Memphis Hires Consultant - Wants New Conference

Quoner · September 18, 2009

I believe that the Sun Belt and the WAC are the only FBS conferences that do not have a private university in their membership. You wouldn't get anywhere leaving Tulsa, Rice, SMU and Tulane without a conference. Nor should you. They've been been playing at the highest level for nearly a hundred years and I sure don't see changing that now. I think that any realignment or expansion plans would have to include them.
Where did we get our disdain for SMU?
From some arrogant little snip that has talked trash to us? Come on. We've got our share of trash talkers and we're mostly not little rich kids. How many other universities do we praise or have nice things to say about? There really isn't a winner when talking about the universities. They have some strengths that we can't touch because they can be more selective and have deep pockets. We also have a lot of advantages with our size, which enables us to offer programs that they can't touch. There is no winner, except mainly on the athletic fields.
Was it because they cheated to remain competitive in the Southwest Conference? A despicable act, but how did that affect us? We weren't in the Southwest Conference. They weren't a recruiting threat and vice versa. That fiasco was orchestrated by about a dozen people, or less, and the SMU student body has suffered for nearly thirty years over it. In many ways, it is still suffering. But again, that really didn't involve us.
Is it because they won't play us? No, that's not it either. They are in a virtual tie with Texas State and New Mexico State for most games played against each other. If you consider all sports then I believe that they are clearly the winner. Compare that to TCU who won't even give us the time of day. We have another six game series in football beginning in 2014 with SMU but it's not in TCU's interest to schedule us. Where's our disdain for TCU?
I know, it's because they have blocked us from two conferences. Not exactly. In the SWC case there never was a vote. They supposedly were against our admittance but so were the other three private schools as well as the University of Arkansas. As to CUSA, they didn't come out in opposition to us, only in support of Louisiana Tech. Since La Tech didn't get in apparently they have no real power to sway the conference. I don't think that we would have made it if we'd had their support.
Can someone explain to me what we have done to earn their support?

But...but...

I HAVE TWO FAVORITE TEAMS...NORTH TEXAS AND WHOEVER PLAYS SMU THIS WEEK!!!!11!

Seriously, good post.

untjim1995 · September 18, 2009

I believe that the Sun Belt and the WAC are the only FBS conferences that do not have a private university in their membership. You wouldn't get anywhere leaving Tulsa, Rice, SMU and Tulane without a conference. Nor should you. They've been been playing at the highest level for nearly a hundred years and I sure don't see changing that now. I think that any realignment or expansion plans would have to include them.
Where did we get our disdain for SMU?
From some arrogant little snip that has talked trash to us? Come on. We've got our share of trash talkers and we're mostly not little rich kids. How many other universities do we praise or have nice things to say about? There really isn't a winner when talking about the universities. They have some strengths that we can't touch because they can be more selective and have deep pockets. We also have a lot of advantages with our size, which enables us to offer programs that they can't touch. There is no winner, except mainly on the athletic fields.
Was it because they cheated to remain competitive in the Southwest Conference? A despicable act, but how did that affect us? We weren't in the Southwest Conference. They weren't a recruiting threat and vice versa. That fiasco was orchestrated by about a dozen people, or less, and the SMU student body has suffered for nearly thirty years over it. In many ways, it is still suffering. But again, that really didn't involve us.
Is it because they won't play us? No, that's not it either. They are in a virtual tie with Texas State and New Mexico State for most games played against each other. If you consider all sports then I believe that they are clearly the winner. Compare that to TCU who won't even give us the time of day. We have another six game series in football beginning in 2014 with SMU but it's not in TCU's interest to schedule us. Where's our disdain for TCU?
I know, it's because they have blocked us from two conferences. Not exactly. In the SWC case there never was a vote. They supposedly were against our admittance but so were the other three private schools as well as the University of Arkansas. As to CUSA, they didn't come out in opposition to us, only in support of Louisiana Tech. Since La Tech didn't get in apparently they have no real power to sway the conference. I don't think that we would have made it if we'd had their support.
Can someone explain to me what we have done to earn their support?

Good point--I mean SMU isn't even our rival, so we should just, you know, praise them. Especially now, since they are in the same boat we are in--crappy conference, after-thought to most college football fans over the last 25 years, and the fact that you can go onto ponyfans.com and see how "highly" they think of us here at UNT--pardon me, that's NTSU, the official name they use for us there. Yeah, I think we should have them over for a cup of tea and see if we can find common ground and make sure they know how much we like them., you know, to "earn their support".

