Chrisattsu

I am ready whenever you are.

The following message comes from Tux on Bobcatfans.com. There was a request to quote it over here. --- 1) it's not fair to say UTSA and Texas State have shown little commitment to excellence in athletics. Both schools are very committed to athletics, and the commitment is growing. I can not speak for UTSA, but Texas State is spending millions to upgrade its athletic and athletic academic facilities, while striving to attract and retain coaching talent by increasing salaries. With donations/fund-raising going up and with the new student fee increase passage the athletic budget has seen significant growth. On the field, the results from the last two years speak for themselves: Volleyball - 2007 Southland Conference Tournament Champions, NCAA Tournament First-Round Women's Basketball - 2007-08 Southland Conference Regular Season Champions, WNIT Second-Round Women's Golf - 2007-08 Southland Conference Tournament Champions, NCAA Regionals Softball - 2008 Southland Conference Regular Season Champions Women's Soccer - 2008 Southland Conference Regular Season Champions Women's Soccer - 2008 Southland Conference Tournament Champions Volleyball - 2008 Southland Conference Regular Season Champions Football - 2008 Southland Conference Champions - NCAA FCS Playoffs Softball - 2009 Southland Conference Regular Season Champions Softball - 2009 Southland Conference Tournament Champions - NCAA Regionals Baseball - 2009 Southland Conference Regular Season Champions - NCAA Regionals In addition, the football team has been to the FCS playoffs 2 of the last four years, the athletic program has won the SLC commissioner's cup four times, placed 2nd three times and 3rd twice in the last 10 years and won nine straight women's all-sports trophies. While basketball is at a nadir, it is improving. As for the baseball team, we had victories over Big XII teams Baylor (ranked at the time) and Texas Tech, and C-USA's Rice (Also ranked). These are not the typical achievements of a school that has "shown little commitment to excellence in athletics". 2) It is true that Texas State is not a FBS division team and therefore does not play in the FBS football division, however to say that it has never played a down of FBS football is inaccurate. Texas state regularly schedules FBS teams and has played well against Texas A&M, Baylor and SMU. This year we will play TCU. http://bobcatfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=17452

Washers

Based on the facilities that we are building, I can say that we are heading to the SBC or the WAC not CUSA. They new baseball is at 2500 people. This is on par with what is in use around the SBC. This is middle of the pack for the WAC. Strahan Coliseum currently holds around 8000 people that puts us on par with the facilities in your conference. The football stadium expansion that is coming is expected to bump us between the 30,000-40,000 range once it is complete (whenever that is). This looks to be about the average size stadium in SBC. I would love to see the moratorium lifted so we have an opportunity to move to FBS. You may be right about the NCAA extending the moratorium, and if our administration knows it this could be why they are pushing hard and fast to get everything in place. Dangling the FBS carrot was the only way to get our alumni and donors back, and convince the students to increase the athletic budget. If we are going to be stuck in FCS, we may as well have the best financed athletic programs and best facilities.

They are currently in the SLC for all sports. However, to this date, they have not requested to be on the SLC football schedule yet (currently lined up through 2012). They will be at Media days this year, so I will be interested to know what they have to say. Additionally, the SLC Commish stated that he is not going to act like a stepping stone in the way that they did for ULM.

I know that the Bobcats are on the SLC schedule through the 2012 season. We are discussing the same conferences (SBC, WAC, CUSA) by 2013. However, I think we can all agree that Texas State will not end up in CUSA.

There was an article in the DMN back in May that said attendance was down, but revenue was up. The attendance section of their 09 Wikipedia Website doesn't look too bad- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Texas_Rangers_season Yeah, they have some sub-20k games, but then again they have some 37k+ games.

Questions with this potential conference. 1. LaTech thinks they are better than the Sunbelt, why would they want to make themselves peers to ULL or ULM? 2. The Sunbelt has gotten some press because of WKU's deep runs into the NCAA tourney. Would WKU and Memphis want to fight each other for Conference spot? 3. Why have South Alabama in the 'Western' Conference when Troy, SoMiss, and UAB are all in the East? Why not bring another Texas School or NM St for UTEP?

We've got a marching band, national champion cheer squads, a former UCA Mascot-of-the-year, and the Strutters waiting to entertain you. We're here, hanging out and waiting for the moratorium to lift, just give us a call sometime...

That is not surprising, I thought I remembered reading that the H-Z got a new Sports Editor awhile back who said that she was only going to cover local schools (and Texas State since they are in the backyard). I believe they were even going to drop their Spurs coverage....Its nice to see that they want to be the small town, local news paper but that is pretty stupid.

That is not surprising, I thought I remembered reading that the H-Z got a new Sports Editor awhile back who said that she was only going to cover local schools (and Texas State since they are in the backyard). I believe they were even going to drop their Spurs coverage....idiot.

I remember hearing stories of them dinging the Cup in Vinnie Paul's swimming pool.

Along this same train of thought.... Would any of you be more apt in joining the WAC if Hawaii was no longer involved?

I know this is off topic, but why do you refer to MTSU as muts? I know that Aggies refer to Texas as t.u. for the rivalry reason, but what is the reason for this?

