TEXAS BOWL SNUB

[FirefightnRick]

Let me get something straight. We can only use the "original article" as a source for information when discussing this topic? Even though it is 4 days old and our own athletic director says otherwise when concerning how TCU can be considered for the bowl? The article gives absolutely no specifics, just a very general statement on which conferences are affiliated with the bowl.

Another thing, you say the article "hints" at exceptions. I thought you were a staunch supporter of people having to say exactly what they mean and no other interpretation can come of it. Or is that only when you are criticizing me?

I love it when people start going crazy about an issue that they don't even have adequate information to judge, and then chose to ignore new information because it hurts their argument and it isn't included in a DMN blurb that contains no specifics and was published last week.

←

As usual, that's not what I said but what your implying. I'm just going off on you like you went off on RCHorn. Your a prince at making assumptions on what people mean and taking every chance to criticize. Nothing more, nothing less.

I just love it when people love it.

Rick

Rick

Edited August 14, 2006 by FirefightnRick

[FirefightnRick]

I agree that no one likes a whiner but there is a vast difference to me from being discontented about a situation and whining.  If you let it pass without saying a word it usually means that you have no objection to the requirements.  If we were the ONLY Division 1A program in Texas that was excluded, for whatever reason, I would make my discontent known. 

←

I agree, and it wouldn't even have to show discontent but be an opportunity to show others that we are raising the bar at North Texas. I don't think anyone here condones "whining". But what would it hurt to let them know in the very least the "We are very interesting and would be excited for the opportunity to bring over 80 years of North Texas football tradition to the Texas Bowl". There's nothing negative with something along those lines.

And again, in respect of traveling fans, I say give North Texas a chance to attend a bowl game that is within 4 hours from the metroplex and that is played on a weekend night. The the very fact that we brought over 12,000 in attendance 4 straight years in a row to a bowl game that is 7 to 9 hours away...........on a week night speaks volumes about our potential to travel.

Interestingly, my inlaws attended the national championshiop game between Miami and Ohio State in '03 by way of representing Frito Lay because Tostitos sponsored the game. They were astonished at how few showed up in attendance for Miami. They said that among the sea of Red and Silver that the bowl officials in their suite estimated that Miami brought between 8 to 12,000 max.

Rick

Edited August 14, 2006 by FirefightnRick

[LongJim]

The the very fact that we brought over 12,000 in attendance 4 straight years in a row to a bowl game that is 7 to 9 hours away...........on a week night speaks volumes about our potential to travel. 

Good point.

They were astonished at how few showed up in attendance for Miami.  They said that among the sea of Red and Silver that the bowl officials in their suite estimated that Miami brought between 8 to 12,000 max.

←

Miami is notorious for (relatively) poor attendance.

[e-bone ver2.awesome]

As usual, that's not what I said but what your implying.  I'm just going off on you like you went off on RCHorn.  Your a prince at making assumptions on what people mean and taking every chance to criticize.  Nothing more, nothing less.

I just love it when people love it.

Rick

Rick

←

And it also does not mention having a contract with the MWC over four years as GreenEddieNT mentions.  I know RV backs this up in his post tonight, but it's not mentioned here in the above original article that was posted three days ago, which is the reason for this thread.

[FirefightnRick]

eBone

Read GreenEddieNT's posts again, assuming that you did in the first place.

Rick

Edited August 14, 2006 by FirefightnRick

[PlummMeanGreen]

If it's OK with you, GrayEagleOne, I'd like to expand on what you posted and (in general) the difference between whining and just being down-right disenchanted with different situations or scenarios in Mean Green Country:

I agree that no one likes a whiner but there is a vast difference to me from being discontented about a situation and whining.  If you let it pass without saying a word it usually means that you have no objection to the requirements.  If we were the ONLY Division 1A program in Texas that was excluded, for whatever reason, I would make my discontent known. 

Now, where we would ever qualify is another matter.  As I understand it, it would take a 7-4 record or better while finishing second in the SBC, no more than one qualifier from the Big XII, CUSA, or the Big East (all financial contributors), then we would be eligible for consideration.  Rarely is better than never.

