untjim1995

Vizza was very talented, no doubt. But, mentally, I wouldn't want him coaching my kid--when the going got tough, he quit the team and basically quit the sport. Riley, for all his faults, was never a quitter. Even after his dad got fired, Riley gave it all on the field, while never publically disparaging anyone at UNT about the handling of the situation. Heck, he even went to McNeese State just to finish out his career. Vizza left to go to A&M, where he never even made the team, IIRC. Oh well--water under the bridge now.

As much as I wish that was possible, this thing will probably break down and split within a couple of years. There probably isn't any non-AQ teams that are going to get included in this move upward, unless its a UConn or Cincy from the AAC.

Thinking a trade for Larry Brown for Tony Benford is a bad idea is just dumb. Sorry, Larry Brown is a HOF coach, has won an NBA Championship, won an NCAA Championship, and is one of the most recognizable names in sports. Tony Benford, in two years, has shown an amazing ability to trash an entire roster of the most talented players the university has ever had. Larry Brown, in two years, has absolutely buried everything that Tony Benford has done in two years. Its not close...

One of the things that the G5 and FCS schools have had in their favor is the fact that they actually got to play--and get paid by--the P5 schools. In a lot of cases, especially here in the Helwig years, those games paid the athletic budget for the year. So just playing the rest of their schedule against non-AQ competition was accepted by the G5, since they already got paid and had some network pay them to play games in non-traditional times for tv coverage. Now, with the P5 split more probable every day, and facing the reality that we won't probably get to play them in anything anymore, including the very few times we played them in a bowl game, the revenues are about to really drop for a lot of schools. I don't think playing in the spring is the answer, but setting up a true playoff, and having regular season games played in December when the p5 aren't playing, as well as having your playoffs in later January and maybe even playing all of your games on non-Saturday and Sunday dates might be a few ways to differentiate your league against the other competition. One thing is for sure--we, as fans of non-AQ schools, are going to face the reality of changing our views on college football sustainability at this level and to accept very different possibilities from scheduling and tv coverage than what we have been used to over the years. Games on weeknights all season long, playoffs in January every year, and even having the season start in late September/early October are all possibilities that I suspect we may have to understand and accept in the near future.

These Power Conferences will make their own legislative body, in which all things will be legal for paying players, admissions standards will be dropped for the athlete, and they will create a true playoff system for football, basketball, and baseball. They will have all of the money, media, and legal backing. For football, losses won't hurt as much anymore because they will create a 16 team playoff, thus making scheduling much more flexible. In basketball, expect the Big East to get absorbed into the P5 basketball tournament. And, yes, this tournament will dwarf the current March Madness in media interest and tv coverage. Everyone loves the David and Goliath story--as long as it involves Goliath. Look, we are going to have to get to play local colleges that we care about in a regional conference--the dollars will finally cause the old SWC powers that aren't in the P5 already to have to play in a conference with us--unless they quit. SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, and Rice could all do just that, too. It might be too much for these schools to handle that kind of drop down in class, especially SMU, who has had the hardest time accepting being former SWC royalty to being left behind in the G5 leagues. One more further drop down would probably cause most of their older alumni to just go away. But, for schools like us, UTEP, UTSA, any of the private schools that do stick with still playing sports at this level, NMSU, La Tech, and ULL, the changes won't be quite as devastating a drop down as what SMU--and UH, for that matter--will have to deal with. The question still remains--will UNT fans show up to watch football against teams that mentioned above as conference mates, even if we are dropped down to a new 1-aa level again? No one seems to know that answer...

This isn't surprising in any way, shape, or form. What is going to be interesting is to see who gets invited to move up to this next Division and who stays behind. Some of the non-AQs are stronger than a few AQs right now. Would you all, as UNT fans, still come to Apogee in 2016 and 2018 to watch us play SMU, even if we were both in a lower level of college football than Texas, OU, A&M, TCU, Tech, and Baylor?

Man, this is just really dumb statement...like, not just dumb, but a special kind of "certifiably stupid" dumb.

