SMU TO THE ACC STARTING 2024-25
- Thread starter loca2874
- Start date
Look - I’m not saying we don’t need to grow the fanbase. Anyone with a brain knows that.
But to just randomly show up and start taking shots at TU, especially when there has been A LOT of work going on to correct the issues of the past, it’s not going to be well received.
But to just randomly show up and start taking shots at TU, especially when there has been A LOT of work going on to correct the issues of the past, it’s not going to be well received.
Plenty of football on. Y’all should watch some.
Growing the fan base when we are such a handicapped small school... Not easy.
And blue- and gold-colored glasses like yours will keep this program from facing its actual problems.
I am old, EVERYTHING is in the past for me. Here's a name for ya... Henshaw
Ok fella 🙄
I’m not going to get into this over on this board because it’s pointless. However, what I will say is that I’m not advocating for TU to not address real issues (we all obviously want the very best for TU).
Well he did find Rubley for us. That turned out ok.
Blame OU. In the Glen Dobbs era the only way to see your team play was to go to the stadium. When OU (I think others were in the suit too) sued the NCAA over broadcast rights it resulted in what we have now. There were probably 25 to 30 games broadcast yesterday on cable/satellite and every D1 game was available to stream somewhere. With that kind of availability the non-rabid fan that just wants to see the game can watch it from their easy chair in the comfort of their home rather than fighting traffic to sit on uncomfortable bleachers, often in more uncomfortable weather.
SMU has had the same President for 28 years. We can call that living in the past OR we can call that stability of vision.
TulsaAM is right. One of TU’s biggest problems is changing Presidents every few years and having different Presidents change the vision of the school. In the last 28 years, TU has had more than one President whose vision of the university was very unfriendly to the growth of the athletic department. We have had way too many starts & stops and changes of direction.
BTW, Donaldson was TU president when Turner became president of SMU.
Last edited:
I understand. Army football attracts eye balls one game a year and we already have a conference member in that game. Not to mention they’re a very average football team year in year out with limitations on its ceiling. Suppose it all comes down to the networks.
Last edited:
ESPN definitely plays a major role in this, but unfortunately I think it comes down to what Aresco can actually pull off and what this conference has to offer. While he’s tried valiantly in the past to lure in conference upgrading programs (Colorado St, Air Force, etc) and failed, at this point the conference doesn’t have a ton to offer any programs outside of the lower level program types (like the Cusa programs we just added).
Army may be the best we can aspire for even though they aren’t a super sexy program, I’d 1000x rather have them than some of the other program names being floated around like Georgia State, Liberty, South Alabama and so on 🤢 🤮
I imagine they always run it by ESPN and/or already know what ESPN's feelings are related to an 'add'. My guess is that attempting to add Army or any other school, has already been preapproved by ESPN before we even approached Army.
Yes I’m sure you’re right because the $$$ attached here is too important… so ESPN would have to approve any additions (unless we wanted to take a pay cut).
My point was just that as our conference has continued to dwindle and top programs exit, the appeal of what we have to offer also continues to dwindle. So Army, if Aresco can pull this off, would be a big victory in regard to the perception of this conference instead of just dipping back into Cusa or the sunbelt and hoping for the best.
I'm not sure how Aresco can be expected to poach from equal to more superior conferences? He has kept the American alive from day 1, replacing exiting schools with what most believe to be the best available options. At least until now, he's managed to keep the best "G5" media rights deal in tact after losing UConn, UCF, CIN, and UH. That's 4 programs with some combination or all of branding, fan bases, funding, and markets.
I believe he made a run at the best of the MWC when UCF, UH, CIN announced their departure but he was rebuffed. I believe he even attempted to engage some Big 12 schools after OU and Texas announced their departure. No Commissioner can force schools to join or stay. I think Conference Commissioner play a bigger role when it comes to negotiating revenue streams and based on what he's dealt with during his tenure, I think he gets a solid B+ or A- when it comes to Media Rights revenue.
TX
There isn’t anybody out there with any true financial value, though Georgia State may be a sleeping giant kinda like UCF was a part time school for future Hilton night managers and without a football program 30 years ago.
Whether Idaho re-promoted itself, New Mexico State joined, or we added Coastal, the dollar values in terms of what it’s worth to the networks is roughly the same no matter who you add.
However, the brand value of the add, and therefore the brand value of the conference could be increased. So programs with national followings or national recognition do have an upside. So Army and Liberty do add a little bit whereas Arkansas State despite its facilities and track record the last ten years really doesn’t. Army has a tradition and cachet to it. And don’t underestimate the influence of administrators, athletic officials, donors and their wives wanting a couple of paid visits to NYC per year and at least one just before Xmas.
The key factor in deciding is probably looking deeper at actual and projected capital outlays and the availability of financing for that, as well as ease of transportation both air and highway. Nobody on here thought UTSA was credible 5 years ago until you were looking at what they were willing to spend after the start up project found its footing. So if there’s a school like that out there lurking, a Kennesaw State maybe, you start to examine the advisability of that.
Last edited:
I don't understand the point. We made some bad hires so we should just give up? you gotta keep fighting every day that's what life is all about.
Besides, one good thing about the titanic changes in higher education is they present opportunities to reinvent yourself for the new world. That's why the Janet - Brad decision was so important, it was two opposite views of how to reinvent TU for tomorrow. Janet, like you, was defeatist and backwards looking. Fortunately we're at least giving a positive vision a chance with Brad.
Last edited:
In all fairness - both Judy and Janet weren’t the best.
yeah, I don't feel like I undermined anyone's great reputation.
That's one reason I value friends like you! Aren't many groups anymore where I'm the young guy!
Thank you. I appreciate your acknowledgement that I will always be older than you, thus making you feel younger
@HuffyCane In your opinion why does it seem UTEP has become toxic and left behind? They are the only school from the original WAC, WAC 16, and WAC /MWC split who never landed in the MWC, American, or better.
Historically they've carried some branding value in the southwest, specifically during their time in the original WAC. Their programs seemed to gain some momentum during the WAC to C-USA realignment of the mid 2000's, both in football and basketball, per some solid coaching hires. When TU shared a conference, UTEP's facilities always seemed to be solid and their atmosphere always seem to be on par or better.
Granted UTEP is isolated in SW Texas but the El Paso/Las Cruces market is top 100 DMA as of 2023, ranking higher than Greenville, Boise, Reno to name some AAC and MWC DMA's. As of the 2020 census, the population of greater El Paso exceeds Tulsa and Memphis.
I'm not necessarily making a case for UTEP, I'm just wondering if you have a take on what happened to UTEP and if their brand as a school is about perception no longer meeting reality? Has their budget and funding plummeted? Is El Paso simply an undesirable market to the Media Rights holders?
TX
Last edited:
This is a little dated but in 2017 their budget was around $30m which isn’t bad and definitely higher than several of their Cusa peers. I believe La Tech’s budget is around $20m.
Similar threads
