Karl Benson Comments On Unt

johnnylightnin · October 22, 2007

I didn't hear it, but apparently Benson stated that UNT has an open invitation to join the WAC whenever they want. What do y'all think about that?

MeanGreen61 · October 22, 2007

I didn't hear it, but apparently Benson stated that UNT has an open invitation to join the WAC whenever they want. What do y'all think about that?

Thread from Tech board.

http://www.latechbbb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46000

SilverEagle · October 22, 2007

That plus the fact that UNT doesn't really need the extra $500M, as hard as that might seem, as they are reaping large oil and gas profits from recent good production on their campus and surrounding acreage.

__________________

Assuming that this is true, would the University be inclined to give any of this money to the athletic department? Also, would this money all belong to North Texas, or does some of it have to go to the general fund for all Universities?

yyz28 · October 22, 2007

The WAC issue is so difficult to quantify.

The positives are obvious. The Negatives are a little less obvious, but none the less, important.

The travel expenses for the team aren't that big of an issue which has been pretty well documented. The ability for an NT (or LaTech) fan to travel to away games becomes a bigger issue in the WAC than it is now, or than it would be in CUSA. If Boise LEAVES the WAC, than the WAC is no stronger than the 'belt, espeically with the improved play of the 'Belt teams of late.

The automatic respect we would get by not being in the 'Belt would be overshadowed by the instability in the WAC.

I've been back and forth on this one, but I think in light of where our program is now and where the 'Belt seems to be heading, our administration has done the right thing by keeping us out of the WAC for the time being.

Cerebus · October 22, 2007

We want to be in CUSA.

The last time Benson approached us, we wanted to take ASU, ULL and possibly ULM along to have conference mates close enough for fans to travel too.

The Big West killed fan support because not alot of fans wanted to travel that far, for either team.

TIgreen01 · October 22, 2007

Anybody around back in the Big West days knows why we MUST NEVER JOIN THE WAC.

heck...just watch TCU for the next couple of years. The same things that are only showing up as slight annoyances for them now will only get worse....no tv package and games that start too late and in odd times of the day. It's takes alot of effort to follow a team that plays it's games out West. If it takes a lot of effort to follow a team, you're probably going to start losing the casual fans...and we can't afford that.

That's not even covering the lack of fans that would travel to Fouts for a game. Now we have several teams that bring actual fans to games in Denton and some that even bring their bands. In the Big West days only NMSU ever had fans at Fouts...and never brought their band until we started playing for conference championships in the Sun Belt....

eulesseagle · October 22, 2007

IMHO, UNT has more in common with Tulsa, UTEP, Rice, SMU, Tulane and Houston in CUSA-West than we do in a rehash of the old BWC of NMSU, Idaho, Boise & Nevada...ect.

Heck UNT is already in a rehash of the old SLC of La-Mo, LaLa and ASU.

Personally, I believe UNT should wait for an invite to the CUSA.

Not this discussion again.

3XNTGRAD · October 22, 2007

That plus the fact that UNT doesn't really need the extra $500M, as hard as that might seem, as they are reaping large oil and gas profits from recent good production on their campus and surrounding acreage.
__________________
Assuming that this is true, would the University be inclined to give any of this money to the athletic department? Also, would this money all belong to North Texas, or does some of it have to go to the general fund for all Universities?

To my knowledge, no wells have been drilled on UNT-owned land. If they were, I think the revenue would not be shared with any other universities (our land, our revenue).

I did hear recently that UT-Arlington approved some drilling on some of their land.

Got5onIt · October 22, 2007

Only if NT can take LaLa, LaMo, & stAte.

johnnylightnin · October 22, 2007

How many fans to ULL and ULM bring to games at UNT? We've long desired to be in CUSA as well, but their field production has been total crap the last two years. They've chased markets until they're blue in the face, but they've ignored performance. With a travel partner, I would prefer Tech stay in the WAC. My personal preference is a new E-WAC, but that may not happen. If Benson could get one more Bowl and a CUSA-type TV deal, I'm fairly certain that the big dogs of the conference (Boise, Nevada, Fresno) would agree not to jump to a conference that isn't a BCS conference. If that happened, even at 10, the WAC is a better option for Tech than CUSA.

JMO, of course

jbchis · October 22, 2007

To me, you are either BCS or non-BCS. Any move to another non-BCS conference is just a lateral move for perception purposes. I would rather UNT stay put and grow. This program needs stability at the Division 1 level which it finally seems to have.

Travis · October 22, 2007

I am wondering if the wac would be a better place for us. At first i was thinking no way in hell. But, now... i am beginning to consider it.

johnnylightnin · October 22, 2007

To me, you are either BCS or non-BCS. Any move to another non-BCS conference is just a lateral move for perception purposes. I would rather UNT stay put and grow. This program needs stability at the Division 1 level which it finally seems to have.

Well, you know what they say...perception is reality...

Buford_Julep · October 22, 2007

If joining the WAC would increase revenue by $500 million, NT would join in about one minute. We could build an 80,000 seat domed stadium after one season.

