Big 12 vs the world

[Hunter Green]

What I don't get, is why does smut have any say so over whether we were admitted to the AAC or not? They're only one vote, yes? If it makes sense for us to get an invite, why do they get to call the shots?

Screw them!

GO MEAN GREEN!

[MeanGreenTexan]

28 minutes ago, Hunter Green said:

What I don't get, is why does smut have any say so over whether we were admitted to the AAC or not? They're only one vote, yes? If it makes sense for us to get an invite, why do they get to call the shots?

Screw them!

GO MEAN GREEN!

They don't.
But what does UNT bring to the table that isn't already provided by SMU (besides a historically clean program), coming from an AAC conference leadership viewpoint?   
Does UNT provide something that would cause the other AAC schools to want to split their revenues with us?

[Rudy]

The Big 12 won't keep their P5 status.  If they do, it will only be in name.

[MrAlien]

AAC is a possibility for UNT but they need to get butts in seats at games for that to happen. 

[WanderingEagle]

7 minutes ago, MrAlien said:

AAC is a possibility for UNT but they need to get butts in seats at games for that to happen. 

It's easier to get butts in seats at games when your home games include Memphis, South Florida, Navy, etc. as opposed to UTEP and Rice.... Both UNT and the AAC know this.

[ChiefTenBeers2015]

We need a religious affiliation.  Damn Mormons have great support.  

[meangreen11]

2 minutes ago, ChiefTenBeers2015 said:

We need a religious affiliation.  Damn Mormons have great support.  

Whether or not we have one our ship is basically tied to SMUt.  Sad to say it but true it is

[El Paso Eagle]

1 hour ago, Rudy said:

The Big 12 won't keep their P5 status.  If they do, it will only be in name.

If "The 8" stay and they pick up those four it would arguably be a better conference than the Pac12

[ForneyGreen]

2 hours ago, Hunter Green said:

What I don't get, is why does smut have any say so over whether we were admitted to the AAC or not? They're only one vote, yes? If it makes sense for us to get an invite, why do they get to call the shots?

Screw them!

GO MEAN GREEN!

I really don't think SMU plays into us being in-or-out of the AAC other than they would have 1 vote on new conference membership. 

What really plays into a future invite for UNT is what UNT brings to the AAC (or MWC, etc.).  If we were super-attractive to the AAC, the conference members would want UNT in the conference whether we're 5 miles or 500 miles from SMU.  We're in a metro area of 7.5 million people, and there's no overlap between UNT and SMU.

More fans and a larger athletic budget are key.  I believe our athletic budget (~40 million) is about 13 million away from the lowest AAC athletic budget.

[MeanGreenTexan]

3 hours ago, WanderingEagle said:

It's easier to get butts in seats at games when your home games include Memphis, South Florida, Navy, etc. as opposed to UTEP and Rice.... Both UNT and the AAC know this.

NT gets butts in seats when we’re winning. We don’t need to argue the need for opponents to prop up our attendance….  Just friggin win!!

[untjim1995]

2 hours ago, ForneyGreen said:

I really don't think SMU plays into us being in-or-out of the AAC other than they would have 1 vote on new conference membership. 

What really plays into a future invite for UNT is what UNT brings to the AAC (or MWC, etc.).  If we were super-attractive to the AAC, the conference members would want UNT in the conference whether we're 5 miles or 500 miles from SMU.  We're in a metro area of 7.5 million people, and there's no overlap between UNT and SMU.

More fans and a larger athletic budget are key.  I believe our athletic budget (~40 million) is about 13 million away from the lowest AAC athletic budget.

Unfortunately, networks and conferences don’t look at the DFW area as needing two teams from the same TV market. It is what it is…

[TheColonyEagle]

17 hours ago, WanderingEagle said:

It's easier to get butts in seats at games when your home games include Memphis, South Florida, Navy, etc. as opposed to UTEP and Rice.... Both UNT and the AAC know this.

I get Navy, but I don't see Memphis and South Florida drawing more here than UTEP and Rice. 

[97and03]

Time for a Big12 megathread?

[rcade]

23 hours ago, keith said:

In order to be in that last 5, you need to have been in that initial 75-500.

