College Football Bowl Games - Comparing Roster Rankings And Outcomes

There was a time in the not so distant past that I was oblivious to the importance of football recruiting. For most of my early life, SMU was a member of the Southwest Conference (SWC), what would easily be a Power conference by the standards of today. SMU played and recruited against Arkansas, Baylor, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston, and Rice. Getting top players to come play in the SWC, in Dallas, and get an outstanding education was pretty simple. And if you were willing to "play the game" that other big schools were playing, you could dominate recruiting - and SMU did.

But something changed in the 80s. The NCAA wanted to make an example of a school in an attempt to reduce the rampant cheating throughout college football, and SMU was the perfect target. It was a private school, smaller fanbase, and less likely to fight back against the selective nature of the investigation and penalty. The NCAA lowered the boom on SMU, shutting down the program for a year. SMU was allowed to play 6 away games in 1988, but opted not to play at all. We would start from scratch in 1989 with a whole new staff and recruit a team from the ground up. I watched coaches/recruiters from every college land on our campus like vultures picking at a carcass, recruiting our players who the NCAA graciously allowed to transfer without penalty. Many of these same programs routinely offered money, cars, prostitutes - whatever it took on the recruiting trail. It was a disgusting day to be a Mustang.

Many people look to the events surrounding the Death Penalty (DP) as the primary reason SMU underperformed for almost 40 years. Certainly it played a major part. But it was truly just the spark that led to the program being put in a position where it could not compete. The real damage came from three key events. 

#1 - The End of the SWC - Had the "merger" with the Big 8 occurred in the early 80s, there is no doubt SMU would have been included - as the best team outside the major state schools. Had it not been for Texas politics, Baylor and possibly Texas Tech might have been left behind. When the dust settled, Houston, Rice, SMU, and TCU had no conference home. Houston chose wisely to look East, and joined with schools who would become Conference USA. The other 3 went West and created the first SUPER conference the WAC 16 - which included teams like BYU, Utah, Air Force etc. On paper, it actually looked like a promising group. But these were teams nobody in Texas followed. The games were late at night, and some programs quite literally could not keep their lights on! Within a couple of years, there was a split, followed by additions and subtractions. And for the next few decades, SMU would wander from one lousy conference to another. 

During this time recruiting hit rock bottom. Nobody wanted to play in some no name conference against some crappy state university. The travel was far and inconvenient for fans. The dates and times sucked. There was little television coverage, and even less national media coverage. And then out of nowhere, the college football experts declared that some universities were more special than others. The special ones were declared morally and physically superior, received more media dollars, better bowls, and were almost guaranteed that one among this anointed few would be DECLARED - NOT EARN, National Champions. So roughly half of FBS, including some schools like SMU who had National Championships, Heisman winners, and 70+ years of playing in a top conference were effectively left behind. And there was little that could be done. Why?

If You Haven't Won A Conference Championship Since The 70s - Maybe You Don't Belong In A Power Conference?

#2 The Pye Penalty - After the DP, SMUs leadership overreacted to the situation. There was NEVER any academic scandal at SMU. Players went to class, made their grades, and graduated with legitimate degrees. In their zealousness to "clean" SMU, administrators first attempted to cancel football, thinking a focus on academics was what the doctor ordered. This was quickly shut down. Athletics are the front door for a university, and every study has confirmed that a successful athletic department keeps alumni engaged and supportive. Plus, a successful and visible program increases applications and quality of applicants. My first real exposure to SMU came from a church youth group watching a game in the Cotton Bowl.

So the "hate athletics" types decided they would "castrate" SMU sports to make sure it would never get out of control, or be nationally competitive. What did that mean? The standards for admittance were raised above any FBS school. Players had to be admitted before they could visit, or even be offered by coaches. For those unfamiliar with college acceptance, getting admitted to a school can be an arduous ordeal - especially before computers. A high school student might be on the edge and dependent on grades in the final semester to pass. Plus, every decent athlete had already accepted an offer elsewhere before SMU got around to accepting and inviting them to visit. It KILLED recruiting, probably as much as our crappy conferences.

The few athletes who were willing to wait, often were rejected in very public and disastrous ways. In football, we were fighting against FCS and JUCO for recruits, and getting excited when we stole a recruit from North Texas. In the early days of recruiting services, our classes were rated among the worst of FBS schools, behind all our natural and historical rivals. And then people wondered why we couldn't win the crappy conference where we were currently stuck.

In the meantime, long time rivals like TCU, a team that I never saw SMU lose to growing up, 15 straight years until after my graduation and the DP, were now out recruiting SMU, and winning. They switched conferences to further separate themselves from SMUs mediocrity - who could blame them? The trend switched, and they were now winning the Iron Skillet much more frequently. 

Apparently, Arthritis Is Contagious At TCU.

#3 Power Conferences - The genesis of this was mentioned above. Suddenly, a select handful of universities were anointed as Power schools for absolutely no reason at all. For every Alabama - that probably deserves special recognition, there was a Vanderbilt, who had NO business being in a Power conference. Teams like Iowa State, who haven't accomplished anything since before the First World War, were arbitrarily determined to be better than all non-Power schools.  As BAD as SMU has been for these few decades, they still have substantially more accomplishments than ISU and many so-called Power schools. And then there are schools just happy to be along for the ride - like Texas Tech, our favorite school in dusty Lubbock, Texas. They have averaged 3.9 conference wins over the last 27 years. Is that Power worthy? Who knows?

If you were a top athlete choosing between any Power school and even the very best "G5" school, which one will you pick? Nine times out of ten, that player is going to pick a Power school. This was something that became obvious observing recruiting for the last few decades. And it was one of the primary drivers for getting SMU back to playing Big Boy football. And since we were effectively blocked by our "friends" in the Big 12, who also assisted in destroying the PAC12 - another possible pathway for SMU, the ACC became our best option. And we will start playing in the fall of 2024.

I must admit there was a time I did not trust recruiting rankings. I believed that the system was rigged, players were rated higher based on picking certain schools. There may be a little of that still happening, but competition between the services has forced them to get better. Plus, in the digital age, its far easier to confirm offers and find out which schools are recruiting certain players. There was a time when player ratings were quite arbitrary. There are areas - small town and private school players that may fly under the radar. But that is quite rare. If you are a decent player with a chance at the next level, you will get evaluated. And if not, players can easily promote themselves and get noticed. And as you go up in quality, from an unknown to a can't miss player, they will be accurate more times than not. There will always be injuries, players not making grades, transfers etc. And there will always be that kid that gets discovered playing 6-man football who comes to town and is All Conference as a walk on. It happens. But those are exceptions.

