SMU2006

The "rumored" next round of Big 12 expansion has Boise, SMU, Memphis, and USF. I think as far as SMU is concerned that's the long play. The Big 12 is going to splinter again before the 2025 season. The MWC just seems like a lateral move that could ultimately backfire. If its SMU by themselves I say no way to the MWC. If its Memphis and/or Tulsa, Tulane then yes. Go west.

Probably a little more focused on the Chiefs but I agree.

I tend to agree on the logic but the reality is the TV revenue, even in a scenario where Boise gets the bulk, is going to be significantly greater than a 14 team AAC with that configuration. At most that conference is going to get $1.5M per school. Would SMU be willing to go MWC for $3M? You also have the perennial G5 darling Boise along with rising contenders SDSU, AFA, etc. Basketball would be better in the MWC as well. I agree however that the exit fees likely make it a nonstarter. Now if you're able to get Memphis and/or Tulsa as travel partners that dynamic changes.

I've heard there are talks w/ Memphis but I honestly don't see the advantage to this for SMU. Why pay the insane AAC exit fees to join the MWC where you'll be taking the TV revenue table scraps left over by Boise? Travel and logistical nightmares too. The best play for SMU is to stay in the AAC and hope for Big 12 expansion round two. If that doesn't materialize then going independent would be a last resort but the Gerald Ford's and Clark Hunt's of the world would finance that endeavor until the end of time if it was what was best for SMU.

UNT is a solid addition to the AAC. I'm unsure about the decision by Aresco to expand the conference to 14 but I'm sure he's been told by ESPN this is the combination of schools that make the most sense. From a revenue distribution perspective this is going to be interesting. I'm thinking 1-1.5m per school range.

SMU knows that the Big 12 is likely a pipe dream. Even in its weakened state. The next two on deck are Boise and Memphis. If more dominoes fall then perhaps SMU enters the equation but its unlikely IMO.

That call has already been made to both SMU and Memphis. Exit fees associated with leaving the AAC (as well as the Boise sweetheart TV deal) make it a no-go.

No need to go all doomsday. This stuff is far from over.

Definitely a major setback for the AAC. You have to wonder now what SMU/Memphis will do. I still think its absurd to pay AAC exit fees to go play a bunch of games in nothing media markets 1,500 miles from Dallas but at the end of the day TV calls the shots.

CSU and AFA staying put. Definitely a setback for the AAC. Might be time for a scheduling alliance. That's been thrown out there. Also have the MWC play the AAC champion for access to the NY6 bowl.

Army, FAU, and Marshall are all higher on the AAC pecking order than Charlotte.

You mad bro?

Its not going to stop at just CSU and AFA. There are going to be more defections from the MWC.

That number is about to get gutted when AFA and CSU leave for the AAC.

San Diego State and Fresno also mulling it over. This is a move to destroy the MWC.

It was a great early afternoon at Amon Carter. TCU is a confusing team. They've got an elite back in Evans, a veteran QB in Duggan, and some real playmakers on defense that is almost always fundamentally sound with Gary Patterson still running the show. I couldn't believe how easily SMU was able to run the ball on the Frogs. 15 runs of 10 yards or more and two 100 yard backs. It was surreal. As an SMU fan that has watched TCU have the upper hand in this series for the last 20 plus years this was the first time where it felt like SMU had significantly better talent. Not a fluke. SMU led the entire game and actually committed 3 turnovers to only one for the Frogs. The better team won.

Correct thus the motivation to sweeten the pot, but they aren't going to let the AAC die on the vine. $20m per school goes a long way to mending the fences and (hopefully) adding some quality programs. We'll see how it shakes out. But the notion of any AAC school leaving to join the MWC to play gimp to Boise (while paying exit fees) is beyond stupid.

The transfer portal is the greatest equalizer for G5 programs. Also, finally the student-athlete has the leverage where for so long these kids get buried on the depth chart somewhere and feel like they don't want to lose a year of eligibility or sit out to play. Let the kids go where they want to go. If programs are run in a player-friendly environment you will be the beneficiary of the portal and not a victim of it.

The only motivation for doing this would be to expedite the departure of UT and OU to the SEC. ESPN has no interest in devaluing their current asset (AAC) to help out the Big 12 (FOX). The buyouts are going to be north of $20m per school if they want to be playing Big 12 football in 2023.

If you think SMU in the 80's was the most egregious cheater in the SWC I can only laugh. They may not have even been the worst in Dallas-Fort Worth. TCU had a pay for play scheme running for years even after the Wacker days. Very well known. You seem to think SMU is the same institution that it was in 1985. Is UNT the same as in those days? I don't think so. Its a much better place with a far brighter future. The same can be said for SMU. There's a reason the SWC was called the OPEC Conference in the 80's. That's where the price was set. SMU's demise came from being a non-blue blood that could easily nuked with minimal fallout. And it sure seems to have curtailed cheating in college athletics right?

What is contradictory? There is really only one metric that matters. WINNING. Whether you are a small, private school like TCU or a commuter school with 60,000 students like UCF. You have to win. Are there are other factors worthy of consideration? Yes, but to a far lesser degree.

This is a tired and lazy argument. Siggers has said a lot of complimentary things about his time at UNT. He was sort of lost in the shuffle and was battling injuries. He wanted a fresh start somewhere else. The portal giveth and the portal taketh away. Insinuating that Samples is a modern day Sherwood Blount is petty. He's probably going to be the next HC at SMU.

You don't have to have mass appeal and you certainly don't have to have 50,000 undergraduates. You have to win. SMU had one 10 win season and in that season played an ABC prime time game at Memphis (College GameDay) and got 28,100 for Tulsa, 23,200 for Temple, and 29,500 for ECU. That's one year. If you honestly think that if 9 plus win seasons became the norm at SMU that it wouldn't translate into consistent crowds north of 27k regardless of opponent then you're divorced from reality. SMU (and Dallas generally) loves a winner. We had 29K for the UNT game this year. Its trending in the right direction. There are also a myriad of other factors that come into play like academics, endowment, political influence, athletic department spending, etc. way before undergraduate enrollment enters the realignment equation. At the end of the day all of this is window dressing b/c WINNING, and winning at the national level consistently, is what will get programs noticed by perceived better conferences.

Series is close but SMU has been on the losing end a ton post-Death Penalty. I think its like 4 wins over TCU since 2000.