gangrene

LA Tech to Hold Tuesday Press Conference Fans invited to Jarrell Room of Charles Wyly Athletic Center at 11:30 a.m. June 28, 2010 Louisiana Tech will hold a press conference Tuesday at 11:30 a.m. in the Jarrell Room of the Charles Wyly Athletic Center to unveil a master facility plan and capital campaign for its collegiate athletics department. Tech President Dr. Dan Reneau, Athletics Director Bruce Van De Velde and Leadership Team Chairman Steve Davison will be addressing the media about the project. Renderings of the master facility plan will also be included in the media packets which will be made available to all media covering the event. A mult-box will be available at the press conference for TV stations. Louisiana Tech officials will not comment on the event prior to tomorrow's event. For any questions regarding logistics of the press conference, call Associate AD Malcolm Butler at 318-614-4513. Louisiana Tech fans are invited to attend the event.

You may have valid points but, I really don't think most people outside of Vegas and local bookies/bettors pay much attention to the ratings of teams 100-160. (I guess that means 40 FCS teams were ranked ahead of the Mean Green? Yikes!)

Honestly, I still haven't seen a compelling argument for staying in the SBC or joining the WAC. Each option seems to have greater risk than reward to me. The WAC just lost it's figure head and the SBC has never really had one. The SBC is widely accepted to be the worst football conference in the FBS. I think that is due in part to a poor record against other conferences but also because of the large number of former FCS teams in the SBC. The WAC is strongly considering adding FCS teams and their success against other conferences will most certainly be reduced with the loss of Boise State. So, the choice is bad or worse - only we can't scientifically deduce which one is bad and which one is worse at this point in time. Since football is the driving force behind any conference affiliation decision, I don't really care about travel costs for the other sports. A good portion of those costs will, obviously, have to be offset by additional revenue generated from the new conference affiliation, but could also potentially be funded by the increased athletic budget realized from the student athletic fee. I didn't travel to any of the Big West games against teams currently in the WAC, mainly because I didn't have the means to do so back then. A lot has changed. While I am only able to make it to a couple of OOC games each year now, I no longer have many of the obstacles that prevented me from attending Big West opponents. Several of the WAC markets are appealing to me because I love to ski and just like cold weather, in general. Hawai'i also doesn't sound bad and it'd be easy to talk my wife into visiting. Still, the weekend road trip is a nice option. I'm also not buying into the media coverage issues of playing in the Pacific or Mountain time zones. I loved it when they used to show the Hawai'i games live (with a 9 or 10 PM Central k/o time) and I watched quite a few of them because it was the last live game of the day. Besides, how much local media coverage do we really get now? Does anyone think Vito will stop blogging about UNT if we join the WAC? I guess my point is that I really don't care which conference we're affiliated with because it doesn't really matter unless we're winning (not unless we're Baylor or Vanderbilt - losing record every year but still raking in millions from the league payout). If we were still dominating the SBC, I think the decision would be tougher because we'd be the top dog in our conference eight years straight. We'd have built a foundation of success that should get us noticed by the conferences for which we aspire to belong. If, at that point, that recognition we desire still hadn't come, it would make more sense to look elsewhere to prove that we could dominate outside of the SBC. Sorry folks but the bottom line is that is all comes down to winning in today's college football world. We have to win both conference and non-conference games. If we consistently win, we will get more media coverage, higher attendance, better traveling fans, more donations, more apparel sales, more respect for North Texas and more respect for whichever conference we choose to align. Then, and only then, will the "sleeping giant" we claim to be awake from the slumber.

Hmmm...for some reason, that idea sounds familiar to me. However, I think the MWC gets an auto-BCS bid and either the MAC or the SBC becomes the third conference in the alliance.

"BCS voters" don't even watch the MWC, so why should anyone believe they hold the BSU-less WAC in high regard? BCS Voters Can't Be Bothered To Watch Utah Play Football Utah out of sight, out of mind

I just came across this article on tsn.com and found it to be almost of Nostradamus quality. Four Downs: Would Texas consider the Pac-10?