The services now have composite rankings of rosters, which make it quite easy to compare teams, and as I have played with it, noted that its rather accurate. Take the first few bowls and consider the chart below.

Each bowl game is two lines, winner on top, loser on bottom. I've included a few rankings for reference - although some of those may be post-game. The focus should be on the number of 5-4-3* players, average per player, and total points as well. Comparing those is quite interesting. Take the New Mexico Bowl. I had folks on social media continually tell me how tough CUSA was this year, especially NMSU, who I've heard upset Auburn. But I have watched football for more than a year, and understand there is a definite tiered system of talent. One "exception" does not change the rules. NMSU did have a few highly talented players, but Fresno is loaded and has much more QUALITY depth. The Total Points is a key indicator, but the difference in rated players 3* or better 64 > 27 is HUGE. That means at almost every position, including special teams, Fresno likely had a player that was a little bigger, faster, smarter, or just plain better than NMSU. And the score reflected that.

And Now, We Dance!

As the talent gap narrows, as in the first two bowls listed above, then individual performances, game conditions, preparation, coaching, player transfers or opt outs come into the equation. Georgia Southern had a slight talent advantage, but Ohio won easily. There was an even bigger gap between JSU and Louisiana, yet JSU managed to win in OT. And then take a look at UCLA and Boise - a Power team against one of the better "G" teams. Look at the ranked players - 23 4* to Boise with 1. Boise does have a ton of 3*, but not enough to overcome the talent gap. And of course the score reflects this.

So what does this mean looking forward? Here are a few upcoming games. These are mostly "G5" contests, and other games that caught my eye. It is NOT a comprehensive list.

 

Again, I just want to point out a few and see if they turn out as expected. I will start with SMU, who has done quite well building their team through recruiting, portal, and NIL. We do not yet have a true Power roster - which explains the losses to OU and TCU this year, which both had more or better rated talent, but we are competitive with the ACC. For our game with Boston College, look at the numbers. SMU should have a very slight edge in talent. The one hiccup is the very best player, QB Preston Stone, is out with a broken leg. But there still should be enough talent to win this game. At the very least, we should be competitive. It is a home game for BC, and that far North, weather could play a factor.

Another interesting game to consider is UTSA and Marshall. The latter has a history of giant killing, although it comes and goes. Looking at the numbers, I am inclined to believe UTSA will win big. They have a multi year starter in SR QB Frank Harris - assuming he plays. And if HC Traylor does not get hired away, I think this game goes to UTSA. Talent and depth should overwhelm Marshall, and playing in Frisco - while not a home game, should favor the team from San Antonio.

And now we come to the most perplexing bowl placement of the season. FSU was booted out of the top 4 even though they were unbeaten because of SOS. Liberty was kept in the NYD bowls because they were unbeaten, screw SOS. The consistently inconsistent NCAA strikes again. In some ways, it feels like just another SMU screw job - we've had our share. But the more I think about it there may have been a diabolical reason for their inclusion. It helps the committee justify the absolutely horrible exclusion of FSU. AND, when Liberty gets beaten senseless, it will give college experts another chance to say - "See, G teams do not belong!" I've always believed Hawaii was set up this way in 2007. They were unbeaten, but played a ridiculously easy schedule, not as bad as Liberty - but close. They had no business playing Georgia, and there was little chance the game would be competitive. Hawaii had a GOOD team, but not anywhere close to the talent level of Georgia. Something similar happened last year with TCU. They managed to make it to the championship - I suspect Sonny D made a pact with the father of lies. And in one of the saddest games ever broadcast, TCU was quite thoroughly humiliated in front of the whole world. Georgia was just far more talented than the Lizards that day.

The Flames had a great season. I read that every day on social media. I will never disagree. But when your SOS is 133, you need to, at least mentally, place a little asterisk next to that season. If Liberty played in District 11-6A in Texas, one of the toughest high school districts in the country, including the state champions for both division 1 and 2 this year, they would be undefeated. And that's great. But who did they play? And then all sorts of ridiculous arguments are thrown out, we beat this team, who beat this team. CUSA is at the bottom of the food chain. Its like beating high school teams, just ever so slightly better. Whether you beat SHSU by 4 or 40, its still a team wearing FBS diapers. Its like 1989 when SMU restarted our program - everyone beat the crap out of us. It was shocking when we won! Yet we managed two wins that year - UCONN and North Texas.

There was a time I used to believe that if SMU just had the right coach, he could take whatever roster we had and win the national championship. That only works in Hollywood. The reality is it takes GOOD players, a lot of them. It takes senior leadership, playmakers, depth, solid coaching and good game plans, and then, the players have to execute. More times than not, the team with the better athletes, those more highly recruited and prized, will win. Good players make coaches look much better. Is Nick Saban an awesome coach, or is it because he is 3-4 deep in 4 and 5 star athletes at every position? I guess its sort of a chicken or egg type question. Alabama is going to get top players no matter who wears the whistle. And for reference, this year's Alabama has 74 4 or 5* players on their roster. Their starting teams could almost be ALL 5* players. That amount of talent can make any coach look legendary. And someone who really knows what they are doing will get the most out of them. But if it were easy, everyone would be Alabama or Georgia.

Now consider Liberty's Fiesta opponent - Oregon. By every objective measure, Liberty has no business in this game. They are like Hawaii in the 2008 Sugar Bowl. If they manage to make it a competitive game, I will be happy for them. If they win, I will be thrilled. But the odds are not in their favor.

Assuming most starters play and don't opt out, Oregon will trot out a team with 5 5* and 48 4* players. Meaning that the 2-deep will likely be filled with 4* or better players at every position. Oh, and they have 32 3* players as well. What will Liberty counter with for the game? 2 4* and 19 3* players will get their Flame on at the Fiesta Bowl. Will that be enough? Maybe they will get lucky, a turnover or two? Maybe a key Duck will miss the game? Maybe the Duck's charter flight is late? Anything can happen, right? All they need is a really rousing pep talk, that fires up the players and leads them to certain victory.

Is it impossible? No. In sports, there is always a chance - that is why you play the game. But I suspect Oregon will be playing their 3* players at the start of the 3rd quarter, and will have likely covered the 65 over by then. Maybe the Flames can prove me and the college football world wrong.

