Arkstfan

I said when UNT made its hire, that the Mean Green made the hire they needed. In fact I said the same about the Cajuns, ASU, and before that WKU. The evidence is sketchier on Mac at this point but I'm not sure people want to think about the recruiting situation. A few years back I watched UNT play ULL in person and watched a very very mediocre group of Cajun receivers more than once blow past the UNT defense, then have to come back to catch a poorly thrown pass and UNT defenders still not there. They were just flat being outrun. There was more to fix at UNT than there was at ULL or ASU.

I was never that impressed with Mario. He went 2-4 against ASU. The first win was the Hilton Heave when T Y fumbled and picked it up and threw it for the winning TD. The other was against a staggering 4-8 team that only lost by 7 in Miami to the Sun Belt champs. Mario was 23-26 in games TY appeared in and 4-20 when he didn't.

History does matter because it sheds insight on what drives someone. Remember that Texas wanted to take TT, TAMU, OU, OkSt with them to the Pac-12 and the deal collapsed when TAMU started talking to the SEC. TAMU wanted in the SEC when Arkansas left. Then they vote to give third tier to the schools, Texas gets LHN and TAMU gets cover to make the move they tried to make back in 1989. History tells us that NMSU finds a conference affiliation in football in desperate times. The Valley had run out of options and took them. The Big West had run out of options and took them. The Sun Belt couldn't get off the ground without them. The WAC ran out of options and took them. Right now MWC is at 9 full 10 football but the Big East is at 13 for football and has to add one more for the west to work but there have been multiple reports that they are contemplating 16 for football. The claims are out there that adding Central time zone teams and calling them western isn't appeasing Boise and SDSU so you have to think MWC loses one or two more to the Big East unless the league punts on the western experiment. The MWC if it loses one full member is at the NCAA minimum, Hawaii then has to come in for all sports to be at 9. More importantly if MWC loses one more to the Big East that makes it all but certain that hopes of luring Boise and SDSU back are dead. I don't see MWC taking anyone today but once that invite happens they have to come east or they have to settle for being the new WAC (10 former members) or the new Big West (five former members) with no place to turn except to an NMSU and Idaho that don't fit the model MWC has followed.

You have to understand what makes someone tick if you want to guess correctly what they will do in a given circumstance. Understand their logic and things should make more sense. When CUSA formed up, Tulsa had the chance to be a part of it but affiliating with TCU, SMU, Rice was a greater draw for them. They left the WAC as a package (sans TCU). They only got in CUSA because Tulane insisted that Tulsa, SMU, Rice be admitted or they would leave CUSA to join the WAC. The hook that made CUSA their destination is now erased except for Rice. With UTEP they had found the affiliation with the rest of Texas to be a positive but SMU and Houston are now gone. Their history has been with New Mexico, Air Force, Colorado State, and Wyoming, If they can get some sort of Texas connection, MWC is their perfect fit, probably their ultimate ideal. So you've got a UTEP that can really benefit coupled with a Tulsa that is just disgusted that TCU, SMU, Tulane, three of the four schools important to them are out of the picture. While UTSA is likely a positive in the mind of UTEP, they are undoubtedly a negative in the eyes of the Tulsa administration as a start-up program. If you are the MWC and want to raid three to five schools to round out to 12 or 14 after losing Fresno, you start with Tulsa and UTEP. That makes everyone in the western part of CUSA nervouse and ready to jump and Tulsa has some degree of input (though likely no vote) on who the third or the third, fourth and fifth team are. If you look at the conference expansion models. The history of CUSA has been market, market, market, with the sole exceptions being La.Tech (which I believe was related to a joint action to put the WAC out of business) ECU (forced on the league by the Liberty Bowl but with a great winning history and great attendance) and Marshall (good winning history and good attendance). The MWC with the exception of SJSU and UNLV has selected members based on good football and good gate receipts. The problem the MWC has now is the well is exhausted. There is nothing left to select in their region except two programs with poor winning histories, poor attendance and very small markets. They have to come east for protection.

Tulane (and their 3,000 seat hoops arena) aren't worried about the athletic side of it. Tulane draws a significant number of students from the Northeast. It's all about recruiting students who pay full price.

