UNT Fan C-USA Perception Poll

[MeanGreenTexan]

1 minute ago, UNTLifer said:

I would consider the MWC if they placed us in the Mountain Division and made adjustments to the game times.

I think the Mountain division would be the obvious spot.   And I bet any home game we have will start at our normal time.  Away games may be different, but you're talking about 1-hour difference in most cases.  The late games would be the crossover AWAY games with the West division (maybe 1 or 2/yr, like we have with CUSA East teams now).  
Game times really are not that big of a deal if you're playing better, more-recognized opponents.

[UNTLifer]

7 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Game times really are not that big of a deal if you're playing better, more-recognized opponents.

They are when the games don't end until midnight or later.  We did that in the Big West and it sucked.

Divisional crossover games are much different between CUSA and the MWC when you consider media coverage, game times, etc...

Edited June 23, 2017 by UNTLifer

[MeanGreenTexan]

12 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

They are when the games don't end until midnight or later.  We did that in the Big West and it sucked.

Divisional crossover games are much different between CUSA and the MWC when you consider media coverage, game times, etc...

We're talking 1 maybe 2 late games like that per year.    And the Big West =/= Mountain West.    Mountain West is widely considered the #1 or #2 G5 conference.  Big West... wasnt.

Oh well, until anyone at UNT is serious about moving and is ready to fork over the cash to do so, then there's really no reason to wait around for an invite anywhere.   Just need to win where we are.

[VideoEagle]

So much to comment on here. First on SMU "blocking" us from the AAC. They don't have that kind of pull in the AAC. They didn't have that level of pull in CUSA either. The first time we were considered for CUSA SMU publicly wanted La Tech. But neither La Tech nor NT were chosen. But it wasn't because SMU did anything - our facilities and budgets were significantly lower than UTEPs and that's why UTEP was chosen. By the time CUSA was ready to expand again, we had improved both. Today, we still are behind in budgets to the AAC although we seem to be much closer and are close if not actually there in facilities. So, it's NOT SMU blocking us - we are doing it to ourselves! 

Next, when TCU joined the MWC they were given special adjustments for game start times. The MWC - specifically CSU, Wyoming and New Mexico (possibly some others as well) - have said they will NOT make that kind of deal in the future. Secondly, the schools in the Mountain division are very insistent about playing each other every year. That's why the MWC was formed in the first place! And before some starts with "if the TV dollars are enough they will," this is the conference discussing droping ESPN, Fox, et al because their fans hate mid-week games. Lastly, not sure what's meant by "better known teams" in the MWC. They might be better known in California, but not in DFW. 

[UNTLifer]

25 minutes ago, VideoEagle said:

So much to comment on here. First on SMU "blocking" us from the AAC. They don't have that kind of pull in the AAC. They didn't have that level of pull in CUSA either. The first time we were considered for CUSA SMU publicly wanted La Tech. But neither La Tech nor NT were chosen. But it wasn't because SMU did anything - our facilities and budgets were significantly lower than UTEPs and that's why UTEP was chosen. By the time CUSA was ready to expand again, we had improved both. Today, we still are behind in budgets to the AAC although we seem to be much closer and are close if not actually there in facilities. So, it's NOT SMU blocking us - we are doing it to ourselves! 

Next, when TCU joined the MWC they were given special adjustments for game start times. The MWC - specifically CSU, Wyoming and New Mexico (possibly some others as well) - have said they will NOT make that kind of deal in the future. Secondly, the schools in the Mountain division are very insistent about playing each other every year. That's why the MWC was formed in the first place! And before some starts with "if the TV dollars are enough they will," this is the conference discussing droping ESPN, Fox, et al because their fans hate mid-week games. Lastly, not sure what's meant by "better known teams" in the MWC. They might be better known in California, but not in DFW. 

Exactly.

[untjim1995]

8 minutes ago, VideoEagle said:

Lastly, not sure what's meant by "better known teams" in the MWC. They might be better known in California, but not in DFW. 

Ok--this is simply not true.

You cannot tell me with a straight face that people in DFW care less about Boise State, Fresno State, Hawaii, Nevada, UNLV, New Mexico, Colorado State, Air Force, etc..than they do F_U, ODU, Charlotte, UAB, MUTS, WKU, Marshall, or USM. And if we are going to add basketball to the mix, then this isn't up for debate.

