Thanks, it’s been fun

[untphd]

29 minutes ago, emmitt01 said:

Here’s the best part.  
 

Now there’s a poster over on punyfans who thinks they could still get to the ACC because…wait for it….NOTRE DAME MIGHT THREATEN TO PULL OUT OF THE ACC IF THEY DON’T INCLUDE THEM 

Thanks, that is the funniest thing I have heard all summer.

[TheColonyEagle]

28 minutes ago, emmitt01 said:

Here’s the best part.  
 

Now there’s a poster over on punyfans who thinks they could still get to the ACC because…wait for it….NOTRE DAME MIGHT THREATEN TO PULL OUT OF THE ACC IF THEY DON’T INCLUDE THEM 

Poor SMU in the AAC

[outoftown]

10 hours ago, NM Green said:

They are about to face the reality that UNT UTSA FAU UAB and Rice are about to start beating them in the major sports 🏈 🏀. Tulane already does, ECU probably will, it’s a sobering internal struggle. Yet they lash out at the conference quality. It’s one of the wildest cases of wtf I’ve ever seen. 

They should go Indy to save the embarrassment to come. They can create their own schedule and whine to the clouds. 

GMG

I think they actually will go indie if they can't get into the ACC. I think they want out THAT bad. It would not be smart, because it would reduce their access to the playoffs (for 25 and 26 at least), but they might do it anyway. Reflective thought does not seem to be driving this discussion on their side. The only reason they didn't go beserk against UNT coming in at the time is that they couldn't imagine being stuck in the AAC long term.

As will Stanford in my opinion. The whole ACC thing doesn't really make financial (or otherwise) sense for Stanford anyway. If they have to come in at 70% or so, that means they'll get like a little over 20 million. If they are an independent I have a hard time imagining they can't find at least 10-15 million in tv rights. The fact that it is only one school will reduce the risk and size of the networks necessary (i.e. this truly IS something CW or similar could stem). The difference in money will be almost nothing if you deduct the cost of travel. Cal is a different story, as worth less if they sell their rights by themselves.

Edited August 10, 2023 by outoftown

[Texas Stranger]

10 hours ago, Dpony14 said:

That picture is from the covid year, hence the squares on the grass. At least be smart enough to use a picture from when the stadium wasn’t at reduced capacity. Is that too much to ask?

Be careful what you ask for...

[UNTFan23]

10 hours ago, NT93 said:

is this one better?

No, not really. It might even be worse.

[UNTLifer]

11 hours ago, Dpony14 said:

That picture is from the covid year, hence the squares on the grass. At least be smart enough to use a picture from when the stadium wasn’t at reduced capacity. Is that too much to ask?

SMU is the only school that begged people to come out to games and still couldn't meet their reduced capacity.  You all should switch stadiums with Highland Park HS.

[Rudy]

$mu:  "We'll pay for the date, the drinks, the limo ride, your dress, your makeup, your heels, your underwear, your jewelry, the cell phone to call your friends to come get you, the car your friends use to come pick you up, and we'll subscribe to your only fans, if you just go in a date with us.". 

 

"No, ok, we will still pay you money on top of that to go on a date with us."

 

"Still no?  Ok, we'll pay your friends too, if you just please go on a date with us."

[emmitt01]

36 minutes ago, Rudy said:

$mu:  "We'll pay for the date, the drinks, the limo ride, your dress, your makeup, your heels, your underwear, your jewelry, the cell phone to call your friends to come get you, the car your friends use to come pick you up, and we'll subscribe to your only fans, if you just go in a date with us.". 

 

"No, ok, we will still pay you money on top of that to go on a date with us."

 

"Still no?  Ok, we'll pay your friends too, if you just please go on a date with us."

“Still no?  Bring a guy you’re actually attracted to, and we’ll pay to watch the date from a distance”

[UNTLifer]

2 minutes ago, emmitt01 said:

“Still no?  Bring a guy you’re actually attracted to, and we’ll pay to watch the date from a distance”

[untcampbell]

Moving in Stereo.