A Mother's Love For SMU And Doak Walker

My Mother attended SMU with the great Doak Walker, who won the Heisman Trophy in 1948. She was a diehard Mustang fan, but quietly in her later years. Her first and primary love was for her Lord and Savior. She and my Father were both Spirit-filled Believers. And if you were living in our house, you were at church whenever the doors were opened. They were both very active, and at times even worked or volunteered in a variety of positions. But this blog is not about that. This is about her love for SMU.

Doak Walker SMU

But first, let me supply a little background information on her and my family. She was a Methodist preacher's kid, and the middle child of three. She moved around a lot as a child. For a brief time she had some health issues, and it was then she devoured the Bible and built a solid foundation for her future. She had just started classes at Oklahoma City University when World War 2 started. Like many, she stopped attending classes and took a job at Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma working in logistics.

Frances Matney Woodard 1942

One of their tasks was doing some final work on B-29s before they headed to the Pacific. One of my favorite pictures has several people from Tinker posing around a B-29. If you look closely, you can see her underneath the plane, directly under the top turret. 

Both my Father and Mother served. He fought in Africa, Italy, and then Southern France. When I was young, I claimed my Father killed Hitler, and my Mother defeated the Japanese. In a small way, that was true. And I was quite proud of both of them, and their contributions to winning the war. 

Dad was the oldest of 13, and was joined by 4 of his brothers overseas. His family put their faith in God, and all 5 came home. And they all experienced dangerous situations at times. My Father left with one, and then two more came later, all in the same theater as my Father. This helped him keep in touch and communicate their status with home. The 5th joined later and was sent to the Pacific.

Hollis H Woodard US Army WW2

With her experience at Tinker behind her, my Mother enrolled at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas. She was a little older and wiser, so the school gave her a job as Dorm Monitor, or what is now called Resident Advisor. Back then the men and women had separate dorms of course. 

Mom At SMU Circa 1947

She graduated and took a job with 4H as an organizer or counselor - not sure how to exactly describe it. But unlike many women back then, she was a working girl. And she had a bit of a "wild" streak. Her uncle owned a dealership and helped her buy a brand new Studebaker. I love this picture and wish I would have known her back then.

Mom And Her New 1953 Studebaker

While in college, my Mother was a huge Mustang fan. She attended many games, and like most folks, was a huge fan of Doak Walker. She collected many of the magazine covers and stories about him. I thought they were lost over the years, but stumbled across a handful that survived all the moves, and selling the family home. It truly is remarkable how much publicity Walker received. And of course, it put SMU in the national conversation for about 4 to 5 years.

SMUs Doak Walker Magazine Covers

She did not save complete magazines. Instead, she retained the covers and articles related to Doak and SMU. Back then people made a lot of scrapbooks, so I assume that was her goal. And then of course life simply took priority. Between three kids, two older sisters, and then me of course, she had plenty to keep her busy between us, work, and Church.

This post will include a few miraculous stories. I include them because they are relevant to the subject. And because they are fun to share. All glory of course goes to God. If you choose not to believe, that is fine. I lived through it, and can never deny what I experienced. And the events mentioned here are just a handful of the many good things God did for us.

At a very early age, I heard my Mother say, "All of my children will graduate from Southern Methodist University (SMU)." At the time, I was clueless as to what that even meant. I was a Longhorn like my Father, who had attended UT with Tom Landry. I watched Longhorn games sitting on his lap. But if my Mother liked SMU, it must be good. She made that statement many times in our lives. And based on our finances, it would require a big miracle for even one of us to attend. But she never gave up. Long after she graduated to Heaven, my oldest sister, who had dropped out of SMU to get married and have kids, went back and got her degree. And after her graduation, my Mother's faith had manifested. All her kids graduated from SMU. You can read a more detailed account of this - Mark 11:21-23 – Speak To The Mountain And Do Not Doubt

Collier's Magazine Dec 1948

I apologize for the image. Trying to pick the best between scans and photos can be tricky. Collier's was a general interest magazine that did have quite a bit of college sports coverage. This edition featured their All America picks, which included QB Doak Walker illustrated above in the top left, also in the list. Inside the article, this was written about Walker.

QUARTERBACK: Doak Walker of Southern Methodist, 21 years old, 5 feet 11 inches, 168 pounds, senior from Dallas, Texas. Does more things well than any other back in college football. Averages 56 minutes per game because Coach Matty Bell can't afford to take him out of the defensive line-up. Says Bell: "If I do, we lose 50 percent effectiveness. Never saw anybody who can touch him defensively - except Scott of Arkansas." Dangerous passer in the clutch. Not a long punter, but stays among nation's leaders by minimizing opposing runbacks. Angles punts away from safety men - low, rolling kicks that usually die out of bounds. Great runner. Slides through tiniest holes and makes maximum use of blockers. - Bill Fay Collier's December 11, 1948

During the Pony Express days, I remember Lance, Eric, and Craig appearing on several covers, but they were almost exclusively sports magazines and newspapers. Granted the 40s and 50s were likely the high water mark for magazines, as radio and TV were growing quite quickly. It just amazes me to see Doak and SMU on the cover of magazines like Life. That was huge publicity.

I do enjoy the story of Kyle Rote. One time, he saw a guy buying a football magazine at a newsstand. 'Don't buy that one,' Rote said. 'It's not official. It doesn't have a picture of Doak Walker on the cover.'" There is some truth to that statement.

SMU Players

Walker was the most visible, but many other players were featured, as was coach Matty Bell. And ultimately the university benefitted from all the publicity. Its not like SMU was running a national advertising campaign. Yet people all over the country were learning about the university.

Mustangs At Practice

This was fantastic publicity for the team. Multipage spreads, articles, covers talking about the Mustangs. How could you not love Doak Walker and this team?

 

The scans don't do this spread justice, as it is a mini biography of Walker through pictures. Not sure which magazine, as this is not labeled. I just thought it was really nice.

The famous cover from LIFE magazine. And also, how you can retire on $200 month. I apologize for cutting off that story. But for those interested - you can't.

I wonder where "Timmy" is these days. Look at that beautiful color picture, full page spread of Walker taking a drink. Wow!

There were two pages like the above in this edition of LIFE. Good stuff. And for my final scan, this was also in this same edition.

Its a brief article on recruiting and the Mustang Club. Would have been nice to experience this firsthand, but I got my chance in the 80s, and expecting great things moving forward. 

