GL2Greatness

they do...all you have to do is go out and beat a bunch of quality teams and don't lose to anyone along the way and if you do have a single loss make sure it is early in the year and to a really good team

the UT System does not make moves based on what happens at other universities like TxState.....Academics is not a competition similar to athletics at all and if UT was so concerned about TxState then they would have prevented them from adding enough Doctoral programs to become an emerging research university and they would have started the Edwards Aquifer research center and the like TxState draws the largest (by far) % of their students from the Austin metro area so Westlake students might not be TxState, but a large number of other Austin area students are UTSA had 352 students in the 2011 cohort from Travis County while TxState had 437 (and growing every year for the last few years while UTSA is down from 2007 and 2008) so while UTSA might be the new hot place for Westlake grads (for what reason I would not know other than the transfer program) it looks as though TxState is still more popular with the Travis County freshman class I would imagine the % of college bound students that were from a school like Westlake that could not get into Texas or TAMU and could not afford privvate school and that did not want to consider Tech or TxState is extremely small compared to the total number of college bound seniors from a school like Westlake and that is ignoring students going to OU, OkState, Arkansas and other state schools that heavily recruit students from Texas Westlake was not one of the top 10 feeder schools for UTSA as well in any recent year

on the one hand you say that Houston won't be able to compete....then you say that Houston will replace TCU......which is it.....especially since it is TCU that was actually able to go out and earn something for themselves while UH did nothing and TCU has a much larger athletics budget than Houston and you must be smoking crack if you think that Boise will replace anyone in the PAC 12 there is not a chance in hell that Boise ever gets in the PAc 12 and Vandy is not going to be replaced in the SEC either especially by the likes if USF and are you saying there are going to be 18 team conferences because 72/4 = 18 where will the PAC get 6 more teams from if they are dumping WSU?...so Boise, Hawaii, SDSU, CSU, USU, Fresno, and SJSU are in and WSU is out?....or will it be NMUS and UNM and UTEP and UTSA and UH and some others? other than all that I think you were on to something!

10 minutes have passed and unT now has over 300,000 alumni in the metro area!!!

if SMU needs unT so bad.....how come after "being scared to play unT all these years" SMU is the one moving to the conference that no one thought they would get ask to join and the conference that everyone on this forum would have loved to have been ask to join? and what is a "favorable revenue term" and how does SMU being in a different conference make any difference to the "favorable revenue term" of TCU or Baylor and how does SMU only suddenly have TCU, Baylor, unT, and Houston as the only regional opponent when Texas Tech, Rice, UT, TAMU, UTSA, TxState, and UTEP all still exist along with Tulsa, LaTech, Tulane, ULM, Louisiana and a multitude of other teams that are close do you just make this stuff up as you go along and the best part is how UH is apparently going to have no issues with going to the big East and they are going to make no difference for any other teams "favorable revenue terms" (what ever that crap is) and it is only SMU that is going to have an issue.....I guess UH needs to be calling Rice right now and begging them not to cut UH off from the "favorable revenue terms" and letting them know they still need them right?.....or is unfavorable revenue terms only an SMU issue? (well since they are BS they are a nothing but I would love to hear the answer) SMU will rue the day they feel the wrath of the unfavorable revenue term!!!!....or is it the Baylors and TCUs that feel the wrath of the unfavorable revenue term of SMU?

where have I claimed they are power brokers? where did I say they were going to get invited to a super conference? and you might consider them forming a new conference as non-sense, but the reality is they are not going back to the CUSA to be one of 17 or 18 temas and they are not going back to the MWC to be one of 14 or 16 teams their fans have no interest in that and you miss out on that fact that it will not be just UH and SMU it will be UH, SMU, Memphis, USF, UCF and possibly Louisville and Cincy that will be looking for a new home along with Temple, Boise and SDSU and Navy.....I would see Navy going independent and Boise and SDSU going back to the MWC and even if Cincy and or Louisville or both go to the ACC that still leaves UH, SMU, Memphis, USF, and UCF looking for a place to play and the other teams from the old CUSA would love to get back together and would be calling them as fast as they could and even if that is not a super conference it does not mean that teams will not look to make the moves that are best for their programs and a CUSA with a fresh batch of moveups and 18 teams is not what will be best for SMU, UH, Memphis and who ever else is left over