Big East ain't going to die as long as quality programs like ECU will accept football only.

#1 Freeze inherited a team that had four guys worthy of NFL contracts including one draftee. #2. Freeze had experience at QB and WR. #3. Freeze had been the OC the year before so wasn't installing a new offense and he knew which assistants were worth keeping. Malzahn took over a 10 win team returning its QB and all but one skill starter on offense.

Yep. Clears up any misconceptions I had regarding character.

I hate seeing the trashing of Belt on the way out the door by some. The only negative the Sun Belt brought UNT was making it easy for Dickey to win and allowing him to think you don't have to recruit hard. But we didn't make you hire Dodge. As to TV if stAte makes a bowl game this year, half our games in 2011 & 2012 will have been on the ESPN family. No complaint from me. Saturday was the first game this year I didn't see in person or on real TV. According the Houston Chronicle Houston - SMU on Fox Regional barely outdrew two Ft Worth high school teams on Comcast. That's the flaw of being on non-broadcast non-ESPN channels.

A start-up gets a measure of grace that others don't get. 1. When they win its "wheeee lookit what they are doing". 2. When they lose its "well they've only been playing a couple years." 3. Start-ups get new dollars that they weren't getting before with some people buying in because that new program is seen as a good civic amenity. That takes away pressure to worry about making budget year in and year that burdens many programs scheduling. 4. Start ups market like crazy and offer ticket deals programs worried about budget would never offer. Then they tout those crowds to generate buzz. 5. Start ups don't have to deal with, "I went to a game five years ago and some team I'd never heard of pounded you." 6. Start ups don't deal with, "Why aren't you lower level? I saw the score and the #2 team in America ripped you up." 7. Start ups just don't have to contend with past negative perceptions. Let UTSA go through four or five sub .500 seasons in CUSA and see what happens. UAB attendance has fallen quite a bit from the heady days when they were brand new to CUSA.

My two bit analysis. Neither defensive coordinator can be happy about this game. For John Thompson he faces a team that seems to have a physical offensive line. Arkansas State has struggled dealing with teams that are physical upfront (have really serious depth issues on defense). USA gave ASU more than we wanted, and WKU was able to rally back from 13 by pounding the ball with mostly a few short quick hit passes. For John Skladany he faces a team that loves to snap the ball a lot of times and maintain a very high tempo. Arkansas State wants at least 80 offensive plays per game and is averaging 75 helped in large part USA's slow pounding offense and three ASU turnovers keeping ASU at 59 snaps. UNT is 1-3 when giving up 70 or more plays with FAU being the lone win at 71.

From the game notes It is the 63rd homecoming game for North Texas and the Mean Green has an all-time record of 40-21-1. North Texas has faced Arkansas State twice on homecoming, in 1999 and 1986, both of which were wins for the Red Wolves.

Since 2005, Arkansas State has been bowl eligible four times, three of those times, ASU's sixth win of the season was against North Texas and twice it was at North Texas.

The ASU defense is not as good as last year (but we lost 8 starters, one to the NFL draft, three more went free agent so there was obviously some very good talent lost). If you look at total defense ASU is 52 which is rather out of line with scoring defense ranking of 80. The difference is special teams not defense. ASU has a pretty average defense but special teams errors have led to direct scores and short fields resulting in 31 points given up on the season, but for two missed field goals would be 37. Factor the special team botches out and the scoring defense pulls into line with the total defense numbers.

What I hate is schools that only use twitter as one-way communication. Here's the latest press release. God help you if you ever need a question answered by our SID office and ask it via Twitter. Waste of your time.

