State Of The Sunbelt

Mean'n'Green07 · September 15, 2007

Is it just me or is the sunbelt getting much more media coverage this year? I've seen 4 games televised so far, and two of them were at sunbelt stadiums. After the games I've watched, I'm not sure if DD's teams really declined that much in his last years because the sunbelt has improved leaps and bounds. I know it's way to early in the season to really make judgement on this, but how do you think any of our four bowl team squads would fair against arky state, muts or troy this year?

If we can patch up our defense, we will have very exciting conference play.

UNTFan23 · September 15, 2007

I'm not impressed with the officials this season. We've seen two very obvious blown calls so far and the season is still very young. As it stands right now, I issuing a vote of no confidence in the Belt officiating when it comes to making the right call on the field the first time. For this conference to really move forward, we need to improve in all areas of the game, which should also include our officials. Troy winning games like this is great, but people will continue to look down on this conference when there is an obvious blown call like that, especially when the game is nationally broadcast.

As a fan, I don't think I am asking for anything out of the ordinary. Short of an email campaign to the Sun Belt office, I'm really not sure what can be done in this regard.

Edited September 15, 2007 by UNTFan23

Arkstfan · September 15, 2007

I'm not impressed with the officials this season. We've seen two very obvious blown calls so far and the season is still very young. As it stands right now, I issuing a vote of no confidence in the Belt officiating when it comes to making the right call on the field the first time. For this conference to really move forward, we need to improve in all areas of the game, which should also include our officials. Troy winning games like this is great, but people will continue to look down on this conference when there is an obvious blown call like that, especially when the game is nationally broadcast.
As a fan, I don't think I am asking for anything out of the ordinary. Short of an email campaign to the Sun Belt office, I'm really not sure what can be done in this regard.

And the Big XII had to admit an error in the Texas-ASU game and had to use replay to over-rule a play called as a fumble and touchdown for ASU. The Belt has plenty of company.

UNTFan23 · September 15, 2007

And the Big XII had to admit an error in the Texas-ASU game and had to use replay to over-rule a play called as a fumble and touchdown for ASU. The Belt has plenty of company.

But as a whole, which conference, the Belt or the B12, has a better reputation as it pertains to its officiating? If you did a fair sampling of football fans I'd wager you'd get an overwhelming response that the B12 has better officials.

EDIT: Additionally, at least the B12 owned up to their officials' coming up short on that play. While it's too early for the back office of the Belt to review that OSU fumble inside the Trojan 10, I'm not expecting the Belt to own up to it either. If the Belt does call out the officials on that bad play call, it at least shows there is a little accountability in the conference.

Edited September 15, 2007 by UNTFan23

Arkstfan · September 15, 2007

But as a whole, which conference, the Belt or the B12, has a better reputation as it pertains to its officiating? If you did a fair sampling of football fans I'd wager you'd get an overwhelming response that the B12 has better officials.

I don't give a hairy rats about a fair sampling of football fans, because the majority are stupid and/or ignorant.

They think a school from the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, Pac-10, or SEC should NEVER lose to a school from the MAC, Sun Belt, WAC, CUSA, MWC or I-AA. It includes people I know who honest to God make their decision on whether or not to attend Razorback non-conference games on whether it is televised because if it isn't on TV it's a team they'll blow out.

The biggest hit the Sun Belt got in officiating was the Alamo Bowl and that was BS. ESPN blah blah blah blahed about how they didn't know how to do video replay when a play didn't get reviewed, the reason it wasn't reviewed was because the pager the Alamo Bowl gave them failed. Then Lloyd I lost to a I-AA because I'm stupid and went for 2 early Carr called a timeout later to force a replay review for a play the officials had looked at and upheld and once again ESPN did the same rant about the officials. ESPN does that because they can get away with it. If you think Slive, Delaney, or Swofford would let them get away with it you are badly mistaken.

akriesman · September 15, 2007

I'm not sure if DD's teams really declined that much in his last years because the sunbelt has improved leaps and bounds.

Based on recent history, I have to agree with this. The Sun Belt is definately much stronger than it was when NT was dominating. TD will take us to the next level. And, it is a good thing because the Sun Belt is no pushover anymore.

