NTXCoog

​Proof that Houston voted against UNT for SWC? We were only full members of the conference 2 years when UNT dropped to 1-AA

​Do we know how much McClane donated? Forbes claimed $200mm which McClane denied. But regarding smaller donations, I believe that at least 2 others were over $20mm each. Really doesn't matter for the discussion. They have huge donors, bigger than UH so don't single out UH for its large donors when many schools have them.

​Moores' donation was $51.4 million, a HUGE donation. Still not close to over the $500mm T Boone has donated to Okie State with half of that to athletics. About $25mm went to athletics, $11.5mm to the Optometry school, $10.2mm to Music school, plus others. So less than half went to athletics. But you act like UH is the only school that has big donors. Almost every major program has huge donors. If UNT doesn't have one, that's a UNT problem. But UNT had a donation of $22mm in 2011. Not a small amount. He just didn't donate to athletics. Also had an $8mm donation that year. Again with nothing towards athletics. Don't complain about others getting huge donations. Get your own. Would I love for Fertitta or someone else to donate 1/2 a billion to UH, for athletics or academics or both? Definitely. But I don't begrudge others because they've had that.

​Do you think UH is bankrolled anything like mega donors at other schools? TCU's stadium remake was paid for by less than 10 donors. Oregon's entire program is funded by 1 guy. Okie State is funded by T Boone. Baylor's stadium was paid for by 1 guy. UH has some decent size donors, but nothing like other schools. I wish we had some mega donors who donate as much as these other schools.

​If you're saying we're both G5, of course I can't disagree, but I assume you'd agree that there are teams at different levels within the G5. I wouldn't say that Idaho is at the same level of UNT. Would you? Definitely not at the same level as a Boise State. The same is true in the P5. Would you say that Washington State is at the same level as Alabama?

​Keep in mind, that's not how all schools want to or can schedule. If a program's home attendance isn't high enough, the FCS option can't be used. Even if the payout is low, without enough attendance, you still make no money. For teams without high enough home attendance, the other option is a one and done paycheck away game against the true powers that be: the Bamas, UTs, LSUs, etc. Some programs make more money on those paycheck games than they do in a season of home games. They are sometimes the largest financial impact on programs. Finally there's the 2-for-1 and 3-for-1 with 2 or 3 road games and only 1 home game. On principle, every G5 school hates these because they are unfair. In reality though, they have their place. When a program's home attendance is improving where away paycheck games aren't needed, but 1 and done FCS games aren't feasible yet, these games start making sense. It allows the teams to play some of the bigger programs (but generally not the biggest) multiple times, AND it gets those programs to home stadiums, hopefully increasing average attendance and season ticket sales. The long term goal is growing the base enough and maybe the stadium capacity enough so you can start get 1-for-1 deals. If not, hopefully attendance increases enough that you can have home paycheck games (even if it's against FCS) instead of road paycheck games. Those road paycheck games are good money and it's nice to say you're playing the best of the best, but they rarely work out well long term because they generally are blowouts which never increase fan base enthusiasm. And sometimes those 2-for-1 and 3-for-1 teams are beatable. Winning against those teams, especially in the one home game, can be a huge program boost.

Just a follow up... After 11 days, it looks like they're at about $23k. Just a few people to go at the minimum of $500 to reach the $25k max match. You always worry that something like this will flop, but it looks like this time it was successful.

BTW: Everyone throwing around the SMU 15k number. It definitely sucks. But what do you think UNT's attendance would be playing a day game on Black Friday when you're 0-10 against UTSA? Do you think you would hit 15k? Considering you didn't hit 15k on one Saturday last season, it's quite possible.

​Again look at UH in 2012. UNT not better than Tulsa or Tulane. It may make a difference for UNT, but not for UH. Not sure I get your point about Austin... Why doesn't have any pro teams? Because it has the 49th TV market, behind markets like Birmingham, Raleigh, Grand Rapids, Albuquerque, etc.

My point about the Tulsa game is it wouldn't have mattered who the opponent was (possible exception big P5). Your point was that Tulsa didn't bring out the UH fan. Do you think it would have been more if it was UNT? Texas State? UTEP? No. The opponent didn't matter. We were going to have poor attendance regardless because of the bad season. If UH had won against Tulane and UTSA and been 9-3 instead of 7-5, it would have been much higher attendance whether it was Tulsa or UNT, but probably higher for Tulsa because we have a long history with them. Did you know that after this season, Tulsa will tie Rice for team that UH has played the most? Go ahead and mention SMU's poor attendance. It sucks. And UH fans weren't coming to Dallas at the end of a poor season if they weren't going to the last home game. But the UH/SMU attendance hurts your argument. It just goes to show because an opponent is in state, it does not necessarily improve attendance. And I understand your point that you think in state teams will improve interest. I just completely disagree. UH has more history with SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa than with UNT, UTSA, and UTEP. We've played the former 30, 19, and 39 times. We've played the latter we've played 14, 2, and 10 times. Maybe for UNT CUSA West is a better choice because you have no history with either. But UH has a history with AAC West that it doesn't have with CUSA West.

