Arkstfan

I don't need any amens, don't care if I get any respect. Just make sure the free beer flows when I'm in town like it did for UNT-ULL. Some people just get offended when facts don't fit their worldview, just listen to any political discussion.

Tech spent $2.5 million that year, UNT $1.5 million.

I believe all those concerns are valid. DOJ is already looking at the BCS, no reason in these economic times why Congress wouldn't look at whether athletic departments spending $80 million + with 15% or less of that money spent on the kids should be eligible to receive money as "charitable" donations. If donations to the Texas athletic department became taxable and the donations fell by an amount equal to the tax paid, the Horns would lose in excess of $10 million a year. They spend 6.18% of their revenue on scholarships and that's supposedly their charitable focus.

But ASU, UNT, and ULM were all I-A before the NCAA changed the rules between seasons with no chance to adjust. They like La.Tech (who also got shipped down) all relied on the expectation that if the rules changed, they would have an opportunity to adjust. If Pacific hadn't had a large stadium and had played at South Carolina in 1981, San Jose State, Utah State and Fresno would have faced the dilemma that Tulsa, Wichita State, NMSU, ULL, and McNeese faced of going I-AA with their conference mates, going independent, or changing leagues. NMSU left the Valley for the Big West, ULL, Tulsa, and Wichita State went independent (the latter two while remaining in the Valley), and McNeese opted to stay with their league. If not for Pacific and their chase dollars schedule philosophy, San Jose probably wouldn't have football today. Remember also that while MTSU and WKU came up from I-AA without having been I-A before, that's the same path of Idaho and Boise. FIU and FAU had to play I-AA as part of their team creation but that's the same path South Florida took and the one UTSA, Georgia State, USA, and Charlotte intend to pursue.

USA Today says UNT had $806,000 in NCAA and conference money in 2008-09, La.Tech had $1.46 milion (but spent $1 million more on travel). I think UNT gets the Sun Belt's bonus for NCAA appearance in the 2010-11 academic year and that will be about an extra $170,000 since UNT was one and done.

Benson is no dummy but the track record of the WAC is for the league presidents to ignore his advice. They ignored him when he wanted to go to 12 for the 2001 season. They ignored him when he wanted to go to 12 for the 2005 season. They ignored his advice last year to add a non-football school to balance the basketball schedule.

But it was originally scheduled to be the opener for FAU's new stadium which was supposed to open in 2010 and now likely won't have final approval until September because the state changes the rules on them every time they bring a finance plan in for approval.

Makes better sense to leave NMSU in the west and to add UNT, ULL, ASU, MTSU, WKU, and Troy. That makes for 7 team divisions and only two cross-over games instead of three. The downside is that by cutting the throat of USA, you probably lose the GMAC.

Maybe if one of us would build an 18,000 seat domed stadium or play some of our home games in another state on another schools field we would finally be recognized as major programs.

Bigger bowls? Boise: Going away. New Mexico: #2 vs. MWC 3/4 Hawaii: Guaranteed to Hawaii if eligible but if you do the research, NEVER has a mainland team gone to the Hawaii Bowl without losing between $1 million and $1.8 million. Kraft Fight Hunger (Emerald in San Francisco) vs. Pac-10 #6 in 2010 and 2013 Poinsettia (San Diego) vs. MWC #2 in 2011 and 2012 That's three bowl ties, the closest is New Mexico. Between the GMAC, New Orleans, Humanitarian, Hawaii, Emerald, and Poinsettia which had ranked teams last year? The GMAC drew a larger TV audience than: Armed Forces (Houston v. Air Force) Eagle Bank (UCLA v. Temple) Hawaii (SMU v. Nevada) Humanitarian (Bowling Green v. Idaho) Independence (Texas A&M v. Georgia) Insight (Minnesota v. Iowa State) International (South Florida v. Northern Illinois) Las Vegas (BYU v. Oregon State) Music City (Kentucky v. Clemson) New Orleans (Southern Miss v. Middle Tenn) PapaJohns.com (South Carolina v. Connecticut) St. Pete (UCF v. Rutgers) Texas (Navy v. Missouri)

Unless it has changed (I never worry about any price except the one on my invoice) the package cited for ASU is only available if you buy four at that price.