UNTFan23 · September 15, 2007

With the Oregon/Oklahoma games, I believe some, if not the entire officiating crew got suspendeded for that hack job they did. The Pac-10 conference owned up to it and did something about it that at least won a little respect back for the conference (which is well known for homer officials anyway).

Sun Belt officiating is what it is, but I don't really expect much to be done about it. Until the conference admits [publicly] that something is being done about bad calls, people will think that nothing is being done at all. Perception is reality.

I just wonder when a line is drawn in the sand and people start demanding more from the officials followed by the conference keeping the officials accountable for their calls.

Edited September 15, 2007 by UNTFan23

foutsrouts · September 15, 2007

I'm finally being convinced more and more, that the SBC is rapidly becoming a conference to be reckoned with. Most of our schools are in recruiting hotbeds and it may be starting to show. Troy was dominating tonight. We better get our defensive arses together real quick or we may have them handed to us this season.

KingDL1 · September 15, 2007

What are you people smoking?

Arkansas State 0-1

Florida Atlantic 1-1

Florida International 0-2

La.-Lafayette 0-2

Louisiana-Monroe 0-2

Middle Tennessee 0-2

North Texas 0-2

Tory 1-2

As a conference the belt is 2-14 with only one win outside the conference, my God in 2001 didn't we beat Tech.

buff64 · September 15, 2007

It is true that the SBC won - lost record is not very impressive this year, note that nearly all of their games have been on the road. For the most part this is the only way the large money schools will agree to play them. Also , realize that many of the so called power schools , A&M, an example , are undefeated ,but look who they have played and all at home. Next week, # 4 , UNT will have it's first home game ,bout time. With a little selective schelduing ,we also, could be undefeated . Several years ago RV told us that UNT would no longer play teams that would not play home and home. That has not been the case . ( and I realize the $ factor ). Give the SBC some love , several schools have given very good accounts of themselves this year , despite the disadvantages of trying to upgrade.

CajunNation · September 15, 2007

What are you people smoking?
Arkansas State 0-1
Florida Atlantic 1-1
Florida International 0-2
La.-Lafayette 0-2
Louisiana-Monroe 0-2
Middle Tennessee 0-2
North Texas 0-2
Tory 1-2
As a conference the belt is 2-14 with only one win outside the conference, my God in 2001 didn't we beat Tech.

Before last night we were 0-13 in non-conference play. The key is who we played:

#3 OKLAHOMA

#5 FLORIDA

#6 TEXAS

#9 LOUISVILLE

#12 PENN STATE

#16 ARKANSAS

#17 SOUTH CAROLINA

#20 CLEMSON

MARYLAND

OKLAHOMA STATE

TULSA

OHIO

SMU

All but 2 of these games were road games.

The only truly disappointing thing about our results so far in that we didn't take at least 2 of 3 from Tulsa, Ohio, and SMU.

I would venture to guess that we have had the toughest non-conference schedule of any conference in the country.

Edited September 15, 2007 by CajunNation

GreenN'walinsVet · September 15, 2007

It is true that the SBC won - lost record is not very impressive this year, note that nearly all of their games have been on the road. For the most part this is the only way the large money schools will agree to play them. Also , realize that many of the so called power schools , A&M, an example , are undefeated ,but look who they have played and all at home. Next week, # 4 , UNT will have it's first home game ,bout time. With a little selective schelduing ,we also, could be undefeated . Several years ago RV told us that UNT would no longer play teams that would not play home and home. That has not been the case . ( and I realize the $ factor ). Give the SBC some love , several schools have given very good accounts of themselves this year , despite the disadvantages of trying to upgrade.

I wouldnt say that this is NOT true. You have to remember that most of the teams we are playing now, were contracted three, four, five or more years ago. Look at our upcoming projected schedules:

Kansas State - reportadly coming to denton

Rice - Denton

SMU - came to denton

Tulsa - came to denton

Akron - sending Navy to denton

Air Force - reportadly coming to Denton

W. Kentucky - coming to Denton

I think we are moving to play teams that will give us a return game, now maybe we will still have to play one or so a year that does not for the money until we can prove to bring enough people to fouts so that we dont have to schedule money games, but i think RV is proving that these multiple body bag games will be a thing of the past. We just have to get through all of these contracts that were signed multiple years ago.

filmerj · September 15, 2007

What are you people smoking?
Arkansas State 0-1
Florida Atlantic 1-1
Florida International 0-2
La.-Lafayette 0-2
Louisiana-Monroe 0-2
Middle Tennessee 0-2
North Texas 0-2
Tory 1-2
As a conference the belt is 2-14 with only one win outside the conference, my God in 2001 didn't we beat Tech.