←

Edited August 14, 2006 by PlummMeanGreen

[eulesseagle]

IMHO,

This is a moot point.

Even if UNT had an undefeated season we still go to the NOB!

Not unless there are additional bowl games added to post season play there will be practically NO chance that a second team from the SBC would be invited. In five years of the SBC UNT got permission from the NCAA to go to the first bowl with a losing record. A couple of years ago Troy, who came in second in the SBC, and had a winning record got invited to the Silicon Bowl (or some similar California Bowl) ONLY because two or three other teams turned it down.....got in by default.

Face it guys....the only way the SBC gets respect is to win OOC games. When you have just about the entire conference, at the end of the season, with par or sub par records what does that tell you about the strength of the conference???

Even if UNT came in #2 this year in the SBC we might, at best, have a 6-6 or a 5-7 record. We all know that.....who are we kidding??

For those of you who aspire to go the the Texas Bowl you have LOST sight of where you really want us to go.......the New Orleans Bowl......Let's get to the NOB a couple more times instead of aspiring to go to a bowl that, even if we came in #2 in the SBC, we may have a losing record.

Heck, the Texas Bowl would be a good bowl to go to if we were #2, #3 or #4 in CUSA.

If UNT can not get to the NOB then conferences will overlook us......and we will be stuck in a "transitional conference" .... one that is barely higher than D-1AA and not as high as a mid-major.

[FirefightnRick]

IMHO,

This is a moot point.

Even if UNT had an undefeated season we still go to the NOB!

Not unless there are additional bowl games added to post season play there will be practically NO chance that a second team from the SBC would be invited. 

←

Not true. We all have seen how the bowl invitations go. Many times it comes down to the wire with everyone trying to guess who is going where? We have seen at times such as in '04 where conferences cannot fill all of their slots such as was the case with the FW Bowl when Cincy and Marshall played. You just never know what is going to transpire and you certainly cannot simply say there is NO CHANCE.

Here is where we would have stacked up had the new Texas Bowl arrangement been in place, and North Texas finished second in conference but remained bowl eligible between '01 and '04.

2001

This first decent year for us is a stretch at best but please bare with me. NT finished 5-6 on the season. MTSU finished 8-3. Switch our loss with Troy for the win against MTSU, plus 3 more points against LaMo and we finish 6-5 and in second place and bowl eligible. MTSU goes to the N.O. Bowl

UofH 0-11

UTEP 2-9

SMU 4-7

Baylor 3-8

Rice 8-4 (no bowl invite?)

tU 11-2 Holliday Bowl

a&m 8-4 Houston Bowl

TCU 6-6 Houston Bowl

TCU played a&m in the Houston Bowl(Texas Bowl). NT would have finished 4th available behind them and Rice. Throw in the current FW Bowl and we move up to 3rd possibly? Like I said, a bit of a stretch but crazier things have happened.

2002

In '02 NT finished 8-5 and went to the N.O. Bowl. NMSU finished 7-5 and in second place with no bowl game. Switch our win over them with a loss and they go to N.O. and we finish second at 7-6 but remain bowl eligible.

UofH 5-7

Rice 4-7

UTEP 2-10

SMU 3-9

Baylor 3-9

tU 11-2 Cotton Bowl

a&m 6-6 (no bowl invite I believe due to suspension? Not sure on this.)

Tech 9-5 Tangerine Bowl

TCU 10-2 Liberty Bowl

The pecking order for the Texas Bowl that season would have been A&M if they were eligible due to the fact of how many people they would have brought, and North Texas. If a&m was not eligible then guess who would have been the next option? North Texas!

2003

This season NT finished 9-4. MTSU finished 4-8 which inluded a loss to us and a 6 point loss to ULL. Reverse those two games for them and they finish at 6-6 and go to the N.O. Bowl and we sit at 8-5 and in second place and bowl eligible.

Rice 5-7

UTEP 2-11

SMU 0-12

Baylor 3-9

a&m 4-8

UofH 7-6 Hawaii Bowl

tU 10-3 Holiday Bowl

Tech 8-5 Houston Bowl

TCU 11-2 Fort Worth Bowl

The pecking order for the Texas Bowl this season would have been Tech, UofH if they don't take the Hawaii Bowl and North Texas.