Unfortunately, I think you're right on the money. We have a less than 5% chance of being considered in the top 64 programs within the next 10 years, and that's even if everything you mentioned miraculously occurred. I'll add one big factor you left out and that's tradition. Several schools will likely be included in the four 16-team super conferences that are not commonly considered amongst the best football programs in the nation. They will be included simply because they have established traditions/connections with the schools that matter. Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Indiana, Northwestern and Minnesota are just a few that come to mind - all bring unquestioned attributes to any conference, but they don't have reputable football programs year in and year out.

I'll drink pretty much any beer at any given time. I guess it just depends on my mood and the time, place and food I'm enjoying the beer. One that I do really like, but have only found at one restaurant in the DFW area, is Hacker-Pschorr Hefe Weisse Natürtrub. The staple beer for me is Coor's Light, although I've been drinking a lot of Bud Select Light 55 lately. I also enjoy many of the Shiner and Samuel Adams varieties as well as Ziegenbach. Some of the imports I enjoy are Tsing Tao, Kirin Light, Amstel Light, Harp, Hoegarden White Beer, San Miguel Carlsburg, Asahi, Bavaria, Paulaner and Corona Light. I've found that your selection gets really limited when traveling to other countries, but it's great because it makes you try a lot of new beers. I had several different brands in Brazil that I can't even recall the names but haven't seen any of them here in the US. Same goes for my travels to Asia. A lot of places will have Budweiser and possibly Coors or Miller brands but I prefer to sample the local flavors. For anyone interested in beers around the globe, I highly recommend "Beers of the World," by David Kenning. BTW, Pabst was just sold for $250 million today. Pale Pilsner or Dark? I was actually surprised to see that one listed here. I prefer the Pale Pilsner and San Mig Light but I've also had the "extra strong" Red Horse on an occasion or two. How about Ginebra?

I'd say that 34K was artificially inflated (like most SMU attendance figures) because of SMU's Sellout Campaign 2009. So, as you can see, 18,000 of those tickets were sold to only 18 people. I have no idea how many of those were given away, but I have to suspect most of them were. If that was indeed the case, I'd estimate their attendance was closer to 16,000 people who actually paid for and used their own tickets.

I think the "home" games at Texas Stadium should also be mentioned within this thread because it shows our potential to draw larger crowds when/if a big-name opponent agrees to visit us. North Texas also played Texas Tech at Texas Stadium in 1998 and 2001, but the attendance was only in the low 20K range. I am pretty certain the attendance for a Tech visit would be higher today. I looked for, but was unable to find, our attendance figures for the '74, '76 and '77 games against SMU at Texas Stadium.

I don't have anything against the Hilltopper's stadium, but what's that on the far left side and corner of the picture?? That thing they're trying to cover up with that ugly piece of 1970s Astroturf couldn't possibly be a track could it? And what's does proximity to a large city have to do with ranking the actual facilities? The writer does at least project us to be #2 when the new stadium is complete, but I'd have to say that will make us a clear-cut #1.

SHSU exploring FBS opportunities: Bearkat athletic department conducted survey to determine feasibility of moving up down the road This article is over a week old but I don't recall seeing it posted here anywhere. Maybe they should go ahead and invite SFA , SE Louisiana, Central Arkansas and Lamar, take the undesirables from the WAC, SBC and CUSA and form their own conference? That would instantly elevate the SBC in the football conference rankings and possibly create an opportunity for us to replace Tulane. What's next? UTA will bring back football and join the Big XII?

We can speculate all day on who may have gone where, but the fact of the matter is that there would still be a lot of movement in the conference realignment picture. As it is today, all conferences, with the possible exception of the WAC, seem to be content with their current members. The concept of the 16-team super conferences never really materialized (at least not yet). Had the Pac-10 become a 16-team conference, I believe we would have seen some major scrambling from the other AQ schools to form additional 16-team conferences. What specific opportunities that scenario would have created for North Texas is anyone's guess. My guess is that we'd have more options than going to the BSU-less WAC or remaining in, arguably, the worst FBS football conference - certainly the least respected.