Weren't we in the Big West when we beat Tech? I remember when we made the move from the now defunct Big West to the Sunbelt. I was skeptical of the move, and I guess it wasn't such a bad thing. But I wonder how boise st, nevada, new mexico, and idaho opting out of the sunbelt has helped their program. Were they not invited? I don't remember. I't seems to have helped boise st. I know the belt was created in mind to help create more regional matchups and make it easier to get fans involved in traveling. It's just a thought.

Edited September 15, 2007 by filmerj

Green Lantern · September 15, 2007

It is true that the SBC won - lost record is not very impressive this year, note that nearly all of their games have been on the road. For the most part this is the only way the large money schools will agree to play them. Also , realize that many of the so called power schools , A&M, an example , are undefeated ,but look who they have played and all at home. Next week, # 4 , UNT will have it's first home game ,bout time. With a little selective schelduing ,we also, could be undefeated . Several years ago RV told us that UNT would no longer play teams that would not play home and home. That has not been the case . ( and I realize the $ factor ). Give the SBC some love , several schools have given very good accounts of themselves this year , despite the disadvantages of trying to upgrade.

Great point about the home and home thing that RV said. I tried to bring this up in another thread (specifically about scheduling @ LSU 2 years in a row) and I got responses like "Donate $1,000,000 to the athletic department and then we wouldn't have to schedule these type of games". Really constructive stuff.

I'm glad someone else remembers what was told to us. If the season ticket sales increased significantly and the MGC donations went up, we were supposed to lose the juggernauts on our schedule. Hopefully this will be the case in the future.

To the point of the thread...The SBC has looked pretty good so far in OOC games. The conference as a whole needs to take the next step and start "cashing in" on these close games.

Kudos to Troy for setting the bar this year.

GrandGreen · September 15, 2007

Why would you want NT to not play the so called juggernauts? Outside of the money angle, this helps you in recruiting, exposure, and gives you a very good indication of were your program is. I don't have a problem with it and would in fact support one game a year against this type of program and in fact think this years schedule is not that bad. NT is an 1a university and should play a representative schedule.

Obviously, economics is the key component of playing these games. I am not sure I've ever heard of RV stating that he would not play money games, but only that he wanted to limit them. NT is very limited with the amount they can earn from a home game. Excluding the end zone there are only 20,000 seats to be sold. If you assume that at least 6,000 of these must be allocated to students, then you have 14,000 to sell. To be frank, student attendance is great but adds little to the bottom line as they have already paid through student fees. If you assume that all available seats are sold at $20 then you have total receipts of only $280,000 compared to a guarantee of $500,000. NT would also make some from concessions and parking but would also have expenses from hosting the game. There would also be travel expenses associated with the guarantee game.

Incorporating these expenses into the equation, some may assume that in fact the home game is very close to matching the guarantee. Not true, not even close. The reason is that to get the home game NT has either got to play a return game or pay a guarantee. If it is a home and away series than in effect the amount received for the home game is for two games not one. So the max for two games is approximately $280,000 less travel expenses to the away game. If you are paying a guarantee game then NT's gross would be reduced by that guarantee. It would be very difficult if not impossible to get any 1a team to play at Fouts without a return game unless NT wanted to guarantee more than their total ticket revenue for the game.

In summary, money games are a fact of life for most programs that do not share in huge conference revenues, or support by very large private donations. Unfortunately, even a new stadium does little to change this reality. In fact, it may make it much worse if it is financed by debt that much be repaid through NT athletic funds.

