PonyFans.com

Stlhockeyguy02 wrote:Sounds like free market to me: You are hereby ordered to cover something and expend funds to print information about something nobody cares about, doesn't sell papers, won't move product, and won't boost our membership.

Which comes first, the chicken or the egg. I am not saying that the Dallas media needs to cover SMU only, but hey, how about a simple mention that SMU played a game the same night they mentioned that West Virginia played a game.

Let me ask you-do you think SMU should play Baylor or Montana St?
Do you think that the media would be wise to tailor its coverage depending on the caliber of team we are playing?

If you think we should play Montana St-you have to admit Dallas media and the Dallas community don't give a [deleted] about that game. Guess what the Dallas community doesn't give a [deleted] about ANY Big East football team either

SMU fans on the other hand love irrelevancy and should celebrate into the wee hours of the Nite should SMU beat Montana St.. The rest of Dallas will probably never know the game was played

So I guess when A&M plays Lamar, The Eagle or The Bryan Times will not cover the game. No SMU fan whishes for irrelevancy. For the record Stallion, I do not think that you are truly a spineless fan. You are better than that.

This thread is hilarious. I got to believe that in the middle of one of America's biggest football crazy cities, SMU can carve out a market for football tickets. How much does it cost for a family of 4 to go to a cowboy game? $1,000? Same family could go to an SMU game for the cost of a movie.

A&M will have 92,000 for that game and SMU will 12,000 for the Montana St. game. Who ever claimed A&M was irrelevant-they play in the No. 1 Football Conference in America

West Coast Johnny wrote:This thread is hilarious. I got to believe that in the middle of one of America's biggest football crazy cities, SMU can carve out a market for football tickets. How much does it cost for a family of 4 to go to a cowboy game? $1,000? Same family could go to an SMU game for the cost of a movie.

Exactly!

Stallion wrote:A&M will have 92,000 for that game and SMU will 12,000 for the Montana St. game. Who ever claimed A&M was irrelevant-they play in the No. 1 Football Conference in America

Way to state the obvious. Nothing new there. Just keep being a fan. Don't give up the fight!

West Coast Johnny wrote:This thread is hilarious. I got to believe that in the middle of one of America's biggest football crazy cities, SMU can carve out a market for football tickets. How much does it cost for a family of 4 to go to a cowboy game? $1,000? Same family could go to an SMU game for the cost of a movie.

That's assuming SMU football is an alternative for Cowboys football (it's not). If that family of four doesn't want to spend $1,000 on Cowboys tickets then they're going to watch the game at home not spend money to watch a bunch of average college football players they've never heard of before. Chances are that family of four is affiliated with one of the big state schools and wouldn't have any interest in SMU football unless their team was involved.

smusportspage wrote:Texas A&M plays Sam Houston St next year and has Lamar on their schedule in 2014. We play Texas A&M, TCU and Texas Tech next year. You just said that those are top tier because they are all in the Jackwipe BCS. Which is it Coach'em?

Which is what? This year's OOC is a step in the right direction but doesn't cancel out that we are the squash game for those teams and that playing those teams is not a typical Saturday in Ford. When we play those teams regularly and don't embarrass ourselves people will notice. Until then we are in the same tier as SHSU and Lamar. A pre-season warm up for top tier teams.

Apparently SMU agrees with me too, as they have been trying to improve our conference situation.

Coach'em, just trying to get a handle on your argument that SMU is not top tier, i.e. BSC and therefore does not warrant being covered by the local media. SMU is playing in the highest division categorized by the NCAA, that being Division I. We can not directly control the landscape of the BCS. SMU has made a concerted effort and commitmwnt to play in the highest division of the NCAA. Playing one game against Montana St does not change that just like A&M playing Lamar does not change their NCAA status either. According to the NCAA, Division I is the highest level of college athletics. If you and other decide to arbitrarily break it into tiers, should SMU be penalized for that?

