How Many Think It Is Time To Revisit The Idea Of The Wac?

[the real grad88]

I know that there are many who disagree on this board and want to stay in the SBC for the long haul. I used to be one of them. I trashed the WAC on this board several years ago when we were invited. I now think that was an error in judgment. The WAC was heads and tails above the SBC this year...no comparison. We could certainly get a lot more respect and a look from even better recruits if we were in the WAC, in my opinion. I doubt seriously that the SBC is ever going to be the league that we wanted it to be. It has served its purpose as for as UNT is concerned. I just think it is time to move on, if the WAC still wants us.

[Texas Stranger]

Think of a WAC minus Boise State and see if you still want to do it. If so, fire away.

[BIG DAWG]

we missed nothing

[ColoradoEagle]

RPI Rk Western Athletic Conf All RPI SOS Rk SOS

57 Nevada 3-0 14-1 0.5810 226 0.4732

64 Utah St. 0-2 10-5 0.5752 118 0.5183

80 New Mexico St. 3-0 12-3 0.5574 246 0.4626

83 Hawaii 1-2 10-6 0.5541 68 0.5435

92 Boise St. 2-1 8-6 0.5444 91 0.5315

96 Fresno St. 2-1 13-3 0.5406 267 0.4551

259 Louisiana Tech 2-1 4-11 0.4375 176 0.4959

261 San Jose St. 0-3 1-14 0.4370 30 0.5657

292 Idaho 0-3 2-13 0.4132 163 0.5026

RPI Rk Sun Belt Conf All RPI SOS Rk SOS

East Division

67 West. Kentucky 5-1 13-5 0.5736 106 0.5241

135 Middle Tenn. St. 3-3 6-9 0.5134 54 0.5512

138 South Alabama 4-2 8-7 0.5125 173 0.4987

178 Florida Atlantic 3-3 6-9 0.4904 168 0.5000

220 Troy 2-4 6-10 0.4658 200 0.4838

286 Florida Intl. 1-5 4-10 0.4166 280 0.4479

West Division

142 North Texas 3-3 9-5 0.5103 291 0.4431

169 LA Monroe 5-1 8-7 0.4950 257 0.4587

213 Arkansas St. 4-2 7-9 0.4714 214 0.4775

217 AR Little Rock 3-4 7-10 0.4679 227 0.4723

243 New Orleans 4-2 7-9 0.4533 265 0.4557

305 LA Lafayette 2-5 3-13 0.3996 188 0.4887

333 Denver 1-5 2-14 0.3341 323 0.4161

Yes.

[ADLER]

Actually the WAC would look very attractive if you could convince those schools to move closer to Texas.

Until then, I wouldn't be interested.

[the real grad88]

I was visiting with a former asst basketball coach during Fry's time. We work together at Paris Junior College. He was telling me about the days when UNT played as an independent and literally played all over the place. He said that the recruits loved seeing the schedule back then when they played Hawaii and programs out west. He said that he believed that the WAC schedule would be great for recruits...particularly if you could add some solid nonconference opponents that people care about. What about this for a home schedule, just for an example? SMU, Ark State (both non-conf) followed by La Tech, Boise State, Hawaii, New Mexico State? Sounds a lot better than our current schedule and it would attract a heck of a lot better crowds.

[good_ken]

I was visiting with a former asst basketball coach during Fry's time. We work together at Paris Junior College. He was telling me about the days when UNT played as an independent and literally played all over the place. He said that the recruits loved seeing the schedule back then when they played Hawaii and programs out west. He said that he believed that the WAC schedule would be great for recruits...particularly if you could add some solid nonconference opponents that people care about. What about this for a home schedule, just for an example? SMU, Ark State (both non-conf) followed by La Tech, Boise State, Hawaii, New Mexico State? Sounds a lot better than our current schedule and it would attract a heck of a lot better crowds.

That sounds really great. Do you have the extra hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay for the increased travel costs? Would this be a better value than taking that money and putting to towards a new stadium?

[the real grad88]

That sounds really great. Do you have the extra hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay for the increased travel costs? Would this be a better value than taking that money and putting to towards a new stadium?

It all kind of works together doesn't it? More conference revenue sharing+higher profile teams+more bowl game ties+more attractive home schedule+increased home attendance+better recruiting+more donor interest. I think that travel dollars would covered with the added revenue.

It all works together to equal more money which will help us get the stadium. Let's be honest. After how many years in the SBC, it ain't taking us any higher than we are right now. I say new coach and new conference.

Plus the fact that I am sure that the WAC would eventually invite more eastern teams, creating east/west divisions.

