Comet7745

We have like 6,000-7,000 undergrads. If you guys were to string 5 winning seasons together, you'll start selling out consistently.

A Texas-only conference would be pretty epic: Texas A&M Texas Tech TCU Baylor SMU Rice Houston UNT UTEP Texas State UTSA

I vouched for you guys.

Wow, you really care about stickin' it to SMU.

25 years of losing isn't going to be remedied by one winning season. Especially in a small private university with less than 10k undergrads. We do sellout or fill up the majority of our stadium when we play someone who people actually gives a damn (UCF? no one but the die-hard cares about them). It sucks but that's just how it goes. The UTEP game and even Northwestern State game were full and looked great. Last year's game against Army and TCU where absolutely filled to the brink, including the lawn area. But not sure what more to say, our attendance does suffer, most SMU fans will tell you that. We got our problems, and clearly so does UNT - I'd be more preoccupied with trying to fix yours than getting off on "SMUt" comments lol.

You guys need to relax. You're on the right path in improving your football program. Even if you don't get an immediate invite from the MWCUSA, you'll have plenty of time to actually start dominating the Sun Belt. If that happens you'll get noticed and will get invited, period. Just because a team is locked out of realignment one year, doesn't mean they're out of it for the next phase, quite the opposite in my opinion. Focus on winning and all the blocks will start falling in place.

Not sure if this is sarcasm or not.

I'd argue that UTSA, UNT, and Texas St all have great potential. A conference like CUSA or MWC should think about wrapping them up sooner rather than later.

A lot of SMU's crap seasons have to do with the fact that school officials didn't give two ****s about the football program. They argued against it because of the scandals that were created - it was tarnishing the image of the university as a whole. That is why you saw terrible SMU football for two decades. It wasn't until President Turner, the Steve Orsini hire, the creation of the Circle of Champions, and the subsequent hiring of June Jones that you see the program pick up again. There is a huge commitment from school officials and rich alumni to get back to the school's winning ways. In just a few years we went from hardly sniffing a bowl to probably participating in three in a row after 4 years with June Jones (3 bowls after 4 years of actually caring is not bad in my opinion). In that short time period SMU has contended for a conference championship and has finally been getting top 25 votes again (after 25 years). This commitment towards football isn't going to dissipate into the ether, that's why SMU is getting AQ recognition. When the school flexes its muscle and utilizes its resources they can create a very appealing athletics department. So seriously, enough about that the whole "SMU was **** for the last 20 years." Of course we were, we didn't care, now we do and are beating ranked teams again. If you're going to fault us, fault us on sub-par attendance or exorbitant tuition rates or something tangible like that.

Exactly. The level of play might be marginally better, but the competition would be much more intriguing I would think.

Without TCU in the Big East, I don't know why SMU is a viable BE candidate now. The BE is much better off focusing on regionalism. They brought TCU in for BCS viability - it's the only reason they expanded into Texas. Now that they're gone, they really don't want to be stretching out that conference for someone like SMU. If you guys want SMU gone in order to open up a C-USA spot, your best hope is a very improbably Big XII/SEC invite. That's not going to happen. If SMU and Houston truly are serious about going AQ, their best bet is doing the whole C-USA/MWC merger. If that happens, not sure where UNT would sit in terms of new openings.

They're more concerned about the recruiting in the New Orleans fertile ground.

Air Force and Navy would be football only. The rest (maybe UCF/SMU/Temple) would be all sports. At least according to that one Boston Globe report. edit - I also think it's premature to say that all is well in the Big XII. I still think Mizzou is in the cusp of accepting an SEC invitation. Sure the Big XII would then reload with BYU and/or TCU, but I really think it's just putting on a band-aid on a gaping wound.

