untjim1995

Look, if you're going to play a "fundraiser" game, schedule a Big Ten team, a Big East team, or a Pac-10 team. Not only should you avoid the SEC and the Big XII-II, you really should avoid the Top Teams of those conferences. But, oh no, not here. We want to play at LSU, at Bama, at OU, at Texas, at Florida, at Georgia, etc... Its just stupid. You can't tell me that Washington, Michigan State, or West Virginia wouldn't be better money games for BOTH the football team and the AD. There is a reason that the top two conferences over the last decade are the SEC and the Big XII. Oh well...maybe we can consider this concept in the 2020s.

DaddyDumpsalot just killed herself.

Because Boise State is a top ten school in football, Fresno State has been in the top 25 many times over the last two decades, Nevada is building up quickly, and Hawaii has been very good in the recent past. And, you don't have to play Idaho, San Jose State, or Utah State in the MWC as it stands now, but you also get UNLV, San Diego State, Colorado State, UNM, and the Air Force Academy as bunk mates with big markets to draw viewership. Your new WAC, if it comes to fruition, will not have anything close to that luxury. Look, I wish you guys were joining the SBC, but it just isn't the right time. Down the road, I, and I think many other UNT fans, would love to have another similar Texas school to be in the same conference with, too. Just give it some time.

Exactly. But, just like with anything, you can't be in the middle. You either must hate the Belt (like DaddyDumpsalot) or you love it (like FFR). I mean there is just no room for gray here. You can't make a point of well, I love UNT, so if the SBC is our home for a while, then we will make the best of it, even if I want to play other Texas schools in a conference that is FBS for the first time in about 50 years or against teams that casual fans know and that the DFW media MIGHT cover on the weekend. Instead, you get PMs from people that tell you that you are an idiot and you are the reason UNT sucks so bad, because you accept mediocrity by not bashing the poor SBC, even though none of the other conferences that we would love to join have publicly mentioned that we would be a good fit for them.

I have posted on this in the past, but it ain't gonna happen with the DFW media. Sending emails will get attention from Newy, Dale, Babe, and Doocy--when we lose. I saw it when both Aggie and Tech hoops fans would pepper those stations with emails about being ignored by the DFW Media in previous years. When either team got beat by Kansas or Texas, Newy would show plenty of highlights saying, "Well, Tech fans, here you go. Here's your coverage. You just got beat by 30. Keep those emails coming about how little attention you get." It will happen here, especially if we get beat by a team in SBC play. There is just such a vast disconnect between the DFW Media and UNT from all the SWC days and our own perpetual ignorance of most things athletic over the previous decades. Richard Durrett of ESPNDallas once told me that he brought up this issue about UNT (regarding football) when he was with the DMN and the writers there all said the same thing. When UNT beats teams people know in football AND win their conference, they will get more attention. I don't know why hoops gets the same treatment, but its real and it isn't going away until we do something big-time in the NCAA Tournament, IMO.

I have been on this board for many years, since 2001. Not once, have I seen anyone post, "Yes, the SBC is the best place for UNT for the rest of history. The SBC is better than CUSA or the MWC for our school." Not once. I have seen idiots say that we should go join the WAC because Boise State, Fresno State, Hawaii, and Nevada are bigger names than who we play in the Belt. No one argued that point, except that most people recognized that there was a great risk of those programs bolting the WAC to go to the MWC, which, just shockingly, happened. Now, the SBC turned about to be a much better deal for UNT than the WAC would have, but no one is saying that the SBC is so good that we will just stay here. I will ask you again what advice you would give to the AD to have gotten that CUSA/MWC invite already or soon? Because it seems that the university and its AD have put into place quite a bit to entice such an invite, but it hasn't gotten here yet. Obviously, you must have the right ideas, though, since you always clamor to get out of the SBC. In reality, this is our home for a long time. If that bothers you so much so that you perpetually post about the conference's woefulness, you should just stop following the program. You will be a great UT T-shirt fan--and have lots of fellow douches to keep you company.

Yeah, but they got good in the early 90s when Phil Knight and Nike made Oregon their unofficial team to support the most. That funding and the attention they have gotten from the Nike support really jump-started them to a place where they are today. I hate Nike and when I become the czar of the NCAA, they will have no place at the table, but I recognize their power and influence. Its gigantic.