2004

NT finishes 7-5 and went to N.O. Bowl and Troy finished also at 7-5 but lost their tie breaker with us due to their loss to Ark State. They went to the Silicon Valley Bowl that year. Reverse the tie breaker and we end up second at 6-6 and bowl eligible.

UofH 3-8

Rice 3-8

SMU 3-8

Baylor 3-8

TCU 5-6

UTEP 8-4 Houston Bowl

tU 11-1 Rose Bowl

a&m 7-5 Cotton Bowl

Tech 8-4 Holiday Bowl

This was the season which there were not enough regional teams that were available and eligible for the Fort Worth bowl to select from and they brought in Cincy and Marshall to freeze their asses off with the rest of us at Amon Carter that night. As I stated earlier you never know how these things play out but it's possible UTEP could have ended up with that invite. If so that would have left North Texas as the next available option?

ArkStFan may can add to this as he's got a much better handle on how the bowls have shaped out over the years. Unless I've left something off this shows that given the right circumstances two of our previous 4 best seasons North Texas could have counted as a valid option to choose from as the state represenative for the Texas Bowl. To me that is recognition worth fighting for, even if we were not the first option. Anything is possible with these situations. There is zero reason that NT should not be considered as an option. Simply look at the records. We may not have been the BEST option those 4 years but we were definately a better option than 50% of the current Texas Bowl invitees during that same time. Again, that is recognition worth fighting for.

I see nothing harmful nor do I see it as coming off as a "Whining" program to in the very least let the Texas Bowl officials know that they have wrongfully omitted someone.

Rick

Edited August 15, 2006 by FirefightnRick

[Quoner]

Not true.  We all have seen how the bowl invitations go.  Many times it comes down to the wire with everyone trying to guess who is going where?  We have seen at times such as in '04 where conferences cannot fill all of their slots such as was the case with the FW Bowl when Cincy and Marshall played.  You just never know what is going to transpire and you certainly cannot simply say there is NO CHANCE.

Here is where we would have stacked up had the new Texas Bowl arrangement been in place, and North Texas finished second in conference but remained bowl eligible between '01 and '04.

2001

This first decent year for us is a stretch at best but please bare with me.  NT finished 5-6 on the season.  MTSU finished 8-3.  Switch our loss with Troy for the win against MTSU, plus 3 more points against LaMo and we finish 6-5 and in second place and bowl eligible.  MTSU goes to the N.O. Bowl

UofH 0-11

UTEP 2-9

SMU 4-7

Baylor 3-8

Rice 8-4 (no bowl invite?)

tU 11-2 Holliday Bowl

a&m 8-4 Houston Bowl

TCU 6-6 Houston Bowl

TCU played a&m in the Houston Bowl(Texas Bowl).  NT would have finished 4th available behind them and Rice.  Throw in the current FW Bowl and we move up to 3rd possibly?  Like I said, a bit of a stretch but crazier things have happened.

2002

In '02 NT finished 8-5 and went to the N.O. Bowl.  NMSU finished 7-5 and in second place with no bowl game.  Switch our win over them with a loss and they go to N.O. and we finish second at 7-6 but remain bowl eligible.

UofH 5-7

Rice 4-7

UTEP 2-10

SMU 3-9

Baylor 3-9

tU 11-2 Cotton Bowl

a&m 6-6 (no bowl invite I believe due to suspension? Not sure on this.)

Tech 9-5 Tangerine Bowl

TCU 10-2 Liberty Bowl

The pecking order for the Texas Bowl that season would have been A&M if they were eligible due to the fact of how many people they would have brought, and North Texas.  If a&m was not eligible then  guess who would have been the next option?  North Texas!

2003

This season NT finished 9-4.  MTSU finished 4-8 which inluded a loss to us and a 6 point loss to ULL.  Reverse those two games for them and they finish at 6-6 and go to the N.O. Bowl and we sit at 8-5 and in second place and bowl eligible.