Nope Tech went to I-AA and like ASU even made it to the title game but unlike ULM, we both got dumped in the championship game.

He picked the Belt like this last year (actual finish) 1. Troy (1) 2. FL Atlantic (T3) 3. Ark St (T6) 4. MTSU (2) 5. ULM (T3) 6. FIU (T6) 7. Louisiana (5) 8. N TX (8) 9. WKU (9) He nailed 1, 8 and 9 but most everyone did. Also got FIU right. Missed FAU by one spot, missed ULL, ULM, and MT by two spots and ASU by 3 (but doubt he projected two season ending injuries in the opener so I give him some grace on that).

Probably because UNT didn't play most of its home games in a 30,000 seat or larger stadium and would not have met the criteria.

When Division I was split into I-A and I-AA for 1979 to be I-A you had to sponsor a minimum number of sports above the basic Division I level. If you didn't sponsor the minimum you could be I-A under an exception the exception being average 17,000 a year in football over the past four years OR play in a 30,000 seat stadium and average 17,000 a year once in a four year period. After the 1981 season ended, at the NCAA Convention the rules for I-A were changed effective for the 1982 season (so no one would have time to adjust). The new rules became: 1. Average 17,000 a year over the past four years. 2. OR average 17,000 one of the prior four years if you had 30,000 seats. 3. AND in both cases, play 60% of your games against I-A schools. Three exceptions were created. 1. Average 20,000 home and away attendance over the past four years. 2. Average 20,000 home and away attendance in one of the past four years if you had 30,000 seats. 3. Be a member of a conference where more than half of the members met I-A criteria. The exceptions could only be used to retain I-A status, not to attain it.

My guess for what its worth. Pac-10 is hamstrung. BYU is the best available with Texas off the table and there is no way a conservative religious school gets in the Pac-10. Just won't happen. Take them off the table and pickings are slim. UNLV, great market little support. New Mexico, good market, little support. Texas was willing when they were going to have ample local teams in their division but TAMU has killed that option unless they have a change of heart. Pac-10 is probably done. Big 10 is at a point where two schools make sense. Notre Dame and Texas and unless something happens, neither is heading their way. As we saw a few years ago, Notre Dame got closer to joining ACC than the Big 10 when they approached the ACC out of the blue. That speaks volumes about who Notre Dame views as compatible. Unless the Big 10 is prepared to go on a raid of the ACC and seek out Maryland, UNC, Duke and then add either Clemson or Georgia Tech if Notre Dame doesn't blink, the Big 10 is probably done. SEC would welcome any combination of UT, TAMU, and OU and then turn and look at VPI, Florida State and Clemson but based on where they are in their TV cycle, they've got no reason to expand unless its a blockbuster. ACC just signed a new contract. They've got no reason to consider expansion unless raided by the Big 10 or SEC. Big XII expansion makes no sense unless it enriches the conference. Adding two teams that don't bring a combined $30 million to the table before the title game loses money. BYU can bring that but Sunday play and travel is an issue. Arkansas could but why give up stability for a league that seems to be the opposite of stable? The next best options are Louisville and Cincinnati and I think its a push that they hit the required value. TCU won't bring that and they just ruffle the leaves in the hurricane that is UT and TAMU in the market. Houston? Not a chance. Big East has a fundamental problem. Start making your list of potential teams and the ones that could play good enough football are schools that would not garner the votes of the basketball schools. DePaul isn't voting to give up a game with UConn to play East Carolina and Marqutte isn't voting to lose a game with Syracuse to play Central Florida. Villanova doesn't want another Philly team in Temple. All of them are bound to be leery of Memphis given that they've vacated two Final Four appearances for rules violations. That means looking at football only schools. Army and Navy bring nice TV value but they aren't going to be very competitive and their enrollment standards basically prevent that from changing. Memphis cannot afford to go football only unless they can get basketball in the Valley and despite the power of the league, you are asking fans to accept a situation where the football and basketball schedules look nothing alike. The Valley would likely be leery between the NCAA scandals and the prospect that they might be short-term if things change in the Big East. Central Florida has made a pretty good hoop investment and accepting A-Sun would likely kill that. East Carolina might accept football only, they likely understand that the odds are against them getting basketball past Duke, UNC, NC State, Wake Forest, and Charlotte. A low cost hoop option might be appealing in return for the chance to get football in the upper tier where there is greater growth potential in North Carolina. Temple would certainly accept and their situation is vastly improved over what it was before. They no longer share a stadium with the Phillies who bumped them more than once because of late season and playoff games and the new administration is putting money in football now. The Big East has a very small inventory of games for TV, so football only might resolve the problem. I think they'd still look at Army and Navy first and after that look at Temple and ECU.

