SCREAMING EAGLE-66

Memphis..... and in the local TV contest...(400 entered) I will win an expensive monitor if the two in front of me in the standings chose Kansas... which I think is fairly likely. I honestly think Memphis will win anyway... Memphis was once a conference-mate of North Texas in the old Missouri Valley along with Louisville and Cincinnati. Plus our present BB coach was once the head coach at Memphis.

The fans bit their tongue a lot last year too.

We lost a lot of games last year...

Looks like four units to me...WKU play their third game this week and SAU played one in first round.

---How many more bowls do we need before everyone gets one??????

---A team with several "shooters" can defeat UCLA. UCLA is tough under the basket but a team that is really good at 3-point shooting and not depending on rebounds and close in shots have a good chance of taking them out. UCLA looked pretty bad at shooting against the Aggies.. ---I think the Toppers have a pretty good chance to win. Every team the Sweet-16 is good, the weak ones are gone.

---Rice, Tulane, Tulsa are very small and their crowds do not get even close to the three you mentioned. SMU is a lot larger (10,000?) but can't seem to draw crowds either. The issue is not the fact that they are private schools but their size and fan appeal....and I doubt that their fan appeal will improve much in the future. The size of many of the Belt colleges could mean big changes. The four private colleges in CUSA mentioned have less total COMBINED enrollment than North Texas. The size and poor fan support of Rice, SMU, and TCU contributed to the breakup of the SWC.

---WKU has a rather good history in basketball. They have made the Sweet-16 before and have several NCAA appearances. ESPN-radio had some guys talking today and the group considered the the last second 3 point shot against Drake the highlight play of the tournament. WKU next will be playing the team, UCLA, with the most NCAA championships.... and this will get the attention of the basketball world, especially if they do well or defeat them. ---CUSA had one team in the March Madness... The Belt had two. CUSA would be better for us because of the amount of Texas/local competition and more Texas media interest. However, I am not convinced that in 5 years CUSA will be the better conference, too many small private schools. We are holding our own against them in both basketball and football. (exception: Memphis basketball, which looks like a giant among dwarfs with Louisville and Cincinnati gone) ----- Good luck Toppers, and thanks for making the Belt look good ----

---Unfortunately too many students and profs do not truly understand how success in athletics can translate to a better university on the academic side with better students applying and more contributions to all programs. A better university and better known university also can translate to better job offers as well for the students. ---An odd twist is that better attendence at sporting events puts more pressure on athletes to achieve more and makes them think people care.... which can cause them to do better. Claiming that there is a lot of things to do near North Texas so this severely hurts attendence is an excuse... and not the best of reasons. There is a lot to do in Austin [lakes, sixth street, frats, etc.] and many other places as well. [how many NT students attend Mav games or Cowboy games??-- people anywhere can watch them on TV] This may be partially true for alums and people in general but for students it is as lame excuse for those who live on/near campus. ---With 34,000 students there should never be less than 5000 students (15%) at football/basketball games. I realize students study, work, and have things to do but there are a lot more than that who are available to attend. College memories are made from doing college things... not watching TV or goofing off.

---It is more fun to beat people who have big egos... and big heads. Besides it will make us look that much better when we do defeat them. Western New Mexico has no reputation and we are complaining about playing them... Go WKU ... We want to schedule and defeat teams that are well known. Good luck to them........... BEAT UCLA

I can't but have some old alum magazines around here somewhere from that year thast I may locate someday.. I am almost certain he had that name prior to being in the NFL. I even think the term Mean Green for the football team was used some (very rarely though) prior to his coming to NT.

It doesn't.... unless you don't count post season conference tournaments. Lots of teams win 20 now... once their tournament is over. ...which is when we won our 20th. I don't have much problem with our schedule... but we could have a couple of better teams or maybe two more teams that are of greater interest [sMU, TCU, reasonable Big-12 or CUSA teams] instead of a couple of those ... should create more interest. ---We need to get our attendence [and student interest] up... Howard Payne with only 1300 students averaged 2000+ for their girls games (went undefeated). We have 34,000... anything under 5000 is awful. We did as well on attendence in the 60's with about one-third the students... but of course then Louisville, Cinncinatti, Drake, Wichita, Bradley, and Tulsa were in our conference. Go Hill-toppers... anything good for the Belt teams is good for us.