Does it really take much to figure out that SMU has absolutely no interest in being in a conference with us? If you think otherwise, I feel sorry for you. Hell, TCU fans want nothing to do with SMU being in a conference with them again because they are higher up the ladder. Its no different then how SMU views their standing on the ladder versus UNT. But, I guess SMU fans should just be nice to TCU fans to "earn their support". Rainbows, puppies, and harmony everywhere!!

ColoradoEagle · September 18, 2009

It seems to me that the Sun Belt and Conf. USA are pretty close to being equal in terms of strength, both have a few weak teams and on the other hand there are some strong teams. The only plus, in regards to UNT joining the USA would be the in state rivalries that would be created. Then there is the reduced travel $$. If Memphis were to leave the conference, the conference would lose strength , especially in BB.

I'm against the grain here, but I don't see any big rivalries being created with Houston, Rice, Tulane, or Tulsa. SMU, sure, but we already have them on our schedule for 2014-2019. I'm convinced that SBC isn't more than 3-4 years away from being as good as or better than CUSA football. Basketball, like you said, is already a wash if you take out Memphis. And if Memphis were in the conference and we moved, we could basically kiss any tournament dreams goodbye. CUSA is a one bid conference, and Memphis gets it.

Additionally, we don't get any more money in CUSA than the SBC, maybe even less. 12 football members instead of 9 (eventually 10). Maybe CUSA's extra bowls make up the money difference, maybe they don't. If you believe arkstfan, the SBC isn't too far away from having at least 3 bowl contracts.

I would've killed to have NT in the CUSA that included Memphis, USF, Louisville, Cincinatti, Memphis, Houston, and TCU. The version of CUSA after they were raided includes three schools in the west division no one wants to have anything to do with in football (Tulane, Rice, SMU), and basketball that is, at best, equal with the SBC outside of Memphis.

Quoner · September 18, 2009

Good point--I mean SMU isn't even our rival, so we should just, you know, praise them. Especially now, since they are in the same boat we are in--crappy conference, after-thought to most college football fans over the last 25 years, and the fact that you can go onto ponyfans.com and see how "highly" they think of us here at UNT--pardon me, that's NTSU, the official name they use for us there. Yeah, I think we should have them over for a cup of tea and see if we can find common ground and make sure they know how much we like them., you know, to "earn their support".
Does it really take much to figure out that SMU has absolutely no interest in being in a conference with us? If you think otherwise, I feel sorry for you. Hell, TCU fans want nothing to do with SMU being in a conference with them again because they are higher up the ladder. Its no different then how SMU views their standing on the ladder versus UNT. But, I guess SMU fans should just be nice to TCU fans to "earn their support". Rainbows, puppies, and harmony everywhere!!

Hell no we shouldn't be nice to them. The question is should we obsess over them and post threads about them non-stop in a way that assumes they are our biggest rival?

If you base your opinion of a school on it's small community of message board posters, North Texas must be a real sh*thole.

LoveMG · September 18, 2009

In the SWC case there never was a vote. They supposedly were against our admittance but so were the other three private schools as well as the University of Arkansas.

arkansas and houston supported us for swc. read bottom of pg 94

http://books.google.com/books?id=bANS-aNcp...;q=&f=false

Edited September 18, 2009 by LoveMG

untjim1995 · September 18, 2009

Hell no we shouldn't be nice to them. The question is should we obsess over them and post threads about them non-stop in a way that assumes they are our biggest rival?
If you base your opinion of a school on it's small community of message board posters, North Texas must be a real sh*thole.

Trust me, venturing over to other message boards will make our board look saintly compared to those at BCS schools. And to a great number of UNT fans, SMU is our biggest rival. Now, maybe that is the pathetic part, since they could care less about us. But, Tech fans get the same treatment from Aggies, who only think of UT as their rival, but look at Tech as a pest. At least Tech gets to beat their ass every fall, though. But, the Red Raiders used their "obsession" to make their program better. Unfortunately, SMU and UNT have played exactly twice since we moved back up to Division one in 1995, which is less than the number of times we have played TCU in the same timeframe. We haven't been so lucky to play them because it was nothing that SMU wanted to do for years. Hell, even Phil Bennett himself said when he wanted to schedule UNT, that he caught lots of flack from SMU alumni who saw nothing to gain by playing us. I agree on the obsession part, which to me is posting their scores on our board or their media reports here, but I understand the Mean Green hatred of them very much.

