keith

What leads you to this conclusion? What did he do exactly? My understand is the 3 (or is it 4) would have left if the offer from the PAC was better. It seems it was really the PAC's failure that has kept the conference whole (for the moment).

Whether UTSA was invited or not the one thing for certain is they won the PR battle hands down and has been able to elevate the perception (warranted or not) of its football program, its athletic department and school across the sporting world. They are running circles around UNT leadership who seem to just be sitting on their thumbs. SMH.

So they would have bolted if the offer was better, but since it wasn’t they are 1000% committed (until that better offer comes along that is). Why is this starting to seem like high school recruiting season? Anyway, it’s nice to know the AAC thinks it has a solid 4 team conference.

Does this rub anyone else the wrong way? If the conference is going to send something out declaring solidarity among its members, it should include all members, not just these four. Almost like they are setting these four apart as a sort of upper echelon of the conference. Flub by the AAC IMHO. It has an "All members are equal, it's just that some are more equal than others" vibe to it.

Congrats players and coaches on a nice win against a MWC foe. Wyoming may be down this year, but it’s not like they mailed it in. We controlled the game and it was never really in doubt. Enjoy this one and get healthy.

Our defense is designed to keep winnable games close.

Looks like Wyoming brought a good crowd.

We got more in CUSA than we got our first year in the AAC.

Other than leading the band (symbolism isn’t lost on me), has anyone heard what the vision is for UNT from our new president? What are his near and long terms goals? Where does he see UNT in 5 to 10 years? What are we doing to improve four-year graduation rates? What are we doing about acceptance rates? Do we have ambitions of AAU status?

I think Memphis really wants to be in the B12. If they see a stint in the PAC-12 as a pathway to that goal, then they will bolt. Unfortunately for Memphis, the PAC-12 also wants stability so is probably looking for some sort of binding agreement or GoR that will lock Memphis in for longer than they want and may cause them to miss the B12 opportunity if it comes in the future. It's clear Memphis wants nothing to do with the current composition of the AAC. It's a classic bird in the hand vs. two in the bush for Memphis. It will be interesting to see what they do.

We received $1.13M in conference distributions our first year in the AAC. Half of the conference members received multiples of that number. How long does that go on? It puts us at an untenable competitive disadvantage. Was that the best we could have done? Don't know. Team travel went from $2.898M to $4.329M, an increase of $1.431M. I doubt travel to the west is materially different than travel to the east, so this number is already baked in. We paid $1.404M in severence in order to hire Morris. If Morris was the one we really wanted, tell me he would not have been around this year or next year or the year after. Was he some super hot commodity that multiple schools were bidding on and going to beat us to the punch? Was he really worth that premium? I don't think so. Bad (and costly) decision by our AD, but fortunately this expense goes away this year. We pay almost as much for the AD and Support staff $8.432M as we do in coaches salaries $9.223M (a difference of only $791K). Add in $4.083M of Admin Overhead (wink, wink) and we're up to $12.515M for the AD and Support staff. There is plenty of money in the AD's budget, we just have a poorly managed Athletic Department.

If that's what it takes, then yes. We should always be looking to improve ourselves. The only constant seems to be change, so I doubt this would be a forever setup for us. We need to put ourselves in the best possible situation whenever change occurs, Right now that looks like the PAC-12. We did that with the AAC move, but it's configuration is already different than it was just a year ago and it's about to be picked apart again.

I wasn't suggesting that Memphis stays in the AAC. I was responding to the premise that if Memphis was able to extract more conference benefits (at the expense of UNT BTW) and stay in the conference then it would make the AAC stronger and benefit UNT, assuming we also stayed in the AAC. It would actually be a horrible scenario for UNT in my opinion.

Because right now, UTSA is out performing UNT not only in perception, but in reality.. It's merger with UT Health San Antonio cannot be understated. If UTSA gets the nod and we do not then it means an external entity (probably with input from industry experts) did its due diligence and deemed UTSA as more worthy to be affiliated with than UNT. Even if we go as a package deal we will be seen as basically riding UTSA's coat tails. It would be such a UNT thing to do if we didn't express interest or worse say we're not even going to consider it as an option.

With our partial shares we are already competing on an uneven playing field with respect to our conference mates let alone the rest of college football. If certain members (Memphis, USF, take your pick) are able to extract additional concessions from the conference and we're still in it, then it will be a disaster for UNT continuing to play at a built-in disadvantage vis-a-vis the "chosen ones" for the foreseeable future. It won't make the AAC stronger. It may make Memphis stronger until they bolt at the next opportunity if it's not the new PAC.

Exactly, within the G5 world, when one conference is doing the raiding and the raided conferences are backfilling, it's kind of self-evident which one is probably the top dog. Maybe still a dog in the grand scheme of things but higher up the food chain than the others.

If true and somehow UTSA ends up in the new PAC and we do not, then everyone in a leadership role or within 50 feet of someone in a leadership role at UNT should be fired.

There shouldn't be any lipstick left in Denton County as we try to pretty ourselves up.

Oregon State was playing #9 Oregon. We were playing #73 Texas Tech. Why the campaign to rationalize what we all saw on the field?

I did not down vote you, but I will chime in. I think we should be able to do both. Like it or not, football drives the money train (think money from conference media deals). I don’t think you have to take money away from football. Looking at the AD’s financial statements, I think there is a lot of cash spent on AD staff and AD “overhead” that can and should be reallocated to basketball.

So true and so sad. I don’t know if I should laugh or cry, so I’ll do both 🤣 🥲.

Purdue’s future is secure in the B1G, our future is much less certain. So, an ass whipping by a ranked ND doesn’t mean much to Purdue. We’re still trying to build our resume and what we saw today didn’t help. Sure, there were fluke plays that made the game get out of hand, but we never looked competitive even against Tech’s 2nd and 3rd teams and Tech is supposedly a middle of the pack Big12 team this year.

And what does that say about our HC?

Do we have to buy them out? Why not just pretend they have had a season-ended injury or reassign them so they can’t do any more damage? Next man up. Let Cobbs take the HC reigns and anyone, really anyone, else take over defensive duties. Can it really get any worse?

That last play…🤮