SMU Insider Makes Stunning Admission on FSU & CLEMSON and Conference Realignment | Mustangs
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 05. 2024
- Pony Up! The college football landscape is shifting, and an SMU insider spills the tea on realignment rumors! Will the AAC finally crumble? How will SMU adjust to life in the ACC? Could the powerhouse programs of Clemson and FSU be on the move, and what does it mean for the Mustangs' future? Dive in for insider intel on potential conference shakeups and how SMU might rise to the challenge in a brand new era of college football!
Appreciate Billy Embody from On The Pony Express for joining me! You can follow him on Twitter here: x.com/billyembody
Subscribe for MORE content like this: www.youtube.com/@CollegeFootb...
The reason FSU and Clemson voted against expansion was because they were hoping they had 8 votes to disband the ACC. Sadly no one else has any cojones and can’t see the forest through the trees. Adding those teams would mean more votes needed to disband and obviously those 3 incomes wouldn’t vote to disband.
It’s not a hatred of SMU thing.
UNC also voted no
FSU and Clemson make up the majority (>50%) of ACC football ratings, yet get and equal share of tv revenue from the ACC deal. Adding more teams that don't bring extensive ratings and TV value further washes down the revenue provided to FSU and Clemson. This is all about $ and attempting to keep up with the SEC and Big10 so they can stay competitive in the decades to come.
Voting NO also helps the legal argument. Why? The ACC and their legal team cannot say Clemson and FSU agreed to a new contract and GOR when Cal, Stanford and SMU were added.
Definitely not a hatred of SMU. Are they a draw, no. Are they a great team no.
Lots of teams.in the ACC are in the same boat so it is more.about what FSU wants to be not what SMU js
Moronic... All ACC members can see the big picture. They have different options and interests. Your comment just evidences FSU's foolish arrogance.
To be a Tier One/Two Program you need:
-Have a bunch of fans and TV revenue. For that you need:
-Have coaching continuity to consistently win. For that you need:
-Money. And be willing to spend.
Keep it up SMU.
The ACC was toast when FSU slighted from the 2023 College Football Playoffs.
I suspect FSU's barking did not help that situation.
@@tarheel7406someone had to be 1st or it’s business as usual and you fall farther behind in revenue.
@@rlbanks6 FSU and its fans are dumb enough to think they were the only and now first to recognize the situation. The issue has always been the tactics FSU has elected to use.
@@tarheel7406wait and see wasn’t working. ACC was falling farther and farther behind and Right now is a 2nd tier conference.
@@rlbanks6
a) Again, it's not FSU's concerns but rather the tactics. UNC most likely secured contingent SEC and B1G invites soon after the TX/OK news. Poor tactics can delay a solution or make it more expensive.
b) The ACC remains a Tier 1 until it depletes out to a material degree.
When the ACC explodes is SMU going to buy there way back into the AAC?
Why would the ACC explode?
Not the worst thing for SMU. I want the ACC to stay relevant. SMU is getting set up for a return to glory. Go noles!
No way SMU sucks and isn't even the 7th best team in Texas in any category.
@@SportHawk717 Please name the 7 teams better than SMU in Texas in all categories.
Guest is wrong, SMU is not only recent addition to power leagues with a national title. BYU won a title in 1984 and joined Big 12 is 2023.
Not only that but Navy and Army and even Rice and others have legit national championships according to the NCAA record books. He is also wrong on why SMU got the NCAA “Death Penalty” and wrong about a massive amount of other things! I thought quarterbacks and former quarterbacks were supposed to be smart? I guess he fell off his pony and hit his head one too many times 😂 😅😅😂!
Texas as well
EAST: Syracuse, Boston College, UConn, Duke, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest, USF. WEST: Tulane, SMU, SDSU, Cal, Stanford, Oregon State, Washington State.
That works ( although I wish Boise and Fresno has a P-4 home).
So the ACC heavily depletes out to the SEC/B1G?
Would this be worth $20 mil per year, per team?
@@jonm4501add a few other teams and remove one in particular and would be worth 25-28 million dollars per school. But you have to get all three service schools to be full members and make some concessions and would be as valuable as that or even the Big12 contract that starts in 2025.
