untjim1995

Again, this is why the P5 giants need to play their own schools. Texas A&M made $57 million last year. Texas made $16 million. Tech made almost $2 million. UNT, UH, UTEP, UTSA, and Texas State all lost between $14-22 million...

Maybe this doesn't tell the whole story, but the anti-athletics faction at UNT and in Denton will jump all over this... https://college-sports.texastribune.org/colleges/university-of-north-texas/

Hell, 2k looks like it would be wayyyy too big...

Just how do you expect more when the path ahead upward is blocked for us as long as SMU and TCU remain in Leagues above us? We are already in SBC 2.0. All of the people we wanted to play in a conference with in the old CUSA are now in the AAC, which is why we aren't still in the SBC. And I doubt Arkansas State and ULL are considered trash by anyone...

Again, the MWC knows that they can get these two or UTSA at any time, but they want to wait out to see about getting TCU back, along with Baylor, and possibly Texas Tech. Then, they can go after UH again, as well. If UH ever leaves to go out west with other Big XII Texas schools, whether in the MWC or somehow they got into the Pac, the AAC folsk would love to get Rice in to fill their spot, keeping Houston's TV market, plus giving SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa another private school to join up with again. The AAC and MWC have 24 football teams within their ranks, currently. If the model of 16 teams is what these leagues go with, eventually, its just not hard to envision the MWC adding in TCU, Baylor, UH, and UTEP. Then the AAC would replace UH with Rice, and add in Iowa State, plus three more teams like NIU, Ohio, and MUTS to get some bigger tv markets, while adding in geographical fits and solid football and/or hoops programs to their league.

Those "coordinators" get paid something, plus they can put on their resume that they worked for Saban and Alabama, which opens up several doors for assistant jobs in the future. Power Football Division is coming and I cannot wait for it to happen. I want to see Bama, Texas, Florida, ND, USC outspend each other like they are MLB teams, while I get to watch the Texas Techs of their world assume the position of replacing the G5/FCS schools as easy wins for the rich programs. It will be glorious to watch them sacrifice wins/bowl berths for the $$$ that being a power team will provide, basically serving as the Oakland A's or Tampa Bay Rays of the Power League Division. Meanwhile, our level of play will produce the opportunity to play teams that our fans actually care about and recognize--unlike the I-aa SLC debacle years--and we will use amateur college players that have the right to win a national championship in a sport that they have zero chance of ever doing now. The 1-AA fiasco was basically of our own doing for 12 years, while being surrounded by the powerhouse leagues in the SWC and Big Eight. We went down a level only 5 years after having a 9 win team under Hayden Fry. That was stupidity at its finest. We had nobody at our level of play in the SLC days that anyone in Texas cared about because of the SWC mentality that ran so rampant in our media and citizenry. Today, that mentality is basically gone. Our fans love traveling to close opponents that CUSA offers, playing teams like UTEP, La Tech, Rice, and USM as division opponents who we could only look up at because of our insane 1-aa decision in the 80's and early 90's. When the power schism occurs, I truly believe that the UNT fans that support the program will continue to do so, as well as future students/alumni will, because we will be playing teams that our fans have heard of and care about, while also being on a normal playing field for both players, coaches, and funding. If this is done right, we could be playing a series of playoff games while the Power teams are prepping for bowls, meaning that you can get really good playoff teams playing each other each week in December, while 6-6 Mississippi State plays 6-6 Washington State in some spare bowl game. I just think more people would care about a G5 playoff system than they do the FCS playoffs because the teams in the MAC, CUSA, and SBC have more fans and name recognition. And adding in the NDSU's, Montana State's, Youngstown State's, etc..like we did with Appy State and Georgia Southern, will only bolster this level of play. I know people want us to play in a conference with the SMUs and UHs of the world, but they don't want that and won't let it happen, as evidenced by the last 50 years or so.

You don't think that the MWC hasn't wanted back in Texas? Do you know how TV works? They just didn't have anyone in the state that networks or other MWC members believed would be worth the investment.

TCU wants nothing to do with being in a conference with SMU--at all. They have shown that many times over. The folks in the AAC already have Texas schools, but the MWC doesn't and they have wanted to get back in since TCU left, but haven't found anyone to provide value to their members. The looked at UTEP and Rice, but the Big XII GOR gives them better options when the GOR expires. The MWC would love getting TCU back, add in Baylor, and they would do backflips to get Texas Tech and Kansas State to get to 16.

It doesn't really matter, since the MWC ain't inviting us anyway-they will get some really solid names for their league then. TCU, Baylor, and possibly Texas Tech are future MWC members within the next 8 years when the GOR for the Big XII expire. At that point, the MWC can also go after UTEP, UTSA, and/or Rice to join to cover the entire state.

Man, that must have just sucked for TCU when they played out West...probably just crippled their program, I bet.

They are also scared of losing the paychecks that the power schools provide for revenue sports.