the MWC was formed in the last 15 years or so and how much conference movement like there is today has there been in the last 15 years.....some, but not at the same level a conference has to wait ZERO years to get an auto bid to compete in championships in all sports except mens basketball provided that they have at least 6 core members that have been together for two years......for mens basketball they need to have 7 core members and 6 of those core members have had to have been together for the last 5 years that does not include some sports like mens soccer and a couple of others that have a play in to go to the championships those have no requirement so if SMU, UH, Memphis, and UCF never play a down in the Big east and are never considered Big East members they would only need two teams from the CUSA out of UTEP, Rice, USM, ECU. Tulsa, and Tulane and then they would need one more core member for mens basketball (a core member is a team that has participated in D1-A for the last 8 years) if SMU, UH, Memphis, and UCF played in the Big East or if they were counted as having left the CUSA (and breaking continuity) then they would still only need to join up with UTEP, Rice, USM, ECU, Tulsa, and Tulane to have 6 core members that have been together for 2/5 years and then they would already have the 7th core member as well that would be 10 teams with an auto bid in all NCAA sports including mens basketball.....a choice of Louisville, Cincy, USF, Boise, SDSU and one other would get them to 12-16 depending on what they wanted to do.....I would imagine it would be Cincy and Louisville and USF combined with one other probably LaTech or UTSA to get them to 14 unless Cincy and or Louisville were taken by the ACC then throw in one more wild card and why would I be going anywhere since NT and CUSA would not be going anywhere they would just "reload" while SMU plays in the new former Big East Disaster conference right?

1. why would I have to face anything regarding SMU 2. how is SMU benefiting from years of cheating when that happened nearly 30 years ago and they sucked for a decade or more after that until just recently 3. how is the benefit of cheating wearing off when SMU was just ask to move to a better conference and when SMU has gone to a bowl game 3 times in a row and won two of them after not going to a bowl game for something like 24 seasons before that? and again the truth is that unT would have died to be ask to join the Big East and you would be saying it was the greatest thing to ever happen if that did happen and instead you are pretending like a conference that had 4 members leave and added 3 programs that have never played D1-A football is something huge and exciting and better than the Big East would be and a multitude of programs besides SMU that have had more recent success than SMU left their conferences to join the Big East as well but hey what ever makes you feel better is what you can go with! even if it makes no sense at all and is easily proven as a joke and you can say SMU is irrelevant and has been for decades, but they are still more relevant than unT and they have been for decades cheating or not

um... the SEC would still have 14......the ACC would have 14 if they lost two and then added two from the BE and the CUSA would have 18 if UH, SMU, UCF, and Memphis returned and those teams and several others in CUSA are not going to put up with all of that and if the ACC grabbed Louisville and Cincy or Rutgers and UCONN or even all 4 to go to 16......that still means that Temple is left there (to the MAC most likely) and then USF is still there and they are doubtful for the ACC unless the SEC goes to 16 by grabbing 2 ACC teams also which means the ACC would need one more team and that would still have CUSA most likely at 17 teams and that will not work for the returning members and for several of the remaining long term members.....which means the madness keeps going

I would imagine it was not even a thought while he was taking a piss because I doubt that SMU even considers that and if the Big East does not pan out for whatever reasons UH fans have made it clear they have no desire to return to the current CUSA and since Tulsa and UTEP fans have made it clear they would love to get out along with ECU and since Memphis and UCF would be in the same boat and USF would be having an issue as well there would be more teams leaving CUSA at least until CUSA starts filling ion again with belt teams and more move ups the schools that have left CUSA and their fans have made it clear they are not looking to come back no matter what happens and there are plenty of CUSA teams that are appealing that would join right in with those BE or former BE teams

what "ink" are they going to get in the SEC that they did not get in the Big 12? they had games with Baylor (just a few hundred miles away), Texas (not much further at all), Tech and OkState and OU every other year at home VS now they have no in state teams that they play and it is TAMU they were getting all the "ink" they could already and they still could not keep up and sucked.....they had the Jerry World game with Arkansas every year and lost it every year TAMU was the biggest benefactor of the uneven revenue sharing the last couple of years they were in the Big 12 and they still managed to find a way to need to borrow 18 million from the academic side and once they start having their asses handed to them even worse in the SEC they might get more "ink" but it will be the kind of "ink" that says you suck and you made a huge stupid mistake moving to the SEC Texas did not get to be the top revenue producing program in the USA for several years running by looking around at what TAMU was doing that is for damn sure and they certainly are not scared of TAMU in the SEC there are 120+ D1-A programs in the country and the ones that always suck and under perform are the ones that sit around concentrating on what a single other program (like SMU or TAMU) are doing VS concerning themselves with what works best for their program.....TCU and Boise have proven this out time and again and the multitude of programs that sit around and under perform or suck while obsessing about another single program proves it as well