Billy Embody, former SMU QB...
Billy is an expert on LSU as well.
He was wrong on so many things here. And SMU people are petty and double faced double standard goofs.
No he is not correct. You know how many things he got wrong tonight. You were at SMU when they got the Death penalty if not mistaken. They didn’t get it for academic improprieties. You would be a better representative of SMU and discuss their addition to ACC and everything than this clown. You can delete my comment all you want but I am right.
SMU has the richest alumni base in CFB. One booster is picking up the SMU tab for the next 9 years. Guy made the statement "it's JUST 200mil"
Texas A&M still think they can buy players to get ships. SMU will learn but you gotta give it up to that OLD money and OIL money. smh
Jeez must be nice to have SMU money
Damn right!
Their athletic budget is much much smaller than FSUs and they raise less money. They also have a power credit rating.
So I am not sure I would want FDU to trade with them
See you soon Notre Dame! I am inevitable.
Sincerely,
The Big Ten
What up Billy
Everyone is sn insider. These folks never have information that is jaw-dropping. It's always I think, maybe, etc.... never this is what's happening, or here's what's been said.
Stanford and Cal might be better off staying with the PAC2 because WSU and OSU still get all the money the old PAC12 had. They will be in okay shape until the PAC whatever figures out what they want to do.
SMU is not the only one with a National Championship of the new G5 to P4. Does dude not realize BYU has one as well...
BYU was independent. Don’t consider that the same. -Billy
@@smuOn3BYU was in the WAC in 1984.
That’s great. That was 40 years ago. As a strong independent (it’s a compliment), I don’t consider them new to P4. They’ve had legit resources for years. It’s not the same. I’m also not saying they shouldn’t be P4. What are we doing here?
@@smuOn3dude you don’t know Jack. Also. SMU got the death penalty for scandalous crimes and behavior and rules violations against the NCAA and state and federal government and nothing to do with academics at all! What the heck are you talking about. I thought quarterbacks or former quarterbacks were supposed to be smart? SMU is R2 and like pagan BYU will never be R1. Never mind the medical field and medical academia, SMU is missing massive amounts of academic programs across the board. Had SMU focused on becoming R1, then you could make your claim. But that is not the case. BYU was in the WAC in 1984. You can’t do that Whirlpool Washing Machine High Spin on your bull corn and expect it to be clean and correct? Because it is not. SMU did not earn their way into the ACC. You have the fewest athletic programs in the country or close and post 1995/96 last season of SWC against G5 competition you have been garbage in multiple sports for multiple years. What malarkey are you talking about?!? BYU has always been G5 or non-autonomous until this season. In the WAC, Rice produced a few winning seasons in football but not SMU. Oh, about the academic stuff, Memphis is R1, UNT is R1 and probably better representation of Dallas than SMU, UTSA is R1, Tulane and Rice are AAU as is USF and a few other schools in the AAC. I won’t dispute that the AAC is not as strong, but to act like SMU has been dominating the AAC in any sports is insane and laughable. Memphis, UTSA, Tulane, USF, Navy, Army, Air Force, San Diego State, Washington State, Oregon State, and even App State have earned the right to move to a power conference or autonomy conference than SMU. You have no justification to be arrogant and conceited other than not surprising because every person who went to SMU or is Methodist is not worth a donkey turd toss in my experience and knowledge. No pun intended here; you come across as making a horse’s butt out of yourself.
SMU does not need to take FSU / Clemson voting against their addition personal OR anything against SMU particularly. I think both of us would've voted against ANY new additions considering at the time we were trying to get votes to dissolve the conference. So don't take it personal SMU it had nothing to do with your school specifically.
They should take it personal. SMU couldn't even win the AAC until the best teams left and got replaced with CUSA teams. SMU is the 7th most popular college football team in their own city and that's a GENEROUS estimation. Comparing them to Virginia is fitting. Tons of money with nothing to show for it.
@@newyorknole2225 so your comment is just meant to insult SMU fans and their school and has ZERO practial purpose past that. Do better diude. My comment was focused on the fact that it is INCIDENTAL that we voted against SMU, CAL and Stanford. We would've voted against the invitation extended to ANY SCHOOL regardless. So your comment is pointless.
