Page 3 of 4

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 9:58 am
by fifty
I wish our new football coach would demand a track team and ipf. How much does a track team cost? Bus rental to meets and some shoes?

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 10:16 am
by PK
fifty wrote:I wish our new football coach would demand a track team and ipf. How much does a track team cost? Bus rental to meets and some shoes?

Shorts and an SMU shirt might be appreciated. 8)

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 10:29 am
by mrydel
And of course the offsetting Title IX ladies.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 11:37 am
by LA_Mustang
EastStang wrote:I disagree about the baseball part. We have a monopoly pretty much on soccer and we are now in probably one of the top 2 soccer conferences in the country. I'd put Men's Track ahead of baseball. Lots of great wide-outs want to run track as well, and lots of throwers are dynamite D/L's. Michael Carter and Margus Hunt come to mind.

East, I'm fairly new to following soccer. I know we have struggled since Hyndman left but we are doing pretty well early in conference play this season. Is the AAC really considered one of the two best conferences in soccer?

Also, I believe the College World Series has become a pretty big TV event for ESPN which elevates it's importance. It's nowhere near football or basketball but I think it is relevant in the discussion.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 11:38 am
by Big12Mustang
fifty wrote:I wish our new football coach would demand a track team and ipf. How much does a track team cost? Bus rental to meets and some shoes?


We play in the AAC so not bus rentals...flights most likely.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 11:39 am
by Big12Mustang
LA_Mustang wrote:
EastStang wrote:I disagree about the baseball part. We have a monopoly pretty much on soccer and we are now in probably one of the top 2 soccer conferences in the country. I'd put Men's Track ahead of baseball. Lots of great wide-outs want to run track as well, and lots of throwers are dynamite D/L's. Michael Carter and Margus Hunt come to mind.

East, I'm fairly new to following soccer. I know we have struggled since Hyndman left but we are doing pretty well early in conference play this season. Is the AAC really considered one of the two best conferences in soccer?

Also, I believe the College World Series has become a pretty big TV event for ESPN which elevates it's importance. It's nowhere near football or basketball but I think it is relevant in the discussion.


North Texas just started baseball. If they have that sport, I don't see why we couldn't start our own baseball + track teams.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 11:40 am
by gostangs
I think you can forget baseball. We are far more likely to move lacrosse up to D-1 rather than add baseball. Track would make sense if we do an IPF - but I don't think we can add sports unless we figure out how to get into a P-5

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 11:40 am
by fifty
Track can compete anywhere. All they need to fly for is conference championships. Go to the highland park invitational every week then fly to memphis for the conference championship.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:41 pm
by HToady
Go on any Big 12 teams athletic website and see if the have Men's soccer or Lacrosse (good grief). Look and see how many have baseball and track.
Look at ECU and UCF, which are probably the two leading P5 candidates and see if they play Men's soccer or Lacrosse. See if they have basball and track teams.

There are some P5 schools that don't play baseball. Iowa State and Colorado, but they don't usually subtract teams from conferences.They usually add.

All I am saying is, if you don't play the sports that everybody else plays, you won' be considered. It's time for baseball again on the Hilltop.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:58 pm
by 1983 Cotton Bowl
OK, so this is a complete left turn from where this thread has been going. . .but since its called "Baylor and TCU" I figured it was as good a place as any.

First. . . whatever TCU's offensive problems were, they appear to have figured it out.

Second. . . that being said, the D has now given up 33 and 61 points in the last 2 weeks. Plus they couldn't hold a 3 TD lead with 10 minutes to go in the 4th quarter against Baylor. So it appears that TCU now has the opposite problem than what they have experienced the last couple of years. Good to great offense, questionable defense.

Third. . .and most importantly since this is an SMU board. . .I too found myself thinking of SMU while watching the Baylor/TCU game. What those two former SWC doormats have accomplished in recent years is pretty impressive. And I think its totally doable for SMU.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 2:03 pm
by Stallion
TCU made some great defensive plays all over the field-but they may not have the depth and it showed in 4th Q. But remember not many teams can stop Baylor for 4 quarters. They put up 61 on TCU but they have scored more than that 8 times in the last 2 years and I doubt Baylor had their starters playing past the middle of the 3rd Q in any of them. Surprisingly UT did pretty well but folded in 2nd half like they have all season. I'm serious Baylor would have hit triple digits or at least 90 on a couple of teams including SMU if they had wanted to over recent years.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 2:31 pm
by PSCA
TCU still has a first rate "D". This past Sat we saw a top "O" play a top "D", and this time the "O" won ... at home. It is always harder to play "D", especially against a very skilled and high Octane "O". I suspect a little bit of a mental let down may have occurred too (maybe a little early celebration) by the TCU "D" when they were up big with 10-11mins to go. Baylor scores quick (like they can), and all of a sudden the train is going down hill and you can't stop it ... and BU is at home. BU, and OU are hardly mid level teams and "O"s.

If anyone needs to be concerned, I would say it is BU and there "D". That was their first test against a good, but not great "O" (they have played no one so far), and they have a lot of heavy hitters on the horizon.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 2:35 pm
by Stallion
cold weather will at least slow the Baylor offense down

Factoid: 8 of 9 of Baylor's highest scoring games in last 2 years were in September/October. The 9th was in covered JerryWorld.

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:45 pm
by ponyfan08
Big12Mustang wrote:
LA_Mustang wrote:
EastStang wrote:I disagree about the baseball part. We have a monopoly pretty much on soccer and we are now in probably one of the top 2 soccer conferences in the country. I'd put Men's Track ahead of baseball. Lots of great wide-outs want to run track as well, and lots of throwers are dynamite D/L's. Michael Carter and Margus Hunt come to mind.

East, I'm fairly new to following soccer. I know we have struggled since Hyndman left but we are doing pretty well early in conference play this season. Is the AAC really considered one of the two best conferences in soccer?

Also, I believe the College World Series has become a pretty big TV event for ESPN which elevates it's importance. It's nowhere near football or basketball but I think it is relevant in the discussion.


North Texas just started baseball. If they have that sport, I don't see why we couldn't start our own baseball + track teams.


Not starting baseball until 2016

Re: Baylor and TCU

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 9:14 pm
by ponyboy
Treadway21 wrote:
ponyscott wrote:Same comments we heard about the 1,500 loyal SMU basketball fans and we would never sell out Moody. Put a good product out there and many more will come to watch and they don't have to be 'just' SMU grads.

Bingo. Basketball was in worse shape than football and in two years SMU had the most sell puts in school history.


Haha. Only at SMU would we use the talk about a put position