SMU_Alumni11 wrote:Either way I give up, just no point in any of this
listen, no one says you can't complain, but be constructive about it and support what you say with something factual, not just observation. SMT has already cornered the whiney fan market around here.
"This is . . . dedication to distraction by fans. Is that what I'm going to go with Jay?" "That poor kid has to be wondering what is dad doing." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XknLDwj0dSo
If 11's complaint is that he doesn't like people (in the SMU community) just coming out for "free food and drink" who have no intention of going to the game...I'm not sure how I feel about that. I'd like to think that those people who come out to enjoy the pre-game experience also have some interest in the game, but clearly there are exceptions. For Homecoming in particular, I'm sure there are some sorority girls who are only there to see if their "sister" gets picked as Queen...and they may hang out on the 'Vard and just drop into Ford to see who gets to be Queen for a day. I don't begrudge thenm that...they have no interest in football and may have no friends who are interested. At least they add to our padded attendance figures and hopefully "dress up" the 'Vard to make others' gameday experience more enjoyable.
I really think in general even the majority of the "fans" that show up on the home side honestly are more interested in just getting out of the house than actually pulling for an SMU win. The number of people that leave between halftime and the end of the game is simply amazing...and it happens no matter what the score is or how close the game may be.
I distinctly remember at least 20 people around me getting up to leave RIGHT BEFORE OVERTIME in the 2009 Navy game.
We don't just have a problem with the number of fans - it's with the number of SERIOUS fans. People are far more interested in the other games nationally or with whatever else is going on than they are actually staying to the end and pulling for the team....and I really think it's because even most of our alumni don't take the team seriously. It's probably the most pathetic part of the whole situation.
2ndandlong wrote:Your tuition does not pay for blvd food or drink. These are predominantly corporate sponsorships.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant though.
Look Im assuming that in some portion of tuition (referring to all $ amounts like student fees and sport package) goes to it.
Again Im giving up, I dont particularly like ranting on my own schools message board nor being the minority, so right now im just going to stop and respond only to the unnecessary comments
good of you to assume things and not do any due diligence. Glad those Cox classes are coming in handy.
WildBillPony wrote:I do believe that winning all the time will turn attendance around, but that really means winning all the time. SMU was averaging about .500 in wins/losses when I was a student in the early to mid 70's, and the Cotton Bowl crowds were generally sparse.
so all we have to do is go undefeated...for how many years?
WildBillPony wrote:I do believe that winning all the time will turn attendance around, but that really means winning all the time. SMU was averaging about .500 in wins/losses when I was a student in the early to mid 70's, and the Cotton Bowl crowds were generally sparse.
so all we have to do is go undefeated...for how many years?
I would say at least one.
You must not have been around this program in the Pony Express days when all we did was field top 10 teams and compete for SWC Championships every year...and still couldn't attract enough fans to fill Ford Stadium...unless of course we were playing Texas or Arkansas or A&M and they brought the crowd
The FACT of the matter is that we are a small, EXCLUSIVE private school that Dallas does not identify with. I like the "new" campaign to try and sell SMU as Dallas' college team, but the truth is that Texas, A&M, and Tech are more Dallas' teams than SMU. It's a real challenge to promote SMU athletics to the Dallas community. Our administration is well aware of this and that's why we have only 30k seats in Ford and 7k in Moody. Perfect size venues for our programs to (hopefully) grow into
Charleston Pony reminded me in what he said about the Sorority Sisters and Homecoming Queen. Mrydel do you remember SMU's queen for Homecoming '70-'71 school year. The vote had to be taken a second time, because of the first vote's results. The picture of the first winner made it into the yearbook.
redpony wrote:I saw a great many of the 'Pony Express' games but as I recall they were all played at Texas stadium. I was not aware that Ford existed at that time.
GO PONIES!!!
Games do not have to have been played in Ford for him to judge whether there were enough fans in attendance to fill Ford.
smustatesmen wrote:Charleston Pony reminded me in what he said about the Sorority Sisters and Homecoming Queen. Mrydel do you remember SMU's queen for Homecoming '70-'71 school year. The vote had to be taken a second time, because of the first vote's results. The picture of the first winner made it into the yearbook.
I do not recall. I was not in a fraternity so really not into all of that plus I have trouble remembering my own name sometimes. Was that they year they elected a guy?
All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand
I don't believe you had to in a Frat to be aware of the hoopla surrounding Homecoming. The Queens were usually dating a member of the football team, ie. Chuck Hixson's wife, followed the next year by Gary Hammond's girlfriend. But yeah, that was the year a guy was voted in. '94, he was a real hippie looking dude. You would have had a great time hitting that Queen.
Did not mean to imply you had to be in a fraternity to be involved. It is just that they are more directly invested in the process. I had forgotten Bev was queen. She and Gary were a great couple abd I assume still are.
All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand
