Smu Attendance

Smitty · September 4, 2007

In his column this morning, Kevin Sherrington said of the SMU-Tech attendance:

Officials projected a sell-out, which certainly seemed reasonable. The game came up 6,000 short. And if it hadn't been for Tech fans, the stadium would have been three-quarters empty.

Pony Up, indeed.

Green Mean · September 4, 2007

In his column this morning, Kevin Sherrington said of the SMU-Tech attendance:
Pony Up, indeed.

Obviously we cant base anything on this season yet but I dont think NT has any room to talk.

Arkstfan · September 4, 2007

Obviously we cant base anything on this season yet but I dont think NT has any room to talk.

SMU has to be horribly disappointed. They are coming off their second best post-death penalty season and the fans seem to have even less interest.

SilverEagle · September 4, 2007

SMU has to be horribly disappointed. They are coming off their second best post-death penalty season and the fans seem to have even less interest.

...and I'd like to be reminded again why CUSA just had to have SMU in their conference? <_<

Eagle1855 · September 4, 2007

The weather was also kinda lousy Monday... not sure if that had an impact or not.

Hope we pack the place this weekend!

Arkstfan · September 4, 2007

...and I'd like to be reminded again why CUSA just had to have SMU in their conference?

Simple. The WAC was courting western members of CUSA.

The main group of CUSA wanted to add Marshall and UCF and be done.

Tulane wanted Tulsa, SMU and Rice and acted as if they would head to the WAC to join them. Houston supposedly was interested in adding them, I rather doubt they were interested enough to follow Tulane though.

CUSA presidents figured what the heck add 'em and we'll have 12 despite the Memphis AD explaining that adding a title game wouldn't add enough money to cover splitting revenue more ways.

DeepGreen · September 4, 2007

...and I'd like to be reminded again why CUSA just had to have SMU in their conference?

I'll take a stab SilverEagle-

-because Kyle Rote, who played 80 years ago is a legend in the minds of the older Pony fans :unsure:

-a resurgance of the defunct phony express :unsure:

-Smut's coeds appearing in Playboy during some past random year :unsure:

-because of the campus moniker "hilltop" :unsure:

-Smut has pictures of cusa's commissioner :unsure:

-As a law school assignment, Smut threatened to sue cusa if they weren't admitted to the conference :unsure:

-Cusa was really desparate :blink:

PlummMeanGreen · September 4, 2007

...and I'd like to be reminded again why CUSA just had to have SMU in their conference?

I know where you're coming from with that statement, Bill, but at least..........SMU "Pony Up'd" a $60 million football palace while in Denton we continue slapping paint on our red-headed step-child, ie, our venerable, aged, ever-persevering Fouts Field. :rolleyes:

Best part of it all is as each day goes by we are (obviously) closer to our own new stadium; albeit as each day goes by, construction costs also continue to rise.

One bright, beautiful, sunshiny day in Mean Green Country, though, the Mean Green Nation will have a very big reason to celebrate. Gut feeling says we will have "one" (and one is all we need) who will step forward and will give UNT the kind of money paid out to some pro athletes ($40 million) which will allow our new stadium project to get jump-started. Money in the world of athletics is everywhere and our day will come to get our fair share--the law of averages just has to work in our favor with this, now doesn't it?

As far as SMU? Their true fan support started to (glaringly) show when the 4 Big 12 Texas schools stopped coming to Dallas (University Park) every other year.

If the game this Saturday between SMU and UNT draws 22,000, that should be considered a victory (of sorts) for 2 teams that did not show too well on the scoreboard in their 1'st game of their season. Of course, #8 ranked OU was a pretty big reason for us and I still don't remember ever seeing so much speed & quickness (across the board) with this 2007 version of the OU Sooner football team. If they don't repeat as Big 12 champions, I'd be very surprised. If they don't stay in the Top 10 all season and possibly contend for an NC I'd be even more surprised.

Edited September 4, 2007 by PlummMeanGreen

PlummMeanGreen · September 4, 2007

I'll take a stab SilverEagle-
-because Kyle Rote, who played 80 years ago is a legend in the minds of the older Pony fans
-a resurgance of the defunct phony express
-Smut's coeds appearing in Playboy during some past random year
-because of the campus moniker "hilltop"
-Smut has pictures of cusa's commissioner
-As a law school assignment, Smut threatened to sue cusa if they weren't admitted to the conference
-Cusa was really desparate

:lol:

I love all the icons, Phil. Now just start working on larger letters with color!

GreenFlag · September 4, 2007

I was at the game with my girlfriend and many of her friends whom she went to Tech with. It was hard to tell at first who the fans were supporting because they both have red as a color. At first glance I thought it was a 50/50 split-nice showing of Tech fans I thought. During the 3rd quarter the Tech fans started their Raider-Power cheer and it was obvious that most of the red shirts that I thought were SMU fans were Tech fans. The stadium was 75-80% Tech fans. This is not a slam of SMU nor is this an exageration to stir up the ponies (ala Baylor fans at Fouts).

