Flaming T.c.u.

August 2, 2008

We are quick to jump on SMU but never seem to have a harsh word to say about TCU. I'm not sure why they get the immunity but I'm tired of their standoffishness regarding playing us.

After listening to the podcast where TCU has told us they have no interest in playing us, I started a slow seethe. Why would that be? SMU is willing to play both TCU and us and we are willing to play both TCU and SMU but TCU is the one that's too good to play its Metroplex rivals.

I am not, nor have I ever been, a TCU hater. I like their program and try to keep up with what they are doing from time to time but I am beginning to lose respect for them; not for what they've done but what they haven't done.

The Dallas-Fort Worth market is the seventh largest in the U.S. with more than 2.2 million TV households. If the three FBS schools in the area were in the same conference they would dominate any ratings in the area. They would create a synergistic interest far greater than what any of the three can do by themselves. I realize that the Big 12 has their offices in Plano and evidently pours money into this market. There are a number of alumni from those schools that live in the area but, they have no teams here. If the three were in the same conference then that conference would also pour money into their largest market, creating a college football market surpassed only by Los Angeles.

I understand that TCU is in the highest rated non-automatic qualifying conference but it's still a Non-AQ conference and always will be. If they are as good as most think they are, they could be the ringleader in forming a more regional conference and should qualify every year when a playoff system begins.

Let's hope that in the not too distant future that there is a "New Southwest Conference" and that TCU has taken a leadership role in its formation. That would elevate their prestige far more than playing in a conference where the nearest member is 600 miles away.

UNTflyer · August 2, 2008

I agree, we should be playing TCU. As far as a new SWC, is that really what college football needs? Maybe it won't be so bad if its members have some weight. If it works, and we want to be part of it, I think it really needs to be composed of:

North

UNT

SMU

Colorado

Colorado State

Tulsa

Arkansas

South

TCU

UTEP

Houston

Rice

Baylor

Texas Tech

Edited August 2, 2008 by UNTflyer

MDH · August 2, 2008

I would understand if they were scheduling only stronger than MWC opponents non-conference as a way of showing they're better than the MWC. But when you schedule SFA they're not really making that statement.

I understand if they wanted to create a rivalry just between TCU and SMU. If they had that there's not a ton of room for another non-conference DFW game.

Edited August 2, 2008 by mdh0192

dodgefan · August 2, 2008

SMU and TCU have been playing football for 90 years or so, they don't need to "create a rivalry". Weather it's TCU or SMU, it doesn't matter, NT needs to stop blaming some other school for not being in a better position. We just need to look in the mirror, if blame needs to be placed. It's not mean ole' TCU or SMU fault, it's UNT's fault.

Edited August 2, 2008 by dodgefan

UNTflyer · August 2, 2008

SMU and TCU have been playing football for 90 years or so, they don't need to "create a rivalry". Weather it's TCU or SMU, it doesn't matter, NT needs to stop blaming some other school for not being in a better position. We just need to look in the mirror, if blame needs to be placed. It's not mean ole' TCU or SMU fault, it's UNT's fault.

I don't think anyone is blaming TCU for us not being in a better position... we're blaming TCU for not playing us, and therefore being cowardly, yellow sissies.

dodgefan · August 2, 2008

we're blaming TCU for not playing us, and therefore being cowardly, yellow sissies.

I hope you are kidding.

hickoryhouse · August 3, 2008

I don't think anyone is blaming TCU for us not being in a better position... we're blaming TCU for not playing us, and therefore being cowardly, yellow sissies.

I would only have to assume a large dose of sarcasm..... :rolleyes:

NT80 · August 3, 2008

I would understand if they were scheduling only stronger than MWC opponents non-conference as a way of showing they're better than the MWC. But when you schedule SFA they're not really making that statement.
I understand if they wanted to create a rivalry just between TCU and SMU. If they had that there's not a ton of room for another non-conference DFW game.

TCU is still trying to separate itself from being a former SWC player. They'd like to be the Stanford of Texas but are too small for many to know or care about Nationally. They will have us back on the schedule once they realize what an easy travel game it is and that we'd bring more fans to cowtown than most MWC schools.