Green Mean · September 15, 2007

Why would you want NT to not play the so called juggernauts? Outside of the money angle, this helps you in recruiting, exposure, and gives you a very good indication of were your program is. I don't have a problem with it and would in fact support one game a year against this type of program and in fact think this years schedule is not that bad. NT is an 1a university and should play a representative schedule.
Obviously, economics is the key component of playing these games. I am not sure I've ever heard of RV stating that he would not play money games, but only that he wanted to limit them. NT is very limited with the amount they can earn from a home game. Excluding the end zone there are only 20,000 seats to be sold. If you assume that at least 6,000 of these must be allocated to students, then you have 14,000 to sell. To be frank, student attendance is great but adds little to the bottom line as they have already paid through student fees. If you assume that all available seats are sold at $20 then you have total receipts of only $280,000 compared to a guarantee of $500,000. NT would also make some from concessions and parking but would also have expenses from hosting the game. There would also be travel expenses associated with the guarantee game.
Incorporating these expenses into the equation, some may assume that in fact the home game is very close to matching the guarantee. Not true, not even close. The reason is that to get the home game NT has either got to play a return game or pay a guarantee. If it is a home and away series than in effect the amount received for the home game is for two games not one. So the max for two games is approximately $280,000 less travel expenses to the away game. If you are paying a guarantee game then NT's gross would be reduced by that guarantee. It would be very difficult if not impossible to get any 1a team to play at Fouts without a return game unless NT wanted to guarantee more than their total ticket revenue for the game.
In summary, money games are a fact of life for most programs that do not share in huge conference revenues, or support by very large private donations. Unfortunately, even a new stadium does little to change this reality. In fact, it may make it much worse if it is financed by debt that much be repaid through NT athletic funds.

I agree with you however when you are getting blowing out 65-0, 79-10 etc without any competition I just think you need to take a step back and maybe play lower bcs schools. It surely does help in exposure and recruiting and thats what I have said from day one that lets not get shoved out of the building and play balls out and we have the possibility of competing.

Green Lantern · September 15, 2007

Why would you want NT to not play the so called juggernauts? Outside of the money angle, this helps you in recruiting, exposure, and gives you a very good indication of were your program is. I don't have a problem with it and would in fact support one game a year against this type of program and in fact think this years schedule is not that bad. NT is an 1a university and should play a representative schedule.
Obviously, economics is the key component of playing these games. I am not sure I've ever heard of RV stating that he would not play money games, but only that he wanted to limit them. NT is very limited with the amount they can earn from a home game. Excluding the end zone there are only 20,000 seats to be sold. If you assume that at least 6,000 of these must be allocated to students, then you have 14,000 to sell. To be frank, student attendance is great but adds little to the bottom line as they have already paid through student fees. If you assume that all available seats are sold at $20 then you have total receipts of only $280,000 compared to a guarantee of $500,000. NT would also make some from concessions and parking but would also have expenses from hosting the game. There would also be travel expenses associated with the guarantee game.
Incorporating these expenses into the equation, some may assume that in fact the home game is very close to matching the guarantee. Not true, not even close. The reason is that to get the home game NT has either got to play a return game or pay a guarantee. If it is a home and away series than in effect the amount received for the home game is for two games not one. So the max for two games is approximately $280,000 less travel expenses to the away game. If you are paying a guarantee game then NT's gross would be reduced by that guarantee. It would be very difficult if not impossible to get any 1a team to play at Fouts without a return game unless NT wanted to guarantee more than their total ticket revenue for the game.
In summary, money games are a fact of life for most programs that do not share in huge conference revenues, or support by very large private donations. Unfortunately, even a new stadium does little to change this reality. In fact, it may make it much worse if it is financed by debt that much be repaid through NT athletic funds.

The argument is not about not playing "money games"...It's the opponents that we choose to schedule. UT, OU, and LSU in 4 years are not the kinds of games I want to see on our schedule. Perennial top 5 programs. There are a host of other teams in BCS conferences that we could try and schedule, and still get a nice payout...while still having a good chance to win. Have you not been on the board the last 4-5 years after our opening games? People say they wanna play the "big boys", and then when we do (and lose big) everyone freaks out.

Now, if losing those kinds of games has that effect on the "hardcore" NT fan base here on GMG, what effect does it have on the casual NT fans? I'll tell you...it breads apathy among those fans. They see that we got killed in a season opener...again. They lose interest in NT football again for another year.

I'm all for scheduling a couple of $ games. I understand the need for these games to support the program financially. Just pick some opponents that we have a reasonable chance to compete with. Miami next year would have been great...oh wait, we dropped them to put LSU on the schedule.