Rice 5-7

UTEP 2-11

SMU 0-12

Baylor 3-9

a&m 4-8

UofH 7-6 Hawaii Bowl

tU 10-3 Holiday Bowl

Tech 8-5 Houston Bowl

TCU 11-2 Fort Worth Bowl

The pecking order for the Texas Bowl this season would have been Tech, UofH if they don't take the Hawaii Bowl and North Texas.

2004

NT finishes 7-5 and went to N.O. Bowl and Troy finished also at 7-5 but lost their tie breaker with us due to their loss to Ark State.  They went to the Silicon Valley Bowl that year.  Reverse the tie breaker and we end up second at 6-6 and bowl eligible.

UofH 3-8

Rice 3-8

SMU 3-8

Baylor 3-8

TCU 5-6

UTEP 8-4 Houston Bowl

tU 11-1 Rose Bowl

a&m 7-5 Cotton Bowl

Tech 8-4 Holiday Bowl

This was the season which there were not enough regional teams that were available and eligible for the Fort Worth bowl to select from and they brought in Cincy and Marshall to freeze their asses off with the rest of us at Amon Carter that night.  As I stated earlier you never know how these things play out but it's possible UTEP  could have ended up with that invite.  If so that would have left North Texas as the next available option?

ArkStFan may can add to this as he's got a much better handle on how the bowls have shaped out over the years.  Unless I've left something off this shows that given the right circumstances two of our previous 4 best seasons North Texas could have counted as a valid option to choose from as the state represenative for the Texas Bowl.  To me that is recognition worth fighting for, even if we were not the first option.  Anything is possible with these situations.  There is zero reason that NT should not be considered as an option.    Simply look at the records.  We may not have been the BEST option those 4 years but we were definately a better option than 50% of the current Texas Bowl invitees during that same time.  Again, that is recognition worth fighting for.

I see nothing harmful nor do I see it as coming off as a "Whining" program to in the very least let the Texas Bowl officials know that they have wrongfully omitted someone.

Rick

←

I don't think our profile was high enough in 2001. In 2002, the 6-6 TAMU team announced they would not accept a bowl bid after the season wrapped up - little did they know they should have kept savoring .500. 2003 was a possibility. 2004 was just a mess of a year, but you're right, it could always happen again.

[eulesseagle]

FFR--

You put some great thought into your writings.....but.....we will have to agree to disagree.

My point is that the SBC has a hard enough time getting into the NOB much less having another SBC team that looks attractive enough to be invited to another bowl, outright.

Given the right circumstances anything can happen and we can look at Troy a couple of years ago being invited to the Silicon Valley Bowl after a couple of other teams declined. They got in because nobody wanted it. If I remember the same thing happened a couple or three years ago at the Humanitarian Bowl where two or three teams turned it down. If schools continue to turn down bowl games because they think they should be playing in better bowls then this is, practically, the only chance that a second SBC team will go bowling, IMHO.

As things stand now the "new" Texas Bowl is going after higher profile conferences---and---I would be bold enough to say that the B-12 and BE is an easier sell for sponsorships.

Like you said, "anything can happen" but in reality, in our current situation, it will not be with the Texas Bowl so I try not to get uptight about our current situation. The key word is CURRENT SITUATION. As we all understand and verbalize about is getting out of our "current situation" but until then we just have to expect being abused by other conferences, in bowl alignments, and those who feel that the SBC and UNT is not worthy to be invited to such events.

Where does that leave us??? We gotta win some games and be consistant in going to the NOB and winning some OOC games against higher profile mid-major and BCS programs.........we all know that losing all the OOC games and just winning the SBC gets no respect nationally not only for UNT but the other members of the SBC.

My last point is what RV was stating the other day when he said that our current football facility was NOT the determining factor in getting accepted to another conference (WAC or C-USA). If that is not the determining factor then that just leaves UNT needing more wins against OOC and SBC opponents and to continue to fill Fouts and the PIT.

[VideoEagle]

Troy did NOT get into the Silicon Valley Bowl because a couple of schools “declined hoping for better bowls.”

First, the BCS conferences did not have enough 6 win teams to meet all of their obligations. Secondly, at least on team was withdrew from bowl consideration after a large number of players were suspended from the team for a some reason - I forget exactly why.