Boise won 20 games in two years in the Big West and made something of themselves to get respect. It starts at home not with the patch on a jersey.

UNT left in 1974 Wichita didn't drop football until after the 1986 season. But Cincinnati, Louisville, and Memphis all left just before or in 1974.

Do you know why some of them didn't come up from I-AA? Because Pacific playing at South Carolina in 1981 made their home and away attendance average just over 20,000. But for that, the Big West would have been reclassified I-AA.

???? Army and Navy are two of the best known names with their own TV deals assuring them that every home game is televised and they have issues filling out schedules as independents.

Given what was known? Absolutely the correct choice, nothing to debate. But in hindsight, probably would have played out significantly differently. Sun Belt would have started with: Arkansas St., Central Florida, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana Tech, Middle Tennessee St., New Mexico St., and North Texas and likely Idaho because all Big West were offered an initial spot as a life raft in exchange for Arkansas State bringing the league down by withdrawing. Tech saying no might have opened the door for Utah State in the WAC. ULM wouldn't have had the votes (remember the membership didn't want them as full members until forced to add full members because of all the problems there). GMAC which ended aligning with MAC and CUSA in 2001 had wanted to go with the Sun Belt until Tech and UCF pulled out of the process so the Sun Belt would have probably sent its champ there to face C-USA #2 instead of to New Orleans to face MWC and later CUSA #4. New Orleans Bowl probably would probably have still be started but would have been Sun Belt #2 vs. CUSA #4 and likely wouldn't have started until 2002 or 03. Utah State if not invited by the WAC for 2001 would likely have been rejected by the Sun Belt for 2003. Troy probably still would have come on board. Chances are, Tech in 2001 would have gone to Mobile to face East Carolina instead of Boise to face Clemson. MAC would have tied with the WAC in Boise or San Jose sending Marshall to one of those two and Colorado State to the other, unless the New Orleans did start in 2001 in which case it would have been Middle in New Orleans vs. Colorado State. Darrell Dickey probably wouldn't have run off the five game miracle and UNT would have hired a new coach in 2002. If Tech had found success, the Bulldogs might have well gone to CUSA in 2005 and that success might have been sufficient for CUSA to tell Tulane to go jump in the lake sending Tulane to the WAC with SMU, Tulsa, and Rice while CUSA rebuilt with Marshall and Sun Belt schools or CUSA might have collapsed with only five teams after TCU's departure and the leagues merged. I think the college football universe would look a bit different today. ULM would be back in the Southland if they still had football. I don't know that Idaho would survived either, they were teetering when they got the WAC invite which never would have come, if CUSA had called Tulane's bluff. SMU, Tulsa, Tulane and Rice would be in the WAC. The MAC wouldn't be hooked up to the GMAC. Utah State possibly would never have made it into the WAC. FIU probably wouldn't have moved up its I-A plans by several years, FAU probably never gets in the Sun Belt and WKU probably wouldn't have waited so long to go I-A.

ie. what Boise did to Idaho and Utah to BYU.

Actually what you are saying is your vision of UNT is of being a tick that sucks the blood of the host to survive. Since the Sun Belt's growth is dependent on schools finally winning some non-conference games and not being one in done in the NCAA Tournament, you want to find a slightly fatter dog to live off of while not doing anything fundamentally required to be a dog rather than a tick.

If they find a conference home, it will likely be in the entry level WAC.

The WAC has four former I-AA, C-USA has three, the Big East has two, the MAC has two.