@lawrencefields7874 Definitely at the time... if they made ND a full participant AND added OkState WITH SMU, I don't think we're suing or in opposition.
@@lawrencefields7874no sunshine, he is right, about everything. This SMU dipwad falsely claims SMU has heavily invested in their sports. No they have not! Every single freaking thing he said was on target and accurate. Did you know that Rice (yes that Rice) has had more winning seasons since the merger of SWC and Big8 and the four Texas teams left out of the Big12 had to find another conference home?
UNT is R1 not lowly R2 like SMU and have had way more winning seasons in football and in all other sports both men’s and women’s teams. Oh that’s another thing, did you know that SMU has the fewest athletic teams or programs in the country and still sucked across the board in every one of them until recently when they thought they get in a Power/Autonomy Conference.
This SMU clown goof Nobody Embody who has his head up his ass, should smell really good the crap he and all SMU fans and alumni and faculty and students are full of and spewing out garbage nonsense. SMU lost to three power schools last year and will lose to BC again by the way this fall.
SMU has not invested in sports as much as they claim. Nope. UNT, Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, Memphis, (I don’t like Boise State) Boise State, San Diego State, all three military service schools, CCU, App State, ODU, Liberty, Marshall, Troy, JMU, WKU, Toledo, Georgia State, Texas State, and even the newbie’s FBS schools from FCS have all clearly invested heavily in both academics and athletics programs over the past 10 years or more and clear results of such as evidence by their success in multiple sports and academics. SMU has no right to look down on any school in any other conference outside of the Power 4.
They are not among the top 60 programs in the country in anything athletic and definitely not academic. How many astrophysicists graduate from SMU? How many Cardiologists graduate from SMU? How many Oceanic Zoologists graduate from SMU? How many Architectural Engineers and Landscaping Graphic Designers Specialists graduate from SMU? The answer is zero for each. But back to the sports dilemma with SMU.
SMU says that they are too good to be in a water downed situation in the AAC. Really? Does SMU know what their records are against fellow G5 schools since 1996 to now? It is deplorable to be kind and respectful to their ineptitude of production in football and all other men’s and women’s sports. I am not hating but just saying that truth that needs to be reverberated throughout football and all sports in college and academia too! Memphis or USF or all three service academies are more deserving to be added to the ACC than SMU. SMU has not earned any level of consistency in any sport to justify the move up. That’s truth. Washington State, Oregon State, and San Diego State have earned the right to be added as part of the Western or Pacific Flank of the ACC moreso than SMU.
Let me get this straight, the schools that SMU struggled to beat over the years that are now in ACC or Big12 mainly are going to be their opponents again, okay. So SMU openly admitted that they couldn’t do a damn thing in football or any sport until the best programs left or had a down season. They should be careful with their wording and syntax because may come back to bite them in the ass in the future.
@@lawrencefields7874 no sunshine, he is right, about everything. This SMU dipwad falsely claims SMU has heavily invested in their sports. No they have not! Every single freaking thing he said was on target and accurate. Did you know that Rice (yes that Rice) has had more winning seasons since the merger of SWC and Big8 and the four Texas teams left out of the Big12 had to find another conference home?
UNT is R1 not lowly R2 like SMU and have had way more winning seasons in football and in all other sports both men’s and women’s teams. Oh that’s another thing, did you know that SMU has the fewest athletic teams or programs in the country and still sucked across the board in every one of them until recently when they thought they get in a Power/Autonomy Conference.
This SMU clown goof Nobody Embody who has his head up his ass, should smell really good the crap he and all SMU fans and alumni and faculty and students are full of and spewing out garbage nonsense. SMU lost to three power schools last year and will lose to BC again by the way this fall.
SMU has not invested in sports as much as they claim. Nope. UNT, Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, Memphis, (I don’t like Boise State) Boise State, San Diego State, all three military service schools, CCU, App State, ODU, Liberty, Marshall, Troy, JMU, WKU, Toledo, Georgia State, Texas State, and even the newbie’s FBS schools from FCS have all clearly invested heavily in both academics and athletics programs over the past 10 years or more and clear results of such as evidence by their success in multiple sports and academics. SMU has no right to look down on any school in any other conference outside of the Power 4.