Its time for SMU to return to the national spotlight. The realignment drama, and invitation to the ACC helped to get SMU back in the conversation. But then the season started, and other teams like Colorado, and players have grabbed the spotlight. Its time for SMU to go on a run in their last year in the AAC. And we need a player to emerge like Rashee Rice that we can rally around and promote nationally. Quarterback Preston Stone is a possibility. And there are a few more that may emerge as dominant players in league play.

I have two more SMU/parent stories to share - because I am feeling nostalgic and miss them - especially on game day. 

In the late 90s, my wife at the time said she wanted to be with somebody else. The divorce was simple enough, we had no kids, minimal assets to divide, but emotionally it was devastating. I never expected that to happen to me. My Mother was no longer with me, so the next strongest female in my life was my Aunt Evelyn, my Mother's younger sister. She lived near Shreveport, and my Father lived in Longview, out in East Texas. I needed to share the news and speak to someone with female wisdom. It was not something I wanted to do over the phone. By coincidence, SMU had scheduled their home game against Arkansas in Shreveport that year. It had been a few years since my Father attended a game with me, so I called and invited him to go to the game and visit our relatives. Both visits were wonderful - I needed to be around folks that loved me. And we had great time talking just good memories - many about my Mother. 

And then something amazing happened that night at the game. SMU and Ramon Flanigan put the beatdown on the Pigs, winning 31-9. It was one of the best moments of an otherwise really bad year for me. It also turned out to be the last football game my Father ever saw in person. That memory alone, along with all the time alone with him I treasure to this day. I attempted to find some highlights of the game, but could not locate any, which is sad.

The next memory will be quite familiar to many older Mustang fans. The year was 1982. I was a senior in high school and living in Longview with my folks. My folks had one of those massive console record player/radios that for some reason was in the entry way facing the Living Room - I assume so we could listen in the living room, which we rarely did. The television was in the den, which is where we generally congregated. In high school, my parents allowed me to drive myself, and a few select friends, to HOME SMU games. But away games were verboten. And since not every SMU game was televised, that meant I had to find a radio station and tune in the game. I would shut off the rest of the house, crank up the game, and prepare for an SMU win. 

That year, SMU had rolled through its nonconference games and SWC games and was 9-0 before it was time to face Texas Tech in Lubbock. It was Saturday, November 13, 1982. SMU was ranked #2 in the nation. I loss would be devastating, especially to the Red Raiders. Losing in Lubbock might drop them out of the top 15. The Red Raiders tied the game at 27 with just 17 seconds left. For the few minutes while commercials were running, a stream of expletives flowed quite loudly from my mouth - which did not happen in our house. It was so loud, my Mother came in to investigate. She calmed me down and asked what was wrong. I explained the dire situation and she nodded thoughtfully. Her exact words, "Don't worry. SMU will win." She smiled that beautiful sly smile, and closed the door. I stood there dumbfounded. I knew my Mother loved SMU. I knew she had remarkable faith, and that NOTHING is impossible with God. But what the heck! There's no time! Just 17 seconds. What could we do?

I considered her statement. It was not a joke. Truly it was spoken in complete confidence of the outcome. 

The announcers came back on providing a summary of where we were. They seemed to agree that the game was headed for a tie. And started imagining what the consequences of a tie might be - at least that is what I remember. That seemed to be the longest commercial break ever. And back then, there was no overtime. When the clock stopped, the game was over.

They say radio is the most visual media. I believe that. Because I could see EVERYTHING in my mind. I saw the kickoff, Blaine Smith trying to get a handle on the ball. And then what? He threw the ball across the field to Bobby Leach. Who then ran it back for a touchdown, securing SMUs 10th win of the season.

Stunned, I sat there in silence, listening to the announcers trying to explain all that just happened. Later, I watched the highlights on the news, as it was a national story for a time. The images were exactly what I had seen in my mind.

Once the game was officially over, and I had done sufficient physical displays of joy, I remembered what my Mother said, "Don't worry. SMU will win." How did she know?

I sheepishly walked into her bedroom where she was reading and gave her a big hug. "SMU won!" I said. And she whispered back, "I know."

Go Mustangs!

Has Anyone EARNED Their Way To Power Status?

The vote to add SMU, Stanford, and California to the ACC is still pending. Depending on who you believe, SMUs addition hangs in the balance. Some schools are playing hardball because they want to leave the conference. Their complaint - they aren't making enough money compared to other conferences. But of course they signed the contract knowing the terms, and locked themselves into the ACC through 2036.

Its Time To Make A Decision!

So what does the ACC leadership do? They go out and find a solution, a provision that states if they add teams, their media partner agrees to pay for the additions. And all three incoming schools agree to take less, and in the case of SMU, agrees not to take ANY media revenue for a time, 5-9 years has been reported. I would rather not get bogged down in the details, as it would likely be somewhat speculative, and others have done a decent job already.

Its sad to pick on sports journalists. There is no quality control, no objective standards or criteria to be one. And just about anyone can become one without any actual training or experience. Take our friend above, who has his panties in a wad over SMU landing in the ACC. He equates it to SMU "buying" their way into the ACC. SMU is not PAYING a cent - its a small detail, but important. We are simply not taking the media payout for a time to help the ACC with a financial challenge. Let's allow that elevator to reach the top floor. Then, he goes for the coup de grâce. Someone mentions Rutgers, a team very obviously admitted for questionable reasons. They took less money, and were admitted, not because of athletics or even academics, it was market size and number of alums. So its OK for a school to be a PROSTITUTE, to be used by a conference for a pittance. And not ok for a school to be generous, offering to not take a payout to help bring some stability to the conference - and yet still invest enough to compete with everyone. Its amazing the way folks think.

I would like to address the angry trolls of the college football world. Who like to throw out terms like "desperate" and "buying their way in" bad "precedent" - among other attempts to impugn SMU, or its efforts to land the school in the best conference possible. One of the more humorous attacks was the one that claimed that SMU has not "earned" the right to be in Power conference. After decades of watching conference musical chairs, I promise you there is no "earning your way" into Power status. It is COMPLETLY ARBITRARY. One expansion will be about academic rating, or membership in AAU. Another will be how big is your metro area. Still another will emphasize attendance or viewership. Its very rare for athletics to be critical to elevation. 

