PonyFans.com

It is glass half empty because SMU is to Dallas what Rutgers is to NY.

not sure what you are arguing. If you are saying we have some embarrassing turnouts, i fully agree, we do. Most D-1 privates do at times. but we also have times where we do turnout such as the Friday night game against TCU in 2010, the bowl game in Birmingham etc. This is not about the lowest common denominator or consistency, its about selling the combination of what we CAN bring, potential, and legit college tradition. SMU fans are quick to crawl into their holes, but TCU fans were hiding for a long time too. All of a sudden they come out of hiding and you notice them more when they are winning big.

mustangxc wrote:It is glass half empty because SMU is to Dallas what Rutgers is to NY.

In what way? Location? That would be about it

Stallion wrote:Hey LA Mustang-SMU didn't play in Cotton Bowl in '24. It was the Dixie Classic at Fair Park Stadium

http://www.smumustangs.com/sports/m-foo ... ts-75.html

True. As I found out in my extensive research (Wikipedia) the Dixie Classic was played only three times and it featured the SWC champion (A&M, SMU and Arkansas). The bowl was later replaced by the Cotton Bowl in 1937. Also, since I'm at my character limit I couldn't list Dixie Classic so I put it under the Cotton Bowl.

Wiki also noted the 1922 Classic that featured A&M is where the 12th Man was created.

It is all about cable subscription. For instance, if we went into the PAC whatever, how many new subscribers would there be for the PAC whatever network. I do not have the answer, but it is not ratings or butts in seats. It is new cable subscribers.

lwjr wrote:

mustangxc wrote:It is glass half empty because SMU is to Dallas what Rutgers is to NY.

In what way? Location? That would be about it

Nobody in NY cares about Rutgers. If they can land a Big Ten invitation, why can't SMU land a power 5 invitation.

LA_Mustang wrote:

Stallion wrote:Hey LA Mustang-SMU didn't play in Cotton Bowl in '24. It was the Dixie Classic at Fair Park Stadium

http://www.smumustangs.com/sports/m-foo ... ts-75.html

True. As I found out in my extensive research (Wikipedia) the Dixie Classic was played only three times and it featured the SWC champion (A&M, SMU and Arkansas). The bowl was later replaced by the Cotton Bowl in 1937. Also, since I'm at my character limit I couldn't list Dixie Classic so I put it under the Cotton Bowl.

Wiki also noted the 1922 Classic that featured A&M is where the 12th Man was created.

Yep my great uncle -the Aggie- scored the go-ahead Touchdown on a 45 yard Interception return for a TD that proved to be the difference in that 1922 game but did he get a statute? No! The waterboy 12th man who didn't even play did. It sucks

no kidding, does anyone really envision Rutgers playing USC in the Rose Bowl? thats' almost laughable. Not only does no one care about Rutgers in NYC, nobody cares about them in New Jersey either. SMU is a legitimate college brand name and could be an asset to a BCS league like it was to the SWC for 80 years.

Again, it's about a local presence. Even if 98% of the NYC market could care less about Rutgers, the Big 10 can still use Rutgers to increase local interest in the conference by the NY Times coverage and network cross-promotion of Rutgers games and other Big 10 games on the Big 10 network. Increasing ratings by small percentage in a market the size of NYC/NJ means huge money.

Hoop Fan wrote:not sure what you are arguing. If you are saying we have some embarrassing turnouts, i fully agree, we do. Most D-1 privates do at times. but we also have times where we do turnout such as the Friday night game against TCU in 2010, the bowl game in Birmingham etc. This is not about the lowest common denominator or consistency, its about selling the combination of what we CAN bring, potential, and legit college tradition. SMU fans are quick to crawl into their holes, but TCU fans were hiding for a long time too. All of a sudden they come out of hiding and you notice them more when they are winning big.

Hoop Fan, I don't disagree with what you are saying. TCU made a conscious effort to improve their program not only on the field but off the field. TCU has done a great job of marketing themselves as FT. Worth's team and please no one give me any of this, SMU competes with the Cowboys, Rangers crap. TCU has to deal with the Cowboys and Rangers as well and they have succeeded.
Yes the BLVD is a great game day atmosphere, but many SMU fans would rather be seen and socialize than go to the game and support the team. I am in the camp that believes SMU must get out and market the athletic program. This "If you build it, they will come", theory does not work.
I don't know if SMU really wants athletics to get to a level of a Stanford, TCU or whatever successful private school you want to use. Yes they have hired two named coaches but as we are all learning it takes more than that. I applaud SMU for the steps they have taken but there is still a long wat to go.
I will continue to support the school. I am not crazy about it but I will continue to catch the 8 am flight on Saturday mornings so I can make the early kickoffs in the fall and I will attend basketball games when I can schedule my visits to Dallas around the games .

