PonyFans.com

ponyte wrote:Not opening a debate on Bennett, but when was the last time we had back to back .500 in conference play? In the two years we have been in CUSA, we have not come close to being the conference doormat. Sure, we all have expectations of been much better especially this year. However, I for one am glad I no longer dread going to ESPN's bottom 10. Are we to the point we want to be? No. Are we out of the cellar? Yes.

That is sad but true--for SMU and its coaches these days, the mark of improvement is getting out of the cellar.

ponyte wrote:Not opening a debate on Bennett, but when was the last time we had back to back .500 in conference play? In the two years we have been in CUSA, we have not come close to being the conference doormat. Sure, we all have expectations of been much better especially this year. However, I for one am glad I no longer dread going to ESPN's bottom 10. Are we to the point we want to be? No. Are we out of the cellar? Yes.

And I know this will be hard for many to comprehend, but if you look at the overall history of SMU football this is an area in which we have lived most of our life. With the exception of a few short "eras" we have been a middle of the pack team, with difficulty getting people to attend games. We got spoiled with the Pony Express era (in a positive way) and now we want it all.

Thus, I think you make a valid point. We have returned to mediocrity and now is the time, hopefully that we can break the glass ceiling and move up. Being in CUSA and having the advantages of our beautiful facilities, up and coming BB program, and Dallas, Texas with all it has to offer, this is the time that SMU can build a program that can get out of mediocrity and rise to the top. I suggest starting by acquiring a few good offensive linemen.

Contrary to what people think (incuding the coach), conference wins have rarely been a problem. Since leaving the SWC, SMU averages more than 3 conference wins a year (3.36 to be exact). The reason SMU was ending up on the bottom 10 is because it was starting out 0-4 or 0-5 every year. The only year SMU finished in the botton 10 is the 0-12 year.

So when the coach says "Before I came here, SMU couldn't win a conference game," he is kind of full of it. Since the SWC folded, Bennett hsa the worst conference winning percentage of SMU's three coaches.

SMU Football Blog wrote:Contrary to what people think (incuding the coach), conference wins have rarely been a problem. Since leaving the SWC, SMU averages more than 3 conference wins a year (3.36 to be exact). The reason SMU was ending up on the bottom 10 is because it was starting out 0-4 or 0-5 every year. The only year SMU finished in the botton 10 is the 0-12 year.

So when the coach says "Before I came here, SMU couldn't win a conference game," he is kind of full of it. Since the SWC folded, Bennett hsa the worst conference winning percentage of SMU's three coaches.

Gregg's conference record
0-16 (.000)

Rossley's conference record
7-34-1 (.167)

Caven's conference record
18-20 (.474) or
14-17 (.452) as 10 games were vacated due to ineligible player in 1998

Bennett's conference record
14-26 (.350)

# of .500 or better seasons
Caven 3
Bennett 2
Rossley 1
Gregg 0

# of > .500 season
Caven 1

Perhaps it is a bit of a stretch to say Bennett has the worse conference record. Based on wins and loses, Caven is the super hero of post DP coaches.

As I posted earlier, I don't want a debate about Bennett. I merely want to point out that we were, just a short while ago, pathetic. We have vaulted to mediocre. We want to be good. We have reasonable expectations that next year we will not return to the cellar and hopefully raise to the top of the conference.

Mike Cavan Head Coach of the Glory Years of Post DP SMU-even under much much more difficult conditions.

What I said was 100% accurate. If you want to quibble, quibble for including Rossley's one .500 conference season in there. Fact is. 1996-2006, SMU averaged more than three conference wins per game. It was more than three under Cavan, it is more than three under Bennett. In

Tuesday's paper, Bennett said that before he came to SMU, SMU couldn't win a conference game. That is simply not true.

Stallion wrote:Mike Cavan Head Coach of the Glory Years of Post DP SMU-even under much much more difficult conditions.

Let's be honest, SMU was 1-10 in 1995 and then in 1996 mysteriously had a nice little jump to 5-6, 6-5, 5-7 (then 4-6 and 3-9). The lesson: Bad SWC conference players could kick most decent WAC players' butts. You have said as much, I think. Let's not be singing Cavan's praises too loudly.

oh I agree 100%-that's why Rossley's 5-6 in the WAC and Cavan's 6-5 in the second year of the WAC are slightly deceiving. But Cavan didn't get to recruit to the SWC, had to play in the Cotton Bowl and had only 1 player-Shanderrick Charles who even got on the field under the new and relaxed recruiting standards circa 2000. Bennett has it much much easier today-he doesn't have near the excuses that any of his predecessors did-and I think it is reasonable to expect that Bennett should be able to achieve a bowl-not necessarily a championship-but a bowl-in 6 years. BTW going to the Whatsamatter U. bowl every 5 years ain't my goal for the program-It always has been as Orsini says to be competitive as a Top 25 program within the restrictions of SMU's present conference ie TCU. I wonder why Orsini's mission statement seemed so refreshing-it should have been the goal all along-but obviously the Model was not in place for someone to credibly make that argument.

ALL I KNOW IS THAT ALMOST HALF OF THE TEAMS IN DIV. 1 ARE GOING TO BOWLS..... SMU IS ONCE AGAIN IN THE BOTTOM HALF THAT IS NOT GOING TO A BOWL!!!.... I AM STILL PISSED AS HELL!!!!....HOW MANY TEAMS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BOWLS, HAVE SMU'S ADVANTAGES? QUALITY OF DEGREE? THE STATE OF TEXAS? CITY OF DALLAS? BEAUTIFUL CAMPUS? TRADITION? FACILITIES? GORGEOUS GIRLS? NONE!!! WE WERE CHEATED OUT OF THE FUN OF BOWL SEASON YET AGAIN!!! THIS SEASON WAS A FAILURE!!!!

Well out of 119 D-I schools, 64 will be going bowling but 9 teams that finished bowl eligible (6-6), SMU being one of the 9 will be sitting at home for the holidays.

We were on step closer. Just so happenend that things didnt fall our way as always.

Of the other 8 sittin' at home, did any hit the .500 mark with one or more wins vs a D - II school? Just asking out of curiosity.

Yes and some teams that are going bowling at 6-6 have I-AA wins, too.

78pony wrote:Of the other 8 sittin' at home, did any hit the .500 mark with one or more wins vs a D - II school? Just asking out of curiosity.

The Mustangs played a Div. 1-AA school, not a Div. II.

Waiting 1 more year brings Todd Dodge into the circle of prospective coaches.

[quote="78pony"]Of the other 8 sittin' at home, did any hit the .500 mark with one or more wins vs a D - II school? Just asking out of curiosity.[/quote]

There are 15 teams at 6-6 including us. Most likely (depending on Troy winning Saturday) these teams will be shut out of bowls at .500: Arizona, Washington State, Louisana Lafayette, Arkansas State, Wyoming, Kent State, Kansas, Pittsburgh, and Alabama (if the SEC gets 2 teams in the BCS Bama will be bowling).

Yes I that some of those teams come from "weaker" Non BCS conferences. Arizona beat Cal and LL beat Houston and those 2 teams wont be bowling this year....i dont know the schedules of all those teams but i think that some of them had I-AA teams on them