The playoff thing that would be a good start would be the Plus One game. Make the Top Four of the BCS--this year Auburn, Oregon, TCU, and Wisconsin, play in the New Years Day Games, then the championship game would be played 2 weeks later. It would keep a lot of the same stuff in play for the non-AQs, so that is there as a carrot for our leagues still, plus it would incorporate the playoff idea in a fashion simlar tot he Final Four in hoops. I believe that if a playoff system gets adopted, UNT will get to particpate in one. It will just be a middle ground between FCS and AQ teams. It would be treated like the AAA playoffs in baseball, media-wise, though. Would it get coverage? Sure, and it would be higher than the current FCS playoffs, because there are many non-AQ leagues with enough name recognition to get attention. But the wish for a playoff system that included everybody and was sanctioned by the NCAA, similar to March Madness, just seems like a pipedream to me. The beauty of the current system is that literally every game matters, that even if you lose a few games during the regular season, there is still a reward at the end of the year available to the school, and there is precedent set to have non-AQ teams invited to play in those games. You can look at a team like Texas Tech and you can argue that they have a chance to sell recruits on making it to a BCS game because of conference affiliation, instead of a team in a non-AQ league, but a recruit could easily see, too, that Tech would have to have an almost perfect year to have that happen because of the minefield that they have to play every year in the Big XII-II. A good recruiter at a school in the MWC or CUSA could also tell these same recruits that to get into a BCS game, we have to go undefeated, which is hard to do, but we really have a better shot to do that here at our school in the MWC or CUSA than at places like Tech, OSU, A&M, KU, K-State, Mizzou, etc. because these schools have historically beaten each other up and they still have to play OU and UT every year, as well. If Boise State or Fresno State go undefeated in the MWC, they will get invited to a BCS game. The chances of doing that are much better than the chances of the Bottom 8 of the Bevo 10 ever doing that. Yes, KU snuck in one year, but they played neither of the big 2 in their conference that year, which isn't the case anymore. Now each of those schools have to play everybody. Sure maybe one of those schools will drop down, like Texas this year, but realistically, beating both Texas and Oklahoma in the same year doesn't happen very often and probably won't happen in the future, either. I just think that a good recruiter can play some of this against the lesser of the AQ leagues, but the key is that you have to be a great non-AQ team. No one in the SBC gets to claim this right now, but there are teams in these other non-AQ leagues that we can emulate and be able to sell our school in the future to some really good recruits. Is it fair, hell no. But the current system is fairer than what I think could easily be put in place by the AQ-leagues if the screws got tightened against them.

You know how it is. The Big XII teams draw well because they play well-known teams. We don't get those teams here normally, so when we do, we draw much better. But when we are playing F_U, UL_,Denver, etc..those temas don't resonate with the students or the casual fan. It sjust the reality that we have always dealt with here and probably will going forward for quite a while as a member of the SBC.

What are your thoughts on the Dickey vs. Dodge years at UNT? I want to hear from you, America!!

I don't believe that CUSA will ever take us unless SMU leaves. The private schools don't want us, the other Texas public schools don't seem to want us, and the Eastern CUSA schools don't want another Texas school.

Good answers--what grade are you in again?

The point made in the documentary about SMU being "The U" before Miami came to prominence seems correct to me. They flaunted the cash and the recruits that could be given and bought. Even to this day, a lot of their alums and former players/coaches/staff think it was genius because it was the only way they could level the playing field with the larger state schools. To watch some fo the alums who were banned from the program in that film act like it was no big deal was just sickening. Knowing that this bunch had as much sway in keeping UNT from joining the old SWC as anyone just disgusts me. SMU got every bit of what they deserved. One thing that the documentary didn't really hit on was the fact that SMU didn't suck after the Death Penalty because of the black cloud that they were recruiting against, but it was because their leadership decided to make enrollment for football difficult and refused to hire a name coach. When they finally got tired of losing and of becoming completely irrelevant, they went back to the cash cows at SMU and bought June Jones. I am sure that they have greatly relaxed their admission standards for football players, as well. One thing that makes me laugh, though, is the fact that SMU will never have it as good as they did back then. They literally blew their chance at staying in a BCS-AQ conference. Imagine how hacked off their fans must be. We get pissed here at UNT because we have had to play in bad leagues over the decades, but I can't begin to imagine what an alum of SMU from the early 80s must think when they see that SMU lost a game against the likes of Marshall or Tulsa, when they saw SMU beat Texas, Arkansas, A&M, etc... That must be one hell of a drop in enthusiasm for the program. Oh well, it sucks to be a cheater that gets caught and punished justly!!