No problem, I am fully aware of the stereotype of SMU. Anyway, SMU does offer the Big East something. Unfortunately, what I'm about to argue assumes that TCU will stay in the conference, which is far from a certainty at this point. If the Big East wants to increase appeal for its football adding natural regional rivals for its members is a good idea. Emphasizing SMU/TCU and UCF/USF rivalry games would be good for the conference. Just look at the intrigue already created by us beating TCU and Patterson making a fool of himself today. People are already interested about the rematch. Why not add even more intrigue by making that game a conference one which could decide a division? Another benefit for SMU is that it provides travelling partners for other schools when they visit TCU. It's easier to knock off two scheduled games in DFW as opposed to spending more resources to go to TCU for one game then down to Houston for another. And judging from things I've heard around the rumor mill, the Big East is fond of the whole private/academic orientation of SMU. I suppose that's all I've got regarding SMU to Big East stuff.

Anyway, SMU alone wont be saving any conference. With the addition of UCF, SMU, Navy, and Temple, coupled with a better sense of solidarity and direction within the Big East (or increase the price of abandonment) yes, the conference might be saved. Umm the SMU allotment of tickets was only 1,000. TCU does this on purpose.

My last post here was about how we're so far down the pecking order for possible Big East candidates. I guess that's not the case after all. This could be good for you guys too. If somehow we leave, C-USA will still want their Metroplex in play.

I highly doubt the Big East ever goes for us. We're so far down the pecking order for them, that the only way that would happen is if they lose Cinci, Louisville, WVU, and TCU. And at that point, C-USA would be leagues better than the Big East in football.

Exactly. I think both fanbases should lay off the other and realize, "hey, our administrators are actually fueling our football programs!" That realization in itself should make all of us happy. I could easily jump into the stuff being thrown around in this thread, but really, what's the point? I wont egg UNT fans on about losing to Tulsa, since not to long ago we went 1-11 with a new coach. National (hell even local) recognition takes time because winning takes time. Arguing about alumni size, location of universities, endowments, football history, etc is useless. Win and you'll get the accolades. All that other garbage is fuel for bitter losers (that's a comment meant for all fanbases, not calling out UNT).

I think it wont be until Tulsa starts playing more of their conference games that we'll know how good they are/could have been. They had a brutal first month. Very few programs in this country would be able to walk out of that month without limping.

This is the 27th time they've applied to the Big East. Perhaps it takes a complete raiding of the BE for them to finally get in?

Well it seems that this whole conference shuffling might take a few more years to actually happen. Things can still radically change next week, but perhaps the storm has passed us? If that's the case, you guys have a couple of years to prove your case once McCarney's system starts kicking in. Oh, and why did the PAC-12 say no to the Big XII 4? Here's why: http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6998978/answering-questions-ever-changing-college-sports-landscape Not surprised.

Keep in mind that during all this TCU was stuck in a crap conference. If TCU was pulling in Texas, TT, A&M, Notre Dame, Baylor, OU, etc, there would be a LOT more buzz in the area for them. Once more, I think the whole public vs. private isn't nearly as relevant as the fact that TCU is stuck playing in the MWC against UNM, Wyoming, and other crap teams for the majority of their schedule. I'm not arguing that all of DFW will go crazy with Frog fever, but the fandom would definitely be amplified. Same thing if SMU started winning and got in a conference with their old SWC rivals. And to your point, same thing with North Texas if they ever got to that level. There's only so much excitement you'll get from the area if you're playing nobody teams week in and week out. If it makes you feel better, Texas in Big XII = NO CHANCE for SMU to ever upgrade It's a vicious cycle of greed.

TCU stuff is all over Ft. Worth. That's what happens after a decade of consistent winning and BCS bowls. Winning the Rose Bowl was a big deal. I can go to a Walmart off of 75 and see TCU gear. That's what winning does. The social make-up of the university has less to do with the potential of fandom as the play on the field does. I will say, DFW will primarily be a Cowboys area first, but SMU, TCU, and UNT have been consistent losers for a long time. Things can change, and they have in Ft. Worth.

Proven schools? You mean like the 2011 Rose Bowl champions?

This made my day. Especially the part where you say they need to go with a big state school and then a cite small private school (the damn sister school of SMU for Christ's sake) as an example of success.