Last minute SMU led pustch to disavow NT from the AAC

[SMUleopold]

 

[GrandGreen]

22 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

Agree. Totally different missions for a State School and a private school. 

No, all colleges have basically the same mission: to teach and prepare their students to earn a good living. 

 

[Rudy]

13 hours ago, Tom McKrackin said:

I have it from a very good source who is a season ticket holder at SMUt that there is a last minute uprising of their big money donors to force Rick Hart the SMU AD to disavow NT from joining their conference.   Please keep Wren and company at the AD in your prayers as they and their lawyers battle to fend off this last minute attack from the Hilltop.  SMU wants nothing to do with NT and I will not believe that we join them in a conference until I see it in writing and duplicate.

Wait, we're burying the lead here. $mut has season ticket holders?!

[cogido]

9 hours ago, DentonStang said:

I don't understand this line of thinking that comes up from time to time. 

 

SMU was one of the worst teams in all of football for 10+ years and not much better for another 10+.  We spent 1997-2013 in a conference not much better than yours.   For a lot of that time TCU was also garbage.  What field could be any more level? UNT had every opportunity to match or pass SMU and didn't have the administrative and/or booster support to pass SMU's incompetent administration and boosters.  It's been level for decades and we have been playing you frequently. 

I’ve watched SMU since I was a little boy in Dallas and played ball around Ownby Stadium.  I know SMU and it’s peaks  and valleys.  SMU doesn’t have the staying power to win consistently, never has, never will.  Within two more seasons the Ponies will be scratching the bottom again.  About UNT, if it ever gets its act together consistently it could dwarf SMU in market identity.   

[outoftown]

2 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

No, all colleges have basically the same mission: to teach and prepare their students to earn a good living. 

 

All colleges do. But for universities (and SMU is one of quite a few misnomers in that regard) I see it differently.

For universities I believe there is an equally important third purpose, which is to drive research forward. That said, being a researcher I am obviously biased.

Edited October 20, 2021 by outoftown

[dodgefan]

10 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

LOL.  This is beyond preposterous.

Rick Hart, the SMU AD, was the largest proponent of adding UNT and Rice.  

I don't see why SMU would be "afraid" of adding a program like North Texas.  There is zero reason for that as proven on the field.

The additions of Rice and Charlotte are completely outrageous.  The general consensus is that adding six now helps offset the eventual departures of AAC legacy schools in the near term.  Either way Rice has shown zero commitment to football and Charlotte plays in a 15,000 seat stadium with an athletic budget akin to a Sun Belt program.  

 

Bingo! The author of this thread is laughing his butt off right now, knowing how predictably people would fall for his "source" post. Memphis and SMU will be gone within 3 years anyway.

[wardly]

Agreed. SMU sharing the same conference with UNT is just temporary on their part. I have no idea where they would go but this realignment is a moving target with the landscape shifting almost daily. Besides, I only care where we end up, and right now its looking good.

[Jonnyeagle]

5 minutes ago, wardly said:

Agreed. SMU sharing the same conference with UNT is just temporary on their part. I have no idea where they would go but this realignment is a moving target with the landscape shifting almost daily. Besides, I only care where we end up, and right now its looking good.

You do understand that the SMU AD Rik Hardt was directly involved on the selection committee?  I seriously doubt he was choosing teams based on the possibility they may get an invite to the Big 12.  Let’s be very clear that SMU is a long shot to get in the Big 12 as TCU aid against them joining as probably is Tech and many others.

[El Paso Eagle]

1 hour ago, dodgefan said:

Bingo! The author of this thread is laughing his butt off right now, knowing how predictably people would fall for his "source" post. Memphis and SMU will be gone within 3 years anyway.

And they both may well be. And just think, the members of the Big 12 think about SMU the same way SMU feels about North Texas. SMU has done some good things lately in football but they have to figure out a way to get their attendance up.

[MeanGreenTexan]

1 minute ago, Jonnyeagle said:

You do understand that the SMU AD Rik Hardt was directly involved on the selection committee?  I seriously doubt he was choosing teams based on the possibility they may get an invite to the Big 12.  Let’s be very clear that SMU is a long shot to get in the Big 12 as TCU aid against them joining as probably is Tech and many others.

You're shooting down the SMU-against-UNT argument, yet saying TCU & Tech would be against SMU?   Isn't that the same thing?

