Re: Will UT go to PAC?
Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:31 pm
Or they could just add some schools in the recruiting hotbeds...SMU, TCU, UH, UT.
AusTxPony wrote:Or they could just add some schools in the recruiting hotbeds...SMU, TCU, UH, UT.
sbsmith wrote:gostangs wrote:The best plan for the pac would be to pull in UT, and then also SMU on condition we add some sports and deck Ford. Then they would pull in meaningful TV geography from the two regions they care about (Austin and Dallas) and pick off the two best schools in Texas that aren't Rice.
Or they could just add UT and 3 other schools that bring some fans/eyeballs to the table.
SoCal_Pony wrote:
Not that I think it will happen, but small thinking on your part SB.
sbsmith wrote:Sure we'd get a bump from where we are now but we'd still be hanging around the bottom of the conference in attendance especially in bad seasons. Why bother with us when they can pursue programs that already draw well?
SoCal_Pony wrote:
If we can average 43k we are with 2/3rds of the conference.
And which programs would they pursue? Baylor, Tech, Coog High or Ok St.?
For the reasons I stated, plus the fact that we are a more cultural fit for the CA schools, I'd argue that SMU shouldn't assume anything, including taking a back seat to any of these schools.
mathman wrote:The Cal vs Stanford thing is pretty settled. There is virtually no rating service that has Cal above Stanford. Also was curious about the rest of the PAC so looked it up. According to US News - (the most used ranking source) - the Cali schools are of course great - Stanford (5), Cal (20), USC (23) UCLA (24) and you can throw in Washington (54) also. They are all above SMU (56) and UT (56). The rest of the PAC is not good - and in fact most of the supposedly poorly academically ranked SEC is above Oregon (103), Utah (111), Arizona (124), Arizona State (129) Oregon State (143) and Washington State (143). That is not a strong group.
I know most don't care about university rankings, but it seems to come up a lot when new candidates are thrown around for PAC or Big membership. So its just FYI - SMU and UT would not be remotely thought of as academic baggage in that conference.
Thanks for looking up all the information. Guess "orguy" was just trolling. California seems to have a weird effect on a lot of people. Think they implemented the travel ban because they were afraid some of their folks might ask for amnesty when they got here.
mathman wrote:The Cal vs Stanford thing is pretty settled. There is virtually no rating service that has Cal above Stanford. Also was curious about the rest of the PAC so looked it up. According to US News - (the most used ranking source) - the Cali schools are of course great - Stanford (5), Cal (20), USC (23) UCLA (24) and you can throw in Washington (54) also. They are all above SMU (56) and UT (56). The rest of the PAC is not good - and in fact most of the supposedly poorly academically ranked SEC is above Oregon (103), Utah (111), Arizona (124), Arizona State (129) Oregon State (143) and Washington State (143). That is not a strong group.
I know most don't care about university rankings, but it seems to come up a lot when new candidates are thrown around for PAC or Big membership. So its just FYI - SMU and UT would not be remotely thought of as academic baggage in that conference.
Thanks for looking up all the information. Guess "orguy" was just trolling. California seems to have a weird effect on a lot of people. Think they implemented the travel ban because they were afraid some of their folks might ask for amnesty when they got here.
Stallion wrote:PAC 12 schools wouldn't move the attendance meter much at SMU.
orguy wrote:mathman wrote:The Cal vs Stanford thing is pretty settled. There is virtually no rating service that has Cal above Stanford. Also was curious about the rest of the PAC so looked it up. According to US News - (the most used ranking source) - the Cali schools are of course great - Stanford (5), Cal (20), USC (23) UCLA (24) and you can throw in Washington (54) also. They are all above SMU (56) and UT (56). The rest of the PAC is not good - and in fact most of the supposedly poorly academically ranked SEC is above Oregon (103), Utah (111), Arizona (124), Arizona State (129) Oregon State (143) and Washington State (143). That is not a strong group.
I know most don't care about university rankings, but it seems to come up a lot when new candidates are thrown around for PAC or Big membership. So its just FYI - SMU and UT would not be remotely thought of as academic baggage in that conference.
Thanks for looking up all the information. Guess "orguy" was just trolling. California seems to have a weird effect on a lot of people. Think they implemented the travel ban because they were afraid some of their folks might ask for amnesty when they got here.
Hmm. Rereading this. U care very much about university rankings. DId you graduate with a degree in communications art from SMU or perhaps a junior college? think you understand the ranking process? living in your Mom's basement in Tyler? The wise sage!! where did you say you went to school? ETSU a and m?
Speaking of Tolls your wrote the book. Likely you are troll who never even graduated from SMU. Take this offline if you wish? Yeah, thought so ... coward.
Good sweat to ya lowlife
East Coast Mustang wrote:orguy wrote:mathman wrote:The Cal vs Stanford thing is pretty settled. There is virtually no rating service that has Cal above Stanford. Also was curious about the rest of the PAC so looked it up. According to US News - (the most used ranking source) - the Cali schools are of course great - Stanford (5), Cal (20), USC (23) UCLA (24) and you can throw in Washington (54) also. They are all above SMU (56) and UT (56). The rest of the PAC is not good - and in fact most of the supposedly poorly academically ranked SEC is above Oregon (103), Utah (111), Arizona (124), Arizona State (129) Oregon State (143) and Washington State (143). That is not a strong group.
I know most don't care about university rankings, but it seems to come up a lot when new candidates are thrown around for PAC or Big membership. So its just FYI - SMU and UT would not be remotely thought of as academic baggage in that conference.
Thanks for looking up all the information. Guess "orguy" was just trolling. California seems to have a weird effect on a lot of people. Think they implemented the travel ban because they were afraid some of their folks might ask for amnesty when they got here.
Hmm. Rereading this. U care very much about university rankings. DId you graduate with a degree in communications art from SMU or perhaps a junior college? think you understand the ranking process? living in your Mom's basement in Tyler? The wise sage!! where did you say you went to school? ETSU a and m?
Speaking of Tolls your wrote the book. Likely you are troll who never even graduated from SMU. Take this offline if you wish? Yeah, thought so ... coward.
Good sweat to ya lowlife
Orguy must be one of the UNT trolls