so it is your premise that SMU is so all powerful, all knowing, and omnipotent that they can tell several years in advance what years that unT will suck and what years they will be a super power? and even if that ridiculous concept was in fact true oh the horror that a university schedules to their benefit as much as possible VS scheduling as a charity case for another program that can't ever get it together or figure out a way to schedule for their own benefit VS being a whipping boy for others year in and year out again why is it the job of SMU in particular out of all the 10 (soon to be 12) D1-A schools in Texas much less the 110 other D1-A programs in the USA to hold the hand of unT and be a benefactor for them and to concern themselves with the success of that program which program is unT a benefactor for and which program do you schedule for their benefit each and every time they call.....and here is a concept perhaps you should stop doing that because SMU worrying about SMU is paying off for SMU much better than unT worrying about what SMU does every second and waiting for a charity contribution from them

Louisville will not get a sniff from the Big 12....there is not a single fan base that desires Louisville and the Big 12 is not looking to add to the bottom they are looking to add to the top the Big 12 has their 10 teams locked up for the next 6 years as it is and they have first and second tier TV deals in place to earn at least 16 million over those years and they have another 1.75 million per team deal with FSN that ends after this season so the Big 12 is making 17.75 per team on their TV deals and that is not including the third tier deals that KU, KSU, OkState, and Texas have in place and that Texas Tech and OU are working on so as it is not the Big 12 makes more than the ACC even with the new ACC deal and they make the same as the PAC because the PAC deal is back loaded just like the ACC deal is and the Big 12 (if they do not work the deal everyone is talking about now) will have a new first tier deal to work in 2015 so the Big 12 does not need to add any team to be competitive with money with any other conference for the next 5 years at least the Big 12 got 9 million per team starting this year for their second tier deal so in a few years in 2015 even if their new first tier deal is exactly the same they will be at 18 million per team with those two combined and no third tier deals included and I doubt that in 2015 the first tier rights will only sell for what the second tier rights sell for today so the Big 12 does not need to add warm bodies like Louisville and if the Big 12 can lure FSU then they can surely lure at least one more ACC team between Clemson, Miami, GaTech, VaTech or even some of the others......any of those 4 teams would be a much better choice for every reason over Louisville so the "Ville will just have to sit on the sidelines and watch or hope the ACC comes calling in the future unless the Big 12 decides they want 6 teams then there is a very very slim chance that they might get the call if the Big 12 can't attract FSU, Clemson. GaTech, Miami, and VaTech plus one more ACC team Maryland, Pitt, and UVA would all be preferable to the Big 12 over The 'Ville if they needed a last team to add 6 for a number of reasons

the Big 12 just completed a deal with Fox for second tier rights last year starting this year.....the other agreement is just a rumor at this point they would not be paying twice for the same content because the rights are for the home team only and SMU is just a single team from conferences with 10 teams and 10 or so teams the BE has already declined a deal with ESPN one time and they will be negotiating with Comcast/NBC most likely next so again the idea (already proven false) of paying twice for the same content is not true Big 12 teams don't care about other teams fans showing up they care about their own teams fans showing up that is why they are in the Big 12 not the belt Rice has next to no fans...Texas prefers to play them because they will move the game to Reliant and let Texas sell all the tickets they can and Texas would work that deal with anyone.....Texas would play Houston, but UH had an issue with trying to limit Texas selling seats and then when UH placed Texas fans in temp bleachers those bleachers were declared unsafe and Texas blew them off Texas will not play TAMU in the future because TAMU acted like such low class babies when they left the Big 12 and blamed it all on Texas even though TAMU was in favor and actually the largest beneficiary of unequal revenue in the last few years there is not going to be a mass rescheduling of games with SMU and Big 12 schools that is just pure garbage you can believe what you wish, but that is just your reality and simply not actual reality top teams usually avoid playing each other because they prefer to get home games so they have 7 games at home per season and they can sell more season tickets to their own fans for higher prices and it is easier to buy in teams that are willing to whore themselves out like North I hope none of you will judge me too harshly when I confess that I've always thought Jerry Sandusky was just misunderstood

