Which would we rather have?

[Stan R]

Maybe it is chicken/egg but if not and we could have our wishes - I'd go for CUSA in a second first... Curious what everyone else thinks...

[KingDL1]

No contest CUSA.

I can live with Fouts if we are heading in the right direction and CUSA would be the right step.

CUSA would give us more DFW public notice, more sponsors, more donors, and should give us better recruiting.

Fout's Field is not keeping us out of CUSA.

Edited December 2, 2005 by KingDL1

[untgirl04]

I think a CUSA membership would lead shortly to a new stadium. With added local publicity and a better share of the national TV market, we would have an easier time finding that "big time" donor or corporate sponsor.

With the recent upgrades to Fouts (scoreboard - yay! no more angry parrot eagle! - new turf, upgrade to the Ben E. Keith deck) I think Fouts is tolerable for a a few more years. No, it's not the most fan-friendly environment, but it's definitely better than it was.

And if it's filled, the atmosphere is great - even if you are 3 miles from the field.

[Eagle1855]

Personally I chose a stadium.

Conference USA isnt the promised land. It would be nice to be in it, but nothing guarantees that league will even look the same as it does now in 3-5 years.

Building a stadium allows us to always have all the pieces to play, recruit, etc with anyone. And I dont buy the "why build a stadium when you cant fill the one you have" train of thought. If you build it, they will come. Out of the cornfields and all. they will come.

Edited December 2, 2005 by Eagle1855

[medpilot21]

C-USA...no question. The stadium would be nice, but better to be in a more prominant conference. (would be nice to have a new Offensive Coodinator too, but the dreaming has to stop somewhere, right?)

GMG!!!

[Stan R]

Personally I chose a stadium.

Conference USA isnt the promised land. It would be nice to be in it, but nothing guarantees that league will even look the same now in 3-5 years.

Building a stadium allows us to always have all the pieces to play, recruit, etc with anyone. And I dont buy the "why build a stadium when you cant fill the one you have" train of thought. If you build it, they will come. Out of the cornfields and everything

←

No offense but are you off your rocker? CUSA isn't the promised land??? So.. you would rather be stuck playing against ASU in front of 7,000 fans? You're guaranteed to play Houston, SMU, Tulsa, each of which would bring an average of around 25K fans, I'd say probably regardless of record.

Not to mention you'd finally be able to tell the average joe fan who we are playing and not have them say UL who or FIU???

Edited December 2, 2005 by Stan R

[UNTLifer]

And I dont buy the "why build a stadium when you cant fill the one you have" train of thought. If you build it, they will come. Out of the cornfields and all. they will come.

←

I agree. Just look at the Texas Rangers and their replacing old Arlington Stadium with The BallPark. They could rarely fill that old frying pan on I30, but now their crowds are much better.

[Stan R]

Wow this is closer than I thought it would be. I thought it would be for CUSA in a landslide. I guess I can see both sides of the argument but CUSA is in my opinion the FAR better option. Here's my point. So say we get the new stadium. WE'RE STILL PLAYING FREAKING FAU AND ULM!

[Coffee and TV]

CUSA no contest. Many of you haven't figured out that the product you put on the field is what matters, not the playground they play in. Although its apples and oranges, the Pittsburgh Pirates, Detroit Tigers, and our men's basketball team have all proven that.

[untgirl04]

I agree.  Just look at the Texas Rangers and their replacing old Arlington Stadium with The BallPark.  They could rarely fill that old frying pan on I30, but now their crowds are much better.

←

That also coincided with the Rangers winning two consecutive Division championships. (Although they still couldn't make it past New York - stupid Juan *chokes in big games* Gonzalez). Anyway, post season appearances, as well as a new owner who had big bucks to spend on marquee players contributed just as much to the sudden increase in attendance. Also, hosting the All-Star Game at the Ballpark adds tons of national exposure. At the time, that stadium was one of the most state-of-the-art facilities in MLB.

However, your comparison is not completely off. Our post-season appearances (also losses except for Cincy) have contributed to an increase in our fan base as well. However, we haven't been able to bring in those marquee players to bring excitement to the games. JMo and PC are good starts, but we need more marquee or at least exciting players to bring in more average fans.

[Eagle1855]

CUSA no contest. Many of you haven't figured out that the product you put on the field is what matters, not the playground they play in. Although its apples and oranges, the Pittsburgh Pirates, Detroit Tigers, and our men's basketball team have all proven that.

←

Dont forget the TEXANS!

But that argument could be made the other way as well. Who's to say averageing 30k+ fans a game in a new stadium with outstanding facilities wouldnt make us attractive to other conferences?

I think they both need to happen and CUSA is a good place to go. But we were given the choice between one or the other. So I chose the stadium.

I figure its easier to switch conferences than it is to build a multi million $ stadium. For example, we have been in 1 stadium for how long, and how many conferences in that time period?

[meangreendork]

Not that this would happen, but I go for the CUSA membership provided that the team would be competitive enough for CUSA. In other words, a team that would post a .5+ percentage during the season.

[Coffee and TV]

For example, we have been in 1 stadium for how long, and how many conferences in that time period?

←

Yes but I don't believe we've had the opportunity to be in a conference as respectable & with as many regional opponents as C-USA, not to mention they have a pretty good TV deal now. We had the chance for this with SWC back in the 70's but it didn't work and we wound up back in I-AA.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

Ill take Conf USA anyday before a new stadium.

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

I think that it'd be easier to get the new stadium w/CUSA membership than to get in CUSA with a new stadium. My goal would be to be a member of CUSA (unless, of course, the Big XII comes calling) so I'll take the bird-in-the-hand.

[NT91]

C-USA!!!!!!!!

[PlummMeanGreen]

I just want our football progarm to be a Top 25 program whether that be as a SBC school or in the WAT conference. The "WAT Conference? You know, the "We're Almost There" conference.

Whatever conference, though, we still don't need to be satisfied or content with Fouts Field as our home, folks, because I think it has been that very Fouts Field that has kept us out of a couple of conferences in the past.

Fouts Field still needs an implosion ceremony that I think would be well attended. Yes, I know, we still need the Big Donor(s) but all that will come in due time.

GBT!

Edited December 3, 2005 by PlummMeanGreen