Colony as an example (although I'm sure the precise timing was dumb luck) of making sure to sell the "brand", going into LR a huge percentage of commuters come in via I-30 from the north. The first billboard in Little Rock since summer has had Gus Malzahn's photo with the slogan "Game On". Wednesday morning commuters saw a new sign replacing it. Just the wolf logo with "Red Wolves Rising". Start with whatever the "hook" is and move to the brand. I suspect serious football fans in DFW know Coach Mac. Heck I don't follow the Big XII closely and I knew and respected him because he gave us fits coming into Arkansas raiding kids to Iowa State that we thought were absolute steals if we got them. And of course Apogee in of itself is marketing tool. If UNT hasn't done a wing-spread eagle logo superimposed over that wild end zone, I imagine it is simply a matter of time until some marketing genius says "hey that sort of looks like an eagle flying". I'm a big Sporting KC fan and they will market anything. The stadium, the players, anything they think will hook some interest. My mantra is "It takes years to be an overnight success." Get that foundation laid and then when the last pieces fall together everyone thinks "Wow look what they did IN JUST ONE YEAR" ( or two years). I've lived in a community with a fairly large private college and I doubt many people realize the advantage UNT holds over SMU. There is a built-in bias amongst most people against private colleges and their students. There are people who will come support UNT who have never taken a class there and none of their friends have either who would never do that for SMU.

Play someone with a fan base that likes fairs. Last time I bothered to go to the Arkansas State Fair I saw a lot of Razorback t-shirts so maybe call them.

They've done a pretty good job marketing their program. Their web campaign prior to their last bowl set a high standard that many SEC and Big XII schools would have been proud to have claimed credit for.

I think the approach has been all wrong. Back when the 5th bowl was approved to get better access, part of the deal was more money. One idea thrown out at the time was to go to an 8 bowl alignment. Rather than cutting WAC, MAC, MWC, Sun Belt, CUSA a check to shut our yaps and behave the idea was to create three new bowls under the BCS label that would take the five champions and have their pick of the best remaining team from an AQ conference that didn't have two teams in the BCS. The check that would have been cut to each conference would have become part of the bowl payout. So if Las Vegas was in and was the "first pick" second tier BCS bowl they would have whatever payout they could afford plus about $2.5 million per team. If Liberty was second they would have whatever plus about $2 million per team, and if say TicketCity was #3 they would have their payout plus about $1.5 million. First selection bowl would get its pick of non-AQ champs plus anyone from a league w/o two teams in. Then down the line until everyone was accomodated. If a non-AQ champ met the criteria to be in a top-tier, they could be replaced by any school from a league that hadn't had two teams selected regardless of AQ or non-AQ. Thompson and Bankowsky opposed that idea, The six AQ weren't crazy about it but it wasn't going to cost them dollars. Once CUSA and MWC said no the deal was dead. Then the next idea to come down the pike was to have a "play-in" game. The two highest rated non-AQ champions that hadn't qualified to be selected would play that weekend for a slot in a BCS game with the next two playing the early game just for the heck of it to make it a TV doubleheader. Fox was committed guaranteeing $5 million to $8 million for just the TV rights to the two games depending on whether it would be held the first Saturday in December (low number) or the second Saturday (high number). CUSA and MWC weren't interested. The money isn't what matters even if it is nice to have. Access and eroding the labels is what matters.

First, this has to be said as a matter of principle. The Memphis numbers are rank fantasy. Despite announcing the move to the Big East and hiring a new coach they cut season ticket prices this year because of the fan apathy. The season ticket package price cuts ranged from $50 to $120 per seat. Of course that is in large part a function of success. ASU bumped my ticket package from $250 (including mandatory donation) to $370 this year and anyone who bailed out in my area because of that 48% increase has been replaced and I'm bracing for another hit next year because they didn't bump it enough to accomodate all the newbies willing to move into that seating area. WKU brought about as many people to Jonesboro this year as Memphis did. Second, remember that La.Tech at the start of the season was getting some semi-negative press for tepid ticket sales in Shreveport and their weather delay wasn't truly warranted but by rescheduling, there was much more interest in the game as Tech started out great and TAMU fans became more interested as well. Sometimes a little luck helps. That worked out wonderfully for both schools. Third. I take UTSA attendance with a big grain of salt. They've never had back-to-back losing seasons nor been steam-rolled opening weekend by a big name team. Let's see what happens when they start living in the real world. Merely winning does not produce crowds and all the marketing in the world won't put 20,000 in the stands unless there is a product people want to see. I don't mean "Oh team X is coming to town". The product has to be the home team. Last year ASU marketed that we were having a "Price Freeze" uh we were coming off a 4 win season, not like we were raising prices. In reality what we did was offer an early renewal discount. This year prices did go up and while there was no exemption for the minimum donation doubling, the small increase in ticket prices could be avoided by those who had bought bowl tickets through the school AND renewed early. For a number of years ASU marketing consisted of two things. Working diligently to get as many businesses in town to decorate their windows with ASU stuff as possible and pushing the tailgating experience. Produced about a 15% bump that was pretty static. But last year bumped 24% above that new level and that was with 1/3rd of the home games being played while we had a losing record. Attendance just doesn't fix over-night and if it does, good look retaining it. You really can't build a permanent fan base based on "winning this year" nor "we play this name team". You've really got to sell gameday experience, push the school brand, and THEN produce a team that creates excitement.