Consider Rutgers again, a perfectly fine university. In the 10 years leading up to joining the Big 10 they averaged a very modest 7.5 wins a year. Since joining, that number dropped to 3.4 wins a year. In their 154 year history, they have never won a national championship, never had a Heisman winner, played in 11 bowl games, and have only 1 conference championship. Does that sound like a resume of Power team? In my favorite measure, wins during the last 5 years, they have 15.

For comparison, SMU has played football for 108 years. Most of that time, 75 years, was in the Power conference of the day, the Southwest Conference (SWC). SMU has 3 national championships, 1 Heisman, 11 conference championships, 18 bowls, 5 in the NFL HOF, 16 consensus AA, has 180 weeks in the AP poll, including 2 as #1, and finally 175 NFL draft picks, including 7 in the 1st round. SMU has won 37 games in the last 5 years and looks to have one of their best teams ever this season.

The point is not to pick on Rutgers. Its to point out the absurdity of "earning" your way into a Power conference. In fact, you could go to every Power conference and find 2-4 teams that are deadbeats, going 27 years and averaging 3.9 conference wins a season for example. Or their last conference championship (of 2) was before the First World War! Are those schools EARNING their conference windfall. OR, like English soccer, should they be relegated down and allow schools that are trying to win have a shot for a time?

It would behoove everyone to take a deep breath and acknowledge that the system makes no sense whatsoever. But as long as it exists, you play the game to win, obeying the rules of course. SMUs leadership decided that the value of being in a Power conference, to win and to fund athletics, is far greater than the media dollars we might have received. And in this case, in order to help the ACC with their internal financial challenges, SMUs donors came ready to Pony Up. Don't hate the players, hate the game. I suspect any G5 school would have done the same if there had been interest, and the available donors. Memphis, for example, has a few very wealthy supporters, I find it hard to believe they would have not offered the same had the ACC shown interest. But this was more of an academic play. With Stanford and California, SMU makes a nice third option, with one of the best academic ratings in the G5 community. It opens a new state (TX) to the ACC and time zone (CST). And it doesn't hurt to be in the 4th largest metro area - and growing.

I truly want this to be over. I'm tired of the drama. SMU has been in the realignment conversation for too long. And there has been plenty of disappointment. I hope the ACC simply makes a decision so we can focus again on football!

Go Mustangs!!

Is SMU P5 Worthy?

After nearly 30 years wandering in the college football wilderness, there is now serious conversations about SMU joining the PAC 12. They recently lost two of their top brands (UCLA & USC) to the Big 10+. And in the midst of TV negotiations, found it would behoove their position to attempt to replace the two Los Angeles teams with a school that would at least give the conference some presence in Southern California. And in a bid to expand their reach, they are considering SMU, which sits in the middle of the #4 Dallas media market (DFW) and also in the Central Time Zone. The negotiations have stretched out much longer than most would expect, leading many pundits and reporters, who have little else to do at this time, to produce hundreds of reasons why the conference will fail, and propose multiple alternative plans.

Also during this time, many ignorant voices have made their hatred for SMU known. Many are from former Southwest Conference (SWC) fans. They are determined to do whatever it takes to keep SMU down. Others are just plain misinformed about what SMU has accomplished, past, present, and its potential for success. These are generally from schools that have been rejected by the PAC 12, or have few options to move up in college football.

Three decades ago there was a split in college football. Generally, the larger schools in the major conferences formed a coalition to make sure they would get the majority of revenue, media coverage, and TV time. At one time, it was called BCS, now we call it P5. Sometimes, the split makes perfect sense. Schools with an average attendance of 15k probably should not be competing against a Texas, Michigan, or Alabama. But who makes that decision, and on what basis? Some teams made the mix like Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Duke, and Kansas, that are notoriously bad and spend little on football. While others like SMU, who for 75 years successfully competed in a Big Boy conference, simply got left behind.

As time passed, and conferences expanded, it was never really clear what determines P5 status. Was it consistent wins, making it to the postseason playoff, attendance, revenue, budget, academics, media market, school investment, or even geography? All of these have been used to either include, or exclude potential members. And to those on the outside, its quite frustrating. Either we are all FBS or not. And if we are, then there should be more equity.

What do I mean by equity? I'm not arguing necessarily for equal revenue. If you earn a billion - good for you. But there is an automatic bias in place for schools with the P5 label. People deny it all the time, but its so obvious to anyone who wants to see it.

Take polls for instance. P5 teams, especially the true blue bloods, always get preferential treatment. A G5 team will not be ranked until mid-season, even with multiple wins - and having played a difficult schedule. One loss may take them out of the top 25, while a loss by a P5 school may only drop the school a few places. It is quite rare for any G5 school to start the season ranked. Which makes it harder to move up to the required ranking to earn a playoff spot. Even G5 wins versus P5 are often dismissed as flukes, or there will be excuses like injuries or weather. But if a P5 wins, they are just naturally superior. The sportswriters who vote will deny this all day, but their votes prove their bias.

But wait, there's more. Recruiting is the key to building a winning football team. Every year, the staff must make sure they are recruiting players even better than what they already have on campus. Its hard work, made even more difficult when you are a G5 school recruiting against a P5 staff. That P5 label is used like a sledgehammer to pummel the opposing staff. "If you go G5, you will never be seen on TV, no rankings, playing teams nobody cares about, with little chance to make the NFL, and even less chance to be National Champions," - P5 Recruiter. "But come to our P5 university and see the facilities built by all our revenue. Bathe in the excess dollars we dump each year into football!"

I only exaggerate a little. Now most of that is untrue. If you are good, the NFL will find you. But a chance at a National Championship is an incredibly difficult proposition, if not impossible. With few exceptions, P5 facilities are generally better than schools at the G5 level. They are usually larger universities with more options overall. Its easy to see why many recruiting battles are won by P5 teams.

But let's suppose Stud Athlete commits to a G5. He was originally rated as a high 4 star, with offers from many P5 schools. Once that commitment is well known, his rating will inexplicably drop. Instead of that G5 having a top 20 class, they fall back down among the other G5 schools. Stud Athlete is still talented, maintains the same offers, but his choice has influenced the people that profit from tracking this to make changes to make sure P5 schools are at the top. It keeps the revenue flowing to the recruiting services, and keeps the P5 fans happy. 

You are in the G5, having a good season, earn a trip to a bowl...in your own town against another G5 school. Every school should appreciate any bowl invitation. But generally G5 schools are placed in bowls against each other. Its rare to get a chance to play up a level. And when a G5 team prevails, its always because the P5 school didn't want to be there. The 12 team playoff is another step in the right direction, but until EVERY FBS school has a legitimate chance to play for a National Championship, it is not enough. If the NCAA finally decides to split FBS into the haves and have nots - fine. But there better be a compelling argument for each school left behind.