Quoner · September 18, 2009

Trust me, venturing over to other message boards will make our board look saintly compared to those at BCS schools. And to a great number of UNT fans, SMU is our biggest rival. Now, maybe that is the pathetic part, since they could care less about us. But, Tech fans get the same treatment from Aggies, who only think of UT as their rival, but look at Tech as a pest. At least Tech gets to beat their ass every fall, though. But, the Red Raiders used their "obsession" to make their program better. Unfortunately, SMU and UNT have played exactly twice since we moved back up to Division one in 1995, which is less than the number of times we have played TCU in the same timeframe. We haven't been so lucky to play them because it was nothing that SMU wanted to do for years. Hell, even Phil Bennett himself said when he wanted to schedule UNT, that he caught lots of flack from SMU alumni who saw nothing to gain by playing us. I agree on the obsession part, which to me is posting their scores on our board or their media reports here, but I understand the Mean Green hatred of them very much.

I hate every school I didn't go to or have a family member at. We can run down a conference list and if they don't fall in this hallowed circle, they can choke on a big one. Hate fuels 90% of the football I watch. Usually I have to decide who I hate less when deciding who to root for in the featured games of the day. Sports is all about hate - people just never admit it. Except service academies - it's in the Constitution.

That said, I won't be posting a thread or a comment every time one of the 113 schools not in my inner circle loses.

LoveMG · September 18, 2009

I'm against the grain here, but I don't see any big rivalries being created with Houston, Rice, Tulane, or Tulsa.

so you think we will have better rivalries with schools 800-2000 miles away than ones within 250 miles?

ColoradoEagle · September 18, 2009

so you think we will have better rivalries with schools 800-2000 miles away than ones within 250 miles?

I just don't think those schools create an instant rivalry. If people living in Dallas wanted to see Rice, for example, they'd probably just watch them at SMU instead of making the drive to Denton. A smaller portion of them would drive to Denton when SMU plays at Rice. SMU would probably be our only real chance for a 'rivalry' game, and we're already playing them 2014-2019. Houston, maybe, but I don't get the impression that they would see us as a rival, even if we were in their same conference. Rice is their geographical rival.

I guess the difference is I don't see CUSA as a step up, it's more like a lateral step, or will be once the bowl situation shakes out in a couple years. If there were an opening in the Big XII or SEC, for example, I don't think they would really care what conference we're in.

Edited September 18, 2009 by ColoradoEagle

greenminer · September 18, 2009

Just win. Titles bring interest, regardless of opponents.

I don't think anyone doubts bringing in a name team will help attendance. But if we are needing name teams to help our attendance, that means we probably aren't winning.

KingDL1 · September 18, 2009

I can't really agree with that. Find me a sellout or near sellout against a Belt team.

Exactly even when we were winning, going to the bowls. I do think our fan-base has increased since the bowl games days

untjim1995 · September 18, 2009

I really don't give a shit what SMU or Rice fans want. I am talking about reconnecting UNT alumni. It has been proven that decent crowds will come out to see regional or nationally known teams, even without a winning team.
Win and bring in regional teams and you are in business. Here is my simple formula:
(WINNING + REGIONAL TEAMS) x NEW STADIUM = SELLOUTS

I agree completely. Attendance would be huge at UNT compared to today if you got SMU, Houston, Tulsa, and UTEP in a conference. My thoughts echo, though, what ColoradoEagle said, which is that CUSA (as a whole) is just about even with the SBC of today. This is good for us for two reasons. While we are in the SBC, the competition is getting better which should help our program continue to build up. The second reason is that as the SBC continues to perform well against the CUSA schools, maybe sanity will reign and the snobbery of looking down at the SBC programs will stop. Then the two conferences will re-align within their respective footprints and make conferences that are geopgraphically aligned instead of being politically aligned. I have always heard that UTEP wants nothing to do with having NMSU in a conference, which is similar to LaTech's view of ULM, and TCU's view of SMU. This mentality has got to end for fiscal sanity and regional rivlaries to come back again. Remember, the SWC of the old days was great because of the closeness and the rivalries. It would be great to be a part of that again, in some shape or form.

greenminer · September 18, 2009

I can't really agree with that. Find me a sellout or near sellout against a Belt team.

In a culture that just voted down the athletic increase, under a mo'fo coaching staff, I think this is pretty close and - in the least - remarkable considering those circumstances...

I don't think it is such a stretch with this staff, as long as they continue to build upon and improve like they have shown this season. The Dodge groupies will hop right back on the train (remember his first spring game attendance?), and fill up Fouts. I think a culture shift is happening, and the athletic fee vote results reflect that.

** and in an "only a Sith deals in absolutes" moment, I would like to suggest that if you are only going to UNT games for name opponents and not to support your team, you are not one of us. You are only in it to support "brand name" football, and not your alma mater.

disclaimer: I am not sure where I stand in regards to this thread. Isn't the Belt much more regional anyways than CUSA? And how many name opponents do they offer than us?

