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

risinggreen · January 20, 2007

Sorry cowtown but I really want to see the facts, not what some thred rider has posted. Perhaps you could provide a link of the actual attendance falls of Idaho, NMSU, and USU since their new conference. I hardly classify a thred post as factual public documents...lol...You dont lose games because of fan support, you lose because you get outplayed. The sunbelt will NEVER match the WAC. Mark my words NEVERRRR. This conference is doomed.

Aren't you getting a little overly obsessed with the WAC? They had a good year but still suck. They just suck less than the Sunbelt. You may be right when you say that the Sunbelt will NEVER match the WAC. For obvious reasons, the WAC is much more likely to disappear than the Sunbelt. The Sunbelt isn't going away anytime soon.

Daddy Dumpsalot · January 20, 2007

ArkStFan is known to be well connected. He's a friend to us here...helping Harry set the board up about 5-6 years ago. You're known to throw out alot of statements and use strawman arguments.

Yeah I'm sure he is.

Im not throwing out statements, but I want to see facts.

Adios!

MeanGreenEngineer · January 20, 2007

Sorry cowtown but I really want to see the facts, not what some thred rider has posted.

You sure are demanding a lot of facts when you haven't supplied a single one. In fact, your entire shtick seems to be to act like a jerk, demand facts when you can't provide any, and complain about how your feelings are hurt. Quoting you: But I feel like youre points are.......not valid Wow, awesome facts, great logic, man it's hard to argue with reason like that. How about we take you to dinner and a movie, what that change your feelings any?

Look, I know you just found this forum and are so eager to share your opinion, but this thing has been around for a long time before you and will be going strong when you are gone. There is a reason most people just lurk when they join a forum, and don't post until they have read for a while, it is so they don't come across as a total dullard.

Arkansas State Fan was an admin from day one on this site, and is very well connected with the ASU and SBC offices. Harry and Cerebus get thier info from talking directly to administrators , coaches and others in the know.

I really don't like to go off on you, but you are just being rude.

Green Mean · January 20, 2007

I went to Idaho's website and got their attendence figures since 2003. I'm going to go to NMSU and LTU after this....

Idaho's Kibbie Dome capacity is 16,000 for football games

2003 -- Games/Avg Per Game 5/12064

2004 -- Games/Avg Per Game 4/17120

2005 -- Games/Avg Per Game 4/15175

2006 -- Games/Avg Per Game 5/14543

UNTLifer · January 20, 2007

Please let this thread die.

NT80 · January 20, 2007

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extended Box

NCAAF 1 2 3 4 F

- - - - --

New Mexico St 0 10 6 7 23

North Texas 0 21 3 6 30 FINAL

New Mexico St-FG Aguiniga 29

North Texas-J Wilburn 7 run (Ball kick)

North Texas-Ryan 42 fumble return (Ball kick)

North Texas-S Hall 8 run (Ball kick)

New Mexico St-Branstetter 3 run (Aguiniga kick)

New Mexico St-Gifford 88 punt return (two-point conversion

failed)

North Texas-FG Ball 32

North Texas-J Wilburn 2 run (two-point conversion failed)

New Mexico St-Enzminger 1 run (Aguiniga kick)

New Mexico St North Texas

First downs 13 17

Rushed-yards 39-180 53-208

Passing yards 139 63

Sacked-yards lost 2-7 2-5

Return yards 93 61

Passes 12-25-2 6-12-0

Punts 5-42.0 8-33.9

Fumbles-lost 5-3 1-1

Penalties-yards 14-118 7-45

Time of possession 25:03 34:57

Individual Statistics

RUSHING: New Mexico St-C Barnes 11-98, Enzminger 14-57,

Branstetter 7-19, Keith 7-6. North Texas-J Wilburn 41-172, S

Hall 12-36.

PASSING: New Mexico St-Enzminger 12-25-2-139. North Texas-S

Hall 6-12-0-63.