I believe that IF the MWC wants back in Texas--and I believe they do--they will just wait out the demise of the Big XII and pick off at least two of the leftovers, most likely TCU and Baylor, but possibly Texas Tech, as well. That said, if the Big XII could remain as a conference, and stayed with the members who couldn't move up, that could lead to them having to look at some of us in the lower G5s to move over. They'd love UH and SMU first, but they may not want to move over there. So, then they'd go back to their old pal, UTEP, as well as Rice, and then ask about the idea of a travel partner(s). Ideally, we would be included, but we won't be ahead of UTSA, just because of the market, the city being a travel destination, and having bowl connections to the city.

If we got included with Rice, UTSA, and UTEP, that would make the MWC with 16 teams, which seems to be the number everyone keeps pegging as the cap for conference membership. Include us with UNM, Colorado State, Wyoming, and AFA. That means we would never be more than an hour's difference in later kickoffs for intra-divisional games. Right now, when we play Eastern CUSA games, its just the exact opposite, being an hour behind. This ain't 1995 anymore and we are depending on the paper for our sports stories. This crazy internet thing has caught on fairly strongly in most of the country.

For the Western Division, they get the old WAC, plus SDSU in their lineup Boise, Hawaii, SDSU, SJSU, Fresno State, UNLV, Nevada, and Utah State. Hell, make the league rules that nobody can kickoff later than 7:00 their body time and no earlier than 2:00 their body time. IOW, no CST kickoffs before 2pm for traveling Pac teams and no PST kickoffs after 5:00 for traveling Central teams. Trust me, if the TV money could be made and the extra market delivery can help the other members, they'll do it.

Again, TCU did this and it led to bigger success for them than they had seen in FW in probably 50+ years. They have shown us the way if we could actually get the opportunity. If we don't get it, than sobeit, we are still in the best conference situation we have ever had currently. But to dream bigger is to look outside of the bubble and see that a path could be blazed to a higher place amongst the college sports world. But it takes courage, commitment, and attention--things we have never shown we have for athletics for any decent amount of time.

 

[Harry]

44 minutes ago, VideoEagle said:

So much to comment on here. First on SMU "blocking" us from the AAC. They don't have that kind of pull in the AAC. They didn't have that level of pull in CUSA either. The first time we were considered for CUSA SMU publicly wanted La Tech. But neither La Tech nor NT were chosen. But it wasn't because SMU did anything - our facilities and budgets were significantly lower than UTEPs and that's why UTEP was chosen. By the time CUSA was ready to expand again, we had improved both. Today, we still are behind in budgets to the AAC although we seem to be much closer and are close if not actually there in facilities. So, it's NOT SMU blocking us - we are doing it to ourselves! 

Next, when TCU joined the MWC they were given special adjustments for game start times. The MWC - specifically CSU, Wyoming and New Mexico (possibly some others as well) - have said they will NOT make that kind of deal in the future. Secondly, the schools in the Mountain division are very insistent about playing each other every year. That's why the MWC was formed in the first place! And before some starts with "if the TV dollars are enough they will," this is the conference discussing droping ESPN, Fox, et al because their fans hate mid-week games. Lastly, not sure what's meant by "better known teams" in the MWC. They might be better known in California, but not in DFW. 

I just respectfully disagree with this.  SMU has by far the largest endowment, coaching salaries and their president Gerald Turner has been at their highest level of conference board leadership be it C-USA or AAC.  Heck he was the mastermind behind the C-USA!  To insinuate that SMU had nothing to do with the UTEP selection is crazy.  They had no desire to send their schools out to the hinterlands and the travel costs of getting to UTEP alone would override our facility shortcomings which were going to be addressed in the Master Plan.  SMU has always tried to separate itself from UNT until recently and that is due to the fact that they see us an easy win and a way to bolster their horrid home attendance.

[untjim1995]

12 minutes ago, Harry said:

I just respectfully disagree with this.  SMU has by far the largest endowment, coaching salaries and their president Gerald Turner has been at their highest level of conference board leadership be it C-USA or AAC.  Heck he was the mastermind behind the C-USA!  To insinuate that SMU had nothing to do with the UTEP selection is crazy.  They had no desire to send their schools out to the hinterlands and the travel costs of getting to UTEP alone would override our facility shortcomings which were going to be addressed in the Master Plan.  SMU has always tried to separate itself from UNT until recently and that is due to the fact that they see us an easy win and a way to bolster their horrid home attendance.

