Page 3 of 3
Re: Orsini made right decision...again
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 10:38 am
by ReedFrawg
dcpony wrote:CalallenStang wrote:TCU in 2001 was 6-6 and in 2004 was 5-6...they are not exactly the models of consistent winning they make themselves out to be
8 bowls in 9 years and on the verge of 4 10-win seasons in 5 years. I'll take that consistency over the next decade, especially with some of our OOC opponents (TX, Tech, LSU, Arkansas, etc.).
Re: Orsini made right decision...again
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 11:43 am
by dcpony
ReedFrawg wrote:dcpony wrote:CalallenStang wrote:TCU in 2001 was 6-6 and in 2004 was 5-6...they are not exactly the models of consistent winning they make themselves out to be
8 bowls in 9 years and on the verge of 4 10-win seasons in 5 years. I'll take that consistency over the next decade, especially with some of our OOC opponents (TX, Tech, LSU, Arkansas, etc.).
You're preaching to the choir. And I don't care about the frying pan. One game doesn't make a season unless it's 97 and 2006 in SMU's case.
Bottom line: TCU owns SMU. ...hopefully SMU can get something started next year, if not another rebuliding job is going to start and I'll officially be done with SMU football.
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 3:10 pm
by SMU_is_bowling
Good riddance, Dcpony. I can assure you SMU football will be non the worse without you. But if you like, stick around a while and try to help the team with your support at games instead of giving them a weak ultimatum.