Why are we playing Wyoming?

[UNTcrazy727]

19 hours ago, meangreenfaninno said:

Just a real head-scratcher to me as we go there in 2026 and they supposedly come here in 27.  We have absolutely nothing to gain from this as it is a terrible travel game for our kids (bad for academics) and on the far west coast so no one will watch or listen and the fans can't afford to travel there.  Wyoming has everything to gain as they want desperately to recruit in Texas since they have literally no players in their state.   We are trying to distance from the Mountain West not give them freebies.  It seems like our scheduling is really needing improvement and we need to quit making boneheaded deals.   2 for 1 maybe at best on this team.

[NT93]

On a national level more people would question why Wyoming is playing North Texas.

[Mike Jackson]

14 hours ago, NT80 said:

Sorry, but playing SFA and Sam Houston isn't moving the needle.   You may not like them, but Wyoming and Nevada are more National brands that our former Southland mates.

National brands know for what exactly?   Being state flagship schools?  Without Wiki/Google Search quickly name a noteworthy pro athlete from  University of Nevada or Wyoming not named Josh Allen.   I had do a Wiki search myself before making that request and found Jay Novack.  The last player we had that was born while Jay was still playing was Austin Aune.  It is a net zero to play any of these team including our Southland mates if you are trying to sway opinion of people not already invested in the program.  Then it becomes about individual preference of the fan.   You just can't logically make the case that going on the road to 27k stadium in Reno, Nevada is really better than a home game against SFA or Sam Houston (assuming you don't crap the bed on the field in either scenario).   And I would that a last seconds home loss against a defending FCS Champion or runner up is better than getting blown out by a Nevada, New Mexico, or Wyoming team that finishes with 4 wins or less.  

[El Paso Eagle]

9 minutes ago, Mike Jackson said:

National brands know for what exactly?   Being state flagship schools?  Without Wiki/Google Search quickly name a noteworthy pro athlete from  University of Nevada or Wyoming not named Josh Allen.   I had do a Wiki search myself before making that request and found Jay Novack.  The last player we had that was born while Jay was still playing was Austin Aune.  It is a net zero to play any of these team including our Southland mates if you are trying to sway opinion of people not already invested in the program.  Then it becomes about individual preference of the fan.   You just can't logically make the case that going on the road to 27k stadium in Reno, Nevada is really better than a home game against SFA or Sam Houston (assuming you don't crap the bed on the field in either scenario).   And I would that a last seconds home loss against a defending FCS Champion or runner up is better than getting blown out by a Nevada, New Mexico, or Wyoming team that finishes with 4 wins or less.  

Do you even follow college football? 

[outoftown]

I am not sure what to make of the Wyoming game.

I do wonder however who the 4th OOC game in  2024 will be. NT needs a home game with an FBS, as there are already two away games and the only home game SFA.

I hear Oklahoma isn't playing that much in Texas that year (probably once) and only has two OOC home games scheduled so far, so space to come one more time to Texas in OOC 😉

Edited March 17, 2023 by outoftown

[Mike Jackson]

39 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

Do you even follow college football? 

I noticed you didn't answer my question, so I won't respond to yours?   Mind you I am not campaigning for loading up to the maximum of 2 FCS opponents every year with the exclusive alternative being these small isolated schools in the Mountain West.  But if these teams are perceived as being in a down stretch we all know that isn't those games are going to get good media distribution slots.  So there is no other value than to say we beat another FBS level school if we beat them.  Unless it is game that has a spectacular play, record breaking individual performance or very odd occurrence, clips of it won't be on highlight shows.  I don't follow mediocre teams in the Mountain West like the vast majority of College Football fans. 🙄     I am not just going off of my opinion either.

All the MWC than I am not interested in UNT playing are "magically" not on the this list of top 84 brands in college football.  That would seem to strongly suggest from a national perspective very few fans are following these teams.   The MWC teams I have no reservations about scheduling are all on this list too. (listed below for convenience)  I just have the crazy idea that if you are already excluded from this list of schools, a long road trip to play another school that isn't on this list is a slam dunk positive vs home game.   

https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach/new-and-improved-ranking-84-college-football-programs-by-brand-value-6e2c65f64515

1. San Diego State

2. Boise State

3. Air Force 

4. Colorado State

5. Fresno State

6. UNLV

Edited March 17, 2023 by Mike Jackson

[NT80]

45 minutes ago, Mike Jackson said:

