but what if UT and BYU leave?). Enter SMU. SMU, Rice, Tulane and Tulsa have as I understand it a handshake agreement. They are now going to stick together through thick and thin. So, any MWC raid that does not include all four may be doomed to failure and if there is a PAC-10 raid, this leaves the paranoid CUSA split scenario. SMU, TCU, Rice, UH, UTEP, UNM, Tulane, Memphis, USM and AFA form a conference with perhaps two other MWC schools like UT or BYU and CSU or WAC teams like La. Tech and NMS. This actually would make ECU happy who pines after the likes of Middle Tennessee State and Western Kentucky. Marshall for some bizarre reason likes CUSA especially the western schools in it and fears a split. My view continues to be that we need to get our football and men's basketball programs into the next echelon as soon as practicable as should the rest of CUSA follow that program. If that happens, then we are relevant to any changes.
Not my handshake.
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:32 pm
by Charleston Pony
the key in all of this is for SMU to become "top 25 in all we do" meaning football and men's bball at the very least. Womens hoops also getting notice and Rhonda keeps inching towards that goal
Re: Is SMU Going To Fundamentally Change College Football As We
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:55 pm
by Topper
I see Utah and BYU going to the PAC 10. Because of the political situation in Utah, I don't see those two teams going separate ways. I also see the MWC looking at Boise State and Fresno State to replace the Utah teams. Both of those schools have had a lot of national recognition and are on national TV a lot anyway.
I think Missouri is the most likely team to go to the Big Ten. Culturally and academically they would be a good fit. After that, its anyone's guess. The Big 12 South wants no part of TCU and I don't think there is any political impetus there to get them in. Would Colorado fight having CSU as a member? Probably, but it might make sense for the Big 12 as a whole.
I think Arkansas may be a wild card. For years Broyles wanted them to join the old Big 8. They have foundered in the SEC. Maybe the Big 12 could tempt them away? If so, that opens up an SEC slot, and it has always been my (wild and not very realistic) dream that the SEC would drag us into the mix so that they could establish a presence in Dallas.