SMUs Case - Historical Argument

Southern Methodist University opened its doors just North of downtown Dallas in 1911. Originally affiliated with the Methodist Church, it has been largely secular in its approach to education. I can attest to this truth, as there were more Catholics on campus than Methodists when I was there in the 80s. There is a seminary on campus, and as a liberal arts college they do require a religious elective. But there are plenty of options that satisfy this requirement that have nothing to do with Christianity - not that there is ANYTHING wrong with knowing Christ.

SMU started playing football in 1915, joining the SWC in 1918. The SWC featured a mix of public and private universities, and some of the best football in the nation. The SWC included: Arkansas, Baylor, Rice, SMU, Texas, Texas A&M,  Texas Tech, and TCU. Houston would be added later. 

In 1922, Ray Morrison "the father of the forward pass" became coach and his team became known as the "aerial circus" for their prolific passing attack - unusual at that time. In 1923, SMU went 9-0, followed by a National Championship, the first of 3, in 1935.

The Game Of The Century - 1935 SMU versus TCU

Grantland Rice called it the "Game of the Century" matching TCUs Sammy Baugh against the equally potent SMU passing attack. Both teams were 10-0, and an overflowing crowd packed Amon Carter to watch this clash of titans. SMU would prevail, earning a trip to the Rose Bowl and was declared national champions by the Dickinson System.

Cotton Bowl - The House That Doak Built

Few players ever receive the amount of coverage, awards, and accolades as Doak Walker. My Mother, who attended SMU with Walker, had a collection of magazine covers and articles about him, too numerous to number - such was his fame. The crowds at Ownby Stadium grew to the point that games had to be moved to the Cotton Bowl, such was the enthusiasm in Dallas to see Walker play. He could do it all - run, pass, kick, punt, and tackle. He won the Maxwell Award and the Heisman Trophy, among many other recognitions in the late 40s.

The Pony Express

There was a time in the 80s that it could be argued that SMU was the best team in the country. And the numbers seem to confirm this. From 1980-84 SMU went 49-9-1. The team was full of future NFL stars - Eric Dickerson, Craig James, Michael Carter, Wes Hopkins - just to name a few. They were the team to beat and the source of much frustration from big money boosters at other schools. It seemed impossible that this little private school in Dallas could out recruit Texas, A&M, and Arkansas for top talent. But they did. 

Their best year was 1982, where they went 11-0-1 - the only blemish, a tie with a ranked Arkansas team. They would go on to beat Pittsburgh in the Cotton Bowl and then waited to see how the sportswriters would vote. They decided to give it to the old man at Penn State, and their one loss team. That paragon of virtue, Joe Paterno, one of the greatest hypocrites to EVER walk on this planet, was given a National Championship.

There is no denying that SMU paid players in the 80s. But so did EVERY university that was nationally relevant, even many of those that weren't relevant, were trying their best to keep up. All the players knew it, because they were getting the offers. The amount distributed by SMU was peanuts compared to the jobs, cars, houses, prostitutes, debt relief being offered major talent around the country. And SMUs misdeeds seem quite mild now, compared to murdered players and covering for rapists on your team at Baylor. And of course years of fake classes for athletes at North Carolina. Those cases got just a slap on the wrist compared to SMU. 

Then there is Joe Pa. Who always wanted folks to believe that he ran a squeaky clean program - and people believed his shtick. That man protected a rapist, and enabled a pedophile to use Penn State for decades! Imagine, young children being raped in Penn State facilities, and at their events. How many folks participated in this, or were aware of Sandusky's activities? We will probably never know how deep the pit really was. But it was PURE EVIL, not corruption, and the diabolical actions started at the very top, and Joe Paterno was right smack in the middle. He was just as guilty as Sandusky for what those kids endured. He provided Sandusky unlimited access and turned the other way. And yet everything is now hunky dory in Happy Valley - a place that should have been razed, and the ground salted for all their heinous activities. But SMU paid a few players, let's shut their program down.

A slight digression to show the ridiculous nature of the NCAA. They will destroy one program, and overlook massive academic fraud, gang rapes, or university sponsored pedophilia at others. I honestly don't know if the NCAA will ever be respected as an organization again.

In spite of the NCAA, SMU was the team to beat in the 80s. But in the Spring of 1987, the NCAA officially shut down the SMU football program for one year. They would allow 6 road games in 1988, but SMUs leadership chose to sit out that year, returning to play in 1989. The very week the NCAA slammed the hammer down, recruiters from virtually every university - many just as guilty for paying players, arrived on campus to pick at the carcass. I was there and witnessed the disgusting event. In every possible way, it was a DEATH penalty. SMU would start from scratch with just a handful of players who would remain. The rest would be new players, recruited under new, and draconian rules. 

The Pye Penalty

SMU was still in the SWC in the 1989 season and would field what amounted to an all freshman team. The results were to be as expected. The Mustangs were dominated by everyone with a pulse. Just looking at the size of the lines revealed much about what a mismatch each game was. That first year, SMU chose to leave Texas Stadium - Home of the NFL's Cowboys, and play in the old, slightly refurbished, Ownby Stadium on campus. All the sportswriters predicted SMU would not win a game for years. The Mustangs won 2 their first year. Beating UCONN with a last second "Miracle on Mockingbird" pass for a TD. And the obligatory beat down of North Texas 35-9. Those flickers of hope were drowned out by embarrassing road losses to Houston 95-21, and a nationally televised game against then #1 Notre Dame, where their coach had his players run out of bounds, rather than score again. The final score was 59-6, but the humiliation was so much worse.

In the final days of the SWC, it was revealed that then President of SMU, Kenneth Pye, had changed the way SMU recruited athletes. The new policy required athletes to be admitted to the school first before their official visit. And if that wasn't a big enough burden. He also raised the standards for entry above the NCAA minimum, meaning the very best athletes were almost certainly excluded from our talent pool. This was all done even though there was NEVER any academic scandal. Athletes went to class, did their homework, and had plenty of tutors if they needed help. But such was the overreaction of our leadership. This policy would haunt SMU for a decade.