National brands know for what exactly?   Being state flagship schools?  Without Wiki/Google Search quickly name a noteworthy pro athlete from  University of Nevada or Wyoming not named Josh Allen.   I had do a Wiki search myself before making that request and found Jay Novack.  The last player we had that was born while Jay was still playing was Austin Aune.  It is a net zero to play any of these team including our Southland mates if you are trying to sway opinion of people not already invested in the program.  Then it becomes about individual preference of the fan.   You just can't logically make the case that going on the road to 27k stadium in Reno, Nevada is really better than a home game against SFA or Sam Houston (assuming you don't crap the bed on the field in either scenario).   And I would that a last seconds home loss against a defending FCS Champion or runner up is better than getting blown out by a Nevada, New Mexico, or Wyoming team that finishes with 4 wins or less.  

So, are you OK with NT joining a conference with East Carolina and South Florida and Temple?   I can't name anyone noteworthy from them either.   We are moving away from HAVING to play SFA and Sam Houston.   Think BIGGER PICTURE than just Texas schools.

[Coffee and TV]

16 hours ago, aztecskin said:

in 1974, sure. In 2026, nah. 

 

I don't mind the occasional Wyoming. I mean its beautiful country. Plan a trip out there, see all the rich people with ranches, and sit in the crisp open air and then come home to Texas. I don't see the problem whatsoever. 

Just an FYI, the rich people live in the other corner of the state part-time and have little connection with the state or the university itself. 

[Green Otaku]

1 hour ago, Mike Jackson said:

You just can't logically make the case that going on the road to 27k stadium in Reno, Nevada is really better than a home game against SFA or Sam Houston (assuming you don't crap the bed on the field in either scenario).   

Yes it is better to play the MWC schools than FCS, and the vast majority of this thread agrees. 

[Mike Jackson]

34 minutes ago, NT80 said:

So, are you OK with NT joining a conference with East Carolina and South Florida and Temple?   I can't name anyone noteworthy from them either.   We are moving away from HAVING to play SFA and Sam Houston.   Think BIGGER PICTURE than just Texas schools.

If you looked at the list instead of just making this about conference affiliation you would have notice all those teams you just mentioned are in the list of top 84 brands.  😆  And USF and Temple are definitely not isolated geographically.   And USF is huge and has been highly ranked a couple of seasons in the recent past.  Temple is a historical elite basketball program and had back to back 10 win seasons under Matt Rhule 2016.  Considering joining a conference is a much bigger decision with far more factors to consider than a couple of games.  I am thinking about the bigger picture ELIMINATING schools that are net zero nationally.  The 3 you mentioned are better brands than those isolated MWC teams that I am not interested in.  That lack of interest is logically justified.  So it a coin flip to me if we are talking one game a year versus an old Southland rival in Apogee or a weak geographically isolated brand in the MWC.  There are a lot of MAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt teams that would be a meh for me scheduling also.   It isn't just about the MWC.   I judge each school on individual merit not just "hey it great they are FBS".   I don't think anyone would be shocked that within 5-10 years programs like Nevada and Utah State drop down to FCS.  And the only reason I don't in UNLV with their in state rival is their location in a popular city, Las Vegas.  Location mean a lot when it comes to value of the program and perception of it.   Hell if you keep everything the same with SMU but he campus is South Grand Praire instead of downtown Dallas they are Dallas Baptist, we are talking about 20 miles.  And I wouldn't be campaigning for us to play a good DBU FCS program if they had one. 

[greenminer]

If you believe Laramie, Wyoming is too close to the West Coast, i've got some ocean front property in El Paso, TX you can buy.

[NT80]

1 hour ago, Mike Jackson said:

If you looked at the list instead of just making this about conference affiliation you would have notice all those teams you just mentioned are in the list of top 84 brands.  😆  And USF and Temple are definitely not isolated geographically.   And USF is huge and has been highly ranked a couple of seasons in the recent past.  Temple is a historical elite basketball program and had back to back 10 win seasons under Matt Rhule 2016.  Considering joining a conference is a much bigger decision with far more factors to consider than a couple of games.  I am thinking about the bigger picture ELIMINATING schools that are net zero nationally.  The 3 you mentioned are better brands than those isolated MWC teams that I am not interested in.  That lack of interest is logically justified.  So it a coin flip to me if we are talking one game a year versus an old Southland rival in Apogee or a weak geographically isolated brand in the MWC.  There are a lot of MAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt teams that would be a meh for me scheduling also.   It isn't just about the MWC.   I judge each school on individual merit not just "hey it great they are FBS".   I don't think anyone would be shocked that within 5-10 years programs like Nevada and Utah State drop down to FCS.  And the only reason I don't in UNLV with their in state rival is their location in a popular city, Las Vegas.  Location mean a lot when it comes to value of the program and perception of it.   Hell if you keep everything the same with SMU but he campus is South Grand Praire instead of downtown Dallas they are Dallas Baptist, we are talking about 20 miles.  And I wouldn't be campaigning for us to play a good DBU FCS program if they had one. 