Man, this list is just a who's who of college basketball powerhouses, isn't it? However, if the list included NAIA or NCAA Division II teams, that double digit victory total wouldn't even have improved by one in the last two years, either, IIRC.

The MAC always gets lots of East Coast love because they surround a ton of media markets that will vote them up--hence, the MAC top teams getting ranked or receiving votes, while SBCUSA schools don't get that lucky, with smaller media outlets that traditionally follow them.

If we don't have a 2010-like injury fest and our lines and QB develop like I think they will under Coach Mac and his staff, I expect 7 wins with this schedule, think 8 is reasonable, 9+ would be incredible (but not unfathomable), and 10+ is pie-in-the sky. But make no mistake about this--every game, including the first one, are all winnable. Texas might be better than us, but I think they are gonna be a train wreck this year under Charlie Strong. SMU will be better than last year, but I still think they are a bad team under a coach who doesn't want to be there. Indiana will be tough since its on the road and they are getting better, but we could beat them. Rice and UTSA are the toughest conference games, by far, since they are both on the road and both teams have good talent and good coaching in place. I see us at 8-4 (losses at UT, Indiana, Rice, and UTSA) and earn that spot in the NM Bowl in Albuquerque.

This guy has Baylor written all over him. LaceDarius Dunn, anyone??

I still see us at either 7-5 or 8-4...Potential losses at UT, Indiana, Rice, and UTSA, with the game against SMU as a 50/50 game (although I think we will beat them at home).

It matters when Tulane can lord it over them when fighting over recruits and media in Louisiana (See SMU versus UNT forever). ULL ain't going to the AAC--maybe to CUSA, but nowhere higher. They are just like almost every other CUSA and SBC school right now--if you have a market that is sizable and don't have another team to split it with, then the AAC or the MWC might look your way. Otherwise, we all are staying put for a while. Teams like Southern Miss, Marshall, Western Kentucky, Arkansas State, Troy, South Alabama, ULL, La Tech, and ULM are pretty much stuck where they are as we move forward because they have no TV market to sell. Teams like Rice, UNT, UTSA, Texas State, Middle Tennessee, F_U, Georgia State, Charlotte, and Old Dominion provide the market size that TV wants, but they either share with other schools in conferences higher up the foodchain or the big AQ powers control those media markets already (Houston, DFW, San Antonio, Austin, Nashville, Miami, Atlanta, Charlotte, and wahtever markets ODU serves). UTEP is the one who stands out as the most potential to move out west, just because they have El Paso all to themselves. UTSA will try to sell that same thing to other conferences about San Antonio, but its clear that they don't have the market to themselves like UTEP does. I still think the MWC will scoop up Texas markets in the next few years--could be UTEP, Rice, UTSA, or us, in some combo. I guess we will see how it goes...

Richard was one of my very best friends. We started working together at the DRC in the late 90s and hit it off immediately. I'm beyond crushed today. Just had lunch with him last week. Please keep Kelly and his children in your prayers. She's also pregnant with their next child.

Just wait to see what this guy will look after he gets even more development for Mac and the staff, especially in the weight room!! This is a nice pickup, for sure--it helps that Mac's reputation as a developer of linemen comes into play again.. Just hope he doesn't get swayed by the brighter lights of an AQ program. Here, he will be able to play quickly and develop into something pretty special. Of course, Snyder at KSU knows a thing or two about that as well...

