PonyFans.com

How quickly you guys have forgotten that we've cost you two BCS bowls in 2005 and 2011!

Hopefully SMU can get some more Ws in the series before 2017 and give more people a reason to get fired up about it

it is the same reaosn we didn't want to schedule UNT for so long.

Win and it is expected.

Lose and you are embarassed locally.

TCU already has Texas rivalry games now in the B12. I'd think they'd like to remove SMU for a cupcake game.

ponyinNC wrote:it is the same reaosn we didn't want to schedule UNT for so long.

Win and it is expected.

Lose and you are embarassed locally.

TCU already has Texas rivalry games now in the B12. I'd think they'd like to remove SMU for a cupcake game.

EXACTLY...TCU is now in a position of superiority and it's an embarrassing loss if you lose to SMU. We could be looking at UNT as our new "local rival". I still prefer that to games with Montana State and SFA

ReedFrawg wrote:As I have said here before...I really think that the SMU-TCU game is in jeopardy. I anticipate that the game will not continue beyond the current agreement.

Don't worry. We'll play together in conference

New Big 5 Rutgers just announced a series with Pac 12 great Wash. State (3-9, 1-8). This is how you do it.

I'd rather see SMU play OCC cupcakes, go undefeated, play in the Orange Bowl and then move up to the Big 5. SMU can do it or watch the other schools in the AAC do it. Just my humble opinion.

charleston pony vs mvpony: mv pony wins.

because to most fans there is nothing wrong with winning games you are supposed to win.

5 minutes after the twelfth game, they only care about the w-l record and the championship game or bowl game.

beyond that, only a few poorly read columnists and about 12 posters on this board are going to argue about "the quality" of the wins. the argument "we were 4-8, but wow, how about those two wins against the big 12!" is hollow to everybody.

when those big signature wins are numbers 8 and 9, THEN you can talk about 'quality" and somebody might care. and that includes a lot of recruits.

originaloverthehilltop1 wrote:charleston pony vs mvpony: mv pony wins.

because to most fans there is nothing wrong with winning games you are supposed to win.

5 minutes after the twelfth game, they only care about the w-l record and the championship game or bowl game.

beyond that, only a few poorly read columnists and about 12 posters on this board are going to argue about "the quality" of the wins. the argument "we were 4-8, but wow, how about those two wins against the big 12!" is hollow to everybody.

when those big signature wins are numbers 8 and 9, THEN you can talk about 'quality" and somebody might care. and that includes a lot of recruits.

Completely agree with this. It's all about W-L for us right now.

Agreed, you get more credit for wins at the end of the year than you do for a quality schedule. Both Mack Brown and Leach used this strategy early in their tenures at Texas and Tech.

MaroonPony wrote:Agreed, you get more credit for wins at the end of the year than you do for a quality schedule. Both Mack Brown and Leach used this strategy early in their tenures at Texas and Tech.

Look at the teams that Hawaii played during JJ's last year there. Had to be one of the easiest schedules in the country........but they were able to take that 12-0 record to the Sugar Bowl!

And you're able to take 99%o of your posts to moronville

ReedFrawg wrote:I would rather play big games and lose them than play a bunch of cupcakes. For example, we may very well lose to LSU this season but it will be infinitely more fun than any other game on our schedule - including the majority of bowl games.

As a TCU fan, I understand that position, since you've had a long track record of being very competitive with top tier teams, even before they starting actually winning the games.

You might feel different if you were an SMU fan watching us consistently lose by 35+ points to average big 12 teams. Nothing fun or motivating about that.

a few more scheduling thots:

we should never ever be scheduling 3-4 games a year against big 12 teams. if they want to come to dallas and play us on a regular basis, they should invite us to join their conference.

besides, until we are 8-9 win locks, we are only scheduling losses for paychecks. and when we are a quality 8-9 win regional power, we can get a good crowd to see a lot of teams play in dallas. iowa state travels pretty well, i hear.

the argument, "we'll never be the best if we don't play the best", has the cart before the horse. we'll never be good if we don't learn to win before we try to schedule the top 25 several games a year.

CBS Sports-- "BCS title in the Cards? Contending may be likely for L'ville. NFL ready QB Bridgewater has strong WRs and the Cards boast a weak schedule." BCS title should help recruiting.




http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... -prospects

MV pony wrote:CBS Sports-- "BCS title in the Cards? Contending may be likely for L'ville. NFL ready QB Bridgewater has strong WRs and the Cards boast a weak schedule." BCS title should help recruiting.




http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... -prospects

If June would get us a NFL ready QB and some strong WRs then we wouldn't have so many fans afraid of a good OOC schedule. By the way, that mailbag notes that Louisville's schedule would likely leave them out of the title game even if they ran the table. We need better talent not a weaker schedule.

sbsmith wrote:

MV pony wrote:CBS Sports-- "BCS title in the Cards? Contending may be likely for L'ville. NFL ready QB Bridgewater has strong WRs and the Cards boast a weak schedule." BCS title should help recruiting.




http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... -prospects

If June would get us a NFL ready QB and some strong WRs then we wouldn't have so many fans afraid of a good OOC schedule. By the way, that mailbag notes that Louisville's schedule would likely leave them out of the title game even if they ran the table. We need better talent not a weaker schedule.

100% agree sbsmith