U N T To The W A C Thread On The Tech Board

MeanGreen61 · June 6, 2009

UNT to the WAC...why not ?

http://www.latechbbb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=64923

drex · June 6, 2009

I have been under the impression that we pretty much had an open ended invitation to the WAC, but are not pursuing it.

BleedGreen64 · June 6, 2009

Culturally, most Texans have far more in common with the WAC schools than the Sunbelt schools."

Maybe as much in common with FAU and FIU as opposed to Idaho and Fresno, but not nearly as much in common with,ASU, MTSU, Troy, and the Louisiana schools. Pure wishful thinking for a bedraggled LaTech. They just can not bear the thought of being in a conference with LaMonroe. (Reminds me of SMU).

UNTflyer · June 6, 2009

UNT to the WAC...why not ?
http://www.latechbbb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=64923

Why not? Because the travel budget would kill us. No, no, no, a thousand times, NO!

UNTflyer · June 6, 2009

I know we pick on UNT allot...

Yeah, but at least we can spell.

NT80 · June 6, 2009

I vote YES! Heck with travel costs, it's a step up. Plus, add in an Eastern Division with some other SBC schools for a 14-team WAC and it cuts those costs to manageable. La Tech is closer than any SBC opponent we have now.

Hawaii

Fresno

Utah St.

Boise St.

Idaho

Nevada

San Jose

NMSU

La Tech

UNT

ULL

Ark St.

---

CMJ · June 6, 2009

Nope

eulessismore · June 6, 2009

The time zone difference really does matter. There's a QB from Euless Trinity, Trevor Vittatoe, who I try to keep up with in his games with UTEP. Often, the results are not posted in the print newspapers, not on the 10:00 TV sports, and it's hard for me to keep up with it on the Internet.

MDH · June 7, 2009

Ya...the Fresno (Bark) Board isn't exactly on the same page. Then again, they're all wanting to ditch the team if they can't win more than 8 games a year.

Daddy Dumpsalot · June 7, 2009

ANYTHING....is better than this death wish of a conference called the Sun Belt.

Travel would be much less of a problem with our new increased athletic fee.

Plus our revenue would increase from more people coming to the games. Also the one poster for La Tech said "i recall they had a decent turnout the last time we played them"...yeah because it was a school not in the sunbelt conference. They should come to some of the conference games...they would laugh.

Lets face it.....we're doomed in this conference and we should be begging to get the heck out of here.

VideoEagle · June 7, 2009

No, no we've covered this so many times that it is getting ridiculous.

First, there is no reason to assume more people would come to to our games because we went Wacy. This is a conference made mostly of schools who were in the Big West with us and people didn't come to the games then. TCU, SMU, Rice and Tulsa all found their fans didn't care about Wacy teams. Our casual fans want us to play Texas, Tech and A&M, not Fresno!

Two, back when the invitation to go Wacy was first extended, our administration go a look at the real financial records with some help of UL, not the version submitted to us by La Tech, but the version La Tech had to submit to the the state of Louisiana. No office who saw the real records has ever suggest it would be a good idea to go Wacy.

Three, the time zone issue is a MAJOR problem. Euliessismore pointed it out but it is huge. Games played on the West coast in the WAC are not listed in the paper nor do they make TV. Dallas is a MAJOR media market, not some little spot in Lousisiana who will get a mention in Mondays paper or Monday's newscast if the game is too late for Saturday. We have the Cowboys who will leave no available time or space for mention on Monday. Again, this was true for SMU, TCU and Rice so why would it not be true for us?

Four, basketball is now stronger in the Sunbelt than with those Wacy folks.

Five, the schools out there might be Wacy, but their administrations are not stupid. They had repeated said they will not sanction an Eastern Wac again. Only La Tech wants this. Not surprising since if a Wac team doesn't make the BSC they can't make their budget work based on analysis by Arkstate Fan. Even Dwayne from Minden who runs their board has commented on how La Tech is going to be in a lot of hurt if they can't find another source of money.

ADLER · June 7, 2009

Such was the wisdom of one Norval Pohl.

After the WAC was raided by CUSA, losing Rice, Tulsa, SMU, and soon after UTEP, WAC Commissioner Karl Benson approached Utah State, NMSU and North Texas about joining the WAC.

Wright Waters proposed forming a league by combining the remaining 6 WAC schools with the 8 Sun Belt football schools for a combined football conference. It was an awkward idea, but as Sun Belt Commissioner, Waters had to protect the interests of all members, not just the football schools. The WAC western schools had no interest in such an alignment.