A few things on this thread that I want to comment on. 1.) Baylor--they have been financing their new stadium and new facilities to improve their program, but also as a way to sue the hell out of anyone who causes the big XII to lose AQ status (see Texas and/or Oklahoma) for breach of contract--"We only built these facilites up because we were in an AQ conference. Not being in one now will cause great financial stress to our institution. We will see you in court." 2.) BYU--their network would be just fine in the Big XII as long as the LHN is around in its current form. I still think they'll find their way into the conference before too long. They'd be a great addition, something the Big XII desperately needs right now. The Big XII in football is currently looked at as the worst AQ conference, since only Texas and OU have any national attraction in football. Add Kansas in for basketball, and that's basically it. The ACC has Notre Dame (basically), FSU and Miami in football, and UNC, Duke, Syracuse, and Louisville in hoops as national programs. The B1G has national programs in Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Nebraska, and Wisconsin in football and Michigan State and Indiana in hoops. The SEC has A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Auburn, Alabama, Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina as national brands in football and then Kentucky in basketball. The Pac-12 has Oregon, USC, and Stanford right now as national names in football, with UCLA and Arizona in hoops. Getting BYu would giuve the Big XII a great program to grab national attention in football. Then I'd get Cincinatti, so that they can be a travel partner for WVU in the east and get a salty hoops program, as well. They will need to do that to get their league back up to par with the others in the AQ setup. 3.) Houston will never get an invite to the Big XII as long as UT is in it. Texas will never cede over that area to help UH ever again--they learned from the SWC days that this was not in their best interests. Sure, the Aggies have even more control in that city, but UT ain't far behind. UH is basically stuck in the non-AQ leagues, just like almost everyone else unless UT leaves and the conference got to stay AQ (not a chance in hell of that happening--see Big East/AAC). The non-AQ teams that have a chance to get into the AQ conferences are BYU, UConn, Cincinnati, and then maybe one of the USF/UCF programs. The Big XII has room, whereas the others really don't. the Pac-12 will only expand if they can get some Big XII teams to come over, otherwise, no other non-AQ will get consideration out west. The SEC will only look at adding teams from the ACC at this point that aren't in their states already (see North Carolina or Virginia schools like NC State and Va Tech), so no non-AQs there. The B1G only goes after AAU schools and TV markets now, so they might change things to get UConn, who isn't an AAU school, but would bring in some NE markets. The ACC might go hard after UConn or Cincinatti if anyone ever leaves their league to go to the SEC or the B1G. Otherwise, its up to the Big XII to look at some other non-AQs, which is why I could see a combo of BYU, Cincy, USF, and UCF getting added.

Or you might be able to get appointed to the BOR...

So does Indiana...probably the best in the country among public institutions. And if you ask anyone what they think of about Indiana, the most prevalent answer will always be that they are a basketball school with an incredibly passionate fanbase.

UNT90 basically answered it for me, but yes, we are known for our music and arts programs. Its what we do best and its what we love being recognized for. For that to change, it would require a complete re-focusing on other areas, whether athletically or in other parts of academia or the arts. Look, you have to be well-known for something. At most state schools that are large, like we are, you are known for certain academic criteria. For a school like A&M, its engineering and science. At Texas, they are well-known for just about everything--from business to engineering to law. UH has a great business school. We are excellent at education (teachers) and have a solid reputation for our business school in the DFW area. But the other schools I mentioned have all decided to pour their heart and soul into athletics, since its a big way to get alumni and students involved together at the university. We have never done that--and I'm not even saying we are wrong because of it. The world loves music and arts just as much as athletics, or at least its close, depending on who you talk to. I just happen to be the guy who loves sports, just like most guys in Texas. That's what I was trying to convey. Its not a knock on being a music and arts school, but it is talking about what UNT puts its resources and heart into outside of academic interests.

Arkansas already plays a game in the Metroplex every year going forward. They will be back to playing the Aggies at JerryWorld every year again for the next 10 years. Its doubtful they'd schedule a game in the Metroplex again, but if they somehow did, they'd call their SWC buddies at SMU or TCU first.

BYU will never go to the Pac, for the reasons mentioned, but the Sunday thing gets overblown--I believe it is a smokescreen for the real reason that people don't want them out west, which is the Mormonism. And I truly believe that is why Baylor better hope that the Texoma schools never run to the Pac, either, because they won't accept Baylor's baptist theology out there, either. BYU would be a great addition to the Big XII and I think they will get invited--along with Cinicinnati. That will get them back to 12, give WVU a travel partner out East with a good TV market and you get BYU's national program that always draws well whereever they play in football or basketball.

