Friday's DMN: OC hired!; and confirms attempts to buy out OSU.

[Dooby]

[url=http://www.dallasnews.com/cgi-bin/bi/gold_print.cgi]SMU looking to drop OSU from football schedule
Mustangs trying to replace Big 12 school with lesser opponent[/url]

09:24 PM CST on Thursday, January 8, 2004

By CALVIN WATKINS / The Dallas Morning News

UNIVERSITY PARK - SMU officials said they are thinking of taking Oklahoma State off the 2004 football schedule.

SMU has contacted Florida A&M, Southern University and Grambling State about replacing the Cowboys.

SMU opens the season Sept. 4 against Texas Tech and faces TCU on Sept. 11. Both were bowl teams.

"We're in the process of evaluating our 2004 schedule and are looking at some potential changes," SMU athletic director Jim Copeland said. "But we have nothing to announce at this time."

OSU athletic director Harry Birdwell was unavailable for comment. Birdwell said last week he had not been contacted by SMU officials regarding a change in the schedule.

Birdwell said OSU is owed two more games from SMU and if a change is made it would be the second amendment to the contract.

SMU could buy out OSU. Birdwell said buyouts are in the six-figure range and rarely happen. SMU probably would finish the contract in two or three years.


Cincinnati's Burns hired as offensive coordinator

SMU will announce Friday the hiring of Rusty Burns as its offensive coordinator.

Burns spent five seasons at Cincinnati as the offensive coordinator and receivers coach. He replaces Larry Edmondson, who was demoted after the 2003 season.

"There is a lot of work to do," Burns said. "When you look at needs, we need it at the skill positions. The offensive line is young, but young kids in a few years get beef."

SMU coach Phil Bennett said the offens would feature passing and different formations to create mismatches. Burns said there would be plenty of one-back formations and some with two tight ends.

Bennett also said he expects to hire an offensive line coach early next week.

<small>[ 01-08-2004, 07:26 PM: Message edited by: Dooby ]</small>

[Charleston Pony]

FAMU, Southern or Grambling to replace OSU? Let's hope it's Grambling. Would the others result in the same kind of crowd that Grambling will? I have little doubt that Grambling would mean close to 30k attendance, assuming ticket prices aren't out of line with our normal pricing. Another home game and possible "W" sure beats a trip to Stillwater. One think Coach Bennett forgot from his stay in Manhattan is that when you are rebuilding, it's not a bad idea to play a soft schedule early in the season. Gotta taste some early success to help build confidence.

[Dooby]

Originally posted by Charleston Pony:
Another home game and possible "W" sure beats a trip to Stillwater. One think Coach Bennett forgot from his stay in Manhattan is that when you are rebuilding, it's not a bad idea to play a soft schedule early in the season. Gotta taste some early success to help build confidence.

Bennett never forgot it; Bennett has little control over the situation. Copeland sets the schedule. Copeland was on record in November that he liked a tough schedule; he said he wanted to schedule UT. Regardless, the schedule, by and large, is set up years in advance. This is really the first opportunity since Bennett got here to get the schedule changed.

[cheesepony]

How cool would it be for Grambling to bring its band to Ford? It would be great for recruiting for both schools, and I would virtually guarantee a sellout.... I think it's a great idea. One question - if we're so cash strapped , what are we doing dropping OSU? and I'd be very interested to see comparatively how Turner and Copeland are matching up in terms of fundraising. It seems like the "commitment" to new facilities, programs, etc... is going extremely well with the general campus, but nothing is happening or being publicly pursued in regards to new natatorium, Moody upgrade, etc...

[Dooby]

Just guessing, but I think the unofficial athletic policy is fix football, then everything else. Not necessarily because football is king is Texas, but because of the investment in Ford Stadium.

I don't know if we are cash strapped or what. If the game comes close to selling out, it pays for itself. But I think there is something else. Just speculating, but like last summer's installation of the new turf in Ford, I think there must be some alumni who are offering to foot the bill for this.

[Bergermeister]

SMU athletics is not "cash strapped". Where did that come from?

[bubba pony]

Ok, I'll be one of the first, this is a cop out and shows fear. we scheduled OK State and should honor the contract not to mention lost of six figures dollars. we might lose to Grambling. many of you sound as sure about this win as you were before we lost to Navy two years ago. I vote stay with OKC. a few months ago everyone was excited to have this game and happy to have the attendance this game will draw.
when we last beat Grambling wasn't that when we had eric dickerson? people came to see the pony express not Grambling.

go ahead and schedule Grambling in the future if you want to, but don't cancel the OKC contract.

[Dooby]

Originally posted by bubba pony:
Ok, I'll be one of the first, this is a cop out and shows fear. we scheduled OK State and should honor the contract not to mention lost of six figures dollars. we might lose to Grambling. many of you sound as sure about this win as you were before we lost to Navy two years ago. I vote stay with OKC. a few months ago everyone was excited to have this game and happy to have the attendance this game will draw.
when we last beat Grambling wasn't that when we had eric dickerson? people came to see the pony express not Grambling.

go ahead and schedule Grambling in the future if you want to, but don't cancel the OKC contract.