EASY Solution... Do away with Spring Break...Just go to class and get more instruction for your money...LOL... We never had one during the 60's at NT when I was there. [ true] Tech is only college in Texas that had one that I know of. UT and Aggies didn't nor did Baylor. By the way Tech got out the same time we did, not later.

Team Matchups W. Kentucky ----- San Diego (27-6) Record (21-13) 76.8 --Points Per Game-- 65.6 .473 ----Field Goal Percentage-- .450 .698 Free Throw Percentage-- .676 .389 --3-Point Percentage-- .343 35.0 --Rebounds Per Game-- 33.7 12.6 --Assists Per Game--- 13.3 7.8 --Steals Per Game-- 6.8 3.7 --Blocks Per Game-- 3.1 ---The bracket group I am a member of shows WKU as the 69% pick, SDS--31% ..Only 17% had WKU picked to defeat Drake. SD had only 3% support to win over U-Conn. It appears SD has the tounament as a conference champion, and not because of record. Gonzaga had won their regular season conference championship but lost to SD by 7 in their finals. Gonzaga is now out. SD lost by 22 to So. Alabama in regular season also to SF Austin.. WKU lost to So. Alabama also by 4 and 5. and to Gonzaga by 3.

--There is some truth to the fact that they fear if they lose to us that it could hurt them... We recruit in the same area and are in the same media market. That is what they fear..... that is the reason that they both voted against admitting us to the SWC years ago. Only those two and Baylor voted against us... the three closest universities... they did want a large state university in their neighborhood competing with them.

--- ---I guess we old ones will have to die off before conditions normalize (if then) . A think most other universities in Texas have a similiar image of SMU. Ours is a bit more extreme because of their constant disrepect of us in articles in the DMN and other places. I don't resent any university's success (some here seem to) but I do resent their lack of respect for NT and others. TCU and their alums don't constantly try to put us down (we all have a few exceptions).. --We should play each other ( TCU, SMU, UTA, UNT ) in football and basketball somewhat regularly. Basketball would make good mid-week games because of the closeness and both groups of fans can attend without much difficulty.. TCU won't lower itself???? How about us raising ourselves up.. [don't understand that attitude] No SWC team played us from 1947 until 1974 (SMU) except Arkansas. We did play TxTech and Houston some during that period but they were not SWC members when they played. us. TCU wasn't doing anything different than the rest of them were.

--Interesting Idea... My kids (UNT grads) took part in a 5-K run associated with it. It seems lke a great opportunity since the official color of St Pats is Green anyway. Cheap way to advertise and get some needed publicity. I would stay away from stressing or portraying us a party school. Just be careful with the presentation. .

Kansas will defeat Memphis... in the finals.

--I saw a lot of Green today.... St. Patricks.

---I was at NT during the MVC (Missouri Valley) era and Drake was a conference member. The MVC has been under-rated regularly since the 70's breakup with Louisville, Memphis, NT, and Cincinnati leaving. I hated to see this matchup... I am pro Sunbelt with still some feelings for the old MVC teams. Bradley, and Wichita State has done well for the MVC lately with a lot of upsets in NCAA play. I thought Drake deserved to be rated higher. I am thinking S. Alabama has the better chance to win..... and picked them.

---In case you haven't noticed... you are on the basketball thread, this is not a football thread.. If UTA pulls it off, they will be the first ever #16 to defeat a #1 seed ...Some day it will happen. Good luck . Marquette, Gonzaga, George Mason, Georgetown, and some others have very good basketball programs but don't have football programs either.