I wasn't happy about that at all. No need risking injury. On the flip side, ASU's final 27 plays were runs. Until that point we had 31 pass attempts and 23 rushes, and finished with 50 rushing attempts.

I disagree with Athlon on a number of points. Big XII and the Champions Bowl is a coup, but they lost TAMU and perennial "almost" Mizzou (TCU this will be your role most likely). West Virginia is a quality team but so far out of the footprint that they eventually will be forced to add at least one school out there for the health of the league (see ACC needing to do something about Boston College). The Big XII was too big to fail but they aren't a winner because of realignment, they are a winner because OU and UT stayed. Boise State, jury is out for me. If they hit their estimates on TV money, Boise will survive the damage done to the other sports. Basketball may not drive the bus, but it is a significant part of an athletic department. It is the only sport other than football that doesn't cost a school to have and pours over money to support the other programs. A lot of Boise's new found wealth be invested in Title IX compliance where you start behind the eight ball with the other sports in an inferior league than they were in. Maybe it works out but I don't think it is a lock. If Boise stumbles in football they can be a force to radically de-stablize the Big East. Conference USA defectors. UCF and Memphis are the clear winners. UCF aligns with USF. Memphis gets a basketball schedule their hoops crazy fans will truly appreciate. Houston and SMU primarily win in aligning with a group closer to them in committment. Rice, Tulane, UAB each have their own quirks that made it difficult for them. They have football coaches being paid around the Sun Belt median. Houston and SMU are in what looks a lot like the OLD Missouri Valley or the old CUSA but the difference is getting away from those who frustrated the efforts to raise CUSA even higher. Mizzou just changes who keeps them from winning the league but after pursuing the Big 10 hard and then being threatened with desolation when the powers flirted with the Pac-12, Mizzou is in a better place. New CUSA. UNT gets three in-state opponents plus Tulsa. That's a win. La.Tech gets to play Tulane. That's a win. UTSA (see UNT). ODU and Charlotte change their timetables but they get their FBS plans on track. Wins all around. Notre Dame. Right now a loser in my book. They were affiliated with one of the elite leagues. Now all you hear is talk of the "Big 5". The Big East is an incredible hoops league pre or post realignment but the perception that most ND sports aren't affiliated with a league consistent with their perception is a loss. Pitt and Syracuse. Clear winners. Life doesn't get much tougher in basketball or football than it was but the ACC doesn't the have the damaged goods mash-up feel of the Big East. TCU. Will the fan base still come with dominance fading away? Big question but Oklahoma State has shown you can crack the UT/OU monopoly. Temple. BIG BIG winner. Hoops finally in the Big East and that's the important part. The new Big East doesn't have Miami, VT, BC, WVU, Pitt and Syracuse to kick them in around in football. Tougher sledding for football than the MAC but not like it was before. TAMU. Winning the SEC will be a much more daunting task, but the recruiting situation in Texas has changed. Before they could rattle off all the things they had and UT would respond by showing something better. Now going head-to-head with UT, the message to recruits is simple. We are in the conference that wins national titles, they are in the conference that watches the national title. WVU came out ahead but it isn't going to be fun for the fans who used to be able to travel and help negate home field advantages. Texas State. They escape the WAC and get in the league they had initially targeted along with UTSA. They aren't in NMSU's or Idaho's shoes. USU and SJSU. Welcome back to the Big West uh WAC uh MWC. Back with some old foes and some schools they long wanted to align with, no looming trips to Texas. ACC winner for now. They have made a strong move to dethrone the Big East as best in basketball. They did nothing to help flagging football. Big East lives to fight another day but they have taken an unstable mess and made it bigger and more unstable. Rumors are swirling that Navy won't even play a full league schedule and will count Army and AFA as designated league games. CUSA. By most accounts still looking to expand. The league is a picture of contrasts. On one end UAB, Rice, Tulane on the other ECU, USM, Tulsa. ODU and Charlotte are bets on the future. La.Tech doesn't fit their traditional models. Biggest problem is that the Big East is unstable and if it tear apart CUSA will feel the impact. ECU got most of what they wanted in the CUSA expansion (FIU, ODU, Charlotte), they didn't get in the Big East but may have better positioned to be considered if the Big East blows up. Idaho is dead meat unless the MWC has a change of heart. On the upside Big Sky wants them, they have old rivalries there, they've been knocked out of the top division twice before and made it back so they can survive if something doesn't break loose. Louisville by mulitple accounts was the consensus #11 for Big XII they just never found a consensus #12. Short-term losers, they stand ready if the ACC goes to 16 or Big XII raids the ACC or the Big XII doesn't raid ACC but needs to solve the WVU problem. MWC. You don't lose BYU, Utah, TCU, Boise and come out ahead. Unlike C-USA doesn't have much to pick from to improve the state of the conference. Sun Belt. Down to three schools really serious about athletics. After Arkansas State, MTSU, Louisiana, it gets thinner. WKU attendance in football is built on deep discounting. Troy appeared to plateau in fan base development before last year's stumble. FAU is a mixed bag.Jury is out on TxSt, USA, and GaSt committment. ULM is just a mess. NMSU it appears Sun Belt has ruled them out. MWC remains a hope but if MWC doesn't pan out they don't have a neighborhood FCS league to provide a place to land.