You get Tech at home and only muster 6,000 fans? The sad part is that SMU has got a pretty decent team. We have our work cut out for us Saturday for sure.

GoMeanGreen1999 · September 4, 2007

SMU has to be horribly disappointed. They are coming off their second best post-death penalty season and the fans seem to have even less interest.

I think those fans are really disappointed after yesturdays disaster. I didn't think we would beat SMU after saturday night, but I must say, I am encouraged after reading about their loss yesturday.

Stan R · September 4, 2007

I think those fans are really disappointed after yesturdays disaster. I didn't think we would beat SMU after saturday night, but I must say, I am encouraged after reading about their loss yesturday.

Don't be so sure 99. I was at that game. For most of the first half SMU was hanging with Tech. Not only that but they were able to move the ball well at times. The game will be a battle. SMU only folded in basically the second half and I can tell you we don't have even 1/3 the speed or talent of Tech on offense.

NT91 · September 4, 2007

The weather was also kinda lousy Monday... not sure if that had an impact or not.
Hope we pack the place this weekend!

The weather my also be lousy this Sat. for NT at SMU.

RETSO · September 4, 2007

Don't be so sure 99. I was at that game. For most of the first half SMU was hanging with Tech. Not only that but they were able to move the ball well at times. The game will be a battle. SMU only folded in basically the second half and I can tell you we don't have even 1/3 the speed or talent of Tech on offense.

I have to agree, SMU did not look bad in the first half.....

I hope we can run the ball vs SMUt to open up our passing....geez I never thought i would be saying that about a UNT team.....

Bring on the ponies.

Go MEAN GREEN

Eagle1855 · September 4, 2007

Don't be so sure 99. I was at that game. For most of the first half SMU was hanging with Tech. Not only that but they were able to move the ball well at times. The game will be a battle. SMU only folded in basically the second half and I can tell you we don't have even 1/3 the speed or talent of Tech on offense.

So? SMU is half the team OU is, so I dont really care how well they did in the first half. They got raped. Plain and simple. So did we. I dont think we know enough about either of these teams. Tech is hardly an impressive D and SMU managed just 3 field goals. Color me unimpressed. I agree it will be a battle, but Im not sold on SMU or UNT one way or the other at this point.

The weather my also be lousy this Sat. for NT at SMU.

Yeah I saw that. But I'll be there for the duration of the game, no matter the weather or score!

September 4, 2007

...and I'd like to be reminded again why CUSA just had to have SMU in their conference?

I think that their nice stadium might figure in a bit, but you also have to remember that they have some pretty good teams in sports besides football. They simply put have many teams that UNT does not even field, such as men's soccer and tennis. For UNT to move to a larger conference, it has to be able to offer a more comprehensive athletics program. No pretty stadium will erase that fact.

GrandGreen · September 4, 2007

I think that their nice stadium might figure in a bit, but you also have to remember that they have some pretty good teams in sports besides football. They simply put have many teams that UNT does not even field, such as men's soccer and tennis. For UNT to move to a larger conference, it has to be able to offer a more comprehensive athletics program. No pretty stadium will erase that fact.

I don't think adding women's rowing and equestrian is going to help NT get into a more prestigious conference. They have one more men's sport than NT; they have soccer, swimming and tennis but no longer any track and field which counts as two sports (indoor, outdoor). The women have one more sport than NT, the two mentioned above but they do not have softball. IMO the number of sports has absolutely nothing to do with getting into another conference. If a conference membership was contingent for example on fielding a baseball team, then NT would get baseball team just like they did when it was a Southland requirement.

Coffee and TV · September 4, 2007

You get Tech at home and only muster 6,000 fans? The sad part is that SMU has got a pretty decent team. We have our work cut out for us Saturday for sure.

To be fair many of the SMU students were taking advantage of (doing coke) the 3 day weekend at their parents' summer homes in Kennebunkport.

Quoner · September 4, 2007

To be fair many of the SMU students were taking advantage of (doing coke) the 3 day weekend at their parents' summer homes in Kennebunkport.

OFFENSIVE. I'M OFFENDED. COKE KILLS PEOPLE!

Stranger danger! Stranger danger!

September 4, 2007

As far as attendance, I could give a damn whether SMU has 30 people or 30 thousand. What's that have to do with whether we win or lose?

I do care what we have. Let's take care of our attendance and let them struggle however they want with theirs. I just want us to average in the mid-20s for this year and BUILD from that as everyone gets on the bandwagon.

I will, however, offer an opinion as to why SMU isn't flocking to Ford in droves. Remember last year when we had several hundred, if not thousand, season ticket holders that vowed not to come to games until Dickey left? I think that the same thing may be happening to Phil Bennett. He has a number of detractors that don't believe that he is the answer for SMU's future. Maybe they figure that it worked for us, why not for them.