Oklahoma president: Sooners and Texas A&M had SEC invitations It will be interesting to see the reactions of Sooner and Aggie fans once this information has had a better opportunity to circulate amongst the fan bases. In the best interest of North Texas, I really believe a full dissolution of the Big XII would have been best.

If you really believe that then why are you trying so hard to convince us to join you in your plight?

Completely agree. Many of us on this board have been saying that for several years, if not decades, now.

And what three "mid major" Texas teams would the WAC be able to add? I don't think Houston, Rice, UTEP, SMU or TCU are willing to move to the WAC.

I agree with this. It's nice to be wanted but unless the WAC can pull in more schools within our immediate vicinity, I don't think it's a great option for North Texas.

Ok, I think it's time to lock this one up.

I would love it if these three conferences could merge into two super conferences and do it now, while the AQ schools are still bickering with each other. That would really steal the wind out from their sails. Counting South Alabama, the SBC will have 10 schools, the WAC now has 8 and CUSA currently has 12, for a grand total of 30 schools. Either keep all these schools and add two more for 32 or drop two and have 28 - two 16-team conferences or two 14-team conferences. Separately, these schools have limited negotiating power with the TV networks but, collectively, it could be very appealing. While 32 schools is far too many for each school to play each other in a given season, exclusive scheduling between the conferences could be arranged so that a school would play one or two schools from the other conference every season. If the 32-team option was chosen, you'd have two 16-team conferences and four 8-team divisions or you could create a 32-team mega conference with the same format. In a 12-game season, each team would play all 7 teams in their division and two teams from one of the other three divisions. The remaining 3 games would allow schools to either schedule one team from the other conference (in a two conference format) and two teams of their choice (AQ or FCS) or two teams from the other conference and one team of their choice. The 28-team option would create two 14-team conferences and four 7-team divisions or a 28-team mega conference. You'd have to eliminate two schools for this option, but it would be very similar to the 32-team option - either two conferences with scheduling between the two conferences or just break it into a four division conference. In a 12-game season, each team would play all 6 teams in their division and four teams from one of the other three divisions. The remaining 3 games could be scheduled against AQ schools to increase strength of schedule. This really isn't all that different from how the NFL works. It's obvious none of the WAC/CUSA/SBC schools individually carry the same the same weight or command the same respect as the "big-time" programs but there is strength in numbers. As I've repeatedly mentioned, I don't think the TV gold mine is going to last much longer, at least not as we know it today. However, that seems to be the dominant motivation factor for conference realignment today. While 32 schools is a lot to divvy the money amongst, a 32-school conference TV network is going to appeal to a LOT more than any one individual school would.

For obvious reasons, QBs are very high on the recruiting wish list this year. We have numerous offers out to quality QBs. Regardless of if we offer and/or sign him, I think his quotes on North Texas are awesome: "My favorite is North Texas," the quarterback said. "They have a good coaching staff. It's kind of a surprise, because they haven't had very good years, but they've got good facilities. They'll get a new stadium for my freshman year."

I have a novel idea, why don't we don't start our own Mean Green television network? Think of the millions of dollars we could earn!

That is correct, sir. I give it a max of 5 years, and not having a conference championship is only going to accelerate the unhappiness within the conference. I don't know why, but I am really perplexed at how the rest of the conference has chosen to blindly follow Texas down the path of doom.

I think you're giving the students a free pass (pun intended). It's downright embarrassing that a university of 36,000 students can't draw more than a 2,700 attendance average for a team that has won 20+ games in each of the last four seasons. We should expect no less than 1/6 or 6,000 of the students to attend every basketball game. What's their excuse? It doesn't cost them anything to enter and most of the games are on weeknights.

Personally, I agree with that philosophy and I think Texas and OU will regret the decision to stay in the Big 12 lite in the not too distant future. How many times have you heard the media criticize the Big 10 and Pac 10 for playing weaker schedules and NOT having a conference championship game? Now, both the Big 10 and Pac 10 have 12 teams and will likely have conference championship games, along with the SEC. Meanwhile, the Big 12(-2) is going in the opposite direction. Who's right and who's wrong?