the Big 12 does not care about "elevating" or not elevating the BE.....the Big 12 cares about home and home games, games with teams that their fans can travel to, and games in areas that are in areas they recruit and why does it matter if SMU is playing a Texas team that is in conference or out of conference that is just a ridiculous argument and it is easily proven as such TCU did just fine when they were the only Texas team in their conference in the MWC.....Boise has moved conferences three times from the Big West to the WAC to the MWC and they are looking to move again to the BE....what about all those "close by rivals" they were leaving behind each time clearly it was a huge mistake for their program t leave all that behind USF left behind teams in the CUSA that were close by rivals and they enjoyed being the only Florida team in the BE you are thinking like a true low end program with the idea that you need other fans to show up to make your program something and the idea that teams sit around worrying about elevating other conferences those are just silly ideas that fans of programs that suck cling to instead of going out and doing for themselves by your concept the Texas should have never played Rice all those years because what if Rice beat them...oh wait that can't happen unless Rice is suddenly in the BE then it would be a huge disaster that would elevate an entire conference.....again that is loser thinking that requires a "conference" to do the major leg work for a program VS a major program doing their own lifting and trying to do it in the best conference possible schools that want success look at all 120+ D1-A programs as their competition not just those schools that are close by that can deliver fans that is just silly

where did I say that SMU was having some type of renaissance...they are winning with their current head coach and even if they have the same record over the next few years and even if they have the same elvel of fan support they will still be making a great deal more money in CUSA and what leads you to presume that North I hope none of you will judge me too harshly when I confess that I've always thought Jerry Sandusky was just misunderstood will have large increases in fans when the winning in the past did not bring huge new fans and the novelty of the new stadium did not bring huge new fans yes bingo of course.....if you ignore the fact that in 2012 SMU will have 10 out of 12 games in Texas with and 9 of those Texas games in the central time zone and in 2013 they will have at least 8 games in Texas with 4 conference home games + Tech and Baylor @ Home and TCU and TAMU on the road and if Houston is an away game that year then SMU will have 9 of 12 games in Texas in 2014 SMU will have at least 8 games in Texas with Baylor and and North I hope none of you will judge me too harshly when I confess that I've always thought Jerry Sandusky was just misunderstood on the road and TCU and TAMU at home in 2015 they will have at least 7 games in Texas with 4 home conference games and North I hope none of you will judge me too harshly when I confess that I've always thought Jerry Sandusky was just misunderstood and Baylor at home and TCU on the road + one game not yet on the schedule in 2016 and 2017 they will have at least 7 games in Texas and in 2018 at least 6 so they don't have some big issue with time zones or distance to games and the like TCU and SMU are scheduled to play through 2018 so that is not a "rarity" and there are 12 D1-A schools in Texas alone with 5 different conferences represented and one team TAMU that has 4 of the teams that currently will not play them along with close by schools OU and OkState just in the states touching Texas there are 23 teams in D1-A and SMU is in a conference with only one of them so there are plenty of schools for SMU to schedule games with and they currently have that mostly wrapped up through 2018 so your issues are non-existant and you might feel that North I hope none of you will judge me too harshly when I confess that I've always thought Jerry Sandusky was just misunderstood does not need SMU, but it is SMU so far that has wrapped up teams in Texas to fill their schedule and there are more D1-AA teams to schedule as well for a single game in Texas also yes VS a conference that has had a larger number of teams leave.....that UTEP and Tulsa have talked about wanting to leave and that is adding 3 teams that are moving up to D1-AA after just starting a football program and that has gone from 12 teams to at least 13 teams and probably 14 teams with no real discussion about adding more money and the BE contract is not done yet and they were already offered 155 million per year and declined it so it is doubtful the contract would go below that and there is a good chance it will go higher

half full, winning more and going to bowl games, and collecting more money beats .55% full in a new stadium, having a losing season, and collecting next to no money...and even after a conference switch half full and collecting more money still beats half full and collecting less money and losing a lot more

and yet they have been ranked at the end of the season 8 times including 2002 and 4 of those 8 were in the top 10 North Texas State has been ranked at the end of the season one time in their D1-A history yet strangely you not only read them you reply to them.....no ne would say that North I frequently have to go to the doctor to have foreign objects removed from my rectum was "scheduling up" because Rice happened to have their best season in the last 4 or 5 decades it was just luck of the draw for NorthTexas State I suppose my "agenda" is the opposite of those that post half truths and lies to try and build a program based on "potential" and trying to call out and downplay the actual success of other programs VS the percevied success that would come with a lot of breaks, what ifs, changed ref calls, tweeking of the schedules after the season is over, and just plain BS that gets tossed around on this forum