This x10000000

[VideoEagle]

57 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

Ok--this is simply not true.

You cannot tell me with a straight face that people in DFW care less about Boise State, Fresno State, Hawaii, Nevada, UNLV, New Mexico, Colorado State, Air Force, etc..than they do F_U, ODU, Charlotte, UAB, MUTS, WKU, Marshall, or USM. And if we are going to add basketball to the mix, then this isn't up for debate.

I believe that IF the MWC wants back in Texas--and I believe they do--they will just wait out the demise of the Big XII and pick off at least two of the leftovers, most likely TCU and Baylor, but possibly Texas Tech, as well. That said, if the Big XII could remain as a conference, and stayed with the members who couldn't move up, that could lead to them having to look at some of us in the lower G5s to move over. They'd love UH and SMU first, but they may not want to move over there. So, then they'd go back to their old pal, UTEP, as well as Rice, and then ask about the idea of a travel partner(s). Ideally, we would be included, but we won't be ahead of UTSA, just because of the market, the city being a travel destination, and having bowl connections to the city.

If we got included with Rice, UTSA, and UTEP, that would make the MWC with 16 teams, which seems to be the number everyone keeps pegging as the cap for conference membership. Include us with UNM, Colorado State, Wyoming, and AFA. That means we would never be more than an hour's difference in later kickoffs for intra-divisional games. Right now, when we play Eastern CUSA games, its just the exact opposite, being an hour behind. This ain't 1995 anymore and we are depending on the paper for our sports stories. This crazy internet thing has caught on fairly strongly in most of the country.

For the Western Division, they get the old WAC, plus SDSU in their lineup Boise, Hawaii, SDSU, SJSU, Fresno State, UNLV, Nevada, and Utah State. Hell, make the league rules that nobody can kickoff later than 7:00 their body time and no earlier than 2:00 their body time. IOW, no CST kickoffs before 2pm for traveling Pac teams and no PST kickoffs after 5:00 for traveling Central teams. Trust me, if the TV money could be made and the extra market delivery can help the other members, they'll do it.

Again, TCU did this and it led to bigger success for them than they had seen in FW in probably 50+ years. They have shown us the way if we could actually get the opportunity. If we don't get it, than sobeit, we are still in the best conference situation we have ever had currently. But to dream bigger is to look outside of the bubble and see that a path could be blazed to a higher place amongst the college sports world. But it takes courage, commitment, and attention--things we have never shown we have for athletics for any decent amount of time.

 

If you go to a sports bar in Addison or Las Colinas, you'd find it IS true. Granted, Boise is better known. But La Tech, UTEP, UTSA and even Rice have more demand than any MWC team except Boise. Depending on who Boise is playing, that some times includes Boise. As for going to 16 teams, members of Mountain Division are the ones who created the MWC because their fans HATED the idea of a 16 team league. These are the same fans driving the MWC to consider giving up ESPN and Fox to avoid mid-week games. 

As far as Mountain and Wester games verse Eastern games, the Rangers, Mavericks and Stars have all very publicly  complained about later starts hurting their coverage even in the age of the internet. While fewer people open the physical paper, the online editions have grown dramatically. And even in the age of the internet, 7pm Western time is still three hours later than 7pm Eastern time. There's a reason viewership for Western and Mountain evening games in the Central time zone is a fraction of that of Eastern and Central games. 

As for limiting the times of the start, again, they will NOT make this deal again. Period. I know CSU, Wyoming and New Mexico were very vocal about never doing that again. 

AS for TCU increasing their crowd, that have more to do with TCU actively working to get their core fans to come out no matter whom they are playing. They stress the opponent doesn't matter, come see the Frogs. They started that campaign while in CUSA and continued it through to today. 

 

1 hour ago, Harry said:

I just respectfully disagree with this.  SMU has by far the largest endowment, coaching salaries and their president Gerald Turner has been at their highest level of conference board leadership be it C-USA or AAC.  Heck he was the mastermind behind the C-USA!  To insinuate that SMU had nothing to do with the UTEP selection is crazy.  They had no desire to send their schools out to the hinterlands and the travel costs of getting to UTEP alone would override our facility shortcomings which were going to be addressed in the Master Plan.  SMU has always tried to separate itself from UNT until recently and that is due to the fact that they see us an easy win and a way to bolster their horrid home attendance.

