Pumpkinhead said:

---

A&M would have made a 12 team playoff in 2012 and 2020.

A&M will make it to some playoffs in the future. Yes, we have underachieved but sheer size and conference weight plus playoff expansion will occasionally get us in.

Bold prediction on SMU and TCU for that matter. One hit wonders on making it to a playoff. I think it unlikely either make it again in the foreseeable future.

---

Let all hope.
10 years from now if A&M is still sitting at zero conference championships and zero playoff appearances in the 21st century( and SMU and TCU have become CFP regulars) it might be time to look at other options besides the SEC.

FCBlitz said:

---

SMU earned the right to play by being conference champs. To get the total playoff scheme initiated lesser conferences needed one guaranteed slot for conference championship to get to 12 teams

---

You might want to recheck the conference standings.

SMU was the AAC Champion in 2023, and the ACC runner up in 2024

Last 1st place season for Texas Schools:
Rice: SWC 1994
Texas Tech: SWC 1994
Texas A&M: BIGXII 1998
TCU: BIGXII 2014
Houston: 2015 AAC
Baylor: BIGXII 2021
SMU: AAC 2023
Texas: BIGXII 2023

Make fun of SMU if you'd like, but that program has won more national championships than this one with the last two in '81 & '82. Their bold leadership found a way into a P4 conference and organized a plan they have executed seamlessly. They've made upgrades every time a coach has been poached and have set themselves up nicely in this new era CFB. We know they can play the NIL game as well as anyone.

Moral High Horse said:

---

But but but the integrity revenues of the conference championship games.

---

FIFY.

MyComputerCareer said:

---

Make fun of SMU if you'd like, but that program has won more national championships than this one with the last two in '81 & '82. Their bold leadership found a way into a P4 conference and organized a plan they have executed seamlessly. They've made upgrades every time a coach has been poached and have set themselves up nicely in this new era CFB. We know they can play the NIL game as well as anyone.

---

WTF are you talking about?

'81 champ: Clemson
'82 champ: PSU

Search results engines can be your friend.

WC94 said:

---

How the **** have two private Texas Christian schools made the CFP before us??? Upper management needs to be fired yesterday. We have a bunch of Jerry Jones wannabees.

---

They played JV schedules.

WC94 said:

---

How the **** have two private Texas Christian schools made the CFP before us??? Upper management needs to be fired yesterday. We have a bunch of Jerry Jones wannabees.

---

Maybe because they are better run programs? Hell most are run better than us. We spend like drunken sailors with 0 to show for it while smaller less advantaged programs have way more hardware.

My bad, should have specified "claimed" MNC's. As a Ag, you know what I mean, right? And as Class of '88 you may actually remember that '82 season, no?

We should fully expect a 12 team playoff to produce these results in the first round. Why should we expect 11th and 12th ranked teams to compete consistently with top-6 teams? This is going to happen every year. Even if they were CAPABLE of going on a run, is it truly preferable to shoe-horn a three-loss team into the playoff? Didn't they already prove they weren't the best team in the country by losing 25% of the games on their schedule?

4 team playoff makes more sense functionally. 12 team playoff provided a more exciting regular season because everyone convinces themselves they have a 'chance' until the very end. Maybe 12 team format is better if you are ok with just holding your nose through the first round (or 2). On another note, it seems a shame to expose the players needlessly to another week potentially serious injuries for some games that are non-competitive

Not Coach Jimbo said:

---

Because you're not allowed to question the authority.

---

this is very much spot on. In fact, sports - which is known to be lotus for the lotus eaters - normalizes situations which people know to be wrong or just feel hinky.

Add not questioning why multi-millionaires put SMU in the playoffs to the long list of how sports shapes the public opinion and perception.

Games and contests have been rigged for numerous reasons for since gladiators battled it out in the Coliseum.

12thMan9 said:

---

MyComputerCareer said:

---

Make fun of SMU if you'd like, but that program has won more national championships than this one with the last two in '81 & '82. Their bold leadership found a way into a P4 conference and organized a plan they have executed seamlessly. They've made upgrades every time a coach has been poached and have set themselves up nicely in this new era CFB. We know they can play the NIL game as well as anyone.

---

WTF are you talking about?


'81 champ: Clemson
'82 champ: PSU

Search results engines can be your friend.

---

SMU claims '81 and '82 national championships.
There used to be multiple polls and foundations that would crown national champions - not just the AP poll.

SMU was one of 5 national champions named by the National Championship Foundation in 1981.
In 1982 The Helms Athletic Foundation named them national champions.


They had a legit claim in 1982 with only one tie vs top 10 Arkansas. Penn State had a loss at #4 Alabama.

Search engine results truly are your friend.

Nice work CC00. That PSU AP title is interesting. More of a lifetime achievement award for the horrifically disgraced child abusing Paterno program who was absolutely boat raced 42-21 by an 8-4 Bama team. Meanwhile, SMU was undefeated but tied a 9-2 Arky team and was coming off probation for recruiting violations. Hard to compete in the AP with St Joe protecting CFB from the Sherrills and Switzers of the world, no? And as a TAMU fans who can't relate to the "recruiting violations" of the whorn controlled SWC?

CC00 said:

---

12thMan9 said:

---

MyComputerCareer said:

---

Make fun of SMU if you'd like, but that program has won more national championships than this one with the last two in '81 & '82. Their bold leadership found a way into a P4 conference and organized a plan they have executed seamlessly. They've made upgrades every time a coach has been poached and have set themselves up nicely in this new era CFB. We know they can play the NIL game as well as anyone.

---

WTF are you talking about?


'81 champ: Clemson
'82 champ: PSU

Search results engines can be your friend.