Memphis will never be in a conference with Arkansas State..

SMU, UH, UCF, and USF aren't joining a conference with us, F_U, or Texas State. Maybe UTSA if they keep going upward, but none of these others have any chance of being in a conference with these schools!!

Us, as in the university...do you not agree? If not, who was responsible?

That was on us, though. We were the idiots that kept him for 15 years.

@MeanGreenTexan this thread is my proof of the fact that the fan base doesn't want to go out west again, even though the MWC is a much better league and did help TCU vault upward rather significantly. It's a moot point, since the MWC doesn't want us, either. But this fan base likes to travel to games easily and as long as they get SMU on the schedule, they are very content with that. Im with you, but the reality is that it's not gonna happen.

Those middle Power teams and low ones will be glad to do it because the TV money is gigantic for them. I'll always remember the year TCU was ranked in the top ten and played an undefeated, top ten ranked Boise State team on the Poinsettia Bowl. TCU won it, and both teams finished in the top ten. And combined, both teams earned less bowl money than a 3 win Baylor squad who hadn't had a winning season in over a decade. That's why Baylor and Tech will do almost anything to stay at the power conference level. Otherwise, they know they'll go the way of SMU and UH, only drawing well when they win, but never making big cash ever again from networks and attendance demand.

What really sucks about us playing the bodybag games that RV scheduled--except for Iowa, which I believe was scheduled correctly if you need a bodybag game (and we do)--is that we chose to play Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, LSU, Alabama, and other regional powerhouses who our own alums and students follow and cheer for because they grew up following them or because we have never given them a reason to care for us. So, when we lose 79-10 to OU, 65-0 to UT, 56-3 to LSU, and whatever Ark and Bama beat us by, all it does is reinforce to those alumni and students that we aren't any good compared to these behemoths. The same goes for the DFW media around here. If you play these games, playing Iowa and Wisconsin is the way to go. Big, slow teams from far away--you might be able to compete with them, but even losing to them doesn't hurt you like it does losing to the Southern Powerhouses we schedule. Playing at Texas A&M and Arkansas in the future just kills momentum you might be building when we get lose to them, usually very badly.

I saw today a list that had UAB as #130 out of 130 FBS schools...again, if we cannot beat Lamar and UAB at home, then the rest of the schedule is too hard for us...

And that's fine. That's what they get for the money and control they wield. I wish we had the same issue, but there are plenty of music majors and arts majors at UT and OU that wish they had the same advantages and resources that UNT provides their musicians and artists. Its all in what you place value in. I never imagined being at a point where I wanted to see these NFL-lite and NBA-lite programs separate, but its not right calling North Texas, Middle Tennessee, Louisiana Tech, Arkansas State, or Western Kentucky the same level as Texas, Tennessee, Louisiana State, Arkansas, or Kentucky. The latter gets their prestige from being the main school(s) in the state, filling their legislative houses with their alumni, as well as their journalists. They have gamed the system for full control, but then use the former to buy easy wins. Its like watching a Varsity HS team play a Freshmen Team in the strong majority of games. Sure, Appy State beat Michigan and others have pulled off these kinds of upsets, but they are the exceptions, not the rule. These games shouldn't get played and when they don't, the Texas Tech's of the world can go and be the piñata to these monster programs just to say they are playing at the top level, even though they will never have the resources to stay up with them.

More power to them--they make the money, they should spend it how they want. It certainly isn't helping them win anything of major note. I cannot wait for the day when the Power Giants split off. They are about as much of a "college" team, in its traditional meaning, as Tony Benford was a head basketball coach. Maybe both have had those titles, but they don't really convey the truth. Let Texas keep building and rewarding their powder-puff kids without merit and have to see them lose to the Kansas's of the world, but play in a world where they cannot buy wins because the system lets them.

It changes if you beat people that fans and media care about. At least you'd have the chance of beating ranked teams in the MWC in football and basketball. In the SBCUSA, not much chance to achieve that...but the games may start an Hour or two later if we play out west, so let's stick with the fun that is playing F_U at 6:00.

I know you hate it, as do I, but a school like SFA is much closer to us in competition level than we are to a Big XII school. We made this bed decades ago. There's just not much that can be down at this point. It could've been different if we had committed to winning when we moved up in 1995, but the clear reality is that we did that to get more cash--nothing else. And has been mentioned, our location didn't help us, either. Those AAC schools aren't in trouble for this relegation because of their budgets and historic success/name recognition. They aren't in need of realigning like the SBCUSA schools are, who need to adopt a MAC-like geographic setup ASAP.

This is what will happen--no matter what. I don't know that the AAC and MWC will be forced to be on this level, but I expect the SBC, MAC, and CUSA to form their own level of play that includes a playoff system and national championship.

If it provides easy games to travel to, and it doesn't cost us a game against SMU, then that is what the UNT fan wants. RV knew that all too well...