Third, Troy had some sponsor - I think it was HealthSouth - kick in a lot of cash to the bowl. That was beyond their paying Troy’s travel expenses. This is not at all unusual. The bowl in Boise often gives a bid to the team willing to buy the most tickets to guarantee sales.

As the the SBC not having enough bowl eligible teams, this problem will get much better if a 9th team is added. A nine team conference playing a round robin schedule is almost guaranteed to produce two bowl eligible teams. There are no ties anymore - some has to win!

It is looking more and more likely that Western Kentucky is going to start to move to playing 1A football which solves the 9th team problem.

[MeanGreen61]

Troy did NOT get into the Silicon Valley Bowl because a couple of schools “declined hoping for better bowls.”

First, the BCS conferences did not have enough 6 win teams to meet all of their obligations. Secondly, at least on team was withdrew from bowl consideration after a large number of players were suspended from the team for a some reason - I forget exactly why.

Third, Troy had some sponsor - I think it was HealthSouth - kick in a lot of cash to the bowl. That was beyond their paying Troy’s travel expenses. This is not at all unusual. The bowl in Boise often gives a bid to the team willing to buy the most tickets to guarantee sales.

As the the SBC not having enough bowl eligible teams, this problem will get much better if a 9th team is added. A nine team conference playing a round robin schedule is almost guaranteed to produce two bowl eligible teams. There are no ties anymore - some has to win!

It is looking more and more likely that Western Kentucky is going to start to move to playing 1A football which solves the 9th team problem.

←

Movie Gallery. The same folks that have their name on the Troy stadium.

[e-bone ver2.awesome]

With the ability to draw from 4 conferences, don't expect the Texas Bowl to not have enough bowl eligible teams to pick from for the next 4 years.

[MeanGreenEngineer]

I don't see how a letter from the NT AD would do much to the Bowl Committee.

I do beleive that a flood of letters, from North Texas fans, who say they are offended by the snub, and would be more than happy to travel to Houston if thier team was to be offered a spot, would go along way.

[Eagle1855]

I don't see how a letter from the NT AD would do much to the Bowl Committee.

I do beleive that a flood of letters, from North Texas fans, who say they are offended by the snub, and would be more than happy to travel to Houston if thier team was to be offered a spot, would go along way.

←

agreed.

Id be willing to make the trip...

[VideoEagle]

Movie Gallery. The same folks that have their name on the Troy stadium.

←

I was thinking something Gallery, but the only one I could remember was Furniture!

I knew that wasn’t right!

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

With the ability to draw from 4 conferences, don't expect the Texas Bowl to not have enough bowl eligible teams to pick from for the next 4 years.

←

--I agree...but... considering the name (TEXAS BOWL) it is still an insult to single out one Texas team (North Texas) to not be eligible. I don't think we are really expecting an invitation but we just dislike the fact that if we somehow managed to be 10-2, 11-1, 12-0, or better than any of those other teams, we would not be considered for a bid. It is still an insult. It would been just as easy to state a member of Big XII, CUSA, plus "any I-A univ in Texas" instead of naming "TCU" individually.

---It would have been much better public relations and would have "cost them" nothing and besides we would have had to earn the bid anyway.

---It reminds me of the "Texas Sports Hall of Fame" in Waco... if you are somehow connected to a former SWC school, then you are much more likely to be in it... thus Abner Haynes isn't, despite an oustanding AFL (NFL) and college career and being a pioneer in Texas desegegration in addition to that.

Edited August 15, 2006 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[e-bone ver2.awesome]

--I agree...but... considering the name (TEXAS BOWL)  it is still an insult to single out one Texas team (North Texas) to not be eligible.  I don't think we are really expecting an invitation but we just dislike the fact that if we somehow managed to be 10-2, 11-1, 12-0, or better than any of those other teams, we would not be considered for a bid.    It is still an insult.  It would been just as easy to state a member of Big XII, CUSA, plus "any I-A univ in Texas"  instead of naming "TCU" individually.

←

Again, TCU has not been given a special inclusion and UNT has not been specifically excluded. I know that this makes this thread and the whining going on completely baseless, and that makes people mad for some reason, but it's the truth. The Sun Belt was not included as a possible tie-in for the bowl. That is it, there is nothing else to read into this. It shouldn't come as a surprise that bowls don't want to have the Sun Belt as a tie in.