UNT President Norval Pohl was Director of the Sun Belt Presidents Council. Dr Pohl worked with the presidents of the other Sun Belt schools and with the president of Louisiana Tech and made the proposal to the WAC that that North Texas, NMSU, and Utah State would join the WAC on certain conditions, that invitations were also extended to Arkansas State, Louisiana Lafayette, and Idaho, and that a suitable Division 1 home was found for MTSU (MAC). FAU, FIU, Troy, and La Monroe were not yet Sun Belt members and were not part of the deal.

Utah State's athletic director, Rance Pugmire then broke ranks and announced that USU was joining the WAC no matter what. The deal then fell apart because Benson told the NMSU commissioner that if NMSU didn't join then the WAC could invite Idaho and be through with expansion. NMSU, which has forever aspired to be in a conference with either UTEP or New Mexico and couldn't risk being left out, left for the WAC with the blessings from the other Sun Belt schools. UTEP then bolted for CUSA and Benson again approached North Texas, stating that if North Texas wouldn't join, then the WAC would invite ASU or ULL and that North Texas would be left without a conference. Idaho was to be left to die. Pohl again declined as long as Division 1 homes were not guaranteed for Idaho, ULL, ASU, and MTSU. The presidents of ASU and ULL also declined. Benson, Pohl, and the presidents of these other universities knew that if one of the three, UNT. ASU, or ULL left, the Sun Belt football conference would die due to shortage of potential football members,

In desperation, the WAC accepted Idaho, the same program that they had been trying to let die for the preceding months.

The Sun Belt then offered Troy, FAU, FIU, and La Monroe. (Until this point ULM had been a full member of the Southland but only played their football in the Sun Belt.

That's why we have what we have today.

Edited June 7, 2009 by ADLER

LoveMG · June 7, 2009

2008 sagarin conference rankings. enough said.

CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS

1 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 78.31 79.08 ( 1) 12

2 BIG 12 (A) = 77.86 77.80 ( 2) 12

3 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 77.70 77.67 ( 3) 12

4 PAC-10 (A) = 76.14 75.39 ( 4) 10

5 BIG EAST (A) = 75.23 74.11 ( 5) 8

6 BIG TEN (A) = 73.21 73.49 ( 6) 11

7 MOUNTAIN WEST (A) = 70.90 71.72 ( 7) 9

8 CONFERENCE USA (A) = 65.88 65.75 ( 8) 12

9 I-A INDEPENDENTS (A) = 64.26 63.74 ( 10) 4

10 WESTERN ATHLETIC (A) = 63.91 64.18 ( 9) 9

11 MID-AMERICAN (A) = 61.96 61.67 ( 11) 13

12 COLONIAL (AA)= 60.84 60.64 ( 12) 12

13 SUN BELT (A) = 60.77 60.24 ( 13) 8

14 SOUTHERN (AA)= 57.08 56.48 ( 14) 9

15 BIG SKY (AA)= 53.64 54.12 ( 15) 9

16 MISSOURI VALLEY (AA)= 49.80 49.30 ( 18) 9

17 SOUTHLAND (AA)= 49.15 49.53 ( 17) 8

keith · June 7, 2009

2008 sagarin conference rankings. enough said.
CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS
1 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 78.31 79.08 ( 1) 12
2 BIG 12 (A) = 77.86 77.80 ( 2) 12
3 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 77.70 77.67 ( 3) 12
4 PAC-10 (A) = 76.14 75.39 ( 4) 10
5 BIG EAST (A) = 75.23 74.11 ( 5) 8
6 BIG TEN (A) = 73.21 73.49 ( 6) 11
7 MOUNTAIN WEST (A) = 70.90 71.72 ( 7) 9
8 CONFERENCE USA (A) = 65.88 65.75 ( 8) 12
9 I-A INDEPENDENTS (A) = 64.26 63.74 ( 10) 4
10 WESTERN ATHLETIC (A) = 63.91 64.18 ( 9) 9
11 MID-AMERICAN (A) = 61.96 61.67 ( 11) 13
12 COLONIAL (AA)= 60.84 60.64 ( 12) 12
13 SUN BELT (A) = 60.77 60.24 ( 13) 8
14 SOUTHERN (AA)= 57.08 56.48 ( 14) 9
15 BIG SKY (AA)= 53.64 54.12 ( 15) 9
16 MISSOURI VALLEY (AA)= 49.80 49.30 ( 18) 9
17 SOUTHLAND (AA)= 49.15 49.53 ( 17) 8

Hehehehe....I bet if you subtract us from the Sun Belt and add us to the WAC, the conferences would probably swap places in the rankings.