Yes, SMU has the large financial resources. But back after the announcement of UTEP joining CUSA there was an article about the decision. Banowsky was very clear that when CUSA compared the facilities and salaries of NT, La Tech and UTEP that UTEP was far ahead of either of us. And that was what convinced the member schools including those in the East to accept UTEP over La Tech and us. I don't know where the article is, but Banowsky was very clear on the reason. 

Yes, there was a master plan at NT, but no visible money to fund it. And no will at the time to get the money. 

SMU didn't block us from joining CUSA in 2005, bad decisions by our administration did. SMU was happy about the result, but they didn't block us. 

[untjim1995]

@MeanGreenTexan--looks like its still you and me on the Western Island...

Too bad for us--the MWC won't get left behind completely, nor will the AAC, when the culling of the FBS occurs in the decade ahead. But we were probably never gonna get invited out there anyways, unless we started winning really big in both revenue sports. And even then, I doubt the administration here would deviate from what our fan base wants, which is no western time zone conference mates, other than UTEP.

Again, the path for someone to make it bigger like TCU did out west does exist--I just don't know who will take advantage of it in the years ahead from Texas. If its UTSA, God help us. This was place will look like a nuclear fallout zone--hell, it may look that way anyhow, if UTSA keeps beating our ass and actually starts winning division and conference championships and we continue to flounder below .500, as we have done for the better part of the last 25 years.

[MeanGreenTexan]

3 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

@MeanGreenTexan--looks like its still you and me on the Western Island...

Too bad for us--the MWC won't get left behind completely, nor will the AAC, when the culling of the FBS occurs in the decade ahead. But we were probably never gonna get invited out there anyways, unless we started winning really big in both revenue sports. And even then, I doubt the administration here would deviate from what our fan base wants, which is no western time zone conference mates, other than UTEP.

Again, the path for someone to make it bigger like TCU did out west does exist--I just don't know who will take advantage of it in the years ahead from Texas. If its UTSA, God help us. This was place will look like a nuclear fallout zone--hell, it may look that way anyhow, if UTSA keeps beating our ass and actually starts winning division and conference championships and we continue to flounder below .500, as we have done for the better part of the last 25 years.

[Harry]

49 minutes ago, VideoEagle said:

Yes, SMU has the large financial resources. But back after the announcement of UTEP joining CUSA there was an article about the decision. Banowsky was very clear that when CUSA compared the facilities and salaries of NT, La Tech and UTEP that UTEP was far ahead of either of us. And that was what convinced the member schools including those in the East to accept UTEP over La Tech and us. I don't know where the article is, but Banowsky was very clear on the reason. 

Yes, there was a master plan at NT, but no visible money to fund it. And no will at the time to get the money. 

SMU didn't block us from joining CUSA in 2005, bad decisions by our administration did. SMU was happy about the result, but they didn't block us. 

[wardly]

I see little if any difference between CUSA and the SBC. I also see no reason for any other conference to consider UNT as an expansion target as we bring nothing to the table, especially as pertains to the DFW media.

[GTWT]

1 hour ago, wardly said:

I see little if any difference between CUSA and the SBC. I also see no reason for any other conference to consider UNT as an expansion target as we bring nothing to the table, especially as pertains to the DFW media.

cUSA = Rice, UTEP, SMiss, Marshall, LTech, Odom (none of these are great but they're at least not an embarrassment to be associated with).

Belt = Monroe, Troy

The worst of cUSA were also in the Belt

[BTG_Fan1]

6 hours ago, wardly said:

I see little if any difference between CUSA and the SBC. I also see no reason for any other conference to consider UNT as an expansion target as we bring nothing to the table, especially as pertains to the DFW media.

If UNT were to move into a bigger conference such as Pac12 or SEC, or even the MWest then you would see a growth in the DFW market. DFW is a huge market that would be appealing to  these conferences. The only problem is that UNT isn't appealing in terms of sports. 

UNT has a huge alumni base in DFW, and is one of the largest schools in the nation as well. The Teir 1 education is impressive to conferences because it's another accomplishment for them. DFW is also a top 5 media market and a market that is endless growing and fertile with recruits. All reasons for conferences to be interested. 

Investment in facilities are a major improvement and will make the AD department attractive to other conferences, and going to bowls regularly. 

UNT has a lot going for it, now is the the time to invest and dream big! 