This... Women's Basketball draws about 1/10th of the interest that men's basketball draws. Plus, comparing anything to Shanice Stpehens is an obvious ender. Look, this was basically foretold after Year 1 of being Benford'd. PLayers don't want to play for coaches that are basically in over their heads and have no idea to run a program. That happens everywhere when losing happens. What doesn't happen everywhere is to absolutely know, without a doubt, that the head coach who is leading this mess WILL be back at a bare minimum of another season, but most likely two more years. He just flat out costs too much for the university to buy him out before that, based on their views of athletic spending. Now, with the accountintg mess that the university is dealing with, it just confirms that Benford will be here for a while longer. Anywhere else in college athletics, with a school this size, there would be so many changes, it wouldn't even be funny. Not here, though. I've gone on record as saying that RV should be fired for this mess--if you cannot fire Benford because he costs too much, then fire the guy who hired him and gave him a contract that looks like an albatross right now. At different points, he has hired Todd Dodge, who pushed the snowball down the mountain and caused an avalanche leaving as the worst coach in school history, hired Shanice Stephens who was the worst coach in school history in that sport, and now has Benford on the list, who can only thank Vic Trilli right now for being a worse coach record-wise here, but Trilli didn't take over a program that was on the rise like Benford did. Again, anywhere else in America, the AD would've been fired years ago for having two of these hires, if not just one, but here at UNT, we keep the guy in charge, let him keep making hires, and extend his contract. And that's why we will always be known as a music and arts school to the rest of the state and country.

I tend to agree with your post. Since football is what drives this bus, I think that the NCAA Tournament and College World Series are not really players in this equation for the P5. Are they for the NCAA? No doubt, which is why the NCAA will never let the P5 major players get probation that hurts the school for too long (see USC, Penn State, Miami, etc...) The NCAA knows it will basically go under if the majority of P5 powers leave their organization. The fans, media, and players want to be associated in any way possible with those P5 programs, especially the big name powers. I think they will get the Division IV thing going very soon, possibly wihtin the next 2-3 years. Will it change anything for us or most of the G5 schools? Nope. If you're BYU or Boise State, its real bad news, but to us in CUSA, or the SBC, or the MAC, or the AAC, it won't change much.

With the SEC's recent rant about creating a Division IV within the NCAA or going with the nuclear option of separating from the NCAA, what does the NCAA look like for football in the next five years? I suspect the Division IV will be a trial balloon to see if the AQs like what they see from the NCAA fiefdom. If they don't like what they get, they will leave. The NCAA cannot have them leave, if only because they will take the NCAA Tournament and College World Series with them, which covers a massive amount of the NCAAs budget. As if Texas, Alabama, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Florida, etc...didn't run this thing enough, now they are probably going to get their way with a tighter division with higher payouts for created bowls and playoffs. As for North Texas, what would it mean to us? Will we see a huge drop in attendance or will it be about the same? Would you expect to see different conferences start up if the AQs pull away fully from the rest of us, just to keep costs more controlled? Very interested to see what the board thinks this will mean for us, since the smoke is getting pretty thick concerning this Division IV setup.

Our new conference is fine for us--its the best we've ever had by a mile in the modern era of college football. But Southern Miss, Louisiana Tech, and Marshall are the best known teams in the league from a reputation standpoint and all three are in small markets within smal populated states that give 99% of their attention to the big AQ schools in their state. Its a huge stepup from the SBC in prestige, but its waaayyyy behind the AAC and the MWC on the conference ladder. A good conference doesn't add FCS startups to their league when they didn't belong there already in the other sports (i.e. South Florida, UAB, or UConn). The new SBCUSA added a ton of Belt teams, but when you throw in UTSA in just its second year of FBS football and then prepare to add in Charlotte and Old Dominion, while replacing East Carolina, Tulsa, and Tulane and all those who ran off to the AAC before we even got invited, its pretty easy for any media outlet to look down on that league--until they do something about it to change their minds.