And I do want it noted that I'd love for UH to play UNT because UNT is the 2nd team I follow. I just don't think the instate argument is a strong point to make.

​I'm sure it all comes down to money. I'm guessing a lot of teams got nice deals to play home and homes your first couple of years. In 2015 and 2016 UH has Texas State instead of UTSA. I'm guessing we got a better financial deal on our home game with them than we could get out of UTSA. So let's talk scheduling strategy: 1) We're going to have the paycheck FCS games so we can have 7 home/Houston games (OU is at NRG Stadium). 2) We'll probably have a Texas G5 team with a decent financial deal. The next 2 years, that's TX State. In the future, Rice is back on the schedule to fill that role. 3) We're toughening our schedule up with P5 schools. 2015 - Louisville and Vanderbilt, 2016 - OU and Louisville, 2017 - Texas Tech and Arizona. I just don't think there was room on the schedule with that strategy.

​Again, I think you're reading too much into 1 game with Tulsa. That game was after an embarrassing loss to Tulane the week before, after an embarrassing loss in the season/stadium opener earlier in the season. Fans were disappointed in the season and wanted the coach fired, so they stayed home for Tulane. I notice that you didn't state that the week before against Tulane, UH had 32k there. Hell we had 30k vs Grambling after that UTSA loss. Maybe we should join the SWAC. But the biggest problem with your argument might be the biggest problem with the UNT fanbase. If you're relying on opposing fans to fill your stadium or for other teams to excite your own fanbase to show up, you'll always have problems unless you somehow manage to join a P5 conference. Attendance has to come from being excited about your own team first. I'm not saying that "big name" opponents won't sell more tickets or cause more excitement, but ticket sells need to come from within first. And BTW: if you think UNT would be a bigger draw, just look at UH's 2012 schedule. UNT was the 2nd lowest attended home game of the year. Only UAB was lower with about 250 less in attendance. Tulane and Tulsa both had higher attendance, and those were the last 2 home games of a 5-7 season when the attendance should be lowest. In the future, UH fans would consider UTSA to be similar. UTEP might be an exception because they do bring quite a few fans around the state. Rice is definitely an exception for UH just because the younger alums and students love when we beat them. But again, It's not the team you play. It's the home team you support.

​Don't bet everything on 1 game or even 1 season. Yes, both lost to in state CUSA teams last year. That helped get UH's coach fired. But don't forget, the year before UH beat 2 in state CUSA teams including the CUSA champ. And while UTSA may have beat UH last year, UH had as good or better overall record than all of the Texas CUSA teams and beat a P5 team in its bowl. UH in the last 10 years vs CUSA TX teams: Rice - 7-2 UTSA - 1-1 UNT - 2-0 UTEP - 6-1 Combined - 16-4 I don't think there's much argument that UH has been and will continue to be the top G5 school in Texas

​ ​I'll feed the SMU fire over here with coaches salary talk for your amusement. UH and SMU both hired big name P5 OCs this year. Of course SMU claims they hired the better coach. Time will tell on that. But one of the consistently funny arguments they use for why their coach is better is because they paid more money, $2mm base. Only 2 problems with that argument 1) They have to pay more to get a decent coach because SMU is a head coach graveyard. I don't believe a single SMU coach has been a D1/FBS coach again after leaving SMU since Hayden Fry was fired in 1972 and then went on to coach at Iowa and of course UNT. 2) June Jones made a large amount of money at SMU. I think his average was more than Briles' and Sumlin's combined average salary. Which coaches were better? Even Levine, who made much less than June and was fired, had a better record at UH than June at SMU.