If we're not in the initial 75-500 schools being considered for Big 12 membership I'll be pissed.

[Salsa_Verde]

17 hours ago, El Paso Eagle said:

If "The 8" stay and they pick up those four it would arguably be a better conference than the Pac12

No way my man. 

[rcade]

18 hours ago, WanderingEagle said:

It's easier to get butts in seats at games when your home games include Memphis, South Florida, Navy, etc. as opposed to UTEP and Rice.... Both UNT and the AAC know this.

Navy, yes. But are casual fans in DFW more excited to see Memphis and USF come to town than they are to see UTEP and Rice? I think when you're not talking about obvious big names, playing Texas schools is better.

[Tom McKrackin]

5 minutes ago, rcade said:

Navy, yes. But are casual fans in DFW more excited to see Memphis and USF come to town than they are to see UTEP and Rice? I think when you're not talking about obvious big names, playing Texas schools is better.

To Piggy back on your thought what if AAC backfill with UTSA and Rice?  We might be with less Texas teams than we have now which is bad for us.

[MrAlien]

If the AAC looses a couple schools, I think UNT will get a look, even being in the same market as smu.  They have an ESPN deal, and they are going to need games, DFW is a top 5 media market, ESPN might be on our side with this.  Plus UNT's basketball program would be a very nice fit in the AAC. 

[Greendylan]

46 minutes ago, Salsa_Verde said:

No way my man. 

You might be right, but would it not at least be arguable?  And, while we are at it, what about comparing the new Big XII to the ACC?

[WanderingEagle]

3 hours ago, rcade said:

Navy, yes. But are casual fans in DFW more excited to see Memphis and USF come to town than they are to see UTEP and Rice? I think when you're not talking about obvious big names, playing Texas schools is better.

Honest answer, yes I do. I could be wrong. I get the appeal of playing lots of texas teams. But I do believe more students, alumni, and casual fans will take interest if there is more high-exposure competition.

[Salsa_Verde]

12 hours ago, Greendylan said:

You might be right, but would it not at least be arguable?  And, while we are at it, what about comparing the new Big XII to the ACC?

No argument that the PAC 12 has been down the last 5-6 years…but when Oregon, Washington, Stanford and USC are good? Sheeesh. There isn’t a school in this new BIG 12 setup that compares to any of those schools. Compare this BIG 12 to the ACC and it still falls short. Obviously Clemson is tops but Miami, VT, Florida State?! As football powers and then add UNC and Duke for basketball?! Forget about it 

[Pavlovs Eagle]

On 9/2/2021 at 5:39 PM, El Paso Eagle said:

If "The 8" stay and they pick up those four it would arguably be a better conference than the Pac12

Thats a spicy take... but when Weber State at Utah on a Thursday night pulls a 51k person sellout at a newly expanded stadium in Salt Lake can you really say the eventual Big 12 2.0 (3.0?) is really a better conference.  There's some sad attendance at the California schools, but for the most part the rest of the PAC12 teams pull exciting attendance numbers even when they're bad.

[El Paso Eagle]

39 minutes ago, Pavlovs Eagle said:

Thats a spicy take... but when Weber State at Utah on a Thursday night pulls a 51k person sellout at a newly expanded stadium in Salt Lake can you really say the eventual Big 12 2.0 (3.0?) is really a better conference.  There's some sad attendance at the California schools, but for the most part the rest of the PAC12 teams pull exciting attendance numbers even when they're bad.

I guess if attendance is your benchmark for being a good team then Michigan should be in the college football finals every year

[keith]

It may be accurate, but I don't get the argument that conference X doesn't need/want school B because school A is already in the same market.  Why do conferences want to share a market (especially one as large as DFW) with one or two other conferences?  Why not try to dominate the DFW market as much as possible by loading up on all the schools in it?  I mean even capturing another 10% or 20% of DFW is more than what they would get with 100% of some other markets (and they would never get 100% of those other markets anyway).  Short-sighted thinking by conference leadership if they are not looking for ways to put a stranglehold on DFW which is only going to get bigger for the foreseeable future.  

[southsideguy]

I don't think the AAC is even looking our direction.  We better get the MWC on the speed dial because I think that will be our best shot or we will get stuck in CUSA with Judy.