RETSO · August 3, 2008

I agree, we should be playing TCU. As far as a new SWC, is that really what college football needs? Maybe it won't be so bad if its members have some weight. If it works, and we want to be part of it, I think it really needs to be composed of:
North
UNT
SMU
Colorado
Colorado State
Tulsa
Arkansas
South
TCU
UTEP
Houston
Rice
Baylor
Texas Tech

Wishful thinking....but never gonna happen.

I cant see 3 Big 12 and 1 SEC schools leaving a big money Conference to join and play vs former MWC, CUSA and Sun Belt teams.

Edited August 3, 2008 by RETSO

GoMeanGreen1999 · August 3, 2008

Wishful thinking....but never gonna happen.
I cant see 3 Big 12 and 1 SEC schools leaving a big money Conference to join and play vs former MWC, CUSA and Sun Belt teams.

Wishful thinking or just plain PIPE DREAM. Either way, it won't happen for the reasons you just mentioned. The Big 12 schools and Arkansas would be selling themselves short and "dropping" down to do this.

GrandGreen · August 3, 2008

I can see some rationale for TCU not playing NT in football with only 4 oc games to be scheduled. Playing SMU every year leaves only 3 games to be scheduled and means that they will always have one local match. This year they are playing two very attractive oc games, Stanford and Oklahoma. The other game is with 1-aa SFA. Obviously, it guarantees a home game and an easy one at that. I wish that a TCU/NT could be scheduled but their apparent strategy of playing one big time school and another BCS level school plus SMU and a team that they can get for a home game with no return appears solid to me.

In basketball, their only reason to not play NT, is that they don't want to get beat. With an OC schedule including Angelo St., Ark-Pine Bluff, Grambling, Texas Southern, Prairie View A&M and Jackson State, it almost seems they want to be in the SWAC. There is no logic in not playing NT in basketball and the same is true for SMU not playing NT. I don't see either SMU or TCU scheduling NT in basketball unless they think it is a sure victory.

August 3, 2008

I agree, we should be playing TCU. As far as a new SWC, is that really what college football needs? Maybe it won't be so bad if its members have some weight. If it works, and we want to be part of it, I think it really needs to be composed of:
North
UNT
SMU
Colorado
Colorado State
Tulsa
Arkansas
South
TCU
UTEP
Houston
Rice
Baylor
Texas Tech

Like the others, I don't believe that you could ever get Colorado, Colorado State, Arkansas, Baylor or Texas Tech from their conferences but the other seven would be great. To those we might add Southern Miss, Memphis, Tulane, for a ten-team league or two among Louisiana Tech, New Mexico State, Louisiana-Lafayette or Arkansas State for a 12-team conference. To me, the key element is getting all three Metroplex teams in the same conference. I can understand if the MWC was made a (automatic) BCS conference that TCU should stay: otherwise, they would be better off in a regional conference with nearby teams.

I also think that a sponsor should be found for a holiday basketball tournament that includes UTA, TCU, SMU, and UNT each year.

SCREAMING EAGLE-66 · August 3, 2008

---Hell will be frozen over before that conference exists, not that I would object to it. I do wish the metroplex basketball tournament would exist and on a regular basis. All would benefit from a cheap travel and lots of local fan interest and would work well for a pre-Christmas tournament since players would be close to homebase... At present none of the four are in the same conference so that is a positve also since those matchups would not otherwise occur later... This makes too much sense and the egos of some of them will likely prevent it unfortunately.

Chrisattsu · August 4, 2008

---Hell will be frozen over before that conference exists, not that I would object to it. I do wish the metroplex basketball tournament would exist and on a regular basis. All would benefit from a cheap travel and lots of local fan interest and would work well for a pre-Christmas tournament since players would be close to homebase... At present none of the four are in the same conference so that is a positve also since those matchups would not otherwise occur later... This makes too much sense and the egos of some of them will likely prevent it unfortunately.