So, it sounds like you're more concerned about geography and isolation than the program there, correct?    

You realize Tuscaloosa, Alabama has less than 100K people and is in the sticks of Alabama, but they play pretty good football.

Starkville, MS Population: 24,657 (2021)

Oxford, MS Population: 26,430 (2021)

Clemson, SC Population: 17,986 (2021)

 

 

[Mike Jackson]

14 minutes ago, Green Otaku said:

Yes it is better to play the MWC schools than FCS, and the vast majority of this thread agrees. 

So far you have one like on this post.  Also it is about all of FCS versus all of MWC.  It is about road game vs home, the location of that road game and interest a FEW FCS teams might bring for students and local alumni.  The fans who care enough to be on this board is a select minority anyway.  For casual followers of college football and the Mean Green, winning the game is most important thing to advance the program forward.  It is great to get Wyoming or any MWC team to come to Denton.  But like the original poster mentioned, I would much rather a 2 for 1 contract with the Mean Green getting 2 at home.  

[El Paso Eagle]

1 minute ago, Mike Jackson said:

 It is great to get Wyoming or any MWC team to come to Denton.  But like the original poster mentioned, I would much rather a 2 for 1 contract with the Mean Green getting 2 at home.  

Name one G5 team you would be OK with us giving them the two games with? Need to use the philosophy Charlotte and a couple of other G5's used. They know P5's recruit heavily in their area so they've leveraged that to get home games against P5 schools.

[Mike Jackson]

31 minutes ago, NT80 said:

So, it sounds like you're more concerned about geography and isolation than the program there, correct?    

You realize Tuscaloosa, Alabama has less than 100K people and is in the sticks of Alabama, but they play pretty good football.

Starkville, MS Population: 24,657 (2021)

Oxford, MS Population: 26,430 (2021)

Clemson, SC Population: 17,986 (2021)

 

 

🙄 nope not at all.  And the fact that you are comparing SEC schools and Clemson which would be a desired addition to the SEC to MWC programs that win nothing, don't' produce NFL players, and have horrible viewership numbers is laughable.   When was the last time Nevada was ranked?    Hell when was the last time Wyoming or Nevada won 10 games in a season?  You can't be a weak brand, mediocre recently in football AND isolated and me or anyone else not from those rural states get exited to watch us play them. (Wyoming, Nevada, or Utah State).    When I say "anyone else" that is an exaggeration but the point is the number that would be excited is few. 

Edited March 17, 2023 by Mike Jackson

[Mike Jackson]

11 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

Name one G5 team you would be OK with us giving them the two games with? Need to use the philosophy Charlotte and a couple of other G5's used. They know P5's recruit heavily in their area so they've leveraged that to get home games against P5 schools.

With the promotions of Cincinnati, and Houston there aren't many.   And OK means toleratable if I were in a decision making roll and better options weren't immediately available from a financial/program marketability standpoint. Army, Navy, Air Force, and San Diego State.  I would add Hawaii* especially if the provision of adding an additional game to your regular season schedule rule in still in tact.  Otherwise the addition would be strictly a personal preference for a vacation in the fall with a built in excuse. 

[DeepGreen]

Good grief.  This thread has gotten out of hand.

[Green Otaku]

1 hour ago, Mike Jackson said:

So far you have one like on this post.  Also it is about all of FCS versus all of MWC.  It is about road game vs home, the location of that road game and interest a FEW FCS teams might bring for students and local alumni.  The fans who care enough to be on this board is a select minority anyway.  For casual followers of college football and the Mean Green, winning the game is most important thing to advance the program forward.  It is great to get Wyoming or any MWC team to come to Denton.  But like the original poster mentioned, I would much rather a 2 for 1 contract with the Mean Green getting 2 at home.  

How are likes on a post any type of determining factor? You're reasoning is mind boggling. 

There are 0 FCS schools that would get the interest of the fanbase. We have played them regularly and they don't draw well. How did beating Texas Southern last year help us in any way? Any home and home with an FBS team is better than a 2-1 with any FCS. 