They are not among the top 60 programs in the country in anything athletic and definitely not academic. How many astrophysicists graduate from SMU? How many Cardiologists graduate from SMU? How many Oceanic Zoologists graduate from SMU? How many Architectural Engineers and Landscaping Graphic Designers Specialists graduate from SMU? The answer is zero for each. But back to the sports dilemma with SMU.
SMU says that they are too good to be in a water downed situation in the AAC. Really? Does SMU know what their records are against fellow G5 schools since 1996 to now? It is deplorable to be kind and respectful to their ineptitude of production in football and all other men’s and women’s sports. I am not hating but just saying that truth that needs to be reverberated throughout football and all sports in college and academia too! Memphis or USF or all three service academies are more deserving to be added to the ACC than SMU. SMU has not earned any level of consistency in any sport to justify the move up. That’s truth. Washington State, Oregon State, and San Diego State have earned the right to be added as part of the Western or Pacific Flank of the ACC moreso than SMU.
Let me get this straight, the schools that SMU struggled to beat over the years that are now in ACC or Big12 mainly are going to be their opponents again, okay. So SMU openly admitted that they couldn’t do a damn thing in football or any sport until the best programs left or had a down season. They should be careful with their wording and syntax because may come back to bite them in the ass in the future.
From an FSU perspective, we didn’t want the conference to expand, nothing directed at SMU just expansion. SMU was in the meeting that voted for legal action. It sucks we are helping SMUs cause in game attendance after their involvement to stop us from leaving.
I actually wanted SMU in the BIG. It would get BIG football on TV in the Dallas area.
No
Funny
The B1G has enough bad football teams. They don't need another in SMU
@@treyabbey6477 Once upon a time, SMU had a great football team. Then the NCAA gave them the death penalty, and they have struggled to recover since then. Put them in either the SEC or BIG, and they will finally get back to being a good team.
@@treyabbey6477sad but true. At least that added the team with the cool uniforms. LOL!
ACC Holding Clemson and FSU hostage.
How? There are mutually agreed upon established rules for leaving.
@@tarheel7406 There was deceit on the part of the ACC and possibly ESPN.
@@SportHawk717 Fraud is very difficult to prove and treating FSU allegations as Gospel is silly. Moreover, fraud would not equate to being a hostage.
SMU is the only new team with national championship? Ummm I guess BYU didn’t win the national championship in 1984?
Lol, not really! 😂😂😂
Sure did. Strong BYU team, won 25 in a row.
It wasn’t necessarily SMU. It’s extra votes to keep us from leaving.
You can leave, no one’s stopping you. Just pay the exit fee! Stop rewriting facts!
If there were close to enough votes to threaten dissolution, the expansion would not have passed.
@@chrisg4931damn facts also getting in the way. Will pay it after we get it down to something reasonable. Then come kick your team’s ass.
It’s getting played by notre dame who will never join that conference in football. Notre dame isn’t about the ACC. They arw about notre dame
Silly actually. If there were close to enough votes to threaten a dissolution, the +3 would not have been approved.
Over 4 months in court and arguing about what state court will have jurisdiction is still the prime issue. These lawsuits are going on for years before GOR decisions are ever made. ACC will never settle because settling means it's end. The TV Deal ending on June 30, 2027, will end the ACC. ESPN will never extend that TV Deal. SMU has a home in the ACC for three years at most. Maybe just two years.
The death penalty was 40 years ago. Get over it.
Lol @ SMU being happy from jumping from one G5 to another soon to be G5.
Their breakout game is going to be against FSU 😮
@@jimmyjam5453means nothing!
@@jimmyjam5453they will be lucky to go 7-5 but 5-7 is more like it. They should start off 2-0 before losing three games straight and then win one and lose 2 more games to sit at 3-5 with four games to go in the season. They could lose all four or win all four but three should be wins hopefully. So 6-6 is what I think will be their record. Worst case scenario is they finish 3-9.
If the ACC depletes out that far, then the BIG12 will be considered the same. In that scenario, the ACC would still be the better option.