Would you be willing to add a couple of D2 scrub teams in Tarleton and A&M-Commerce? Or would egos prevent that from happening?

untjim1995 · August 4, 2008

We are quick to jump on SMU but never seem to have a harsh word to say about TCU. I'm not sure why they get the immunity but I'm tired of their standoffishness regarding playing us.
After listening to the podcast where TCU has told us they have no interest in playing us, I started a slow seethe. Why would that be? SMU is willing to play both TCU and us and we are willing to play both TCU and SMU but TCU is the one that's too good to play its Metroplex rivals.
I am not, nor have I ever been, a TCU hater. I like their program and try to keep up with what they are doing from time to time but I am beginning to lose respect for them; not for what they've done but what they haven't done.
The Dallas-Fort Worth market is the seventh largest in the U.S. with more than 2.2 million TV households. If the three FBS schools in the area were in the same conference they would dominate any ratings in the area. They would create a synergistic interest far greater than what any of the three can do by themselves. I realize that the Big 12 has their offices in Plano and evidently pours money into this market. There are a number of alumni from those schools that live in the area but, they have no teams here. If the three were in the same conference then that conference would also pour money into their largest market, creating a college football market surpassed only by Los Angeles.
I understand that TCU is in the highest rated non-automatic qualifying conference but it's still a Non-AQ conference and always will be. If they are as good as most think they are, they could be the ringleader in forming a more regional conference and should qualify every year when a playoff system begins.
Let's hope that in the not too distant future that there is a "New Southwest Conference" and that TCU has taken a leadership role in its formation. That would elevate their prestige far more than playing in a conference where the nearest member is 600 miles away.

I am from Ft. Worth and know many TCU alums and supporters. It is really simple why they don't play UNT. They don't believe that there is enough advantages to outweigh the negatives if they lose--and they are right. Look at it this way, they are the big dog right now in non-AQ BCS, at least in the Southwest. They play their metroplex rival that is their peer every year. TCU is in great shape--they get strong recruits, good hometown support, and have a lot of funds. To schedule UNT right now--or even in the next five years--doesn't serve their interests at all. Maybe it will in the future, but even if we got our program going in the right direction, TCUs alums made it clear when we played them in that last series that they didn't like it at all. We have our work cut out for us on many levels beyond just winning and building a new stadium. In the state of Texas and the entire Southwest, most schools' alumni still believe that we aren't worth the risk of playing because of where we stand in today's NCAA. The good news, though, is that the success of the SMU series for both schools may have opened up some eyes to the other athletic departments in the state to look at us more closely when scheduling games in the future.

eagle37 · August 4, 2008

We are quick to jump on SMU but never seem to have a harsh word to say about TCU. I'm not sure why they get the immunity but I'm tired of their standoffishness regarding playing us.
After listening to the podcast where TCU has told us they have no interest in playing us, I started a slow seethe. Why would that be? SMU is willing to play both TCU and us and we are willing to play both TCU and SMU but TCU is the one that's too good to play its Metroplex rivals.

Maybe they dont want to play us, because we have beat their ars when we have played them in the last twenty years. We beat them two out of three days during the Wacker Backer days and they havent wanted to play us since.

Quoner · August 4, 2008

Maybe they dont want to play us, because we have beat their ars when we have played them in the last twenty years. We beat them two out of three days during the Wacker Backer days and they havent wanted to play us since.

I bet they remember that way better than the two wins this decade.

August 4, 2008

I am from Ft. Worth and know many TCU alums and supporters. It is really simple why they don't play UNT. They don't believe that there is enough advantages to outweigh the negatives if they lose--and they are right. Look at it this way, they are the big dog right now in non-AQ BCS, at least in the Southwest. They play their metroplex rival that is their peer every year. TCU is in great shape--they get strong recruits, good hometown support, and have a lot of funds. To schedule UNT right now--or even in the next five years--doesn't serve their interests at all. Maybe it will in the future, but even if we got our program going in the right direction, TCUs alums made it clear when we played them in that last series that they didn't like it at all. We have our work cut out for us on many levels beyond just winning and building a new stadium. In the state of Texas and the entire Southwest, most schools' alumni still believe that we aren't worth the risk of playing because of where we stand in today's NCAA. The good news, though, is that the success of the SMU series for both schools may have opened up some eyes to the other athletic departments in the state to look at us more closely when scheduling games in the future.

If what you say is true, then why does TCU play SMU? The Mustangs are not their peer. They may be soon but they haven't been since the demise of the SWC. TCU's program is elevated to the point where they should not worry about what others might think; they have a proven record. Anytime you tee it up you run the risk of losing. If North Texas is truly not their peer then we should be as much of a cinch as SFA, which is non-FBS. Isn't that as bad of a risk?

One purpose of football is fan interest. The last time we played them in Fort Worth about 6,000 North Texans were there. About 3,000 TCU supporters were in attendance when they played in Denton. That's about as many as either school has traveled in regular season.