Playing them after the game wouldn't be a bad idea. It might get people in the stands early, and keep them around. Texas State tried it the other way around last year. We brought the bands (Cory Morrow, Reckless Kelly, Randy Rogers, some Reggaeton artist, some local guys) in during the pregame tailgates. Their hope was draw people to tailgate, have a good time, and then they will go to the stadium come game time. Attendance was alright, but I don't know if it caused a significant increase. The only problem I see with moving something like that to postgame versus pregame is that in the pregame, everyone is drinking beer having a good time--creating a party atmosphere. If you have a concert inside the stadium, you can't have that same party atmosphere because you won't be able to consume alcohol.

Its the freaking Redmen !!!

Whoa... Please clarify what you are saying because I am interpreting this as, "San Antonio is filled with brown people". Is there a large Hispanic community in San Antonio? Obviously, but it has diverse cultural heritage made up of all major ethnic groups. While North Texans (speaking of region not the University) would like to think that everything south of Austin in Mexico, we are still very much Texan down here. We like our beer cold, our chili hot, and our Friday night football. Have you ever looked at the Express News on Friday or Saturday during October? There is nothing, but football previews and scores. I agree that the IAA indy route is not the right road for the San Antonio market. Should they go this route, it will be a hard sell for the students, alumni, and potential Tshirt fans to remain avid followers after the initial buzz has worn off. The students do not have a history of supporting the University's athletics for the reasons mentioned in previous posts (CAP program, Non-trad students, and large city with more entertainment options). Could this change? Possibly. The creation of a football team has people talking about UTSA. This is creating buzz for their athletic program. I think two things that have hurt UTSA in the past are their location on the FAR Northwest-side of town and the fact every sport they participate in occurs during Spurs season (except Volleyball). Maybe the downtown location and the lack of local competition will draw a fan base. Agreed They embraced the team, and sold out every game that was played in the Dome in 2005. Playing SLC (or IAA teams) is not going to draw well and they know it. NJIT and UTPB joined the Great West, but both lack football. SLC will not move up. While there are the four Texas teams (TxSt, Lamar, UTSA, and Sam Houston) discussing moves to FBS, the other conference members lack the funding or desire to move to FBS.

I agree that you have to find the right balance. Since the University operates like a business, it needs students as customers to continue playing tuition and fees to survive. If you raise your standards you run the risk of not being able to accept enough quality applicants. However, if you lower them too much, you run the risk of accepting too many 'at-risk' students that could lower your retention rates.

At this time, UTSA has not filed a request to be added to the SLC schedule. In addition to that, the SLC commish stated that he did not want any team to (UTSA, Lamar, TAMCC, UTA) to join the league long enough to move to FBS. Maybe they two are agreeing to leave it alone. UTSA will start as an FCS independent, and move up from there?

UTSA shouldn't surprise anyone. Once AD Hickey got the ball rolling, it was only a matter of time before the recruits started to come in. It has never been a secret that they want to be an FBS school, and I think this is why we've all been watching UTSA closely. I have heard from the very beginning the CUSA is where they would like to end up. Of course, the posters here and on Bobcatfans would like to see their teams end up there, it does not mean that it is going to happen. In regards to your concern about another FBS talent suck, you have to remember that FCS teams like Texas State, Sam Houston, and now UTSA have always gone after UNT, UH, Rice, UTEP caliber players. We may not get them all the time, but all of our schools are looking for "D1" talent. Looking back last year's commits, some of our recruits had offers from North Texas, UTEP, Purdue, Fresno State, Missouri, Iowa State just to name a few. Players pick their schools for any number of reasons. Some want the D1 bowl attached their name, some are just looking for a ride so they can get their education, some want playing time (which could happen sooner if they drop down a level), while others want to stay close to home. I would guess that the addition of two new FCS teams (UTSA and Lamar) has as much impact on recruiting for Sunbelt / CUSA teams as Incarnate Word's new football team has on Southland Schools. I believe that their athletic fee will peak at $20/SCH (as will Texas State's).

I did my part for North Texas. 5-5 and refreshed it 8 times.

After reading the LaTech board, is it just me or are they a bunch of douchebags? I mean, I don't get it. Their academic and athletic profile doesn't make them appear to be any better than a Sunbelt or Southland school. However, reading their posts, you would think that they are UT or SMU simply because of their smugness.

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT MONTICELLO BOLL WEEVILS AND COTTON BLOSSOMS .

In terms of Academics and DMAs (TV market shares), it would make sense for the PAC10 to look at Colorado. Academically they are considered a Public Ivy, their research dollars rank in the Top 10 nationally, and they consistently bring in top notch faculty. Based strictly on Media Markets, It would allow the PAC10 to extend their brand into Colorado. The includes the #18 Denver market, the only Top 25 DMA close enough to their footprint that is not part of the conference. They have shown interested in the Colorado before, it is just hard for me to imagine a team in the Pacific 10 conference who is located in the Boulder.

The Big 10 is as much an academic conference as it is an athletic conference. All of the Public School (this excludes Northwestern and Purdue) are considered Public Ivies. Mizzou and Iowa State bring nothing to the conference academically, and nobody besides Iowa plays ISU on a regular basis. Rutgers is considered a public Ivy, and offers up the NJ/NYC media market, but to me the B10 will always be midwestern conference. I know PSU has made their mark, but they always seem like the odd man out in this group