RECEIVING: New Mexico St-P Winston 4-42, A Davis 2-39, Talbert

2-24, Branstetter 2-6, Mccray 1-22, C Barnes 1-6. North

Texas-Curtis 3-46, Mclane 2-16, Holly 1-1.

Att: 8,635

Edited January 20, 2007 by NT80

Green Mean · January 20, 2007

These are all of La Tech's attendence numbers since 2003.....

2003 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 43,279 (against Miami in shreveport)

ATTENDANCE: 17,859

ATTENDANCE: 19,128

ATTENDANCE: 14,872

ATTENDANCE: 8,752

2004 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 21,127

ATTENDANCE: 22,467

ATTENDANCE: 18,330

ATTENDANCE: 18,103

ATTENDANCE: 7,713

2005 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 17,318

ATTENDANCE: 16,242

ATTENDANCE: 19,481

ATTENDANCE: 12,758

ATTENDANCE: 16,281

2006 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 18,765

ATTENDANCE: 19,231

ATTENDANCE: 14,463

ATTENDANCE: 9,383

ATTENDANCE: 11,086

Green Mean · January 20, 2007

NMSU's attendence numbers since 2003 season....

2003 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 19,227

ATTENDANCE: 18,624

ATTENDANCE: 19,702

ATTENDANCE: 10,318

ATTENDANCE: 12,472

2004 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 17,587

ATTENDANCE: 31,214

ATTENDANCE: 9,748

ATTENDANCE: 14,472

ATTENDANCE: 18,485

2005 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 30,343

ATTENDANCE: 11,312

ATTENDANCE: 8,312

ATTENDANCE: 11,325

ATTENDANCE: 7,345

2006 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 15,561

ATTENDANCE: 29,095

ATTENDANCE: 15,450

ATTENDANCE: 16,872

ATTENDANCE: 17,318

ATTENDANCE: 15,308

ATTENDANCE: 13,568

shaft · January 20, 2007

The pro-WACers are misinformed on the conference's payouts.

The out going members (Tulsa, SMU, Rice, UTEP) had to give up a big portion of their last payouts, this included UTEP basketball tournament cash.

The incomming members (Idaho, Utah State, New Mexico State) not only had to pay a hefty entry fee they also had to agree to reduced payouts for multiple seasons.

So had UNT taken the plunge to join the WAC at the same time our on the feild performance also took a dive then we'd be in a real tight spot. Boise's BCS cash will only off set one of these unbalance payout years.

Green Mean · January 20, 2007

Here are the attendence numbers for USU since 2003....

2003 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 19,215

ATTENDANCE: 26,594

ATTENDANCE: 12,516

ATTENDANCE: 6,988

ATTENDANCE: 9,291

2004 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 20,117

ATTENDANCE: 24,750

ATTENDANCE: 17,895

ATTENDANCE: 15,238

2005 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 12,408

ATTENDANCE: 12,542

ATTENDANCE: 12,922

ATTENDANCE: 9,457

ATTENDANCE: 7,153

2006 Numbers

ATTENDANCE: 20,082

ATTENDANCE: 8,618

ATTENDANCE: 10,701

ATTENDANCE: 10,291

ATTENDANCE: 7,108

UNTFan23 · January 20, 2007

What point are you trying to prove by posting attendence numbers? That by joining the WAC, they're attendence has gone up or something?

Regarding the NMSU numbers, aren't two of those games against a local opponent like UTEP or NMU?

risinggreen · January 20, 2007

What point are you trying to prove by posting attendence numbers? That by joining the WAC, they're attendence has gone up or something?
Regarding the NMSU numbers, aren't two of those games against a local opponent like UTEP or NMU?

Poopboy got his numbers. Case closed.

badgerwolf · January 20, 2007

What point are you trying to prove by posting attendence numbers? That by joining the WAC, they're attendence has gone up or something?
Regarding the NMSU numbers, aren't two of those games against a local opponent like UTEP or NMU?

