Page 16 of 17
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 2:09 pm
by smupony94
ericdickerson4life wrote:smupony94 wrote:SMU carries the Village of Bee Cave market. Pony 94 and Gilbert family there.
That's good to know. At least we pull one market, albeit a small one.
634 people
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 2:11 pm
by jtstang
What, the Lake Jackson 94's don't love us?
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 2:40 pm
by smupony94
jtstang wrote:What, the Lake Jackson 94's don't love us?
he played baseball for UT. His dad also a UT grad had SMU season tickets for a decade in the 60's. He knows more about SMU football than most of us.
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:21 pm
by SMU89
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:32 pm
by Mustangsabu
Sounds like we are still in the mix though. And lets hope UCF are distracted by all this on Saturday
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:42 pm
by PonyKai
Army Spurns Big East...another presser with SMU/UH in the "western" division.
http://www.mwcconnection.com/2011/10/11 ... force-navy
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:44 pm
by EastStang
As I said in another post, the BE ought to have the cojones to invite Missouri and Kansas. That would send a shot across the bow of the Big XII. You know Missouri wants out and wants to ensure it has a check to go with it. Moving to the BE gives them that plus it gives the BE the St. Louis/KC market. And KU lands in a great hoops conference.
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:35 pm
by ericdickerson4life
If you did that you would probably face retaliation by the B12 and see even greater defection from the BE.
Missouri would not leave the B12 for the BE.
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:37 pm
by goldenstang
EastStang wrote:As I said in another post, the BE ought to have the cojones to invite Missouri and Kansas. That would send a shot across the bow of the Big XII. You know Missouri wants out and wants to ensure it has a check to go with it. Moving to the BE gives them that plus it gives the BE the St. Louis/KC market. And KU lands in a great hoops conference.
If KU and Mizzou wanted less money and to be less relevant in football this makes total sense.
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:38 pm
by goldenstang
SMU89 wrote:Wonder what the buyout is going to be? If we have options in 2 years....what's the cost to exit?
In several articles it has been said that they want to raise the buyout from 5 million to 10 million.
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:03 am
by BRStang
Just trying to bump this ahead of jtstang's disgusting "Embrace CUSA thread"
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 2:56 pm
by BRStang
The latest:
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/ ... d-14731768Appears SMU is still in the mix for a Big East spot...
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:02 pm
by smupony94
Nothing new
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:13 pm
by mathman
Conference calls all week, including today, and not one rumor? What is going on?
Re: According to ESPN: SMU target of BE, not AFA
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:15 pm
by BRStang
smupony94 wrote:Nothing new
you know nothing