If the revenue increase is only $500 K (thousand), there are some questions that need to be answered. How much of the extra revenue is thanks to Boise St beating OU? Is Boise St leaving the conference? How much would travel expenses be?

Edited October 22, 2007 by Buford_Julep

DeepGreen · October 22, 2007

Perception is the Sun Belt is the weakest of the D1A conferences (or whatever the new name is), and in many cases SBC teams are weaker than a number of D1AA teams, a conference that is not taken seriously, garners no respect, and just doesn't belong on the major college football landscape.

Reality is the Sun Belt is the weakest of the D1A conferences (or whatever the new name is), and in many cases SBC teams are weaker than a number of D1AA teams, a conference that is not taken seriously, garners no respect, and just doesn't belong on the major college football landscape.

Edited October 22, 2007 by DeepGreen

Go_UTA · October 22, 2007

To my knowledge, no wells have been drilled on UNT-owned land. If they were, I think the revenue would not be shared with any other universities (our land, our revenue).
I did hear recently that UT-Arlington approved some drilling on some of their land.

Yes.

http://www.uta.edu/naturalgas/

badgerwolf · October 22, 2007

Only if NT can take LaLa, LaMo, & stAte.

As an old timer, I definitely prefer stAte be in a conference with NT and the Cajuns. These are my two favorite conference mates!

jbchis · October 22, 2007

Perception is the Sun Belt is the weakest of the D1A conferences (or whatever the new name is), and in many cases SBC teams are weaker than a number of D1AA teams, a conference that is not taken seriously, garners no respect, and just doesn't belong on the major college football landscape.
Reality is the Sun Belt is the weakest of the D1A conferences (or whatever the new name is), and in many cases SBC teams are weaker than a number of D1AA teams, a conference that is not taken seriously, garners no respect, and just doesn't belong on the major college football landscape.

Can't you apply that perception to C-USA and WAC (outside of Boise and Hawaii) as well? Again, any move to another non-BCS conference at this time is a lateral move.

Eagle1855 · October 22, 2007

Just where the hell is boise state going? Certainly not to the Pac 10. They have neither the academics, money, nor any competitive sport outside of football to make that move. Is the MWC really that much better?

I agree- non BCS is non BCS. Stick to a conference with regional rivals and win all your games. National attention/respect will follow, regardless of conference affiliation. C-USA is and should be our goal. In the meantime, it would be nice to be competitive in our current conference.

UNTLifer · October 22, 2007

To my knowledge, no wells have been drilled on UNT-owned land. If they were, I think the revenue would not be shared with any other universities (our land, our revenue).
I did hear recently that UT-Arlington approved some drilling on some of their land.

There was a natural gas well drilled about a year or two ago just south of the Mean Green Village. You can see the old retaining pond from I35W, but I don't think any wells have been on NT land.

Quoner · October 22, 2007

In the meantime, it would be nice to be competitive in our current conference.

That's small time thinking.

cdawgrun · October 22, 2007

I didn't hear it, but apparently Benson stated that UNT has an open invitation to join the WAC whenever they want. What do y'all think about that?

take the WAC offer, NOBODY cares ABOUT ULLLLL, ULLLMMM, middle tennessee, we would have more respect in the WAC, attendence would be up at home games due to slightly better teams...just the conference name itself has history behind it and would be a tremendous boost to UNT...its a great move--like someone said earlier the sun belt is always there if it doesnt work out..and it seems to me that conference usa has taken wac teams over sun belt teams in the past..

Edited October 22, 2007 by cdawgrun

johnnylightnin · October 22, 2007

I agree- non BCS is non BCS. Stick to a conference with regional rivals and win all your games. National attention/respect will follow, regardless of conference affiliation. C-USA is and should be our goal. In the meantime, it would be nice to be competitive in our current conference.

If non-BCS is non-BCS, why should CUSA be your goal?

Eagle1855 · October 22, 2007

If non-BCS is non-BCS, why should CUSA be your goal?

as stated in my post, regional rivals.

like it or not, UH, Southern Miss, UTEP, Tulane, and SMU are far more enticing opponents than most of our Sunbelt brethren (from the casual fans perspective). Im not saying they are better programs, but they have a name...perception/reality.

Additionally, it would be a great benefit to our school to play a game or two in Houston every year. There's a lot of talent down there and most of the city doesn't realize UNT is Div 1.

johnnylightnin · October 22, 2007

as stated in my post, regional rivals.
like it or not, UH, Southern Miss, UTEP, Tulane, and SMU are far more enticing opponents than most of our Sunbelt brethren (from the casual fans perspective). Im not saying they are better programs, but they have a name...perception/reality.
Additionally, it would be a great benefit to our school to play a game or two in Houston every year. There's a lot of talent down there and most of the city doesn't realize UNT is Div 1.

Then non-BCS isn't non-BCS. Word is that FAU is the choice if CUSA takes from the Belt.