how exactly do you count new member fees when there would be no new member fees if teams were not leaving? and since programs like Boise, UH, UCF and even SMU and SDSU that have more on the field success are all getting out of CUSA and since ECU that has clearly had more success would kill to get out of CUSA and even Navy is leaving I would think that the ADs of those programs are much more in tune with what the benefits of the new conference will be VS their old one and since there have been zero programs to turn down an BE invite I would think all those ADs know a bit more than the fans on this forum with their clearly biased and easily refuted view on the changes and movement in conferences

2002 Boise was 12-1 and ended ranked #15/#12 and had no D1-AA teams on their schedule and their only loss was to Arkansas perhaps 1996 Boise would be a better comparison?

so 7 million - 500K = 6,500,000 / 5 years = 1,300,000 per year that teams in the CUSA get football playing teams in the big East were getting 9 million per year or more so 7 million to leave + 2 million to join = 9 million given up to get 7.7 million more per year for years to come.....yea that is a real "sucker move" there this article says that WVU is looking to make 18 to 19 million in the Big 12 about double what it make in the BE http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7574104/west-virginia-mountaineers-join-big-12-july-big-east-lawsuit-settlement so on the low side that would be 9 million per year in the BE this article says that UH was looking to make 3 million in CUSA (conflicts with the link in the OPs post) and 10 million with the new BE TV deal for a 7 million dollar difference per year http://www.chron.com/sports/cougars/article/Amid-Big-East-celebration-UH-officials-talk-new-2393437.php so even at those numbers that is still a 7 million dollar per year increase or 5.7 million more per year for the 5 years with reduced income which means that in year two teams moving from the CUSA to the BE will be 2.4 million ahead and from then on 7 million ahead per year......again that is a real "suckers bet" there and if you use the low payout numbers for the BE from the OPs link and the high payout CUSA numbers from the UH link you are still at 7 million per year paid in the BE and 3 million per in the CUSA for a 4 million dollar advantage which means that in year 3 the new BE schools would be 3 million ahead and from then on 4 million per year ahead......again that is a real "suckers bet" there.......earning 133% more per year after a 2.5 year break even