---

SMU claims '81 and '82 national championships.
There used to be multiple polls and foundations that would crown national champions - not just the AP poll.

SMU was one of 5 national champions named by the National Championship Foundation in 1981.
In 1982 The Helms Athletic Foundation named them national champions.


They had a legit claim in 1982 with only one tie vs top 10 Arkansas. Penn State had a loss at #4 Alabama.

Search engine results truly are your friend.

---

Quit lying.
SMU does NOT claim the 1981 and 1982 National Titles.

Penn St was voted the 1982 AP and Coaches Poll National Champion because they defeated an undefeated #1 ranked Georgia team in the Sugar Bowl.

SMU didn't get the votes for National Champion because they played UNT, Tulane and UTEP out of conference while Penn St had played Alabama, Nebraska and Notre Dame in addition to their usual dose of East Coast opponents.

SMU was on probation in 1981 and didn't play in a Bowl Game.

Kellso said:

---

CC00 said:

---

12thMan9 said:

---

MyComputerCareer said:

---

Make fun of SMU if you'd like, but that program has won more national championships than this one with the last two in '81 & '82. Their bold leadership found a way into a P4 conference and organized a plan they have executed seamlessly. They've made upgrades every time a coach has been poached and have set themselves up nicely in this new era CFB. We know they can play the NIL game as well as anyone.

---

WTF are you talking about?


'81 champ: Clemson
'82 champ: PSU

Search results engines can be your friend.

---

SMU claims '81 and '82 national championships.
There used to be multiple polls and foundations that would crown national champions - not just the AP poll.

SMU was one of 5 national champions named by the National Championship Foundation in 1981.
In 1982 The Helms Athletic Foundation named them national champions.


They had a legit claim in 1982 with only one tie vs top 10 Arkansas. Penn State had a loss at #4 Alabama.

Search engine results truly are your friend.

---

Quit lying.
SMU does NOT claim the 1981 and 1982 National Titles.

Penn St was voted the 1982 AP and Coaches Poll National Champion because they defeated an undefeated #1 ranked Georgia team in the Sugar Bowl.

SMU didn't get the votes for National Champion because they played UNT, Tulane and UTEP out of conference while Penn St had played Alabama, Nebraska and Notre Dame in addition to their usual dose of East Coast opponents.

SMU was on probation in 1981 and didn't play in a Bowl Game.

---

https://smumustangs.com/documents/2024/8/15/2024-07-History.pdf

Link to their media guide (on their website). Page 142.
"Dickerson, James and McIlhenny led SMU to an 11-0-1 record and its second-consecutive National Championship in 1982"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMU_Mustangs_football
See claimed national championships.

I didn't say they should have either title. But they WERE awarded those titles by entities that could do so. Our 1919 title was awarded by the same NCF that awarded SMU their 1981 title.

I mean.... I clearly looked this crap up. Did you not even check before saying I was lying?

Smu wasn't national champs in 81 or 82. What about the year the Texas Aggies were undefeated but on probation? We can claim that one but it doesn't make it legit.

Smu, Indiana and tu didn't belong in the tournament and would not have made it if sos was used correctly. They need 16 teams to get this right or drop to 8 teams; including only the SEC and Big 10. Until they fix it it will generate bad matchups. South Carolina could win this title if they were allowed in. Counting losses isn't the right approach

DGrimesAg92 said:

---

South Carolina got hosed. Bama shouldn't have lost to ****ing ou.

---

Gamecocks would have done well in CFP. They were on fire by end of year. Wanted them to be there.

Reno Hightower said:

---

Aggie Apotheosis said:

---

jt16 said:

---

These announcers are begging us not to question SMU's inclusion in the CFP. Why are they exempt from criticism with this boring ass game? They shouldn't be there, and now we all know it. If this was A&M everyone would be piling on, but for some reason we aren't allowed to draw conclusions about smu from this one game.

---

I would suggest that we can't criticize SMU because they had a better season than we did.

---

A perineal 8&4 team criticizing a team that actually MADE the playoff? SMU did this BEFORE perineal 8&4 has. Sure. Criticize them from making the playoff and ******* the bed all ya want, but 8&4 is looking in from the outside AGAIN!

---

I will take 8-4 over having SMU as my team to cheer for. So sorry, has nothing to do w inside vs outside or anything philosophical. It is football. And a game.

Call it a Rorshach test, but who was the 1927 National Champion? Or 1919 National Champion?

LincolnBorglum79 said:

---

Smu wasn't national champs in 81 or 82. What about the year the Texas Aggies were undefeated but on probation? We can claim that one but it doesn't make it legit.

---

The difference is no one (including the NCF) named A&M a national champion that year (1994). They named both Nebraska and Penn State (both undefeated).

In 1981, the NCF named 5 teams National Champions:
Clemson 12-0 (AP #1)
Nebraska 9-3 (AP#11)!!
Pittsburgh 11-1 (AP#4)
SMU 10-1 (AP#5)
Texas 10-1-1 (AP#2)
Texas, Nebraska, and Pitt do not claim this title. SMU does. Clemson was clearly the champ.

It's dumb but it is what it is.

A&M claims the 1927 National Championship what was retroactively given to us by Jeff Sagarin 50 years later. We were 8-0-1 and Illinois was 7-0-1.
We began claiming our 1919 championship in 2012 but we were undefeated and unscored upon so seems legit enough to me.

jt16 said:

---

These announcers are begging us not to question SMU's inclusion in the CFP. Why are they exempt from criticism with this boring ass game? They shouldn't be there, and now we all know it. If this was A&M everyone would be piling on, but for some reason we aren't allowed to draw conclusions about smu from this one game.

---

I'm not going to quit wishing they get beat!!!!!