Quote from RV: "Texas Bowl - the new Texas Bowl applied for approval in June of this year and were approved listing four conferences for tie-ins: the Big XII, CUSA, the MWC and the Big East.... The Big XII and CUSA created the financial solvency required to keep the bowl alive. The Big East and the MWC were chosen as alternatives in the event the other two conferences did not have enough qualifying teams to fill the spots and the national prominence of those two conerences. The major reason that the Sun Belt and therefore North Texas were not considered is that in only two years of the last five have we had enough qualiying teams to fill more than one bowl."

Obviously, people seem to believe he was not telling the truth for whatever reason. So here is a quote from the real original article(not a general blurb from the DMN).

"Participating teams will be chosen from the Big 12, Conference USA, Big East, and Mountain West conferences. It is expected that the Big 12 and/or Conference USA will provide at least one team to compete in the game on an annual basis."

And I'm sure that I'll be accused of making that up, so here is the link to the real original article.

You will see no mention of TCU being specifically included as a possibility to play in the bowl. But, like I, GreenEddieNT, Rick Villarreal, the Big 12, etc... have been saying, the MWC has been included as a tie-in to the bowl. The Sun Belt has not.

It is that simple.

[FirefightnRick]

The real article reads differently from the first one in this thread which sort of takes the snub factor out of the picture. But as much as some people dearly want to see the Belt fail out of simple justification for their criticism of it, they still cannot dismiss the fact that NT has been in a situation in which it could have played a role in qualifying for it in the past, even as a Sun Belt member.

GladToBeGreen

2.) Conference affiliation - continuing to beat down the Sun Belt does nothing but beat down North Texas.

Rck

Edited August 16, 2006 by FirefightnRick

[e-bone ver2.awesome]

The real article reads differently from the first one in this thread which sort of takes the snub factor out of the picture.  But as much as some people dearly want to see the Belt fail out of simple justification for their criticism of it, they still cannot dismiss the fact  that NT has been in a situation in which it could have played a role in qualifying for it in the past, even as a Sun Belt member. 

GladToBeGreen

Rck

←

Of course there isn't a snub factor, that is what I've been trying to get across for awhile here. But instead of listening to what I say you have to come attack me, as usual. And now that I've proven you and the whole purpose of this thread wrong, to the point that even you have to acknowledge it, you have to change your angle of attack and keep coming after me. Now you are trying to say I want the Sun Belt to fail to justify my criticism of it? That is just ridiculous! In this thread I said that the Sun Belt sucks and that is why NT can't be in the Texas Bowl, which is the truth. The Texas Bowl doesn't want the Sun Belt. No one wants the Sun Belt. That is the truth, but it sure as hell doesn't mean that I want it to fail. I don't know what else to do when saying the truth is considered "beating down" the Sun Belt. I'm not going to overreact, whine, cry and make excuses about why NT can't play in the Texas Bowl, when I can sit here and see that the reason that NT can't play in the Texas Bowl is because we are in the Sun Belt.

The Sun Belt is a bad, bad league and that is why NT can't play in the Texas Bowl. That is the truth. Sometimes the truth hurts.

[FirefightnRick]

Of course there isn't a snub factor, that is what I've been trying to get across for awhile here. But instead of listening to what I say you have to come attack me, as usual. And now that I've proven you and the whole purpose of this thread wrong, to the point that even you have to acknowledge it, you have to change your angle of attack and keep coming after me. Now you are trying to say I want the Sun Belt to fail to justify my criticism of it? That is just ridiculous! In this thread I said that the Sun Belt sucks and that is why NT can't be in the Texas Bowl, which is the truth. The Texas Bowl doesn't want the Sun Belt. No one wants the Sun Belt. That is the truth, but it sure as hell doesn't mean that I want it to fail. I don't know what else to do when saying the truth is considered "beating down" the Sun Belt. I'm not going to overreact, whine, cry and make excuses about why NT can't play in the Texas Bowl, when I can sit here and see that the reason that NT can't play in the Texas Bowl is because we are in the Sun Belt.

