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

shaft · June 7, 2009

Why not the WAC?

Because the Big West failed.

And why throw LA Tech a life preserver. Tech's isolation is going to force them out of the WAC and into the SBC in the next round of conference re-alignment.

UNTflyer · June 8, 2009

C-USA Mt. West or nothing!

MWC probably won't take us, but C-USA would put us in the driver's seat for our future. When the athletic fee maxes out in 7 years, we'd be in a position to be one of the best funded athletics programs in C-USA.

Edited June 8, 2009 by UNTflyer

Quoner · June 8, 2009

What about travel costs? Could we compete? Would they have us? Do we need to add baseball first? How could we align the divisions? Good stuff for sure.

GoMeanGreen1999 · June 8, 2009

What about travel costs? Could we compete? Would they have us? Do we need to add baseball first? How could we align the divisions? Good stuff for sure.

This must be a post from someone other Quoner - it too generic.

Quoner · June 8, 2009

This must be a post from someone other Quoner - it too generic.

I think these are important questions and I'd like to see them explored. Sorry if you can't handle focusing on the issues that will shape the future of this great institution.

VideoEagle · June 8, 2009

Why not the WAC?
Because the Big West failed.
And why throw LA Tech a life preserver. Tech's isolation is going to force them out of the WAC and into the SBC in the next round of conference re-alignment.

This is an excellent point. Is the SBC thinking about expanding to help Denver? Why should the WAC expand to save Tech?

Daddy Dumpsalot · June 8, 2009

I'm sorry but we will never be part of the C-USA. There are far better schools that would jump at the chance for that conference that have A LOT more to bring to the table than UNT. And lets face it...MWC wanting UNT is so out of the scope that it should not even be brought up.

There is no reason to list reasons because if you are honest with yourself and take off 'the green goggles' it doesn't take much to realize it.

Sadly our only option is to try to build up the SBC and by the looks of it it is going no where fast. We had one school do something of worth this past season and that was WKU going to the dance. Us being in the SBC these past years has done nothing for us and if history repeats itself as they say...

GrandGreen · June 8, 2009

I'm sorry but we will never be part of the C-USA. There are far better schools that would jump at the chance for that conference that have A LOT more to bring to the table than UNT. And lets face it...MWC wanting UNT is so out of the scope that it should not even be brought up.
There is no reason to list reasons because if you are honest with yourself and take off 'the green goggles' it doesn't take much to realize it.
Sadly our only option is to try to build up the SBC and by the looks of it it is going no where fast. We had one school do something of worth this past season and that was WKU going to the dance. Us being in the SBC these past years has done nothing for us and if history repeats itself as they say...

Well Danny what "far better schools" are just chomping at the bit to get into CUSA? There are not even a lot of "far better schools" already in CUSA. If you are talking only about the football program, yes; NT is on hard times but that doesn't mean that can't be relatively quickly turned around.

If you really think NT cannot compete as an institution with the rest of the Belt or the various 1-aa schools that want to move up, I wonder what your rationale is. I seldom am accused of wearing green goggles but I think you are blinded by something other than the basic facts. NT is a large University in a great location with academics and potential significantly better than most of the Belt and most of the programs that want to move up to the FB classification.

VideoEagle · June 8, 2009

I'm sorry but we will never be part of the C-USA. There are far better schools that would jump at the chance for that conference that have A LOT more to bring to the table than UNT. And lets face it...MWC wanting UNT is so out of the scope that it should not even be brought up.
There is no reason to list reasons because if you are honest with yourself and take off 'the green goggles' it doesn't take much to realize it.
Sadly our only option is to try to build up the SBC and by the looks of it it is going no where fast. We had one school do something of worth this past season and that was WKU going to the dance. Us being in the SBC these past years has done nothing for us and if history repeats itself as they say...

Just curious, but since all the actual analysis that includes costs and real math shows this is a terrible idea and no one has suggested any figures to dispute this, why "removing the green goggles" could make loses in money, news coverage and overall prestige into bonuses?

Again, if the SBC doesn't want to expand west to make Denver a viable member, why should those Wacy folks expand east to save La Tech?

Arkstfan · June 8, 2009

Sadly our only option is to try to build up the SBC and by the looks of it it is going no where fast. We had one school do something of worth this past season and that was WKU going to the dance. Us being in the SBC these past years has done nothing for us and if history repeats itself as they say...

I was rather pleased with ASU's win over TAMU after the "accidental officiating mistake" at Texas last year.

I thought middle of the Sun Belt pack MTSU's win over ACC member and bowl game winner Maryland was pretty nice.

I thought FAU's win over Central Michigan was pretty good too given it was played in a bowl game 2 1/2 hours from CMU's campus, and CMU did beat Indiana, albeit a bad Indiana team but still a BCS win.