[UNTFan23]

9 hours ago, BTG_Fan1 said:

If UNT were to move into a bigger conference such as Pac12 or SEC, or even the MWest then you would see a growth in the DFW market. DFW is a huge market that would be appealing to  these conferences. The only problem is that UNT isn't appealing in terms of sports. 

UNT has a huge alumni base in DFW, and is one of the largest schools in the nation as well. The Teir 1 education is impressive to conferences because it's another accomplishment for them. DFW is also a top 5 media market and a market that is endless growing and fertile with recruits. All reasons for conferences to be interested. 

Investment in facilities are a major improvement and will make the AD department attractive to other conferences, and going to bowls regularly. 

UNT has a lot going for it, now is the the time to invest and dream big! 

I have doubts that we'd see any substantial growth in market share if we moved to the Mountain West.

[wardly]

14 hours ago, GTWT said:

cUSA = Rice, UTEP, SMiss, Marshall, LTech, Odom (none of these are great but they're at least not an embarrassment to be associated with).

Belt = Monroe, Troy

The worst of cUSA were also in the Belt

Rice and UTEP? Marshall,UAB, and So.Miss were CUSA holdovers, and La. Tech came from WAC. Most if not all of the rest of CUSA were from the SBC,IAA division, and a  new program starting  from scratch. Just about all the bottom feeders, including UNT, came from the SBC.

[wardly]

3 minutes ago, UNTFan23 said:

I have doubts that we'd see any substantial growth in market share if we moved to the Mountain West.

Correcto mundo!  TCU's successes in both the WAC and MWC were the best kept secrets in the metroplex because of time zone.Pac12,SEC? Expanded Big 12? No one outside of DFW knows who UNT is, where they are, or what UNT stands for.At least with "North Texas" instead of UNT they had a clue. When the Eagles start filling a 30,000 seat stadium[which has never been done once], move off the CUSA doormat on the field, then perhaps we will be in realignment conversations if and when then occur. Until then we are just second rate underfunded football program with a small fan base[check Mean Green Membership] who moved from the bottom of the SBC to the bottom of CUSA, and doesn't even look that good at closing time.

[Harry]

9 minutes ago, wardly said:

Rice and UTEP? Marshall,UAB, and So.Miss were CUSA holdovers, and La. Tech came from WAC. Most if not all of the rest of CUSA were from the SBC,IAA division, and a  new program starting  from scratch. Just about all the bottom feeders, including UNT, came from the SBC.

I thought we got the better programs from the SBC.  Heck WKU has dominated and MUTS has been one of the more well rounded programs.  FIU and FAU have struggled but with new coaches like Lane Kiffen you may see them step up in future years.  I like the current situation we have in CUSA.  The problem is not CUSA it's us and our ability to recruit and perform on the field.  We just need to be the best we can be in this conference and good things will happen!

[BTG_Fan1]

5 hours ago, UNTFan23 said:

I have doubts that we'd see any substantial growth in market share if we moved to the Mountain West.

Games like Boise would be a draw. But yea most MWest  wouldn't be a major draw in terms of media but the others conferences would.

[MeanGreenTexan]

20 minutes ago, BTG_Fan1 said:

Games like Boise would be a draw. But yea most MWest  wouldn't be a major draw in terms of media but the others conferences would.

Air Force wouldn't?  New Mexico wouldn't?   I think we would do just as well with those 3 schools, if not better, at Apogee or in the media as we would with any other C-USA West team not named Rice (and that includes UTEP & UTSA)

[wardly]

6 hours ago, Harry said:

I thought we got the better programs from the SBC.  Heck WKU has dominated and MUTS has been one of the more well rounded programs.  FIU and FAU have struggled but with new coaches like Lane Kiffen you may see them step up in future years.  I like the current situation we have in CUSA.  The problem is not CUSA it's us and our ability to recruit and perform on the field.  We just need to be the best we can be in this conference and good things will happen!

We are in violent agreement.

[mgfan]

On 6/22/2017 at 10:27 PM, untjim1995 said:

What conference are we gonna go up to? The fans don't want the MWC and the AAC is out because of SMU.

I would love the mwc. It is a move in the right direction and way better than sitting idle and doing nothing.

[BTG_Fan1]

3 hours ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Air Force wouldn't?  New Mexico wouldn't?   I think we would do just as well with those 3 schools, if not better, at Apogee or in the media as we would with any other C-USA West team not named Rice (and that includes UTEP & UTSA)

Definitely