[runt96]

My belief is that in two or three years BSU will be MountWestConf(at least). That will leave the strongest team(FB) in the conference to be Hawaii. Like the others said, travel will be costly. If you look at the SBC any of us could load up on a friday and be at the away game by Sat.(except the possible exception of the two Fla. teams). It would be nice to see if we could get in another regional conference such as CUSA. I see your point, in that these SBC teams do NOTHING for excitement. Keep an eye on TROY and MTSU though, both of these teams could probably handle most of the WAC(except BSU and Hawaii).

With the idea of more teams joining the WAC, If they were to lose Hawaii and BSU they would probably be game to merge with a conf. such as ours. The SBC is getting better. Look at some of the close games this year involving SBC teams with larger conference teams.

Edited January 13, 2007 by runt96

[FirefightnRick]

Absolutely not. Although it should be some part of a goal for any program, and I'm not sure how high up it should be given, but few around here care about what RPI rankings you end up with. If they did more people would know that TCU finished in the top 25. If it's more name opponents coming to Denton for ticket sales and interests sake, then build a stadium that will hold the bigger programs, or continue to bring in the TCU's, Baylors, Smu's etc....during OOC play.

As of now we should continue to build the Belt.

Rick

Edited January 13, 2007 by FirefightnRick

[mad dog]

Yes, but the line of thinking that says we can eventually make money by spending it (here in travel costs) presupposes an initial investment. Here, that money simply isn't there. If you can think of a way where 1) we could feasibly come up with the money, and 2) you could prove to me that there is a high likelihood of return, then I'd be glad to hear it. Otherwise, I stand with our decision to stay in Sun Belt.

[Mean'n'Green07]

I would be very surprised if BSU was still in the WAC two or three years from now. I think we took a calculated risk when we didn't join, and I think it was the right decision in the long run. The sunbelt is getting better every year, we had 2 bowl teams and we were 4-3 against CUSA. Each year the OOC play gets better. Troy is shaping up to be a great football program, I really hope we can establish a great rivalry with them before we leave.

The only thing I don't like about the belt is we don't have a rival team from Texas, but neither does the WAC so I'm glad we made the decision to stay.

[Harry]

No. I just went to wedding in Tahoe and flew into Reno. Good lord that was a long flight. I don't want to put the kids through that again. CUSA is where we need to be.

I will say this, back in the day we used to give Boise fits! I don't know that we want any of that now tho...

[foutsrouts]

Actually the WAC would look very attractive if you could convince those schools to move closer to Texas.

Until then, I wouldn't be interested.

It would be nice if we could do the same thing with the SBC schools. For example, since we no longer have to travel over mountains by covered wagon, the difference between a Boise/Reno/Fresno/San Jose trip, and a Miami/Miami/Troy/Muts trip is basically irrelevant. An occasional Hawaii trip is only a positive as far as I'm concerned. I would love an all Texas/regional conference situation, but unfortunately we are where we are and that ain't gonna change any time soon. Personally, I think we were typically short-sighted by not taking the plunge into the WAC. The finances would of worked themselves out one way or another. But that's only my humble opinion of course.

[AnotherEagleFan]

The way I see it we have 2 options:

1. Build the Sunbelt. We really need to get to 12 all sport teams. Yes we need to add baseball. The question is who will come to the belt. UAB = good rivalry for Troy. LA Tech - I know three schools from one state seems a little much. and then take 2 of the TX teams from CUSA.

2. Join CUSA. I think that if we build a stadium CUSA would rather have UNT and Troy rather then UTEP and UAB. UAB has always struggled and threatend to end sports several times while Troy is growing. And well who wouldnt want us over UTEP???

OK I thought I would dream a littla and throw in a #3

3. Super Conference. Very Unlikely. Take the top teams of all of the Mid Majors Conferences and form a Super Conference. Yes we will have to travel but can you imagine Boise, BYU, TCU, UNT, Houston, SMU, So Miss, Troy, Rice, Tulsa, Air Force and ???. Obviously someone smarter then me would have to figure out among the mid majors who would be the best fit, but this would be a very good conference. Again Very Unlikely

Personally, I think that option # 2 is very realistic and it is my favorite.

[3XNTGRAD]

Personally, I think we were typically short-sighted by not taking the plunge into the WAC. The finances would of worked themselves out one way or another. But that's only my humble opinion of course.

I wonder how my personal finances would look if I used that philosophy! I am very glad that the UNT administration didn't use this as their criteria for determining the future of the program.

The WAC of today is a glorified Big West. Having survived that once, I don't want to go backward. Except for the Hawaii tie-in, there really are no positives in that conference for us. The negatives (poor publicity being at the top of the list since our football scores and stories would not make it into local papers until Monday and would always miss the TV news for away games just like when we were in the Big West) clearly make that a bad idea.

[El Paso Eagle]

The WAC of today is a glorified Big West. Having survived that once, I don't want to go backward. Except for the Hawaii tie-in, there really are no positives in that conference for us. The negatives (poor publicity being at the top of the list since our football scores and stories would not make it into local papers until Monday and would always miss the TV news for away games just like when we were in the Big West) clearly make that a bad idea.