Few thoughts:

First, to paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes, there is nothing immoral about breaching or terminating a contract. We buy OSU out and we are happy and OSU is happy. Contracts are not written in blood on sacred parchment.

Second, the fact that we had Eric Dickerson the last time we beat Grambling has as much relevance as the fact that the last time we beat OSU was 1950 (56-0). In fact, it means even less because we haven't played Grambling since 1983.

Third, the loss of "six figures dollars" would be countered by the ticket sales from a potential sold-out home game. The 2004 OSU game won't draw squat for us because it is in Stillwater. The 2005 OSU game is another story, but I'll take that risk. If we can win some friggin' games, our attendance will go up and it will be a moot issue.

Fourth, fear. Sounds to me like you are afraid of losing to Grambling. I confess I am a little warry of that proposition as well. But I am not afraid of losing to OSU because I have done it two years in a row and don't look forward to two more years of it. I'd rather risk winning and letting our players get a little confidence going into conference play.

<small>[ 01-09-2004, 05:50 AM: Message edited by: Dooby ]</small>

[k pony]

THe OSU games will be played later in the decade.

[EastStang]

We won't lose six figures if the game is rescheduled to another year. My guess is that Bennett and Copeland would like to rework the contract to get OSU after the TT contract expires. They might honor OSU here next year and play two at Stillwater later in the decade. These things have a way of working out. For the replacement Grambling would be my first choice, Prairie View A&M my second choice. Don't those two schools sell out Texas Stadium every year? Southern would not be bad either, they would bring a crowd (but they are better than Grambling). Florida A&M would in my view not bring a crowd the way Grambling, PV A&M, or Southern would. And yes, we need one winable game early in the schedule to give these guys a taste otherwise depression sets in and self-fulling prophecies start to occur. "We're ahead, but they'll probably make a big play, oops we just fumbled."

[abezontar]

Prairie View and Grambling play every year in the Cotton Bowl, I don't think they sell the place out, but they darn sure bring a good crowd. (Doesn't the Cotton Bowl seat more people than Texas Stadium?)

[BigEasyPony]

I think this buyout stuff stinks. It shows your players that they can't handle playing big-time programs. I understand when you have a young team that you don't want to stunt their growth by getting pounded by a Ok. State. The only way to get better is to play better teams. I also think you can use this in recruiting that you can play schools like OSU every year.

It also sickens me that you are not only admitting that you are an inferior team, but you have to pay a sizable sum of money to get out of the contract. If I were a large booster I'd be really angry that the athletic department has placed a priority in buying out OSU and this pushes other projects back.

[cowboypony]

Grambling would be absolutely fantastic for attendance, media exposure and, hopefully, a win. If not Grambling, then Prairie View. This could be a real good move b/c our early season schedule is not looking real favorable right now. Having recruits come in for a game like this with a packed house and a W would be fantastic.

[Dooby]

Originally posted by BigEasyPony:
I think this buyout stuff stinks. It shows your players that they can't handle playing big-time programs. I understand when you have a young team that you don't want to stunt their growth by getting pounded by a Ok. State. The only way to get better is to play better teams. I also think you can use this in recruiting that you can play schools like OSU every year.

If you understand that you don't want a young team's growth stunted by getting pounded by OSU, what are you complaining about? In the November 13, 2003 DMN, several coaches offered advice on how to improve SMU. At least two coaches said to build confidence while developing talent by scheduling weak opponents. This is part of that.

Regardless of OSU, we play schools "like OSU" every year in Texas Tech and TCU.

Originally posted by BigEasyPony:
It also sickens me that you are not only admitting that you are an inferior team, but you have to pay a sizable sum of money to get out of the contract. If I were a large booster I'd be really angry that the athletic department has placed a priority in buying out OSU and this pushes other projects back.

What the heck are you talking about? Newsflash: we finished 116 out of 117 Div. 1 teams according to ESPN. Anyone not willing to admit this team is struggling is in fantasyland. Schools buy out of these contracts all the time. I prefer the proactive approach to just shrugging our shoulders and saying there is nothing we can do.

What other projects are you referring to? Moody? A new natatorium? When we built Ford, like it or not, straightening out this football mess became priorities 1, 2 and 3 for the athletic department. The 0-12 season showed how much work has to be done. This is part of that work. Personally, I consider fixing the schedulign fiasco that Copeland created to be an important project.

<small>[ 01-09-2004, 06:46 AM: Message edited by: Dooby ]</small>

[MizterTea]

Originally posted by BigEasyPony:
I think this buyout stuff stinks. It shows your players that they can't handle playing big-time programs.

OSU and Tech did a pretty good job of doing that for us this past season.