this is the great thing about this forum the total lack of honesty about what is being discussed here is the last three years of the Boise OOC schedule VS North Texas-Denton 2011 Boise #22 Georgia for a win true Georgia turned out to not be that good that year, but Boise had no idea that was the case when they scheduled them and I am positive no one on this forum would discount a similar win if North Texas-Denton even pulled one off......hell there is still talk of beating an unranked Tennessee team in 19 and 77 (or was it 78) on here Toledo that was 9-4 for a win Tulsa that was 8-5 for a win Fresno State that was bad that year, but is generally tough and Nevada that was 7-6 for a win so Boise played 4 bowl teams that year in the OOC and beat a team that was ranked #22 at the time from the SEC to open the season 2011 North Texas-Denton Houston, Alabama, the same Tulsa team for a loss, Indiana for a win so you played a tougher team from the SEC, lost to the same Tulsa team.....a historcially horrible team from the Big 10, and Houston + of course killers row from the belt! so lets see no D1-AA team for Boise, a win over the same team, and three more games against teams that have historcially been as good or better than the Houston team that North Texas-Denton played so at best I would say this is a push and clearly not the schedule you try and make it out to be 2010 Boise Beat #6 VaTech Beat WY Beat Oregon State beat an 8-5 Toledo 2010 North Texas Denton lost to Clemson Lost to Rice Lost to Army Lost to Kansas State so that shows zero D1-AA programs for Boise, a win over a #6 ranked BCS team on the road, and another BCS team on the schedule and a MAC team with a winnign record....VS a loss to a BCS team, two horrible mid-majors, and a loss to a middle of the road BCS team clear advantage Boise in that OOC schedule not to mention the clearly tougher conference schedule 2009 Boise beat #14 Oregon (BCS and ranked) beat Miami of Ohio (terrible MAC team) beat Bowling Green (decent MAC team) beat UC Davis (D1-AA) North Texas-Denton beat Ball State (terrible MAC team) lost to Ohio (decent MAC team) lost to Army a terrible independent team lost to Alabama again I would say this is pretty much a push since North Texas-Denton would have had the same zero chance of beating Oregon VS Alabama, two MAC teams and Army VS D1-AA UC Davis so of the last 3 years Boise only had a single D1-A team on the schedule (so there goes your claim they have regularly scheduled D1-AA teams the last couple of years), one year was a clear advantage for Boise in the OOC in 2010 and at best 2011 was a push and probably advantage Boise and 2009 is at best a push.......hardly North Texas-Denton being able to claim even a slight OOC scheduling advantage and again Boise clearly played a tougher in conference schedule those years as well even if you go back a few more years when Boise did play more D1-AA teams it is difficult to claim that North Texas-Denton had some clear advantage in the OOC 2008 Boise Idaho State, Bowling Green, Oregon, LaTech VS 2008 North Texas-Denton KSU. LSU, Rice, Tulsa again hardly a tougher if at all 2007 Boise Weber State, Washington, WY, USM VS 2007 North Texas-Denton Oklahoma, Navy, SMU, Arkansas.....so a slight advantage for North Texas-Denton 2006 is below and hardly a tougher schedule for North Texas-Denton if at all so there is 6 years of OOC schedules with North Texas-Denton having a slight advantage in a couple and with Boise not schedulng a D1-AA team for the last two years so your claim is pretty much off base and incorrect in 2012 again no D1-AA team for Boise and Boise is playing MSU, Miami (oh), BYU, and USM VS North Texas-Denton LSU, TSU, KSU, Houston so it is North Texas-Denton with the horrible D1-AA team and again hardly a clear advantage for either program.......the huge difference is that Boise manages to beat the good teams and the crappy MAC, WAC, MWC, CUSA teams that they play while North Texas-Denton gets destroyed by them for the most part and Boise playes ina much better conference as well and has better fan support and more resources so they don't need to whore themselves out again your claims are blown way out of proportion and are actually becoming less true every year over the last 4 years including 2012 oh yes again history threw the view of the green tinted potential machine here are those WAC cupcakes Hawaii was 11-3 SJSU was 9-4 Nevada was 8-5 the OCC was Sac State that sucks Oregon State that was 10-4 and ended the season #21 in 2006 North Texas-Denton played Texas, SMU, Tulsa, LaTech and Akron + of course the killers row of the belt!

could have fooled me hell that is only one less thread about the SMU AD on "not ponyfans.com" than there was on ponyfans.com the day it first happened funny how you want to talk about SMU so bad until reality steps in and then it is "hey this is not an SMU forum"

do you know how to read? the comparison was made that SMU now is worse than when RV came to North Texas-Denton at that time North Texas-Denton was in non-compliance with title IX Fouts was still going to be used for the next 8 years North Texas-Denton was in the Big West so again the comparison was North Texas-Denton then VS SMU now and SMU has already raised a major portion of the money to start renovating their arena http://www.smudailym...ng.com/?p=40706 first please show me where anyone said that SMU was a football powerhouse? second SMU has more bowl wins in the last 4 years than in the history of North Texas Denton and you might not be impressed with the TCU win, but when was the last time that North Texas-Denton beat a top 25 program back in the 70s? and when was the last time for a winning season 7 years ago before any current high school recruits were even in middle school? and yea it is funny talking about playing D1-AA teams when the North Texas-Denton home schedule is only 5 games this year in a two year old stadium with two ponds and your past few seasons have been highlighted by beating teams that had barely moved up to D1-A so nice strawman arguments trying to say that anyone said that SMU was a powerhouse when that claim was never made and trying to compare North Texas-Denton today to SMU today when the origonal post I replied to was one comparing North Texas-Denton when RV first arrived to SMU today and SMU today is still in better shape more financial support from private donors, better conference in the eyes of anyone with an ounce of common sense, better recent football history that is comparable to anything that North Texas-Denton has done in the last 3 decades (like beating a top 25 team or going to and winning bowl games) and they are improving facilities as well and getting money up front to do so and they have a larger budget to work with and SMU had 2X the revenue for football and 2X the revenue for basketball as well...in their "dump" with no ponds and no bridge over a freeway that was opened years ago VS being brand new so anyone out there would say advantage SMU even today.....that is why there is a thread on a forum not related to SMU athletics asking if the AD will be leaving to SMU and that is where there are probably 6-8 SMU threads from the recent past littering that forum.....because SMU is "irrelevant" right....haha...and PS North Texas-Denton has not beaten a team with a winning record in at least 7 seasons....nice

more wins than SMU this century!!