With all due respect to say the WAC is a “step back” is reaching deep to try and justify something that is not there.

Also if the WAC is a glorified Big West what the hell is the Belt? As far as the publicity being negative in the press how positive has it been (up until TD hiring)? Also, and since I no longer live in the D/FW area – I guess everyone has forgot about TCU since they moved to the MWC?

[foutsrouts]

I wonder how my personal finances would look if I used that philosophy! I am very glad that the UNT administration didn't use this as their criteria for determining the future of the program.

I guess you're a bit more conservative than I. My personal finances would be very boring if I hadn't taken some of the risks that I have in life. Sometimes you just got to go for the gusto sort of speak. Maybe we'll get lucky and this argument will become a moot issue upon USA's invite after some immediate Dodgeball success.

[the real grad88]

I am not saying that the WAC is the best place for us to be...clearly C-USA is the place we all want to be eventually...unless we could get a new southern conference as some have touted...plucking the southern teams from the WAC, C-USA and SBC.

BUT, until something like that happens, the WAC is a good stepping stone THAT WILL HELP US GET TO THE NEXT STEP. The SBC is going no where fast. I even question our ability to get donors to pay for a new stadium while we stay in this conference.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

WAC membership is the worse wacky idea ever for NT.

1. It would be far more expensive to operate... consider all the basketball and other trips as well.

2. It is in the Mountain time-zone in a sparsely populated area... The Belt is in a highly populated area and much better time zone to get media coverage plus the Belt and mixed in with several other well recognized conferences [ACC,SEC, Big-12, even CUSA) and in a football crazy area of the USA.

3. The Belt plays more recognized opponents and it will improve with time and will get more recognition once it starts defeating some of them (again in a football crazy area).

4. With only a couple of possible exceptions the WAC doesn't contain teams that are recognized any more than the Belt does.

5. Travel is so bad in the WAC that few of our fans would ever travel to see games, not true with some Belt games..... plus some of our alums even live near Belt teams... not so much true of the WAC teams.

6. I can't see the WAC improving any from what it is now..... I can see the potential of the Belt and it could improve greatly given some time. Football wise this is a very new conference.

-------And yes I would prefer to be in CUSA but because of all the regional (Texas) opponents available but not because I think it is now all that much better than the Belt or even do I see it to be that much better in the future (unless we get in...LOL).

--------Joining the WAC is an awful option... even if invited ....

[El Paso Eagle]

The way I see it we have 2 options:

1. Build the Sunbelt. We really need to get to 12 all sport teams. Yes we need to add baseball. The question is who will come to the belt. UAB = good rivalry for Troy. LA Tech - I know three schools from one state seems a little much. and then take 2 of the TX teams from CUSA.

Be careful here - remember there are already 4 Texas teams in C-USA --- Some might say 5 from one state is too many

[MeanGreen61]

Be careful here - remember there are already 4 Texas teams in C-USA --- Some might say 5 from one state is too many

But Texas is "A whole other country" and after all Louisiana is just Louisiana.

[AnotherEagleFan]

Be careful here - remember there are already 4 Texas teams in C-USA --- Some might say 5 from one state is too many

Oops let me clarify what I meant to say. "Build the Belt" meaning adding teams to the sunbelt. Adding two CUSA texas teams gives 3 teams in TX. I dont think that 3 will be too many. For a state this big it will probably have benefits.

On the 2nd option (when we go to CUSA) we are swapping UNT for UTEP. The number of TX teams stays the same.

[CMJ]

The WAC would be a terrible idea. And I LIVE in the West. Every year the SBC gets better. We had a winning record against CUSA this season. Their would be little more interest in any WAC opponents in DFW than SBC opponents(sans BSU). TCU didn't draw particularly well in the WAC from what I recall.

[GreenEddieNT]

I know that there are many who disagree on this board and want to stay in the SBC for the long haul. I used to be one of them. I trashed the WAC on this board several years ago when we were invited. I now think that was an error in judgment. The WAC was heads and tails above the SBC this year...no comparison. We could certainly get a lot more respect and a look from even better recruits if we were in the WAC, in my opinion. I doubt seriously that the SBC is ever going to be the league that we wanted it to be. It has served its purpose as for as UNT is concerned. I just think it is time to move on, if the WAC still wants us.

I am no longer in favor of jumping to the WAC. I agree that the WAC easily trumps the Sun Belt(not that it is very hard to trump the Sun Belt) but I think the schools with the goods in that conference(Boise State, Fresno State, Hawaii, and Nevada) will all be part of a 14-team MWC along with UTEP from CUSA in 5-10 years. What would be left after that would not be good. Sure we could still re-join the Sun Belt after that but what good it is to join the WAC if we're just gonna have to return to the Sun Belt eventually.