Eagle1855

It's typical small-minded thinking at an institution that continues to be the only person in its way from truly taking flight (eagle reference...hey-ooo). It's an ass-whip of the highest order and why I have absolutely ZERO expectations with regards to conference realignment. What I want to see is confidence...even if it is baseless. Perception is reality. I want a blog post that says UNT has a lot to offer any conference and is ready to take the next step onto the national stage. UNT is positioning itself to become another namebrand, large, quality state school in the athletic as well as academic world. But I never hear any of it. In more positive news, we're supposed to be more "competitive" this year and winning 6 games or so would really be a boon to the program!

That was my exact question while reading the article.

We should all write a really nice letter to UT and explain why they should bring us with them to the Pac-10 instead of stupid Texas Tech. If we get like 1000 signatures, I don't see how they could ignore it. Conference realignment starts on message boards. Athletic directors are always taking advice from the internet. Never underestimate the power of your ideas.

I've said this for a long time, so to a point, I agree. However you have to have PLAYERS to win games. So the question becomes, which conference, on average, is going to bring in higher-ranking recruits? I'd assume the WAC.

If the Sun Belt seriously decides to scoop up UTSA (another spread out commuter school who has yet to play a down of football), another generic, no-name southern school a thousand miles away, and Texas State, I hope our administrators will seriously reconsider that WAC invite.

high five.

UH to the SEC is intriguing to me. There's a foothold on a large Texas market.

Why would they? The DMN doesn't cover UH or Rice. But I will agree, the Chronicle has its share of lousy writers.

Thank God. I'd hate to miss out on that trip to Monroe, LA every other year.

It'd a nice picture, but Texas State's stadium still looks pretty mickey mouse in person. The baseball thing is troublesome and not having it will make us less attractive to other conferences. I remember when we were supposed to play our first season of baseball in 2008. Sigh.

You'd rather have Kansas and Utah, however you won't likely won't get Texas, Texas A&M, and OU without Tech and Ok State. Maintaining the strong(ish) rivalries among the relevant schools in the Big 12 South and placing them all in their own division in a new, substantially stronger conference with a huge media market makes the offer far more enticing. So you grab two schools that probably don't fit the profile of the Pac-10 in order to score the big dogs.... or really, THE big dog, Texas.

Love Oswalt. If he has to go to another team, I'd like it to be a contender. If not there, then the Rangers would be perfect in my book.

I used to think this but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it is, but is C-USA really some sort of Panacea for North Texas Football? Is it really the height of our aspirations? Would it be more desirable to be the lone Texas team in a more highly-regarded conference than just another middle of the road team lost in the shuffle of a conference with several?

I'm not trying to hash out the same tired old debates- I realize we are where we are and there's nothing we can do about it- but while the "build the belt" concept is noble, it in actuality is probably little more than a pipe dream. IF UNT ever wants to be a BCS buster, we'll need a conference that people actually realize exists and is recognized as a legitimate player in Division 1A football. Also, this article just put me in a mood this morning. Vent over.

If for no other reason at all, take a look at ESPN's list of conferences and their rankings. Notice anything peculiar?

the least memorable dunk of my time at UNT had to be Calvin Watson on a fast break against Memphis.

How good a football program has performed is only one component of adding a school to a conference, which is why you'll never see Boise State in the Pac-10. Texas and Texas A&M haven't any interest in UH being a part of their conference. Neither would any of the other teams in the Big 12 North like Kansas and Kansas State who recruit heavily in Houston. The Big 12 already HAS the Houston market- they've got UT and A&M. TCU makes sense, but I'm not sure they want another private school. They would score the DFW market, but they've already got that too. On the other hand, I could see them locking up UH and TCU if for no other reason than not allowing any other conference to get a foot in those markets as things shake up. If I were Texas and A&M, I'd be tempted to look west for a new conference. As for us, well our best bet at a BCS conference isn't going to be the Big 12.

Thanks for the laugh.

exactly. I'm glad someone gets it.

Yeah, that's just what a league of havenots needs... more start up programs.

They may come after them, but that doesn't mean they'd leave. Texas is more than a football school and they've made it clear they want to maintain their academic profile on all fronts, including conference affiliation. The Big 10 is comprised of AAU schools. The SEC has a couple good ones (UF, Vandy, Alabama) and a host of mediocrity. I guess I'm just not sure what OU and UT have to gain by going to a more difficult conference with lower academic standards when they pretty much just switch off every other year playing for the national title by being in the Big 12, which is really the Big 2 and 10 friends.

I think we're just sad we don't have a bunch of bandwagon douches following us because if we did, that would mean we were actually relevant in the scope of college sports. Not a one of you is going to tell some johnny-come-lately UNT fan to F off if we ever go 12-0 in football and garner a bunch of support from the DFW area. We'll celebrate it, as we should, and build on it.

Stewart Mandel is one of my favorite college sports writers. Also, this is an SI article, not ESPN. Either way, I think it's a nice, relevant piece. Much like Bar Refaeli.

So what were you saying during the Dickey years?