[Mike Jackson]

On 3/17/2023 at 3:24 PM, Green Otaku said:

Any home and home with an FBS team is better than a 2-1 with any FCS. 

 Now who doesn’t follow College Football again?  FCS teams don’t host FBS teams.  (I think there is/was a rule against that but I maybe mistaken*).  Furthermore even if they could in 99% of matchups the FBS hosting the FCS team is financially more beneficial for both teams.  And in this discussion I never suggested a 2-1 with a FCS team.  So you put out fake scenario that no one who follows college football would assume I was suggesting in this discussion.  The simple comparison.   
 

Assuming we play well and win in either scenario. 
 

Rural away FBS game against a weak brand having an average season (or the season prior) 🟰 A home game against an FCS we local fans are familiar with and have a winning reputation.   And financially probably more beneficial.   The thread is about Wyoming and similar schools for non-conference scheduling nothing else.  Never suggested doubling up on FCS games every year (you can count only one victory over FCS🤦🏽‍♂️ toward bowl eligible anyway) year either.
 

*FCS teams in the process of transitioning to FBS can host FBS teams but their transition status makes them ineligible for FCS post season.

Edited March 19, 2023 by Mike Jackson

[Green Otaku]

53 minutes ago, Mike Jackson said:

 Now who doesn’t follow College Football again?  FCS teams don’t host FBS teams.  (I think there is/was a rule against that but I maybe mistaken*).  Furthermore even if they could in 99% of matchups the FBS hosting the FCS team is financially more beneficial for both teams.  And in this discussion I never suggested a 2-1 with a FCS team.  So you put out fake scenario that no one who follows college football would assume I was suggesting in this discussion.  The simple comparison.   
 

Assuming we play well and win in either scenario. 
 

Rural away FBS game against a weak brand having an average season (or the season prior) 🟰 A home game against an FCS we local fans are familiar with and have a winning reputation.   And financially probably more beneficial.   The thread is about Wyoming and similar schools for non-conference scheduling nothing else.  Never suggested doubling up on FCS games every (you can count only one victory over FCS🤦🏽‍♂️ toward bowl eligible anyway) year either.
 

*FCS teams in the process of transitioning to FBS can host FBS teams but their transition status makes them ineligible for FCS post season.

My mistake on the 2-1. Also I didn't ask if you watch college football, @El Paso Eagle did.

No those two aren't equal. Playing an FCS at home does nothing for us, no one knows those teams or their reputation.  Wyoming isn't a marquee team that everyone will know, but it's better than TSU or ACU any year. 

This is pretty simple to solve, make a thread with a poll to see who prefers an FCS at home vs a 1-1 with an FBS team and you'll see how alone you are in your thinking. 

Edited March 17, 2023 by Green Otaku

[Side.Show.Joe]

I have no problem with scheduling Wyoming. Baker had a fairly simple scheduling formula for OOC games....

 

P5 home/away game (P5's that would agree to home & home series)

G5 opposite location to out P5 location (mostly AAC & MWC)

G5 away game (preferably Texas teams)

FCS home game (Texas FCS team)

 

The preference for AAC programs will have to adjust. It will be interesting to see which conference Mosley tries to schedule those games with.

 

[Eagleisland]

The elevation of Laramie is 7,165" (almost 2,000 feet above Denver). Playing at that altitude without sufficient time to acclimatize is like playing with one hand tied behind our backs. Terrible game to schedule in my opinion, given many other options. 

 

[El Paso Eagle]

1 hour ago, Eagleisland said:

The elevation of Laramie is 7,165" (almost 2,000 feet above Denver). Playing at that altitude without sufficient time to acclimatize is like playing with one hand tied behind our backs. Terrible game to schedule in my opinion, given many other options. 

 

I guess you feel Cal made a mistake agreeing to come to Denton and play us at the beginning of the year when it will be hot here compared to their weather.

[Side.Show.Joe]

11 hours ago, Eagleisland said:

The elevation of Laramie is 7,165" (almost 2,000 feet above Denver). Playing at that altitude without sufficient time to acclimatize is like playing with one hand tied behind our backs. Terrible game to schedule in my opinion, given many other options. 

 

We have a strength and conditioning coach. The elevation difference shouldn't be an issue in my opinion. If it is an issue, then our problems are bigger than competing against the likes of Wyoming. 

[Side.Show.Joe]

On 3/17/2023 at 9:48 AM, NT93 said:

On a national level more people would question why Wyoming is playing North Texas.

Not anymore.