Should our AD & President make a statement?

El Paso Eagle · September 30

The athletic director from Tulane has now came out and confirmed that Tulane, Memphis, South Florida, and UTSA did have conversations amongst themselves about the potential to move to the PAC. Outside of the "we're all committed to the AAC" it is clear now that, as we always hate to hear, we have been left behind and are not considered in the upper tier of desirable schools in the conference despite supposedly representing the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex market. Should the powers that be publicly addressed this issue to the supporters of North Texas Athletics?

DeepGreen · September 30

Yes!

RBP79 · September 30

Just win....

If that was true the PAC has no "Business Sense" for success.

MDH · September 30

There’s little to no upside from doing this. Sometimes better to be Switzerland.

Mean Green 93-98 · September 30

Just curious, what kind of statement are you looking for? Any kind of statement I can think of under the circumstances other than "we're all committed to the AAC" sounds to me like a desperate cry for attention.

NT93 · September 30

I don’t know what statement to make. “Tulane, Memphis, UTSA, and South Florida discussed the feasibility of a move to the PAC. We were not asked to be involved in any of those conversations. We remain committed to the AAC.”

C Rod · September 30

I'd much rather our play on the field do the talking. We have the opportunity to beat Memphis, Tulane, and UTSA this season. Let's seize the moment and the national pundits will do the talking. GMG.

TripleGrad · September 30

I'm with NT93. What can they say that helps elevate the school?

"We weren't asked to join the PAC, but if they did ask we totally would have said 'NO! Keep your 100-year history and name recognition far from us!'"

jtm0097 · September 30

"Hi, we can barely afford to pay our bills. We can't afford to go to the Pac 12 or MWC, therefore here's our statement."

"We're not leaving" Oh Yeah Yes GIF by Jordan Belfort

emmitt01 · September 30

1 hour ago, NT93 said:

I don’t know what statement to make. “Tulane, Memphis and South Florida had legitimate offers from the PAC…and UTSA’s name got thrown around with them. We were not asked to be involved in any of those conversations. We remain committed to the AAC.”

FIFY

NM Green · September 30

How about good old fashioned bulletin board material. And when we start beating them and the game is in hand start chanting AAC. They can thank us later for keeping them from making a brutal mistake.

Now I would be on the horn with San Antonio. Schedule a margarita zoom or invite their AD to La Gloria in the Pearl District for a little catch-up. Jared should look their AD in the eye and say, you know we play better together. Force the North Texas South Texas angle in the future. An athletic handshake if you will. If San Antonio doesn’t agree, stop at a bbq joint in San Marcos. You know the drill.

Those 4 could have looked at this at a more macro level to power a strong deal. But that would be too much bipartisanship in this day and age. Plus maybe they just didn’t want to be like the PAC and attempt to destroy a conference on the way out. Or they realized it was ultimately fools gold out there.

Just beat them this year and make the others realize there is hot potential in North Texas.

GMG

97and03 · September 30

Those four stayed because the PaC didn’t pay the conference buyouts. That’s it.

UNTLifer · September 30

Just do to them what UNLV did to Fresno St. this past weekend after UNLV was left in the MWC.

GreenN'walinsVet · September 30

For what’s its worth I was told that we were one of if not THE first contact by the PAC due to our eastern most location. We told them thanks, but no thanks, and they moved west.

keith · September 30

33 minutes ago, GreenN'walinsVet said:

For what’s its worth I was told that we were one of if not THE first contact by the PAC due to our eastern most location. We told them thanks, but no thanks, and they moved west.

If true and that's as much thought that went into it, then whoever said that on behalf of the university should be fired. You should always at least listen to the offer.

Jonnyeagle · September 30

Jerrod told us at the tailgate last weekend that we told the conference up front that we had no interest in it. Jerrod said he had queries dozens of AD's across the country and they all said it would be a terrible deal both financially and for the student athletes. UTSA is so god damned horny for $$ that they raised their skirt up high when the Pac 12 came calling. They never received an invite only moderate interest which they reciprocated AGAINST the wishes of Pernetti by the way.

Now you could make the argument that we should have been more open to what they had to offer but it was a business decision to be loyal to the conference and the new commissioner at this time.

GMG_Dallas · September 30

26 minutes ago, Jonnyeagle said:

Jerrod told us at the tailgate last weekend that we told the conference up front that we had no interest in it. Jerrod said he had queries dozens of AD's across the country and they all said it would be a terrible deal both financially and for the student athletes.

If true, I feel better about the direction of our program and our leadership. I still think you should always listen to an offer before saying no but I can respect this position.

keith · September 30

42 minutes ago, Jonnyeagle said:

Jerrod told us at the tailgate last weekend that we told the conference up front that we had no interest in it. Jerrod said he had queries dozens of AD's across the country and they all said it would be a terrible deal both financially and for the student athletes. UTSA is so god damned horny for $$ that they raised their skirt up high when the Pac 12 came calling. They never received an invite only moderate interest which they reciprocated AGAINST the wishes of Pernetti by the way.

Now you could make the argument that we should have been more open to what they had to offer but it was a business decision to be loyal to the conference and the new commissioner at this time.

It's nice to know AD's of other schools are making decisions for our future without some due diligence on our own. How do they know what's in our best interests? You never know who you may need to call on for a favor or how things are going to shake out in the future. Why reject it out of hand when you can politely listen to what they have to say and then let them know it's not a good fit for us if it turns out that way.

New2Green · September 30

A big statement is drawing more than 18k attendance for a 3-1 team.

wardly · September 30

28 minutes ago, New2Green said:

A big statement is drawing more than 18k attendance for a 3-1 team.

plus 1

rcade · October 1

15 hours ago, keith said:

It's nice to know AD's of other schools are making decisions for our future without some due diligence on our own.

I don't see a problem with our AD reaching out to the good ol' boy network of other ADs as everybody grapples with constant realignment chaos.

Dannymacfan · October 1

Call me paranoid, but I sense SMU's greasy fingers on this. They know the ACC is about to implode with Clemson and FSU leave (maybe even Miami now they have blown up). They have always been fast friends with Tulane and Memphis from back in the original C-USA and then AAC. So I think they are advising them to hang tight as the rewards for their patience will far outweight the sugar high from moving to the POS 2!

MeanGreen22 · October 1

16 hours ago, Jonnyeagle said:

It was a business decision to be loyal to the conference and the new commissioner at this time.

Stuff like this matters. Unless you have a clear upgrade out there, don't waste your time and others. Pernetti will remember this when it comes time to negotiate new media splits if/when Tulane/Memphis moves on.

97and03 · October 1

Again, the pAc was not offering AAC schools to pay their full buyout like they did the MWC schools. Why take that deal? So if we knew that was the case then glad we didn’t drag it out. It would have been a no-brainer to pass.

GrandGreen · October 1

On 9/30/2024 at 12:49 PM, NT93 said:

I don’t know what statement to make. “Tulane, Memphis, UTSA, and South Florida discussed the feasibility of a move to the PAC. We were not asked to be involved in any of those conversations. We remain committed to the AAC.”

I like how so many assume that NT was not asked to consider PAC membership. Being asked and turning it down is not the same as not being asked.

As far as the mentioned schools having discussions about their future, they are like it or not; the highest profile teams in the AAC. I am not sure how you know NT was not part of this group, all I can guess it is an assumption. The PAC makes little sense for any of these teams. Does USF really want to travel across country for volleyball and swimming?

This only makes sense if the new PAC can retain it's designation as a P5 conference. How do they do that by replacing their best teams with g5's?