Yes, they usually play UTEP (< 45 minutes away) or UNM (<3 hours away) every year; that accounts for the increased attendance at one game per year. The Lobo fans and the UTEP fans both turn out in force for their teams in the local area.

shaft · January 20, 2007

Now let's put those numbers into an actual context

2005 NCAA Attend.

School Rank Avg.

Utah State 112 10,896

SJSU 111 12,506

NMSU 110 12,557

MTSU 106 14,526

ULM 105 14,617

Nevada 102 15,076

Idaho 101 15,175

LA Tech 98 16,416

UNT 97 16,446

UL-L 95 17,591

Ark St 93 18,381

Troy 90 19,425

Boise 77 30,112

Hawaii 72 32,735

Fresno 62 39,307

NuMexAg · January 21, 2007

Just another perspective...

From NMSU's standpoint the move to the WAC has been a HUGE improvement. FB attendance did decline in 2005 - but only because we turned in an 0-12 goose egg. Attendance in 2006 was up. Attendance in 2007 is looking to be up again (and we play UTEP or UNM at home every year - including our Sun Belt years - so no difference there). Donations are way up. National exposure is way up (NMSU FB was on ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU 4 times in 2005 and once in 2006. Also check out BB - national exposure in the WAC is much higher). As a result our recruiting is way up. NMSU had to pay an entrance fee - but that has been paid now and we will start receiving full revenues (including our share of Boise State's jackpot). The WAC is not well publicized in Texas (I know I live here), but it IS well publicized in the West. Most of the members of the WAC are the primary schools in their state. They are the name schools there, and generally fans respond to that.

Having said that I think UNT made the right move to stay in the Belt. Fans and recruits here will not respond to the WAC any better than they respond to the Belt. They will respond to winning (eventually). UNT just needs to again start winning the Sun Belt. I expect Todd Dodge to start helping along those lines pretty soon.

Best of luck!

Green Mean · January 22, 2007

Believe it or not...I really wasnt posting all of those attendence to prove any kind of point....I just wanted to post some figures that people could look at and kinda have a clearer picture. As some people know my stance has always been that UNT should have joined the WAC but history is afcourse history and we can only look ahead in the future. On the whole....with the exception of USU's numbers...all the other schools attendence were actually pretty impressive in comparison to ours.

Green Mean · January 22, 2007

Just another perspective...
From NMSU's standpoint the move to the WAC has been a HUGE improvement. FB attendance did decline in 2005 - but only because we turned in an 0-12 goose egg. Attendance in 2006 was up. Attendance in 2007 is looking to be up again (and we play UTEP or UNM at home every year - including our Sun Belt years - so no difference there). Donations are way up. National exposure is way up (NMSU FB was on ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU 4 times in 2005 and once in 2006. Also check out BB - national exposure in the WAC is much higher). As a result our recruiting is way up. NMSU had to pay an entrance fee - but that has been paid now and we will start receiving full revenues (including our share of Boise State's jackpot). The WAC is not well publicized in Texas (I know I live here), but it IS well publicized in the West. Most of the members of the WAC are the primary schools in their state. They are the name schools there, and generally fans respond to that.
Having said that I think UNT made the right move to stay in the Belt. Fans and recruits here will not respond to the WAC any better than they respond to the Belt. They will respond to winning (eventually). UNT just needs to again start winning the Sun Belt. I expect Todd Dodge to start helping along those lines pretty soon.
Best of luck!

I agree with pretty much everything you said other than recruits and fans not responding to the WAC more than the belt. In addition to be on TV but players atleast want to play against better competition. I mean you're obviously going to get more fired up playing Hawaii rather than ULL or ULM....its just fact almost. What i've been saying numexag is that we fans at UNT want to spend 60 million dollars on a stadium yet we arent willing to spend the extra half mill or so per year and have the benefit of being in a valuable and more respectable conference and play more respected teams. I mean wouldnt you see something wrong in that? I know I would and do.