LA_Mustang wrote:Again, it's about a local presence. Even if 98% of the NYC market could care less about Rutgers, the Big 10 can still use Rutgers to increase local interest in the conference by the NY Times coverage and network cross-promotion of Rutgers games and other Big 10 games on the Big 10 network. Increasing ratings by small percentage in a market the size of NYC/NJ means huge money.

I agree, I am simply making an analogy to prove that given the right circumstances and the right people to further our cause we could land in a very attractive situation.

lwjr wrote:

Hoop Fan wrote:not sure what you are arguing. If you are saying we have some embarrassing turnouts, i fully agree, we do. Most D-1 privates do at times. but we also have times where we do turnout such as the Friday night game against TCU in 2010, the bowl game in Birmingham etc. This is not about the lowest common denominator or consistency, its about selling the combination of what we CAN bring, potential, and legit college tradition. SMU fans are quick to crawl into their holes, but TCU fans were hiding for a long time too. All of a sudden they come out of hiding and you notice them more when they are winning big.

Hoop Fan, I don't disagree with what you are saying. TCU made a conscious effort to improve their program not only on the field but off the field. TCU has done a great job of marketing themselves as FT. Worth's team and please no one give me any of this, SMU competes with the Cowboys, Rangers crap. TCU has to deal with the Cowboys and Rangers as well and they have succeeded.
Yes the BLVD is a great game day atmosphere, but many SMU fans would rather be seen and socialize than go to the game and support the team. I am in the camp that believes SMU must get out and market the athletic program. This "If you build it, they will come", theory does not work.
I don't know if SMU really wants athletics to get to a level of a Stanford, TCU or whatever successful private school you want to use. Yes they have hired two named coaches but as we are all learning it takes more than that. I applaud SMU for the steps they have taken but there is still a long wat to go.
I will continue to support the school. I am not crazy about it but I will continue to catch the 8 am flight on Saturday mornings so I can make the early kickoffs in the fall and I will attend basketball games when I can schedule my visits to Dallas around the games .

We need to get to the point where our games are attractive enough such that a game that has 32,000 people in attendance yet 1,000,000 people claim they were there lol!

I like our chances to get into a reconstituted ACC or maybe even the PAC-10.
Think about it:
What state has the greatest population growth: Texas
What state has the best D1 football scholarships awarded each year: Texas
What are the largest media markets in the fastest growing state: Dallas and Houston

ACC: once is gets raided it will need access to large media markets and recruiting area to stay competitive with the Big 10. Access to the Houston and Dallas recruiting pool will be a must. The ACC can either stay in the Southest with the left over teams or expand into Texas, Uconn, Cincy and show advertisers a significant media footprint. I'm betting on expansion.
This is SMU's most likely scenario

PAC12: Their primary problem is a declining football talent pool. Population shifts favor Texas and the Southeast in general and D1 football players in these markets are growing relative to the PAC12 geographical area. Look at how hard Oregon recruits Texas and their success. This must have been noticed by the other PAC12 teams. You would think they would want a game every year in Dallas and Houston to showcase their programs. The BIG is addressing their declining talent pool by expanding into the SE. the PAC12 if they are thinking strategically will see Texas as the most attractive expansion alternative to grow their talent pool.

The goal of athletics is to win to bring a positive image to school which attracts student applicants, donor dollars which raises the academic profile of the school.

SMU is already well known in Texas. Showcasing the school in the Southeast or West Coast will grow our student applicant pool greater as opposed to being in the Big XII.

LA_Mustang wrote:Again, it's about a local presence. Even if 98% of the NYC market could care less about Rutgers, the Big 10 can still use Rutgers to increase local interest in the conference by the NY Times coverage and network cross-promotion of Rutgers games and other Big 10 games on the Big 10 network. Increasing ratings by small percentage in a market the size of NYC/NJ means huge money.

Agreed

Pony81 wrote:I like our chances to get into a reconstituted ACC or maybe even the PAC-10.


PAC12: Their primary problem is a declining football talent pool. Population shifts favor Texas and the Southeast in general and D1 football players in these markets are growing relative to the PAC12 geographical area. Look at how hard Oregon recruits Texas and their success. This must have been noticed by the other PAC12 teams. You would think they would want a game every year in Dallas and Houston to showcase their programs. The BIG is addressing their declining talent pool by expanding into the SE. the PAC12 if they are thinking strategically will see Texas as the most attractive expansion alternative to grow their talent pool.

If they want exposure in Texas then schedule games against Texas teams at marquee state football venues (several Pac-12 teams are already doing this).