Keith

NT80 · June 7, 2009

Hehehehe....I bet if you subtract us from the Sun Belt and add us to the WAC, the conferences would probably swap places in the rankings.
Keith

Ouch! But you may be right. Anyway, who are those Colonial guys ahead of us? That is just sad. <_<

SUMG · June 7, 2009

Ouch! But you may be right. Anyway, who are those Colonial guys ahead of us? That is just sad.

http://www.caasports.com/SportSelect.dbml?...amp;SPSID=48484

eulessismore · June 7, 2009

http://www.caasports.com/SportSelect.dbml?...amp;SPSID=48484

Well, you might be able to learn more about them by finding their teams on this link:

FCS conferences, listing teams

and then looking at their records for the last 4 years on the this link:

college football data warehouse for 1-AA teams.

You might find it interesting that New Hampshire, their North Division champion last year (losing in the quarterfinals to Northern Iowa, beat Army during the regular season, and that Delaware, who lost the 2007 FCS Championship game to Appalachian State, beat Navy that year when we didn't. I don't see much in the way of common opponents to compare UNT or the rest of the Sun Belt, but their top 7 or 8 teams definitely looked more competitive against BCS teams than we have from 2005-2008.

STE · June 7, 2009

I've been saying for some time that we should join the WAC

They have put 2 teams in the BCS the last two years.

It's not ideal but it’s a step up. And perception wise - it's a big step up.

emmitt01 · June 7, 2009

Ahhhh...it must be close to Fall now. Let's see, we have a thread on helmets and a thread on how the Western Athletic Conference could solve all our woes. If someone could just start a thread about helmet stickers and/or billboards I think it'll be time to start heading towards Ball State.

Arkstfan · June 7, 2009

For the couple who think the WAC is your ticket to respectablity....

Go look at the football standings. Sucking in the Sun Belt = sucking in the WAC. Right now UNT is playing football roughly at the caliber Idaho played it in the Sun Belt, playing in the WAC and being with a cross-state rival has rocketed them into the top 118 schools.

USU and NMSU who were convinced the WAC was their ticket... their attendance has fallen and they aren't playing any better.

Humm could it be success has more to do with taking care of YOUR program than being a tick sucking off someone else?

NT80 · June 7, 2009

For the couple who think the WAC is your ticket to respectablity....
Go look at the football standings. Sucking in the Sun Belt = sucking in the WAC. Right now UNT is playing football roughly at the caliber Idaho played it in the Sun Belt, playing in the WAC and being with a cross-state rival has rocketed them into the top 118 schools.
USU and NMSU who were convinced the WAC was their ticket... their attendance has fallen and they aren't playing any better.
Humm could it be success has more to do with taking care of YOUR program than being a tick sucking off someone else?

It's just that LOSING gets old real fast. Something, anything is needed to try to ignite the fires again and find some hope amongst all the gloom. The new stadium is a good diversion. New conference rumblings are also. More fun to discuss those things than if Riley can help us get beat by 20 instead of 35.

DeepGreen · June 7, 2009

It's just that LOSING gets old real fast. Something, anything is needed to try to ignite the fires again and find some hope amongst all the gloom. The new stadium is a good diversion. New conference rumblings are also. More fun to discuss those things than if Riley can help us get beat by 20 instead of 35.

Riley Dodge will lead us to a winning season this year. Then again, I predicted Joey Byerly, because he was a local standout QB from West-Orange Stark, would be the second coming of Joe Namath(well, sort of). Wait.................oh, never mind. :blink:

DallasGreen · June 7, 2009

The time zone difference really does matter. There's a QB from Euless Trinity, Trevor Vittatoe, who I try to keep up with in his games with UTEP. Often, the results are not posted in the print newspapers, not on the 10:00 TV sports, and it's hard for me to keep up with it on the Internet.

This is the same QB that one Ramon Flanigan scouted and came back to tell DD that he would never be a D-1 player. Such is the stuff of which our departed recruiting coordinator espoused as the pearls of wisdom that started this downward free fall. When you replace a Chuck Mills with Flanigan that is not a sign of progress. We are still paying the price of that bonehead move.