PonyFans.com

Circle tomorrow on your calendars boys and girls.

PonyEnergy wrote:

redpony wrote:lots of tslk regarding Stanford and Cal. Nothing about adding SMU. I am feeling that again we will be left on the outside looking in. Guess we will see in the next week or so.

most articles written in the last 24 hours are about Stanford and SMU, not Cal. Let's get it baby! George W has our back!

Definitely a lot of articles highlighting Condi and W. Who knows how it will go. This could be a very good day (SMU 2 ACC), and it could be a very bad day (Stanford or Stanford + Cal 2 ACC but no SMU)...

anyone have any intel?!?!

Must be a moratorium on lies and bs today.

Nothing real. Jim Williams a DC media type posted following this morning:

"Is Stanford, Cal and SMU buying their way into the ACC the next wave of realignment?
Let me begin by saying I have no issues with the three schools doing whatever they can to help their programs. But if they are successful in making it to the ACC will other schools buy a franchise in other P5 conferences?"

Water Pony wrote:Nothing real. Jim Williams a DC media type posted following this morning:

"Is Stanford, Cal and SMU buying their way into the ACC the next wave of realignment?
Let me begin by saying I have no issues with the three schools doing whatever they can to help their programs. But if they are successful in making it to the ACC will other schools buy a franchise in other P5 conferences?"

There is a lot of snickering on the internet about SMU attempting to buy its way into the ACC. Is it a fair process? Is it fair that Vanderbilt, and Northwestern are in the Power 2 by a fluke of circumstance? What about Baylor weaseling into the Big 12 because the Governor and Lieutenant Governor at the time threatened to hold up UT and A&M if they didn't bring in the sexual outlaw school? Not to mention Texas Tech which only got into the Southwest Conference because SMU sponsered them after some big West Texas spenders at Neiman Marcus threatened to fly to Chicago rather than Dallas to do their shopping if the Matadors didn't make the SWC. One does what one must.

The same ones that think twisting arms politically is ok, are the same ones who will mock and complain about buying a school in.

These days it is all about the money as we have all seen, so why they hell is SMU’s money no good but ESPN’s money is good? If SMU buys itself into ACC, everybody wins.

I'm sorry but you can't buy your way into a program - either they want you or not. Conferences don;t need a 'good deal' for a school that will be an anchor a decade from now. If we, or anybody else, gets in it's because they want us.

A bit disturbed that Shrub is now associating himself with SMU again.
What possible advantage could this give us in a lobbying effort w/ the ACC?

.

Interesting you say that about money. Seems Stanford is now doing the same thing to increase the likelihood a vote goes in thier favor. If money didn't play a significant role would USC or UCLA be in the Big10? Did they want to go? Did they and Oregon want a more difficult path to the national championship? or was it money that "bought" them?

Value propositions are both additive and negative. No purchase or contract or exchange or acquisition is all good. SMU and Stanford aren't buying thier way in but rather increasing thier value to those schools that currently don't see enough in it for themselves... it's the difference of paying zero percent interest for 7 years or paying 9% interest on a purchase. Zero sometimes makes all the difference in one's decision to buy.

ROCKNEPONY wrote:Interesting you say that about money. Seems Stanford is now doing the same thing to increase the likelihood a vote goes in thier favor. If money didn't play a significant role would USC or UCLA be in the Big10? Did they want to go? Did they and Oregon want a more difficult path to the national championship? or was it money that "bought" them?

Value propositions are both additive and negative. No purchase or contract or exchange or acquisition is all good. SMU and Stanford aren't buying thier way in but rather increasing thier value to those schools that currently don't see enough in it for themselves... it's the difference of paying zero percent interest for 7 years or paying 9% interest on a purchase. Zero sometimes makes all the difference in one's decision to buy.

This.

Haha. You be you chief.

Each human has both the capacity and reality of doing good and evil things in thier lives. The ability to recognize ourselves as flawed is a sign of maturity. Passing judgement and failing to value another humans contributions because they too are imperfect is a sign of hubris. I have no doubt you should remove the log from your own eye before you attempt to remove the spec from W. In his actions he is working for the good of the SMU community and his effort should be thanked. Judge not a humans good work now by thier failings, less no one be given the space nor have the will to do good at all.

leopold wrote:I'm sorry but you can't buy your way into a program - either they want you or not. Conferences don;t need a 'good deal' for a school that will be an anchor a decade from now. If we, or anybody else, gets in it's because they want us.

All that these schools are interested in now is money. Especially the big state schools that are open to legislative criticism for not maximizing income. They want schools that bring some financial advantage to their schools which allows them to pay coaches and ADs more money. They want us or don't want us for monetary reasons.

Topper wrote:

leopold wrote:I'm sorry but you can't buy your way into a program - either they want you or not. Conferences don;t need a 'good deal' for a school that will be an anchor a decade from now. If we, or anybody else, gets in it's because they want us.

All that these schools are interested in now is money. Especially the big state schools that are open to legislative criticism for not maximizing income. They want schools that bring some financial advantage to their schools which allows them to pay coaches and ADs more money. They want us or don't want us for monetary reasons.

Agree with this in principle. Exception being BIG12 because they have other options and clearly believe they already have DFW locked down with TCU. I also believe TCU is leading the way in blocking us because they know once we go big time it will negatively impact their recruiting and brand presence.