The Acc as low as the AAC this is outerspace. Fsu offers nothing in BB so that's not hurt. I know some FSU people seem bitter but the Acc is not imploding without FSU or Clemson. Unless the want to.
a) Where is CLEMSON going if FSU is the only other loss?
b) The ACC will be considered a Tier 2 if it loses from the top, but it's unlikely to drop to the BIG12's level.
SMU has fans?
BYU had a national championship before they joined the little 12
If ACC folds....everybody will blame FLa State
Some will thank Florida State, actually.
We don’t care.
The ACC screwed the ACC
Like it or not every team in the ACC signed to GOR. FSU is simply a bad faith partner at this point and a general nuisance. I for one can’t wait to see them gone and I hope they pay through the nose to accomplish it. The longer FSU continues this cry baby game the more the BIG10 membership sees their value in expansion, and it doesn’t paint a pretty picture. Trust me you’re only getting in with the P2 when they are ready for you not just because you make yourself available.
@MikeSharpe973 this is a weird take. It is literally impossible to you that the ACC violated the terns of this sacred and unbreakable contract? And why focus all your ire on FSU and none on Clemson? Also, keep in mind the ACC sued FSU first. Why are they not a bad faith partner?
I like the ACC adding SMU but i feel like Cal and Stanford is a reach I’m not sure they even care about football not enough to add value to the ACC.
I’m not looking forward to our November 16 game in California
Go Cardinals‼️ #LsUp
I've always thought the ACC should have expanded west to Texas many years ago, instead of to the northeast, ala Pitt and Syracuse
But the ACC has never been a football-first league
a) There were talks with TX/OK, but OK would have never preferred over the SEC.
b) All ACC expansions from FSU to L'VILLE were football focused.
NO ONE GOES TO SMU GAMES and NO ONE OTHER THAN SMU FANS CARE ABOUT SMU!!
SMU is in the ACC b/c they bought their way in.
I live in Dallas and there are many college football fans here but very few SMU fans. SMU has just never endeared itself to Dallas.
I feel like SMU is the stuck up step brother lol
Most fans only watch their teams in every conference... People give way more credit to conferences.. SeC, big 10, acc ,big 12.. it's bragging rights for commissioners.. that's about it.
The ACC may survive w/o FSU, Clemson, UNC, Miami, etc. But, more likely, we will see 3 major conferences of about 60 to 72 teams total. 20-24 teams in each 3. 16 team playoff. The other 60-70 teams will be tier 2 conferences and have their own playoffs.
There will be no peer P3.
@@tarheel7406 We have discussed this a dozen times. Nothing is “peer”. Not the teams, not the conferences. Equity across the board is a leftist delusion. It’s not human nature and not the real world. Of the remaining tier 1 conferences, when the dust settles over the ACC/ESPN contract debacle, there still wont be “equity” among the teams and remaining conferences. Rather, people will rank them based upon their success. But, the gap between them and the bottom half of Div 1 schools will be such that the bottom half will compete among themselves and move to have their own playoff, or drop football, or reclassify division. You need to move off your hangup with “peer”. Academics and leftists like to use such, but that’s not the real world. Equity of outcomes isn’t the real world. It’s a delusion leftists are addicted to.
@@mark8337 "Peer" means within a reasonable range. The BIG12 has no feasible path to get back to peer with the SEC and B1G.
Why you still don't understand after "a dozen times" isn't my problem.
@@tarheel7406 It is your problem as you’re the one with the reading comprehension problem.
@@mark8337 There will be no peer P3. As the ACC depletes out, the BIG12 will fall further behind on all factors.
I guess the fact that the SEC said it doesn't plan to add anymore teams anytime in the near future doesn't matter in this conversation? Florida will fight adding FSU, and possibly South Carolina will fight the addition of Clemson. The problem is that the ACC was built as a great basketball conference, but FSU and Clemson favor football.
a) The SEC isn't going to just pass on 2 elite southern flagships that it has wanted for decades.
b) The football focused ACC expansions pushed by CLEMSON/FSU failed to meet expectations.
@@tarheel7406 Tell the SEC that, they said it, not me.
@@garygable4170 The high value ACC schools are of high to some interest to both the SEC and B1G. What do you expect them to publicly say?