[GrandGreen]

1 hour ago, Cr1028 said:

And if you flip that need to want, we want them alot more than they want us.

You are guessing and I doubt you are right.

Sports is ultimately a business, and at some point; teams are very interested in gate, travel, and publicity.   NT/SMU scores very high on all those factors. 

If you are only talking about fans, than you are right: NT fans want to beat SMU, and a lot of SMU fans think their program is too good to play NT.  

[DentonStang]

13 hours ago, Side.Show.Joe said:

SMU is scared. They know what will happen once we are in the same conference. UNT becomes Houston and SMU becomes Rice. Just look at how the college football power structure shifted in the city of Houston once UH joined the SWC. There is a reason Rice Stadium has been reducing their size for the past 50 years.

This is a bizarre take.  Rice is Rice because Rice does not attempt to compete in football. Rice and UH have and always will be behind A&M and UT in Houston and their relative prestige between the two is negligible beyond their own success driven by their administrative support.  UH having success does nothing to prevent Rice's success.

 

Similarly there is plenty of population in DFW to support SMU, TCU, and UNT, plus some UT/A&M and Baylor for recruiting to successful top 25 teams.  

7M people across 3 schools is like each of SMU TCU and UNT having a Kansas City, or Pittsburg, or Portland MSA all to ourselves. 

SMU does not fear UNT, because like dozens of other large state schools that have done nothing to support successful athletics. Nice facilities are necessary but not sufficient, and lots of schools have nice facilities but no success. There has to be administration support.  UNT had not demonstrated this at any point in several decades, although support seems to be increasing.

If that support increases and UNT reaches success level of where SMU is now, great.  Conference gets stronger. We both make more money. It does nothing to prevent SMU from being at that similar level that they are at today. 

If SMU cannot succeed because UNT is decently successful, then any arguments about going to the B12 is silly.

SMU opposes UNT because UNT's prestige, driven by lack of success and lack of history, lowers the prestige of SMU and everyone in the conference. More UNT success is desirable to fix this issue, not something to fear or prevent. 

[El Paso Eagle]

5 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

This is a bizarre take.  Rice is Rice because Rice does not attempt to compete in football. Rice and UH have and always will be behind A&M and UT in Houston and their relative prestige between the two is negligible beyond their own success driven by their administrative support.  UH having success does nothing to prevent Rice's success.

 

Similarly there is plenty of population in DFW to support SMU, TCU, and UNT, plus some UT/A&M and Baylor for recruiting to successful top 25 teams.  

7M people across 3 schools is like each of SMU TCU and UNT having a Kansas City, or Pittsburg, or Portland MSA all to ourselves. 

SMU does not fear UNT, because like dozens of other large state schools that have done nothing to support successful athletics. Nice facilities are necessary but not sufficient, and lots of schools have nice facilities but no success. There has to be administration support.  UNT had not demonstrated this at any point in several decades, although support seems to be increasing.

If that support increases and UNT reaches success level of where SMU is now, great.  Conference gets stronger. We both make more money. It does nothing to prevent SMU from being at that similar level that they are at today. 

If SMU cannot succeed because UNT is decently successful, then any arguments about going to the B12 is silly.

SMU opposes UNT because UNT's prestige, driven by lack of success and lack of history, lowers the prestige of SMU and everyone in the conference. More UNT success is desirable to fix this issue, not something to fear or prevent. 

Was with you until the end. SMU's "prestige"? Bottom line is if you did not have some big money boosters SMU would be Rice. You speak about the high level of education at SMU and while that is true you also have lowered the requirements to allow athletes in that if they could not play ball the vast majority of SMU students and Alums would not want them at their school because they did not deserve to be there. You have done a very good job selling transfers on coming back to SMU and I know your coaches have pushed the ability to build connections in the Dallas area. Hopefully this works out for those athletes and only time will tell what happens once they're no longer on the field at SMU. So yes, I think SMU needs to continue to strive to improve and get their ultimate goal of returning back to the Big 12. But for people at SMU to continually act like they are this high and mighty institution that is somehow superior to all others hopefully will change. You talk about growing attendance and while winning does help I think there are a lot of people who will never support SMU for the elitist attitude many have. 

[Primo]

So AAC will have two public schools and two private schools in Texas. This seems like a way to appease SMU; travel partner in Rice and leave the public U's to each other.

Prolly reading to much into that bit but... rite?