MDH · June 8, 2009

I bet if you take out Boise the WAC is not even on the list.

Not to be a homer or anything...but Nevada, Fresno, and Hawaii could beat the best team in the belt 95% of the time along with a surprise team of La Tech, San Jose St or believe it or not Utah St (next year is "their" year) also being able to do the same. The only consistantly hopeless teams in the WAC are NMSU and Idaho...both of which would beat us and WKY last and this year.

I bet Boise won't even win the WAC this year...watch out for Collin Kaepernick and Nevada - they're doing big things!

gangrene · June 8, 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.

You know...I was totally opposed to the idea two years ago, but I think I've since done a 180. I saw a BYU vs. Utah game on the MTN channel the other day and it made me change my mind. Besides, maybe it will motivate our guys. Lord knows we've needed some extra motivation these last two years.

GrandGreen · June 8, 2009

You know...I was totally opposed to the idea two years ago, but I think I've since done a 180. I saw a BYU vs. Utah game on the MTN channel the other day and it made me change my mind. Besides, maybe it will motivate our guys. Lord knows we've needed some extra motivation these last two years.

Just curious, how did a game between two of the best Mountain West teams change your mind about NT and the WAC.

UNT_playmaker · June 8, 2009

I have always been a very vocal opponent of moving to the WAC but for the first time I am going to say YES to UNT moving to the WAC.

The WAC has alot more to offer us. They have teams in the top 25, BCS contenders, and teams that people have heard of.

Picture this: UNT vs. MTSU or UNT vs. Hawaii or Fresno St at Fouts Field here in Denton, Texas.

Pros:

More bowl invites

More nationally televised games

More national recognition

More attendance numbers for home games

More of that BCS money

More rivalries ( we are really lacking in that department, look at my thread on the HOF)

More interest from DFW WAC member alums as opposed to Sun Belt alums

More of a turnout for conference games.

Cons:

We arent covered much by the DMN or FWST ohhhhhh big loss there

I am all for any move to any conference, we have been waiting for a long time and nothing. The Sun Belt is not a conference that is built around us or our needs. We dont fit in, plain and simple.

Edited June 8, 2009 by UNT_playmaker

gangrene · June 8, 2009

Just curious, how did a game between two of the best Mountain West teams change your mind about NT and the WAC.

Sorry I didn't clarify. I still think the WAC is a bad idea. It's the helmet stickers I think I could live with now. BYU uses the stickers. I'd like to see a list of which FBS schools currently use the sticker system. I know of BYU, Ohio State, Florida State, Michigan? who else?

foutsrouts · June 8, 2009

The repetition of this topic is superceded only by stadium threads. I do think that a WAC move would be a step up IF the WAC remainded stable, but let us try and look like we belong in the SBC (in FB) and not the SLC before we even talk about a WAC move. To tell you the truth, I'm not really overly impressed with the WAC, USA or the SBC. IMO, in recent years the WAC has remained relatively stable (or up) in stature, USA has clearly gone down in stature, and the SBC has clearly gone up in stature. My dream is some regional combination of USA and SBC. It may only be a dream, but it's still my dream!

foutsrouts · June 8, 2009

I have always been a very vocal opponent of moving to the WAC but for the first time I am going to say YES to UNT moving to the WAC.
The WAC has alot more to offer us. They have teams in the top 25, BCS contenders, and teams that people have heard of.
Picture this: UNT vs. MTSU or UNT vs. Hawaii or Fresno St at Fouts Field here in Denton, Texas.
Pros:
More bowl invites
More nationally televised games
More national recognition
More attendance numbers for home games
More of that BCS money
More rivalries ( we are really lacking in that department, look at my thread on the HOF)
More interest from DFW WAC member alums as opposed to Sun Belt alums
More of a turnout for conference games.
Cons:
We arent covered much by the DMN or FWST ohhhhhh big loss there
I am all for any move to any conference, we have been waiting for a long time and nothing. The Sun Belt is not a conference that is built around us or our needs. We dont fit in, plain and simple.

To me, it's impossible to deny the WAC opponent recognition factor. It's sad to say, but almost all of our SBC opponents are thought of as obscure (who!!) schools by most of the people who NT students and alumni associate with. I don't mean that in a snobby way personally, because I am more aware of the schools in our conference than many, but it is just kind of a fact of life. Hawaii/Fresno/Boise/NMSU/Nevada etc. vs. Monroe/Troy/FIU/FAU/MTSU etc. is really no contest to most of the people we associate with in Texas. Oh well, as usual, let's hope it works out for us. :ph34r:

NT80 · June 8, 2009

The repetition of this topic is superceded only by stadium threads. I do think that a WAC move would be a step up IF the WAC remainded stable, but let us try and look like we belong in the SBC (in FB) and not the SLC before we even talk about a WAC move. To tell you the truth, I'm not really overly impressed with the WAC, USA or the SBC. IMO, in recent years the WAC has remained relatively stable (or up) in stature, USA has clearly gone down in stature, and the SBC has clearly gone up in stature. My dream is some regional combination of USA and SBC. It may only be a dream, but it's still my dream!