@@tarheel7406 Well, my opinion is that they said the truth. After a couple rounds of adding more teams to the SEC they were done for awhile. Probably not for good, but for awhile.
@@garygable4170 Okay. My concern was that UNC would go to the B1G without enough rivals. If the SEC stands pat, the B1G will run down the east coast like Sherman and my concerns will be eliminated.
If that happens, the B1G will have addressed its demo concerns and likely its competitiveness concerns.
They fear SMU.
No way Clemson and FSU agree to partial funding to join SEC.
From everything I’ve heard the SEC and Disney have burned that bridge with FSU. They will be in the BIG. I have heard O about Clemson. I know the BIG would like UNC also and of course ND
As an FSU fan, I was pretty excited about SMU coming to the ACC. I figured they'd spend like crazy and will be competing for ACC football championships in a short time.
One crazy lunatic loves another.
I watched and did not see the stunning admission. That sucks, bad headline.
Standard for this channel.
SMU will take up FSU slack when you pay up. Thank you FSU!
Nah. No need to pay up since SMU is picking up that slack. Even trade
Nope, ACC got them on the cheap. ACC needs you'll to pay exit fee so the rest of schools will get paid as much every year as SEC.
@@Mr.rogers1969 Clemson and FSU’s days of being the meal ticket are coming to a close. ACC teams will have to actually invest money into football and earn that wage through results on the field that lead to increased viewership numbers and revenue
@@Doc_Boots LOL... a) FSU agreed to be a football tentpole. b) It's likely that CLEMSON has been carried more than carried over the history of the ACC.
FSU has no class. A reasonable bet turned bad. It's unfortunate and the ACC members must deal with the situation as best as each can, but the scorched earth tactics and finger-pointing is so amateur.
@@tarheel7406 perhaps the best solution for the ACC is to generate swift and immediate distance from such an unruly program and their shenanigans. A settlement would do just the trick.
If anything, Clemson has taken the gloves off and gone for the throat of the ACC more than FSU with their latest suing for damages against the ACC. Hope Clemson wins and ACC pays them to leave
Unless a team is AAU certified they won’t be considered in the Big 10. Clemson and FSU to the SEC. UNC, Virginia, Miami they would get invites to the Big 10. Maybe not even UNC if they are tied to NC State by legislation.
AAU Cert. is not a requirement. If Fox wants actual southeast viewers The Big 10 will take them. Nobody actually watches UNC, Virginia, or Miami. Do you think advertisers want prospective viewers or guaranteed viewers?
@@rooroo_7Quick question, who do you think makes the decision on expansion?
@@rooroo_7
a) Media value is a function of both quantity and quality if viewers,
b) FSU would be a double exception for the B1G, so an invite is not certain.
@@troywest7045 it’s a mix of entities that have a stake in the matter and decision making on expansion, between the School boards, athletic directors, media entities, and University Presidents. I assume if you’re watching videos like this, you’ve got that part figured out. But, if you’re referring to or questioning my reference that media companies drive a large portion of it, I’d be interested in how you think they’re not involved in a large way.
History repeating for SMU? 1/19/2012, SMU BIG East announcement. czcams.com/video/P44SdKVGvgg/video.html
I get that SMU can’t really concern themselves with what is happening with the ACC, but wow, this just comes off as tone deaf. ESPN can essentially push one button, and SMU’s hopes and dreams evaporate.
If B1G offers full share then it’s a no brainer and I’d have to think SEC knows that. If they don’t want B1G in FL then acknowledge FSUs prestige and offer us immediate full shares.
The BIG will be in Florida! Either FSU or Miami, or Both. Both gets BIG football seen in the entire state
The B1G has two options to get into Florida: Miami or FSU
Who will take the least amount of shares? That's who will get the votes
@@francoisdillinger9992 not necessarily. Miami would probably join for less but they aren’t as valuable to the B1G compared to FSU either.
@@pklein1675Miami is arguably more valuable just by virtue of being in Miami. FSU is coming off 4 losing seasons out of the last 6 years. This year will be telling for both schools.
@@pklein1675additionally FSU still doesn’t have the academic requirements (AAU which Miami has) to get into big 10.