The Pye Penalty made it impossible to compete in the SWC. Recruiting suffered as SMU scrambled to get the leftovers after almost every school had their picks. Few high quality players were willing to wait to see if they were admitted, or qualified, when they already had offers on the table. Instead of fighting Texas, Arkansas, and Baylor for recruits, we were fighting it out with FCS teams and North Texas for talent.

From 89-95, SMU did not have a winning season and only won 3 conference games. so when it came time to form a new conference, merging the old Big 8 with the best 4 from the SWC, it was pretty clear SMU would be left behind. Texas politics made sure Tech and Baylor were included, leaving Rice, SMU, TCU and Houston to find new homes.

The Wander Years

The three privates landed in the newly formed WAC16. A conference made up of teams seeking a better life. It was made up of the old WAC conference plus a few others, and truly had potential to be a pretty decent collection of schools. Houston, to their credit, joined the new CUSA, in hindsight, a far better move.

Almost immediately there was friction in the WAC. Nobody liked the quad system, and attempts to split into divisions meant loss of traditional rivals. So instead of figuring it out like adults, a handful of schools met in a dank airport bar and decided to split into a new conference. Not only that, the split took the very best teams, leaving 8 teams, that had little in common, to pick up the pieces. TCU eventually made the right move and jumped to CUSA. SMU, Rice and Tulsa attempted to make it work. Teams would come and go, and with each move, the conference seemed to get a little weaker. SMU had taken action to fix their internal recruiting issues, but now they faced a problem that made recruiting even more difficult. SMU had no conference stability. Playing teams that were not brand names, and were not traditional, or even natural rivals, impacted recruiting. The bowl options were uninspiring, TV very rare, little revenue, and conference mates were virtual unknowns to Texas recruits. Something had to change.

Here Is Where The Story Begins 

There were too many iterations of the WAC to even attempt to define. SMU spent 9 long years trying to get its house in order, while the ground kept shaking underneath. No offense to all the fine universities that tried to make it work, the conference(s) were dumpster fires. And everyone knew it. SMU aggressively sought a way out before finally landing in CUSA in 2005, where they would remain until 2012. To keep their distance from SMU and the privates, TCU joined the MWC, a conference they could dominate, and remained there until invited to join the Big 12, finally receiving their golden ticket to the Big Boy League.

Many teams in CUSA would later be in the American, so the next few years provided some stability, even though expansion was always being discussed. It was during this time that SMU had its first taste of post-death penalty success under June Jones. From 2009-2012, SMU won 30 games and 3 out 4 bowl games. While not the national breakthrough we needed, it was proof that a coach could win on the Hilltop. Jones used his success at SMU in an attempt to change jobs, and before contracts were signed was very publicly rejected from consideration. His interest in SMU quickly faded, along with the results. In short order, he was gone.

Chad Morris, a former Texas high school coach, and OC at National Champion Clemson, seemed like a homerun hire. The Texas high school coach had barely unpacked before he was floating his name for new jobs. Recruiting did improve under the Texas high school coach, and he had a winning season his last year before leaving for an embarrassingly short time at Arkansas. The Texas high school coach's departure was actually a Blessing, as Sonny Dykes was available and interested to see what he could do on the Hilltop. By this time, all recruiting hindrances were gone - so no excuses there. SMU was investing and building everything the staff requested. Recruiting improved, and the transfer portal became a valuable tool, and before long, SMU was winning, a total of 37 wins in the last 5 years! Of course Dykes would leave in 2021. And his former OC Rhett Lashlee would return as HC from Miami. He built upon what Dykes had accomplished and even improved the recruiting results - especially when it came to transfer recruiting.

Which brings us up to date. The expansion delay has given opportunity for folks to come out of the woodwork with reasons why SMU should not be selected. The most fascinating of which have come from former SWC teams now in the Big 12, and specifically Texas Tech. They joined the Big 12 from the very beginning, and yet have never won a conference championship. Even Baylor, a Big 12 doormat for years, found a way to eventually win. And even with SMUs post-DP slump, our AP appearances still top the poor folk in Lubbock!

It makes you wonder, what could possibly make Tech fans so disturbed about SMU landing in the PAC12? Its a mystery, but they are not alone. TCU, BYU, and even a handful of Baylor fans have offered their brilliant commentary, which normally starts with something like, "My brother once lived in Dallas and he said SMU can't draw flies!" - How can you compete with such thoughtful analysis?

Or even better, someone will post some random photograph of Ford stadium at the end or beginning of a game, and claim this is proof that SMU has terrible attendance. You could literally do that in any stadium, wait until halftime, or when fans start leaving, and suddenly that full stadium is a ghost town. It doesn't prove a thing. But the really amazing thing about this kind of "thinking" is the total absence of imagination. SMU has 12k students and a stadium that sits around 32k. We do not have the advantage of 30,000 students as a starting point. We must have our local alums, Dallas sports fans, and even visitor's fans to fill the stadium. NoNameU motivates few folks outside the players' family, and rarely brings much of their own fanbase. But make the game meaningful - a clash between unbeatens, a traditional rival familiar to alums, or a major brand name, suddenly alums and students WANT to attend. Local sports fans buy tickets, and yes, even the visitors will bring some fans. In short order, there are 30k folks in the stadium. In the past we have had some awful attendance, but nobody can argue that it has continued to improve - averaging 24,972 in 2022. That is 78% capacity. The stadium will be slightly larger when construction is done. And we are hopeful a new group of conference mates will be exciting for students/alums/fans.

The attendance smack is simply outdated.

SMU In The Record Books

In listening to the whiners on social media, you would think SMU has never accomplished anything noteworthy in its history. Well, let's do a quick review, comparing the Mustangs to some of our friends - both old and new.

Heisman Trophy Winners

TCU - 1 - Davey O'Brien 1938

SMU - 1 - Doak Walker 1948*

Oregon State - 1 - Terry Baker 1962

Stanford - 1 - Jim Plunkett 1970

Houston - 1 - Andre Ware 1989

BYU - 1 - Ty Detmer 1990

Colorado - 1 - Rashaan Salaam 1994

Baylor - 1 - Robert Griffin III 2011

Oregon - 1 - Marcus Mariota 2014

*In my humble, and of course totally unbiased opinion, Eric Dickerson earned the Heisman Trophy in 1982. I could identify several reasons for the snub, but you could probably guess them just as easily. Walker was not even statistically the best back that year. Dickerson shared time/carries with Craig James. So let's compare stats: ED: 232/1617/7.0/17. HW: 335/1752/5.2/16. Walker had 100 more carries, one less TD, and almost 2 yards less a carry! And compare their NFL careers and there is no doubt who was the best RB in 1982, and likely the best player on the best team that year. I like them both, as players and individuals, but ED was robbed!