Of course, our primary concern right now is a new stadium. Assuming that will happen, the next order is to fill it. That won't happen with Sun Belt Teams but it easily could with either TCU or SMU there.

The MWC is the best non-BCS conference but they are in many ways like the WAC. Take away BYU and Utah and they are pretty ordinary. TCU is third in that conference in rating and attendance. The WAC has three very good teams and the rest are mediocre or less. Neither will ever be an automatic qualifying conference. When we go to a playoff system TCU will have a slim chance at the playoff slot but if they were in a conference where they would be the premier team their chances would be greatly elevated.

Losing to anyone is usually a nothing to gain, everything to lose situation. If the Horned Frogs are that concerned about their image maybe they should find a conference of patsies but even the Sun Belt doesn't fit that category.

Edited August 4, 2008 by GrayEagleOne

untjim1995 · August 4, 2008

If what you say is true, then why does TCU play SMU? The Mustangs are not their peer. They may be soon but they haven't been since the demise of the SWC. TCU's program is elevated to the point where they should not worry about what others might think; they have a proven record. Anytime you tee it up you run the risk of losing. If North Texas is truly not their peer then we should be as much of a cinch as SFA, which is non-FBS. Isn't that as bad of a risk?
One purpose of football is fan interest. The last time we played them in Fort Worth about 6,000 North Texans were there. About 3,000 TCU supporters were in attendance when they played in Denton. That's about as many as either school has traveled in regular season.
Of course, our primary concern right now is a new stadium. Assuming that will happen, the next order is to fill it. That won't happen with Sun Belt Teams but it easily could with either TCU or SMU there.
The MWC is the best non-BCS conference but they are in many ways like the WAC. Take away BYU and Utah and they are pretty ordinary. TCU is third in that conference in rating and attendance. The WAC has three very good teams and the rest are mediocre or less. Neither will ever be an automatic qualifying conference. When we go to a playoff system TCU will have a slim chance at the playoff slot but if they were in a conference where they would be the premier team their chances would be greatly elevated.
Losing to anyone is usually a nothing to gain, everything to lose situation. If the Horned Frogs are that concerned about their image maybe they should find a conference of patsies but even the Sun Belt doesn't fit that category.

GEO,

I understand many of your points, but, again, to the TCU fan and alum, they don't see any value in playing UNT. Remember that SMU is their rival--always has been. Even if they are in much better shape right now than SMU, they are still big rivals and always have been. They are peers in that they share a rivalry that is very old, involved two cities that rival each other, and are both private schools. This will never change as the TCU fans and SMU fans hate each other. They stopped playing their series one year and their fans were all up in arms about that because they both believe that they should always play each other. That is a rivalry and that is why they will always play each other. The same goes for UH and Rice (conference mates for now again but were not for awhile), and will eventually get there for UNT and SMU, which assumes that the contract to play each other never gets cancelled in the future. And, of course, SFA is a much less risk than playing UNT--they aren't peers either, but their athletic department recognizes that you should beat an FCS school, but getting one that will bring people to the game is a win-win for them. Playing UNT may bring people to the stands, but they could lose to us, which is the entire point of the TCU fan. Sure, they have lost to FCS teams in the past, but the risk is lower than playing UNT, which could play with them and be motivated to beat them with talent that feels as if TCU looked down at them. The best questions in my opinon to ask yourself are if you weren't a UNT alum, and your team was playing us, a huge public school that has really not done much on the field in the last 30 years or so, what would you think if your ranked team (or at least close to being ranked team) played UNT, especially in Denton? Would you care that they don't draw people to their dump of a stadium, except for the few games when a well-known team comes to town? Would you think that it would really help you in recruiting all that much if you win, but could really hurt if you lost? Most people on the outside of this would definitely tell TCU to avoid us, try and get games against former Big XII foes that you do recruit against, and keep your long-standing rival in the OOC. Just my $.02. And, oh by the way, I hate their sentiment toward us. Its just what we face from all of these old SWC schools' fans and alumni.

BleedGreen64 · August 4, 2008

One thing we can do to help the image is take a crowd to Rice. Show all of the in state schools how we can boost their attendance. Only UT, A&M, and Tech (while the latter is winning) do not need that.

Secondly beat the other non BCS temas we play and some of the BCS teams. IMO>