The Sun Belt is a bad, bad league and that is why NT can't play in the Texas Bowl. That is the truth. Sometimes the truth hurts.

←

You haven't proven any one wrong. All you have done is take some updated info that the original post NT80 posted wasn't privy to, and say "I told you so" as if you "knew all along", which you didn't.

Your first post on the Texas Bowl subject was in this Poll thread:

eBone:

The best thing to do would to be to have a great season and let them and everyone else know that they made a mistake.

You too originally thought it was a mistake to be left out.

And I still stand by my assesment though that it would not hurt a thing to pick up the phone and let these folks know that we too would be interested in the Texas Bowl. All they can say is "Thanks but no thanks".

It reminds me of one of my favorite sayings: "If your ship doesn't come in, swim out to it".

Rick

Edited August 17, 2006 by FirefightnRick

[e-bone ver2.awesome]

My initial post in this thread was the most polite way I think of to say stop whining, we have no room to complain.

Also, I became "privy" to that information at the same time as everyone else. RV reaffirmed that information, and you still purposely ignored it because it wasn't in the "orginal article" and it made all the whining going on in this thread baseless. Then you blasted me for because I decided to not have the narrow view of everyone else who was complaining about not being included in the Texas Bowl. In case you forgot, the whole issue was why TCU was included and UNT was not. When it came to my and everyone elses attention that the MWC was included and the Sun Belt wasn't, you and some others kept harping on it as if there was some slight against UNT specifically, which there was not.

For that, I can say "I told you so", because you attacked me and said I was wrong about the MWC being included as the reason to why TCU could play in the bowl. I really don't appreciate it when someone attacks me when I am the one who has the facts straight.

[gangrene]

Yaaawwwn...

To me, worrying about the possibility of not being invited to a bowl game when we deserve to go is like us worrying about not be invited to the BCS Championship game when we complete an undefeated season.

I don't want to knock the SBC but, if everyone can separate yourself from your UNT and SBC affiliations for just a couple of minutes, can you honestly tell me that you would have would been happy including an SBC tie-in if you were on the Texas Bowl committee? If you're honest with yourself, that answer is a resounding no. Until SBC teams start defeating opponents from well-respected conferences on a regular basis, we'll continue to be the lowest ranked D-1 conference.

If the Mean Green can start winning some OOC games and resume domination of the Belt, then I truly believe we'll start to see some doors opening for us. The repercussions of last year's slip up, if that's what it actually was, will have an impact on us for some time to come...we've lost our spot as Cream of the Crap.

Edited August 17, 2006 by gangrene

[FirefightnRick]

For that, I can say "I told you so", because you attacked me and said I was wrong about the MWC being included as the reason to why TCU could play in the bowl. I really don't appreciate it when someone attacks me when I am the one who has the facts straight.

←

It still doesn't mean you proved anyone wrong as you would like to think, but whatever?

I'll never admit that my school isn't good enough(if that is a proper term to use?) as Rice, SMU, UTEP or anyone else on the playing field regardless of whatever conference excuse is thrown at it. I'm proud that at least that at times in the past our teams have played like they belong on the same field with the rest of them. And for that I will remain convinced that there's nothing wrong with asking someone from the SBC or NT to knock on that bowl committee's door just to let them know we are here. I agree that we have to earn it, and 2 out of 4 previous years we would have had we been in consideration. That's enough for me to know that we belong. Had Troy had the same crappy attitude as some of us about their(SBC) chances to get a second invite, they would have never gone to the Sili in '04 in the first place.

Rick

Edited August 17, 2006 by FirefightnRick

[GrandGreen]

Of course it is a snub and a rather obvious one at that. It would take very little effort to make the bowl open to all Texas 1a schools and then truely support the title of the Texas Bowl.

We have a lot of people who like to fault the Belt for NT's problems. Where would NT be without the Belt? Do you really think NT would be better off losing more money in the WAC or as an independent? The Belt is the newest and logically the worst 1a football conference. There is not a team in the Belt that does not want to be in a better conference. However, damning the Belt is not going to accomplish anything, the objective has got to be to improve the program and thus enhance any further opportunities.