It is not one game it is the totality of not being competitive when we play Big 12 teams to the point we have to drop one. Plus being 7-5 in a mid major conference that has teams the local media considers inferior. It is only having 3 end over BCS level teams. This would not be a big deal if we weren't doing it cause we can't compete. The problem is that the program is admitting we are not ready to play at the top levels and that doesn't fly in a crowded sports market.

smusportspage wrote: SMU has made a concerted effort and commitmwnt to play in the highest division of the NCAA. Playing one game against Montana St does not change that just like A&M playing Lamar does not change their NCAA status either. According

I appreciate the thought here, but this is where you lost me. So far, SMU has only TALKED about making a concerted effort and commitment to play at the highest level but has not done nearly enough to back that talk with anything tangible enough to attract a larger following. We put together a campaign to get into the Big 12, only to have those teams routinely beat us like we stole something. We have a coach who either doesn't want or doesn't know how to recruit to the level necessary to stay on the field with elite teams. And now, as we move into a (for the moment) BCS conference and are trying to position ourselves to have a seat at the table when the realignment merry-go-round stops, we drop a game that would boost attendance and gain possible national attention to play Montana St. It might be good short-term strategy to take advantage of the last BCS year by improving our chances of having a decent W-L record, but it sends a terrible message about our ability to compete at the level of the elite teams.

A&M and the like can get away with it because they have a solid tradition of beating opponents of all levels, so if they want to take a vacation against Lamar or SHSU who cares. We, on the other hand, can't win a second-tier conference and lose to bottom dwellars in Div I yet have the nerve to say we belong in the big leagues. Then, we simultaneously send the mixed message that we can't hang with those big leagues by dropping one of those teams for an FCS squad. When SMU beats the likes of Tech, TCU and A&M more than once a decade, then they can make this argument; but now is not the time to look small time, and this move looks exactly that (not that it is going to stop me from going to watch it and rooting on my Mustangs regardless).

smusportspage wrote:If you and other decide to arbitrarily break it into tiers, should SMU be penalized for that?

Unfortunately the "others" you refer to include the non SMU affiliated college football fans that do not have any interest in SMU football. The DMN and other media outlets are not penalizing SMU, they are trying to appeal to the interest of people who read their newspaper, i.e. the "others" you refer to.

You can gripe about it being arbitrary all you want, but that is not going to change anyone's mind about whether to have any interest in SMU.

RyanSMU98 wrote:

smusportspage wrote: SMU has made a concerted effort and commitmwnt to play in the highest division of the NCAA. Playing one game against Montana St does not change that just like A&M playing Lamar does not change their NCAA status either. According

I appreciate the thought here, but this is where you lost me. So far, SMU has only TALKED about making a concerted effort and commitment to play at the highest level but has not done nearly enough to back that talk with anything tangible enough to attract a larger following. We put together a campaign to get into the Big 12, only to have those teams routinely beat us like we stole something. We have a coach who either doesn't want or doesn't know how to recruit to the level necessary to stay on the field with elite teams. And now, as we move into a (for the moment) BCS conference and are trying to position ourselves to have a seat at the table when the realignment merry-go-round stops, we drop a game that would boost attendance and gain possible national attention to play Montana St. It might be good short-term strategy to take advantage of the last BCS year by improving our chances of having a decent W-L record, but it sends a terrible message about our ability to compete at the level of the elite teams.

A&M and the like can get away with it because they have a solid tradition of beating opponents of all levels, so if they want to take a vacation against Lamar or SHSU who cares. We, on the other hand, can't win a second-tier conference and lose to bottom dwellars in Div I yet have the nerve to say we belong in the big leagues. Then, we simultaneously send the mixed message that we can't hang with those big leagues by dropping one of those teams for an FCS squad. When SMU beats the likes of Tech, TCU and A&M more than once a decade, then they can make this argument; but now is not the time to look small time, and this move looks exactly that (not that it is going to stop me from going to watch it and rooting on my Mustangs regardless).

A&M and the like have been able to get away with it because they have always had the benefit of being in a BCS conference. The money and media exposure that comes tbeir way by simply being BCS makes it so much easier. it is easier to buy a Rolls - Royce than it is to build it. SMU has not been such a beneficiary.

If SMU wants to be considered top tier, bring Sherwood and what's left of the "naughty nine" back.