I love having a couple Louisiana teams to play every year: I can't wait to go there for a road trip and hear what it is all about.

Edited September 18, 2009 by greenminer

stebo · September 18, 2009

Funny that the picture above was from New Mexico State - hardly a "regional" team...

Find me a sellout when TCU and Houston came to town... You won't - because we sucked at the time. We have to have a winning team (or a team with a chance) and the crowds will come - whether it be Tulsa, Rice, Houston, SMU, TCU, or FAU - most fans could care less about going to see Houston or Tulsa or SMU... they want to see the Mean Green win.

Edited September 18, 2009 by stebo

pvilleguru · September 18, 2009

i'll trade mississippi state for them.

September 18, 2009

The SBC is definitely getting stronger but we haven't reached parity with CUSA yet. Here are this week's rankings from 47 different computer ranking services:

Houston 27

Tulsa 34

Southern Miss 51

East Carolina 65

Louisiana 74

Troy 78

MTSU 84

Arkansas State 86

UCF 88

UAB 89

SMU 93

Rice 95

ULM 96

FAU 100

FIU 102

Marshall 104

UTEP 107

Memphis 111

North Texas 113

Tulane 117

W. Kentucky 120

While it's a little early to be taking these rankings as gospel, it is nevertheless the perception of those that do computer rankings. I don't know that any rankings are precise but many of these are independently close to the same numbers for most teams.

And, while we have improved in the last few years, we are much further behind them in attendance.

If you want to talk about the MAC then I think that we've reached parity.

BeanCounterGrad'03 · September 18, 2009

i'll trade mississippi state for them.

Can you imagine if we (by some miracle) got into the SEC? We'd get our ass kicked for the first few years, but I bet we'd rise to the occasion (its amazing what some extra funding would do).

Guess I can dream.

pvilleguru · September 18, 2009

Can you imagine if we (by some miracle) got into the SEC? We'd get our ass kicked for the first few years, but I bet we'd rise to the occasion (its amazing what some extra funding would do).
Guess I can dream.

i was talking more at memphis because they in tennessee.

LoveMG · September 19, 2009

In a culture that just voted down the athletic increase, under a mo'fo coaching staff, I think this is pretty close and - in the least - remarkable considering those circumstances...

that was for a conference championship and first bowl trip in 40 years and we still only drew 20,000.

navy at fouts drew 27,000 for nothing on the line and a lousy unt team. it is all about the opponent at this time in unt's life. maybe someday it won't matter who we play like at a bcs school but we are not those schools yet, it still matters!

Edited September 19, 2009 by LoveMG

3XNTGRAD · September 19, 2009

that was for a conference championship and first bowl trip in 40 years and we still only drew 20,000.
navy at fouts drew 27,000 for nothing on the line and a lousy unt team. it is all about the opponent at this time in unt's life. maybe someday it won't matter who we play like at a bcs school but we are not those schools yet, it still matters!

Actually, this was for the 2nd bowl berth in a row.

However, it is important to note that this game was 19,000 more than the same opponent drew two years previous.

It really is more about what our team is doing than about who the opponents are, for the most part.

AnotherEagleFan · September 19, 2009

1) congrats on the win over Ball St. And I thought that UNT should have one last week.

2) $5,000 per month does not equal $120,000 per year (Maybe I read the article wrong). Either way, that is not much money. I do not think that they are thinking that this will do anything other then give them a "to do" list.

3) I do not see a shake up within 2 years unless CUSA expands to be a 16(?) team "Mega Conference"

good luck this year

DeepGreen · September 19, 2009

Let's see, we're 1-1 on the year, our starting QB is out, face #4 Alabama tomorrow, and we're talking conference realignment?

LoveMG · September 19, 2009

It really is more about what our team is doing than about who the opponents are, for the most part.

no, big attendance is mostly about opponent. baylor, tcu, smu, navy have drawn the largest crowds. and it was not because they brought 10,000 fans.

BeanCounterGrad'03 · September 19, 2009

i was talking more at memphis because they in tennessee.

Way to kill a man's dream.

VideoEagle · September 19, 2009

3) I do not see a shake up within 2 years unless CUSA expands to be a 16(?) team "Mega Conference"
good luck this year

Do you think that would happen? I have a hard time seeing Tulsa, SMU and Rice voting for that as they were in the WAC when that was tried with disastrous results. Obviously, those three could be out voted. But they also had a chance to tell the other Presidents how bad it was.