 

GMG

[Cr1028]

With all due disrespect to SMU, we aren’t really in a place to talk about other folks attendance.

[ColoradoEagle]

1 minute ago, Cr1028 said:

With all due disrespect to SMU, we aren’t really in a place to talk about other folks attendance.

Well, the difference is one of us thinks they're ACC material and the other doesn't.

[greenminer]

37 minutes ago, Cr1028 said:

With all due disrespect to SMU, we aren’t really in a place to talk about other folks attendance.

Niether are they, but the3y keep coming here and (successfully) trolling our board.

[Cr1028]

1 hour ago, ColoradoEagle said:

Well, the difference is one of us thinks they're ACC material and the other doesn't.

That’s a fair point.

[trud1966]

Bye, Cya...I'll help carry your sh*t to your car...

[GMG_Dallas]

I'm curious about the whole "SMU playing for free deal." If I'm a network who knows SMU will play in a P5 (P4?) for free because they want in so badly and they do in fact join one of those conferences, say the ACC, why would I ever pay any money to that conference for SMU? Do they have value due to being in Dallas? Sure, maybe? But they just played 5 years for free because we didn't want to pay them the ACC rate but they still wanted in, why should I pay them the ACC rate in a new contract?

If Costco started charging for the samples that are currently free, would you take them? I wouldn't. I don't necessarily *want* them. I'll try them if it's free but I don't want them that bad that I'd pay. They're somewhat worthless to the consumer. SMU should reconsider this and what it does to their perceived value very carefully. I understanding taking less to get in but you can't cheapen your value down to $0

[Mike Jackson]

On 8/9/2023 at 6:25 AM, dodgefan said:

The question our fans should be asking, what are the powers that be at UNT, doing to better our position? Memphis, Tulane, SMU and UTSA are being aggressive, but we spend our time, trying to belittle anyone, that is trying to improve themselves. SOS

Unfortunately the do have deep pocket and delusional donors like SMU does.  The time to get some of those donors was when it was made clear to everyone that Deion Sanders was available.  I know a lot of people on this board don't like Sanders.  But us not even attempting to get him speaks volumes about our program.  The leaders overpays for +2 games over mediocrity.  Maybe that is changing.  But they missed the chance to make the biggest splash possible by hiring Sanders.  I don't think it is beyond the realm of possibility the Pac 10 left behind takes notice of a REGIONAL DFW Public University with R1 research designation, NIT Basketball Title, and serious enough about football to overpay Sanders and his staff.   He would have brought several nationally rated recruits his first 2 years.  And just based on hype and curiousity DATCU* is packed. 

Aimming for P5 is taking a big swing.  And I don't think the UNT community is ready for that unfortunately.   That is the reputation of this program nation wide I believe.  (It is DEFINITELY that way for most fans and media who don't closely follow G5 level football).   Yes SMU clearly bought this "story" because it has everybit of "journalistic" merit as my dreams of UNT joining the Pac 12.  That isn't anything to aspire to.  I don't believe we have stupid donors.  They seem to be reluctant and obtuse with their desires and it's like they don't realize there are trade off for everything. 

 

*With the buzz around Sanders, and a pending PAC 12 invite,  maybe we get interest from Peterbuilt (Paccor) for the naming rights.  DATCU is nice but having an international company worth over 40 billion is better.  

[Dpony14]

55 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

I'm curious about the whole "SMU playing for free deal." If I'm a network who knows SMU will play in a P5 (P4?) for free because they want in so badly and they do in fact join one of those conferences, say the ACC, why would I ever pay any money to that conference for SMU? Do they have value due to being in Dallas? Sure, maybe? But they just played 5 years for free because we didn't want to pay them the ACC rate but they still wanted in, why should I pay them the ACC rate in a new contract?

If Costco started charging for the samples that are currently free, would you take them? I wouldn't. I don't necessarily *want* them. I'll try them if it's free but I don't want them that bad that I'd pay. They're somewhat worthless to the consumer. SMU should reconsider this and what it does to their perceived value very carefully. I understanding taking less to get in but you can't cheapen your value down to $0

ESPN gets to go from charging out of network carriage fees ($.10 per pay TV) to in-network carriage fees ($.80 per pay TV) in the state of Texas. I.e, ESPN can charge cable companies more for ACCN. And before you say SMU doesn’t bring Dallas/Texas, it’s based on whether or not the conference has a school in that state. 