[El Paso Eagle]

2 minutes ago, Primo said:

So AAC will have two public schools and two private schools in Texas. This seems like a way to appease SMU; travel partner in Rice and leave the public U's to each other.

Prolly reading to much into that bit but... rite?

It's about markets. Houston and San Antonio are covered. I think it's clear SMU has goals to get to the Big 12 and with the supposed interest in UNT from the Mountain West, the AAC is covering it's bases so if SMU does leave at some point they are not left without a team in their home market (think of it like Green Bay who keeps drafting QB's to make sure they have someone available). The plus side for the AAC will be if UNT continues to invest in facilities and can build up football. Don't underestimate the potential strength of having access to games on non-internet ESPN. 

[MeanGreenTexan]

19 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

... 

SMU does not fear UNT, because like dozens of other large state schools that have done nothing to support successful athletics. Nice facilities are necessary but not sufficient, and lots of schools have nice facilities but no success. There has to be administration support.  UNT had not demonstrated this at any point in several decades, although support seems to be increasing.

...

Here's the biggest point in all of this, and I'm glad you're able to recognize the last part instead of ignoring it and allowing the previous decades to be the sole contributor of your perception.    We're all very aware of previous administrations' lackadaisical approach to Athletics at UNT.    We now have a President that has rapidly turned this perception around (since his arrival in 2014), oftentimes referring to Athletics as our University's "Front Porch".   
We understand that perception is cloudy right now due to poor football results lately.   That is something we must address quickly.   Otherwise, NT is putting together a "Front Porch" that is worthy of a cover on Better Homes & Gardens, but we have a 6' bronze statue of a hunched-over dog laying a turd right in the middle of it.

[MeanGreenTexan]

12 minutes ago, Primo said:

So AAC will have two public schools and two private schools in Texas. This seems like a way to appease SMU; travel partner in Rice and leave the public U's to each other.

Prolly reading to much into that bit but... rite?

Rice probably pairing up with Tulane.   So if SMU wants to have a private school partner, it'll have to be Tulsa.

[Cooke County Kid]

SMU, is a private university with expensive tuition they have to sell themselves as an “elite university” and that is okay but you don’t have to be an elitist. Enough said, I believe you judge a person and an institution by their actions and their deeds. We shall see. 
 

UNT, as a public institution has a similar but different role,  UNT has to provide the best “quality” education at an affordable cost. I could not be more satisfied with my education and what it has afforded me and my family. 
 

I am excited about the AAC!

GO MEAN GREEN!!!
WIN GAMES!!!!!!

[Mike Jackson]

21 hours ago, trud1966 said:

I've always said this....I'm sure SMU is a fine institution, has a renowned Law and Business School...But it's the PEOPLE there, the entitlement D-Baggers that ruin their own image.   For F sake they should FIX that....But I digress. 

It doesnt suprise me that they'd put up a fight...Yes - they're D-Bags, I hate em, but lets be honest, they're program's star is WAY on the rise, and we'd trade places with them in a heartbeat I'm sure...   Schools are like competing companies trying to gain customer attention.   If we're in the same conference, theyre going to have to work harder at recruiting, and likewise, so will UNT...  So they're mad....They can get over it...If they're as good as they appear to be, (and regardless of past years, claim their so much more superior of a program, even when they would go 5-7)  then good for them....They can work hard and see if they can jump ship out of the AAC one day.  

Now...Who's ready to buy a billboard ad on 75 Central, close to the Hilltop?

I’ve got $150 towards this.  I have spent way more than that this year on games.  This would give way more pleasure than a victory over Liberty this Saturday.  I might double my evening commute time for a week or two just to drive by and imagining Hilltoppers cursing every time they see it.  Love it

[southsideguy]

yeah I throw a few bucks at it.

[Wag Tag]

2 things the AAC did was give SMU Texas teams which should put a stop to the MWC and they got a backup if SMU does leave.

[laxtonto]

Hell… I’ve donated for banners to flown around stadiums to help voice our displeasure with the AD, so why not billboards to piss of SMU fans too…

 

I would be in for a few scheckles as well… 

 

Would just need someone to take some good pictures for me because I live in Ohio..

[Jonnyeagle]

I would be up for this as well

[emmitt01]

I’m in

[greenminer]

14 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

No, all colleges have basically the same mission: to teach and prepare their students to earn a good living.

Yah, and make money doing it.