You have way too much faith in Congress to do anything about this. They would have already done something over the course of the last 20 years if they wanted to. Most congressmen have degrees from BCS schools or live in states where the BCS brings in a lot of money from the big state schools that have large programs that are well funded. If Senator Cornyn goes after the BCS, the big $$$ that Texas, A&M, Tech, Baylor, and now TCU would throw at his opponent would be staggering. If you don't believe this, then ask yourself why a PUF endowment still only gives money to UT and A&M every year, even though there are dozens of other public universities in Texas? The answer is that the legislature is dominated by Longhorns and Aggies. Congress has proven many times over the years that they may pay lip service to this, but the big schools have all the power and sway with them, too. And if the top 60 BCS-AQ teams left the NCAA to form their own coalition, I can guarantee you that their tax-exempt status wouldn't change a bit. As a matter of fact, you would start hearing how this is good for competition with the NCAA. The monopoly argument that would get put out there by ESPN, Fox, CBS, and other media and politicians will center around the NCAA, not the AQ-BCS schools. It sucks big time, but those schools have the rest of the wannabe AQ schools by the short hairs.

Man, this is a great idea. Do you have any credible ideas on how to convince ANY other league to take us away from the SBC? If so, what would it be? You have any way to convince SMU to let us join a conference with them when they have already blackballed us from their current conference by openly backing a La Tech bid to join CUSA? How about an idea on how to convince the MWC to go ahead and just get us as their next expansion team right now? Surely, you have the ideas that will get us out of the SBC, since you rail on that league in every single post you make and act like changing conferences is just the easiest thing to do for UNT. If you don't have anything in the sort of credible ideas to get out of the SBC, I am going to recommend that you think about it more--and post about it less...

Your post about Wacker and TCU is dead-on. I grew up in Ft. Worth during the 70s and 80s and remember this all so very well. Wacker not only turned TCU in when he found out about it, he suspended his best player, Kenneth Davis, for being paid. Then TCU got royally screwed by the NCAA. At the exact same time, Jackie Sherrill was running a pay-for-play at A&M and they got off relatively light compared to TCU when their scandal broke later in the decade. What reaqlly stood out about SMU getting caught, deservedly so, was wehn they beat Texas in 1980 while they were ranked #2. The NCAA was on their heels right after that, which gives credence to those anti-Texas fans who cliam about the Longhorns influence with the NCAA, the Texas media, and the boosters in this state.

Thanks for the information--I didn't know that, but it makes more sense. I figured there had to be something to this, otherwise, Texas and Oklahoma wouldn't fight so hard for more $$$.

I think that most AQ BCS schools look at these two conferences that way--that they are really not true FBS conferences. The fear is that the AQ schools will eventually do something about it again, just like they got the NCAA to do back in 1981 with the i-aa fiasco.

The bowl games are neat because of the history and, sometimes, they even provide a great matchup between teams that normally would never play each other. It gives the teams something to enjoy, the fans an opportunity to plan ahead to go to the game, and they give the university a nice advertisement. That all said, a playoff would normally be ideal, except that there is zero chance that the NCAA will force one, and if by chance they did, the AQ schools would probably drop from the NCAA together and form their own coalition of 60-70 schools, which would then drop us from any bowl system AND a big basketball tournament every year. You can say, well Congress would step in, but those big schools have lots of lawmakers that fill the state and national legislatures, along with the TV networks and their advertisers that would also back those big schools, too. I hate it and I wish it was different, but I don't think I will hold my breath waiting for it change for the better. As a matter of fact, I expect it to change for the worse over the course of the next 5-10 years for non-AQ leagues and schools.

I heard that the SEC splits evenly amongst its 12 teams, too. If this is true, why does Texas require a deal that is different than Ohio State and Florida, two other peer institutions that have similar positions within other major conferences?

I am not trying to stir the pot here, in part, because I don't know the answer to this, but do Ohio State or Florida get more than Northwestern and Vandy for being the king of their conferences? It seems that both schools do everything that Texas does for the Big XII, Again, I don't know the answer on that. How about USC? Do they get more too in the Pac-10 than Washington State? And if they don't get more, why should Texas get more than the others if they are truly equal members of a conference? It just seems like the Big XII is the only league that I have ever heard this imbalance occurring in. Does it happen in the SEC, Big Ten, or Pac-10, as well?

When did this nickname get started?

If the Big XII-II lost its southern teams down the road, which I think will happen in the next 3-5 years, we could possibly move there. I think Texas will either go independent or will join the Pac-12 down the road. If they go west, Tech, OU, and OSU will follow, while A&M goes to the SEC. If they don't go west and go independent, I believe that the SEC will take A&M and OU. Either way, it would be good for us. The Big XII-II without any of the Southern teams, except Baylor, would provide an instant need for Texas teams. Since Baylor hates TCU and won't play in a conference with them, that would probably help our cause. At worst, at least CUSA and MWC would have even more interest in us, assuming we give them something to be interested about!!