As it is now we are the western most football member of the SBC and besides La Tech would be the eastern most football member of the WAC. The "best" solution for NT is to join.....the BIG 12, we're closer to the middle there. Next best would be your dream, a combo league of SBC/CUSA/La Tech. While I think being in a conference with Marshall and East Carolina would be an upgrade, they're too far for fans to travel easily. Likewise FIU/FAU et al.

risinggreen · June 8, 2009

As it is now we are the western most football member of the SBC and besides La Tech would be the eastern most football member of the WAC. The "best" solution for NT is to join.....the BIG 12, we're closer to the middle there. Next best would be your dream, a combo league of SBC/CUSA/La Tech. While I think being in a conference with Marshall and East Carolina would be an upgrade, they're too far for fans to travel easily. Likewise FIU/FAU et al.

No, I think we should go ahead and join the PAC 10. Texas (Austin) has hinted about hooking up with them for years, and the two of us would make great travel partners on the eastern end of the conference. The other option would be the SEC. I'm sure they would just jump at the idea of having a "media market" team here in Texas to anchor the western edge of their conference. Someone needs to get on this ASAP!

Arkstfan · June 8, 2009

More bowl invites

The closest is in New Mexico. Others are in Boise and Hawaii.

More nationally televised games

And they tend to involve the schools who accomplished something who brought a quality opponent.

Last year's national games under the WAC contract:

Miss. St. at La.Tech

Wisconsin at Boise State

Tech at Boise

Hawaii at Boise

Boise at San Jose

Nevada at Fresno

Fresno at San Jose

Boise at Nevada

Fresno at Boise

Cincinnati at Hawaii.

Zero national appearances by: Idaho, Utah State, and New Mexico State. Every televised game involved either Boise, Fresno or a BCS school.

More national recognition

See above. Unless you are going to be Boise or Fresno and have long-term sustained success in and out of the league, you won't get recognition. Hawaii got two games a year after making the BCS>

More attendance numbers for home games

The numbers out of New Mexico State and Utah State say you are wrong. They drew better in the Belt. Point of comparison. ASU drew a larger crowd for Southern Miss than Tech drew for Mississippi State, despite the fact more Miss. St. fans traveled to their game and they have the value of being an SEC team. Middle drew more fans for Troy than Tech drew for any WAC opponent, even including the buy one-get-one promotion for the Nevada game where everyone under 18 was admitted for free to drum up a crowd to try impress bowl scouts.

More of that BCS money

Difference of about $300,000.

More rivalries ( we are really lacking in that department, look at my thread on the HOF)

Yeah the Hawaii, San Jose, and Nevada fans flowing into Denton will really heat up the rivalries.

More interest from DFW WAC member alums as opposed to Sun Belt alums

Other than Tech who has any significant number of alums in DFW? Tech's numbers should be roughly similar to ULM's.

More of a turnout for conference games.

Again. See LaTech, See New Mexico State. See Utah State.

Quoner · June 8, 2009

More rivalries ( we are really lacking in that department, look at my thread on the HOF)

This is arguably the worst use of scoreboard I have ever seen.

LongJim · June 8, 2009

What about travel costs? Could we compete? Would they have us? Do we need to add baseball first? How could we align the divisions? Good stuff for sure.

Ah, how we have missed you, sir.

LongJim · June 8, 2009

WAC=Kiss of death.

Got5onIt · June 8, 2009

No to the WAC. Take Boise & Fresno off the list and you have a conference that's probably equal to the Belt as far as "power" rankings go. With the current state of the economy and tightening of budgest across universities, I'm wondering if that can be enough to push for a super regional friendly "mid major" conference? Something along the lines of 12 teams mainly TX, LA, AK, & OK schools? : NT, UH, Rice, UTEP, SMU, Tulsa, LaTech, ULM, stAte, ULaLa, etc.

MDH · June 8, 2009

I guess I should say I'm opposed to UNT going to the WAC. I'm 99% sure that Boise will be gone within 3 years and 90% sure Fresno and/or Nevada or Hawaii will be as well. Just in case you guys hadn't heard about those rumors yet, but I'm sure most of you have. Let's focus on going over .500 in the belt first! Despite our "great" basketball team, we're not that far above .500 in conference play the last few years.