[UNTLifer]

1 hour ago, Dpony14 said:

ESPN gets to go from charging out of network carriage fees ($.10 per pay TV) to in-network carriage fees ($.80 per pay TV) in the state of Texas. I.e, ESPN can charge cable companies more for ACCN. And before you say SMU doesn’t bring Dallas/Texas, it’s based on whether or not the conference has a school in that state. 

Really, nobody cares about smu. 

[UNTLifer]

1 hour ago, Mike Jackson said:

  I know a lot of people on this board don't like Sanders.  But us not even attempting to get him speaks volumes about our program. 

 

*With the buzz around Sanders, and a pending PAC 12 invite,  maybe we get interest from Peterbuilt (Paccor) for the naming rights.  DATCU is nice but having an international company worth over 40 billion is better.  

I like what it says about our university that we didn’t go after Sanders. That pending PAC12 invite went poof. All we would need is a sponsor that expected the PAC12, got nothing and then was pissed and not engaged. 

[GMG_Dallas]

10 hours ago, Dpony14 said:

ESPN gets to go from charging out of network carriage fees ($.10 per pay TV) to in-network carriage fees ($.80 per pay TV) in the state of Texas. I.e, ESPN can charge cable companies more for ACCN. And before you say SMU doesn’t bring Dallas/Texas, it’s based on whether or not the conference has a school in that state. 

That doesn't explain why ESPN would pay SMU the ACC rate after those free 5 years. If ESPN really wants a Texas school in the ACC, there are plenty of options.

[greenminer]

Pro tip, for anyone that wants the trolls to disappear: stop replying to them.

[Mike Jackson]

13 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

I like what it says about our university that we didn’t go after Sanders. That pending PAC12 invite went poof. All we would need is a sponsor that expected the PAC12, got nothing and then was pissed and not engaged. 

That wouldn't be the end of our program.  And the positive impact of actually looking like we are aimming above G5 would be substantial.  To unengaged alumni who actually watch college football and don't really follow college football business (not the typical GMG member) their perception is that we don't really try.   And showing them improved facilities when they have no clue as to how they compare with our peers and programs we are chasing, has no impact on that perception.  Believe me I have tried in vain hundreds of times.   We need those alumni to buy in and be convinced that we are trying.  

If we aren't playing a P5 opponent or G5 school in OK, LA, TX, or AR they don't care.  In reality by now with wise investments, accountability and high standards, SMU would probably be looking to work with us a valuable rival than leaving us behind.  And since I have first guessed these conservative moves that blew up in our faces, when/if we get completely disconnected to the highest level of football it will be an especially bitter pill to swallow.  Do you want to be in a lifeboat with 50% shot of sinking or a fancy comfortable but leaking yacht  with only a 20% chance of reaching it's destination without sinking?  

[UNTX]

[rojomojo]

The only thing SMU does that could be deemed attractive is that it's in a perfect location for media revenue. Other than that, there really isn't that much of a divide between UNT and SMU. Sure the student body at SMU is vastly more wealthy and definitely more suitable for appealing towards college athletics, but as seen through attendance, that factor has failed to benefit SMU. 

The campus may be much more beautiful and prestigious than UNT, however I wouldn't consider UNT an "ugly" campus, so the benefits are very limited to this regard. 

Lastly, while SMU definitely has an edge in recruiting, it's not the massive separation between UNT that you'd imagine they'd have at first glance. If this trend continues through the 20's and 30's, I have no doubt that UNT will surpass SMU in athletic and overall appeal on a national level.

 

Sure, UNT will likely never be able to rival SMU in regards to financial aspects, but at the end of the day, who gives a sh%t? UNT's diversity and appeal towards "the university for all" kinda goes against SMU's aspect and I think great things are ahead for UNT.