NFL Hall Of Fame Members By School

Oregon         (6) Dan Fouts, Alphonse Leemans*, Mel Renfro, Norm Van Brocklin, Dave Wilcox*, Gary Zimmerman

Arizona St         (5) Curley Culp, Mike Haynes, John Henry Johnson*, Randall McDaniel, Charley Taylor

SMU         (5) Raymond Berry, Eric Dickerson, Forrest Gregg, Lamar Hunt, Doak Walker

Stanford                 (4) John Elway, James Lofton, John Lynch, Ernie Nevers

TCU                 (3) Sammy Baugh, Bob Lilly, LaDainian Tomlinson

Washington         (3) Hugh McElhenny*, Warren Moon*, Arnie Weinmeister

California         (2) Tony Gonzalez, Les Richter

San Diego St         (2) Marshall Faulk, Joe Gibbs*

Utah         (2) Mac Speedie, Larry Wilson

Washington St  (2) Albert Glen Edwards, Mel Hein

Baylor          (1) Mike Singletary

BYU                 (1) Steve Young

No HOF         (0) Texas Tech, Arizona, Colorado, Oregon State

* Player went to multiple schools

One might ask, what does the NFL have to with college? It simply shows the impact that a college has had at the highest level. Along with the above, SMU has placed 10 in the College Football Hall of Fame, 31 All Americans, 11 conference championships, and 3 recognized National Championships - 1935, 1981, and 1982. 174 SMU players have played 8442 games in the NFL, and scored 720 TDs - ranking #35 of all schools, and 73 Pro Bowl selections, ranking #31,

What Have You Done For Us Lately?

You will notice in any discussion concerning P5 status, there is an ever changing level of criteria that makes a team "worthy" of acceptance. Those freshly admitted, and those that have been there for decades, and yet accomplished NOTHING, seem to be the loudest. Some schools just know they belong, and don't throw stones - God Bless them.

One of the best measures, IMHO, is current record - meaning the last 5 years, both in wins, and head-to-head against future conference partners, and maybe even the malcontents if it is relevant. When it comes to the PAC 12, SMU has not played any teams in some time. But their all time record is solid. Including SDSU in the mix, SMU is 7-6. In the last 5 years, SMU has more wins (37) than Arizona (15), ASU (28), Colorado (19), UW (36), WS (32), OS (26), Stanford (23), and California (25). Only Oregon (45), Utah (43), SDSU (40) had more. Will their success translate to immediate success in the PAC, history suggests no. But maybe the adjustment period is a lot shorter than TCU, Baylor, or even Tech in the Big#(tbd) league.

And before people start shouting strength of schedule, you play the hand you are dealt, and generally recruit at that same level. SMU did face 9 bowl teams last year, and has played TCU 4 out of the last 5 years, going 2-2. Even with their mega run last year, TCU only has 36 wins. And SMU counts all 4 new Big members among the teams they played in the last 5 years. So if we played weak competition, then who did they add?

Then we have our friends out in dusty Lubbock, who based on their fans on social media, are apoplectic at even the possibility that SMU would be considered for a P5 conference. They, along with others, have worked diligently at keeping SMU down. Having a financially blessed P5 school right in the middle of Dallas will certainly not make it any easier to recruit the area.

Tech is an interesting case. The Texas legislature made sure they were included, along with Baylor, in the first iteration of the Big 12. So Tech had a 27 year head start, and STILL hasn't earned a Big 12 championship. Even historically dreadful Baylor, the doormat of the Big 12 for a decade, finally put things together. During Tech's glorious reign as whipping boy for the Big 12, they averaged 3.96 conference wins a year! And only 28 wins overall in the last 5 years. Can P5 schools be kicked out for underperforming? I don't understand their hubris. Maybe its the sand and tortillas. But now that the conference will be diluted, they might get lucky and win the Big#(tbd).

I have no harsh words for TCU. I see them as a trailblazer, a model that SMU can learn from. And while our paths are a little different, there are some similarities. 

Let's take a quick trip back in time, when a young man, who at the time was a UT fan because of his Father, was introduced to SMU by his Mother, and a trip with the Methodist youth to see TCU @ SMU. The year was 1973 and SMU won 21-19. That was the first of many SMU v TCU games that I went to as a young man. Even though we only attended SMU home games, it seemed like we always saw SMU beat TCU. It was so bad, I asked if we could see another opponent. From 1972, I never saw SMU lose to TCU. This continued into the 80s while I was at SMU. In fact, only the death penalty brought the streak to an end. 15 straight wins through 1986. And even after the DP, TCU was often the only SWC team we could beat, going 2-5 in the final years of the SWC.

Just a few years later, TCU decided to be a player in college football. They switched conferences and distanced themselves from the private schools. They landed in CUSA, and started investing in the program and recruiting better. They hired Dennis Franchione, who proved they could win. He passed the baton to Gary Patterson who continued the progress. And something amazing happened. Patterson was successful and stayed at TCU for 20 years - unheard of for a school like TCU. But the stability of staff and conference allowed them to move to the MWC, which was brilliant, because they dominated what was then likely the best G5 conference. They were able to build their resume and make a solid case for them to be included in the next round of expansion. And it just so happened that the Big12 needed a replacement, and TCU was ready for the call.

SMU made a few bad moves, some poor coaching hires, so progress was disjointed at times. But now they are poised to move up. Whether that's this year, or 5 years down the road, we will be ready. NIL and the portal has changed the game. And SMUs most recent success is directly related to both. The class signed this year would have been inconceivable five years ago, but there is SMU in the top 10 of recruiting for combined HS & portal transfers.

That's enough for today. Most of this was written from memory, as I lived through the majority of the facts mentioned. Where needed, I provided links to sources. If I missed something, or was off a date, I apologize. It was not done intentionally or maliciously. And all my barbs at SWC teams are meant in good fun. I usually root for Texas teams when not playing SMU. I do miss the SWC and unfortunately  know it will never exist again. And that makes me sad.

Some of this may be very familiar to SMU fans. But younger Mustangs may have not heard everything. And its obvious many from other schools know little about our journey.

There is more I could add, but let's see how this first blog is received.

Go Mustangs and God Bless You!

I think we all miss the Longhorns. 
Especially the brunette in the background.