---Sounds like we have some posters that are "green" with envy and not "Green" with pride. Congrats to our fellow "Texas universities" on making the NCAA March Madness and I wish them well against those "foreigners" (other than Belt teams) .... --- In short: Let's not sound like we attended SMU ----

ok-- but the rest had't. Maryland is not typical of the rest of the ACC which are considered in Southern States. The situation that existed is also one reason the Missouri Valley was as good as it was. Those schools were integrated and were on the edge of the Deep South and was getting a lot of the best athletes. Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis, St.Louis, Tulsa were nearby and Bradley, Drake and Wichita was in the same conference and recruited the south as well. Can't say that North Texas other than pulling athletes from Texas when the SWC wasn't. The situation also explains why we had Joe Green and 9 future NFL athletes on one team at one time. When they were recruited they had limited good options unless they went far away. In short the ACC was a good basketball conference but people have seemed to forgotten that the MVC was better. The media was rather ACC freindly also compared to the MVC (you know why) . Times have really changed, if you did not live then, then you can't understand. I went to an integrated high school (very few minorities however) but the the blacks in my class could not attend college in my hometown (I could) or go to the SWC schools. The guy that sat behind me in Geometry was apretty good student and athlete... his younger brother made the NFL after attending independent Houston... The situation is the reason the Texas Western (UTEP) story made so much news in 1965 when they defeated all-white Kentucky in the final game. UTEP had several white players..just did not start any of them.

---The metal parts will be sold to someone (maybe a smaller college or high school)... The stadium that Odessa used until the current concrete one was built was sold, torn down, and reassembled somewhere near Austin. Midland tore down 1/2 of their old stadium (metal) and sold it to someone a couple of years ago. The other half is still there and used for track meets, junior high games, and other events. Curved or not, someone will have a use for a lot of it. Are those benches really curved or are they a lot of straight benches assembled to look curved? There is no way they would be moved intact... they would torn down and reassembled.. maybe not even appearing the same ( curved ). after all "tinker toys and legos" can be put together many ways. It would not surprise me to see the same happen to Fouts unless they need the land for more academic buildings. I would take down the student side... and leave the side with the pressbox unless the highway wants part of the land there. That would also give more land back to campus side if needed.

--You are correct about the 1995 championship but the run of the 60-70s ended in 1975.. Wooten retired and they no longer had the recruiting advantage they had earlier over the ACC (which was all white, Southern blacks left the area to play). You ae also correct about the ACC making the final four a lot.. but you need to understand that the regions at the final four were exactly that. No teams played out of their region. The Southern region consisted of the ACC, the SEC, and not much else of any note. As a result one of the two almost always had a team in the final four. Making the Final Four for ACC was not that difficult if they could win their conference and beat the SEC champion, usually Kentucky (also all white). They in turn would ALWAYS play an Eastern team or Big-10 team in the first FINAL FOUR round . Making the final-two was more difficult since there was very good teams in that group especially the Big-10. Meanwhile the Midwest region would always play the WEST in the first Final Four round and often this should have been the championship game since often these were the two best teams....UCLA dominated the West for a long time although SF did well for a while (I think they dropped basketball after cheating occured) . The Big-8 with the two Kansas universities and the Missouri Valley with Louisville, Cincinnatti, Bradley, etc dominated the midwest region although Houston (independent then) did very well too. Often times the the two best teams were playing in the semi-finals... The Western team (UCLA?) against the Midwest team (often from Kansas or the MVC unless Houston made it). --The ACC was dominated by North Carolina and Duke..which had to then defeat Kentucky (Rupp) to get to the final four... not much else was in that region.... and all of them had all-white teams. Things changed greatly in the late 70's when regions were not truly regional champions anymore and the the team make-ups changed as well. Also multiple teams came from conferences instead of just one. The MVC changed greatly then also as some MVC teams formed the Metro conf with a few other teams (CUSA now) because of football reasons and UNT went independent thinking they would become a SWC member...... --they didn't...thanks to SMU. ---Other things also changed about 1976...two teams per conference were allowed in , the true regional system was scrapped and teams became seeded according to perceived ability. Until then you will the see the finals was the WEST/MIDWEST against the EAST/SOUTH . The SWC during that period was pretty awful. It improved when Houston was added in mid 70's and Arkansas got a lot better.