GreenEddieNT · January 22, 2007

I agree with pretty much everything you said other than recruits and fans not responding to the WAC more than the belt. In addition to be on TV but players atleast want to play against better competition. I mean you're obviously going to get more fired up playing Hawaii rather than ULL or ULM....its just fact almost. What i've been saying numexag is that we fans at UNT want to spend 60 million dollars on a stadium yet we arent willing to spend the extra half mill or so per year and have the benefit of being in a valuable and more respectable conference and play more respected teams. I mean wouldnt you see something wrong in that? I know I would and do.

Well, in that case let's spend millions on trying to get into the MWC because when all is said and done that's where the 4 WAC teams that actually have money, facilities, and a large fan base are going to end up. The other 5 WAC teams mean nothing. They are just glorified wannabes. We should try to go where the cool kids are going instead of where only the geeks will end up.

NTPhiKap99 · January 22, 2007

Well, in that case let's spend millions on trying to get into the MWC because when all is said and done that's where the 4 WAC teams that actually have money, facilities, and a large fan base are going to end up. The other 5 WAC teams mean nothing. They are just glorified wannabes. We should try to go where the cool kids are going instead of where only the geeks will end up.

I couldn't have said it any better the WAC is 2-3 teams leaving away from being as bad or worse than the Sunbelt.

UNTLifer · January 22, 2007

I....its just fact almost.

Now that's committment!

Please Dear Lord, just let this thread die.

Green Mean · January 22, 2007

Well, in that case let's spend millions on trying to get into the MWC because when all is said and done that's where the 4 WAC teams that actually have money, facilities, and a large fan base are going to end up. The other 5 WAC teams mean nothing. They are just glorified wannabes. We should try to go where the cool kids are going instead of where only the geeks will end up.

Well lets do all of this assuming...hell lets even assume that NT athletics will always SUCK ARSE cuz of people like you that dont wanna lead and want to put all your eggs in one basket (CUSA). I mean why build a stadium? Lets just assume we will always suck and we will never advance in our athletics program. If we are going to assume that those WAC teams are going to leave then frankly I think we are the wrong school to be in athletics....to me thats pure stupidity. You act as you go....you go with the times....lets look at the big picture and run with it. Thats my philosophy. There is risk in everything life but thats something you have to take if you want to advance. I come from a business family and have businesses myself so maybe my mentality has a little bias in it but good greif think of all the positives....dont always think of the negatives. Just cuz RV made the decision to stay in the sunbelt it doesnt mean he made the RIGHT decision.

AND BTW....atleast the WAC has those "4 teams"...what the hell does the sunbelt have? And I bet those other "5 WAC teams are more respected and more known than the whole sunbelt combined.

Edited January 22, 2007 by Green Mean

UNT_playmaker · January 22, 2007

CUSA all the way

UNTFan23 · January 22, 2007

CUSA all the way

+1

total = -2

Daddy Dumpsalot · January 22, 2007

AND BTW....atleast the WAC has those "4 teams"...what the hell does the sunbelt have? And I bet those other "5 WAC teams are more respected and more known than the whole sunbelt combined.

Amen!

WAC=good, SBC=bad, AnyotherConference=good, SBC=bad, ProNewConferencePeople=good, Others=bad

the real grad88 · January 22, 2007

Amen!
WAC=good, SBC=bad, AnyotherConference=good, SBC=bad, ProNewConferencePeople=good, Others=bad

Wow...when I started this thread, I had no idea that it would last this long. Do I win some kind of prize? I agree with this statement. At least the WAC has those four teams. I would like to be a part of a conference that had teams that may be sought after in the future from other conferences. Did you ever think that by competing in a better conference and building our program, that we too could be a candidate some day of an even better conference (Moutain West, CUSA, etc)?

When all you hang out with are chickens, don't expect to ever sore with the eagles. My problem is that we actually had a choice to make the jump and turned it down. Now, Boise State has a stadium fundraising campaign that is going on RIGHT NOW...while we still sit and plan and strategize and do feasibility studies.