​ ​I'll feed the SMU fire over here with coaches salary talk for your amusement. UH and SMU both hired big name P5 OCs this year. Of course SMU claims they hired the better coach. Time will tell on that. But one of the consistently funny arguments they use for why their coach is better is because they paid more money, $2mm base. Only 2 problems with that argument 1) They have to pay more to get a decent coach because SMU is a head coach graveyard. I don't believe a single SMU coach has been a D1/FBS coach again after leaving SMU since Hayden Fry was fired in 1972 and then went on to coach at Iowa and of course UNT. 2) June Jones made a large amount of money at SMU. I think his average was more than Briles' and Sumlin's combined average salary. Which coaches were better? Even Levine, who made much less than June and was fired, had a better record at UH than June at SMU.

​Slight clarification. He is not matching generic new donations. He is matching donations for new membership into the 46ers (UH football started in 1946). This is a group created specifically to raise funds for football, not the athletic department in general. Minimum donation to join is $500 per year. Benefits include private events with the coaching staff, invitations to some closed practices, and exclusive gear. Not much different than what you said but it is targeted less towards small 1-time donors and more towards medium or larger donors (minimum $500/year) or consistent donors ($500/year can be spread over monthly payments). This might address some of Ben Gooding's concerns about lack of substance and longevity in his post. If they enjoy the benefits, especially access to the coaching staff, hopefully they continue their membership. And if membership grows too large to continue providing those benefits, of course the membership costs can always be increased and/or a waiting list can be created. This can create a consistent. long term, larger donation fundraising source.

Grand total of about $160k. On the bright side, UH made the Washington Post, Huff Post, Breitbart, and others. And as emmitt01 said (from the article): "McConaughey will speak to a sold-out crowd at TDECU stadium"

We got stuck with Matthew McConaughey. Alright, alright, alright.

I hate to do this to you, but throw in 4 star Jordan Elliott and 3 star Dixie Wooten. We're in shock and so excited. Haven't seen anything like this at UH since the 70s. I think the more that commit together, the better chance that most, if not all, sign.

The issue is not walk up available for every game. The tipping point that starts triggering season ticket sales is when at least one game a season sells out. If you can buy decent seats every game at walk up, why not do that? But if there's one game that will sell out, you buy season tickets to make sure that you don't get shut out of that game. But how do you get that sell out? Unfortunately it is probably a gradual process. Most likely you need that opponent that excites the fan base and/or brings in opponent fans. But how do you get that opponent to come to Apogee? You probably need to increase average attendance enough to make a decent financial offer to that opponent. You probably have to do a 2 for 1 or 3 for 1 initially. Then you have to sell that game out. Otherwise you don't get the season ticket bump and you can't schedule another bigger opponent because it doesn't make sense financially for UNT or prestige wise for the opponent. But it all comes down to getting that sell out, whatever it takes. It's probably that big opponent, but it could be an awesome winning run, good marketing, or something else. But until that sell out happens, getting season ticket sales up is tough.

Houston passed Rice before we got into the SWC. They haven't been ranked since 1961. We were ranked in 1967 (didn't finish ranked because they only had top 10 then) and finished ranked from 1968-1971. We were averaging about 30k per year with some games >40k. If UNT finishes ranked 4 years in a row and averages 30k, I guarantee you could move up in conference, no matter what SMU does.

I would love it since I live in Providence Village and used to live in Denton (the reason I hang out here). I know there are plenty of Dallas based alums that enjoy it too. But a series doesn't really energize the UH fanbase. I don't think anyone is opposed to it though. As long as it makes financial sense for UH, I think UH fans would approve. I think it would be preferred to Texas State the next 2 years.

History lesson.... Rice fought like the devil to keep UH out of the SWC because we were deemed beneath them, doing things like offering to sponsor UH for admission, then pulling that sponsorship during conference meeting forcing delays in conference membership for several years. Even Rice's stadium was originally intended to be for both universities and was originally named Houston Stadium. But since it is on Rice campus, they managed to take it over, cutting UH out. It goes back to UH's first season of football. Rice (a power at the time) invited the newly formed UH team to scrimmage. Instead of a nice, quiet closed informal scrimmage, Rice invited the media and fans to a formal scrimmage with officials and proceeded to embarrass the UH team. Rice vs UH at this point in time is primarily a benefit to Rice. UH fans provide a decent boost to games at Rice. Very few Rice fans come to UH. There is some uptick in UH fan attendance at home because many younger UH fans like the "rivalry," but it does little for the older fan. Coexistence within a conference with Rice means little to UH. In comparison to many rivalries, UH and Rice is pretty short having been in the same conference only 28 years split between 2 conferences with a 10 year gap in between. And after the game this year, we'll have played Tulsa as many times as we've played Rice. So I wouldn't say Rice/UH is a great example for your argument.

Does that not apply to any student organization that gets funding?