Did I hear him to say the reason SMU got the death penalty was because they went to far and deep in pursuit of academics?
Yep, all credibility lost immediately
no. after the death penalty, SMU refocused on academics and forgot about athletics. They overcorrected from previous 'win at all costs' approach to sports.
@@goodnerarts1206 honestly what else where they going to do?
@@hurricane2053 nothing. Lots of the old SWC teams were under multiple investigations at that time. Some admins did not have the stomach for it. Houston had a similar retraction/refocus not long after. Still recovering from that.
SMU did not overcompensate by focusing on academics. Are you unaware how many academic programs that SMU doesn’t provide or have ties to. SMU is R2 not R1. If cared about academic integrity would have become R1 like Baylor and other schools.
SMU has not invested in sports as much as they claim. Nope. UNT, Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, Memphis, (I don’t like Boise State) Boise State, San Diego State, all three military service schools, CCU, App State, ODU, Liberty, Marshall, Troy, JMU, WKU, Toledo, Georgia State, Texas State, and even the newbie’s FBS schools from FCS have all clearly invested heavily in both academics and athletics programs over the past 10 years or more and clear results of such as evidence by their success in multiple sports and academics. SMU has no right to look down on any school in any other conference outside of the Power 4.
They are not among the top 60 programs in the country in anything athletic and definitely not academic. How many astrophysicists graduate from SMU? How many Cardiologists graduate from SMU? How many Oceanic Zoologists graduate from SMU? How many Architectural Engineers and Landscaping Graphic Designers Specialists graduate from SMU? The answer is zero for each. But back to the sports dilemma with SMU.
SMU says that they are too good to be in a water downed situation in the AAC. Really? Does SMU know what their records are against fellow G5 schools since 1996 to now? It is deplorable to be kind and respectful to their ineptitude of production in football and all other men’s and women’s sports. I am not hating but just saying that truth that needs to be reverberated throughout football and all sports in college and academia too! Memphis or USF or all three service academies are more deserving to be added to the ACC than SMU. SMU has not earned any level of consistency in any sport to justify the move up. That’s truth. Washington State, Oregon State, and San Diego State have earned the right to be added as part of the Western or Pacific Flank of the ACC moreso than SMU.
Let me get this straight, the schools that SMU struggled to beat over the years that are now in ACC or Big12 mainly are going to be their opponents again, okay. So SMU openly admitted that they couldn’t do a damn thing in football or any sport until the best programs left or had a down season. They should be careful with their wording and syntax because may come back to bite them in the ass in the future.
The ACC has no future. Why? Because the mid-level teams will bolt to the Big 12 when FSU and Clemson leave. Just saying...
The smart ones will try at least.
They have this discussion every year between the end of basketball and start of football. The result: ACC added 3 teams and lost nobody.
An ACC that "just" loses FSU and CLEMSON remains far better than the new BIG12. B12 fans have no self-awareness.
@@garygable4170 they will lose FSU and Clemson. Then UNC because their coveted by both the BIG and SEC. Virginia would be next and anyone else of value to the Big 12.
@@tarheel7406 the PAC fans felt the same way, keep living the delusion.
lol reduced rate
Only team that gets a full share from the B1G during the current media deal is Notre Dame. That's because they are the only team named in the media deals escalation clause. Everyone else will either have to settle for half shares or wait till 2030.
Click bait alert 🚨
🗣️
I think SMU is going to hand FSU their first loss of the season.
Dreamer
@@pattgriggs3435 they have a good team and FSU is not as good as they were last year.😞
@@jimmyjam5453 SMU will be one of the toughest games on FSUs schedule…but they will be just as good, or close, to last years team. Defense is deeper and offense will be fine under DJU. Running back room is also deeper.
I wouldn't doubt it
Certainly not impossible but SMU got bullied by all their P5 opponents on the LOS last season, inclidong BC. FSU's dline is likely going to be elite again. The oline should be improved with new guards. I can't see SMU winning unless FSU is not as good as expected in the trenches.
What is this guy talking about? SMU has never won a championship....maybe in cheating, but that is it.
In the 1930’s.
You need clicks so bad to interview a guy that knows virtually nothing