UNTFan23

Doesn't appear to be gone for good. Just down until someone can fix whatever the problem seems to be (hacked?).

RowdyTalk is down so I can't even gauge what the fan reaction is to the deal.

Given that other conferences use their coaches for determining conference awards, why should CUSA switch to a different method?

Nick Saban?

Obviously LaTech got some sympathy votes. Is it fair? Not really but it happened. But to lay this at the feet of the Commissioner is pretty out there.

The SEC has its coaches determine conference award winners, including CotY.

That's a pretty bold thing to throw out there but this is the internet so it seems appropriate.

https://conferenceusa.com/sports/2016/7/1/sports-w-softbl-spec-rel-w-softbl-format-html.aspx?path=softball Postseason Awards: Coach of the Year, Player of the Year, Pitcher of the Year, Freshman of the Year, Newcomer of the Year, first and second team All-Conference and All-Freshman Teams are chosen by head coaches and announced prior to the championship. In addition, an All-Academic Team of 11 players will be selected by SIDs.

The Commissioner has little to no say in conference awards. More often than not, it's a combination of coaches, SIDs, and press members. I do agree that LaTech getting Coach of the Year doesn't feel quite as deserving compared to Rodney DeLong

I went to this thread thinking it was literally Scrappy's last night, not that the Scrappy Awards were last night.

Ratings?

To expect all CUSA teams to be better than all Sun Belt teams is a bit of a high and mighty position to take, don't you think?

For a little context, Appalachian state went 3-1 against CUSA. All three wins against CUSA teams were at home as well. @UAB - L, 80-61 v. Marshall - W, 74-52 v. Marshall (WBI) - W, 83-71 v. North Texas (WBI) - W, 76-59

Reading the article, it states the contract is through the end of the 2018-19 season, which would be until May or June? Given there are literally no cable/satellite carriers, I struggle to see where CUSA renews/extends the contract.

North Texas is 4-7 on the road for the season but also 4-1 on a neutral court, so 8-8 when not playing at the SuperPit.

There has been a massive overreaction to the resolution failing in the Senate. If you go and actually read it, there is no meat to it. The resolution is pretty much just a bunch of promises that will cost US taxpayers anywhere between $50 and $90+ trillion dollars over the next unknown number of years. In fact, the resolution make no reference to when all these expensive changes need to be in place. Had the resolution passed, nothing would have changed. There were no regulations, no laws, no directive that was a part of this resolution; it was merely a promise that the federal government was going to literally force all these changes.

Maybe I should have been more straightforward with my sarcasm. What happened in 1996 lead to the creation of the MWC in 1999, which lead to the Big West giving up football in 2000, which lead to North Texas moving to the Sun Belt in 2001. In 1996, the WAC added TCU, Rice, SMU, Tulsa, San Jose State, and UNLV. This annoyed some of the older members of the WAC, who left to form their own conference in 1999 due to a far-flung league when travel costs became a concern. The WAC in turn raided the Big West, which eventually ended up with North Texas landing in the Sun Belt. What makes you think our fans will turn out for MWC schools??? Maybe the few times a MWC school is ranked (assuming it's a home game) but what about the other schools that aren't? We've done better with getting more people to attend games recently but will changing conference nameplates just result in another disconnect with a new host of unknown schools that aren't the least bit local. Yeah, diehard football fans know these schools with will the casual Joe Blow fan know them?

I say the WAC MWC just add UTEP, UTSA, Rice, and North Texas and the entire conference can party like it's 1996!

Former Big West Conference members now in the MWC: Boise State (joined in 2011) Fresno State (joined in 2012) UNLV (Founding member) Nevada (joined in 2012) San Diego State (Founding member) San Jose State (joined in 2013) Utah State (joined in 2013) Old time fans of North Texas have plenty of interesting memories of playing these teams. For fun, New Mexico who would be our new closest opponent is 608 miles away. Rice is 285 miles away. UTSA is 297 miles away. Louisiana Tech is 298 miles away. Southern Miss is 571 miles away. UTEP is 637 miles away. UAB is our furthest divisional opponent at 681 miles away. The MWC is already at 12 member schools for football, so if they were to add us, to have even divisions, they'd have to invite at a minimum a second school. Who else besides us should they add that adds value to their conference? Or should they pull up an FCS program or an upstart that previously doesn't field a football team?

Yes, we are already paying to ship teams east but we also have more teams closer to us in CUSA than what we'd have if we moved over to the MWC. Sending teams overseas and hosting post-season tournaments are single year costs for single sports. It's not known whether we'd see the same level of success (or more for that matter) if we moved over to MWC in any specific sport. It's debatable whether the athletic department would be in a better position as a whole compared to us staying in CUSA outside of just the perception of being in the MWC.

Just joining the MWC won't be enough to propel us above SMU, we need to win and win across the board. I don't see where increasing travel for every single sport being good for us in the long term. I'd wager that joining the AAC for SMU hasn't been all it's cracked up to be. Even in basketball, the Ponies have come back down to earth after their meteoric rise thanks to their Larry Brown hire. SMU in Football since joining the AAC: 2013 - 5-7 2014 - 1-11 2015 - 2-10 2016 - 5-7 2017 - 7-6 2018 - 5-7 In the same time, North Texas has posted the following records: 2013 - 9-4 2014 - 4-8 2015 - 1-11 2016 - 5-8 2017 - 9-5 2018 - 9-4 So, North Texas has had more winning seasons. I think we would be at best middle of the road in football and it would take at least two recruiting cycles to see any improvement, assuming the move actually moves the needle any. I think all other sports would see similar drops. It's tough to say whether any sports would actually bounce back to the levels of success we've seen recently is really anyone's guess. I wish our fans would get away from this idea that what worked for TCU will work for us. There's absolutely no way for anyone to know whether putting all our eggs in the MWC basket will do anything for us because of right now it is pure pie-in-the-sky speculation.

This never gets old. Never.

Comerica Center in Frisco (formerly the Dr. Pepper Arena).

A 14 point margin is barely beating someone? It was 45-34 going into the 4th quarter.

There is this idea that adding G5 programs from Texas is going to enrich the MWC where adding them will somehow result in the multimedia disbursements increasing per MWC member institution. Chances are that won't happen. In fact, I'd expect the multimedia disbursements to decrease per institution if they added more G5 programs from anywhere as I don't think there is a G5 program that could deliver a large enough share of any market to result in a net increase.