Go watch FC Dallas. They aren't very good this year but probably a good bunch of fans. Don't know how the FCD fans are but Sporting KC fans are some tailgating, yelling, hardcore fans. FCD plays Toronto on July 4 and ought to win that one. San Jose on Saturday, probably not as fun of a game to watch. Portland on the 21st very winnable. Galaxy on the 28th Donovan and Beckham. Colorado on August 11 and then its time for football. In the meantime, you've had some beer, had some practice tailgates and you are ready to go.

I think there are several things at play. First, CUSA started out with a consensus to add two schools (FIU and UNT). The Alliance idea was still in play and two divisions of 10 playing 9 games was rather manageable. Then MWC needed to kill the WAC in order to survive since it became apparent that the Alliance idea had some serious issues. Offering a lifeboat to UTSA and La.Tech then entered the equation. That led to ECU and Marshall to oppose because they felt there was not sufficient accomodation in the east and UAB felt basketball was getting the short end of the stick. That led to Charlotte and ODU. What was supposed to be a simple 2 team expansion mushroomed into six teams (remember WAC16 was supposed to be WAC12 and it took off). From those I've talked to the sense is C-USA is not content at 14. There is belief that the Alliance concept of a large conference having greater bargaining power with TV still has merit but MWC is not the appealing partner it once was. I am told models of 16, 18, and 20 are being discussed, 18 looks popular at this point. Timining is a significant issue because it needs to be done prior to signing the next TV deal but not so it overlaps with the ODU and Charlotte transition seasons because there could be two FCS added (James Madison and Delaware being most likely). The eastern schools supposedly would like to add JMU, UD, and FAU so that USM is in the west. With one school added in the West, supposedly UTEP wants New Mexico.

Off-topic but reminds me of something I've been wondering. As a general rule, I've put my "rooting energy" into Boise State quite bit hoping to see them keep SEC fans seething about how undeserved their rankings were. Now going into the Big East, I don't care if they lose every game. I'm wondering if moving to the almost big time of the Big East may actually hurt national interest in watching their games.