Conference Expansion Question

untjim1995 · May 24, 2010

.

Reading over the various possibilities on this subject has been extremely interesting to say the least, but it also has me wondering what would happen if the next big expansions involve the BCS conferences capping at 64, thus the rest of Division 1-A being left to sort of be the "minors" of college athletics . If this happens, and we don't get into an improved conference setup (i.e. a new SWC/CUSA league with more regional teams located in Texas), what does UNT's future look like for the next 20 years or so? We have made up so much ground since we got out of 1-AA purgatory, but would this scenario send us back to that level again if we are still in the SBC? Personally, I like the SBC for us right now and have enjoyed it very much, because it has been a place for us to build something up from the ashes, but I also realize that our athletic future of moving upward really does involve being in a conference with better names than what we have now. But my question is if we are left behind in this all, what does that mean for us? Does that force us to go the WAC, even though Boise and Fresno are probably gone? That would basically be a return to the Big West days, which didn't seem to work for anyone east of the Rockies. Does it mean we just have to come to terms with being in the SBC with the current teams, minus a team or two to the east that could potentially get gobbled up (MTSU, FAU, or WKU) which get replaced by programs moving up like USA, UTSA, and Texas State? As a UNT alum and fan, it is just hard to figure out what our "worst-case" scenario would be and how it would affect our university's support for athletics. We have just made so much progress in the last 15 years and I don't want it to get wiped away again over the next 15 years.

NT80 · May 24, 2010

The BCS capping at 64 is a very real possibility. In reality it is already that way now with the 6 auto-BCS qualifiers and the 5 non-auto BCS conferences. The titling may change but the results the same, the haves and havenots for the $$.

As for UNT, I'm not sold on the SunBelt ever rising to the promised land. I'm in favor of any moveup to a more established conference. Image is everything. Otherwise, the best we can hope for is they keep us under some kind of BCS umbrella with very limited access to a future BCS bowl.

MeanGreen61 · May 24, 2010

The BCS capping at 64 is a very real possibility. In reality it is already that way now with the 6 auto-BCS qualifiers and the 5 non-auto BCS conferences. The titling may change but the results the same, the haves and havenots for the $$.

As for UNT, I'm not sold on the SunBelt ever rising to the promised land. I'm in favor of any moveup to a more established conference. Image is everything. Otherwise, the best we can hope for is they keep us under some kind of BCS umbrella with very limited access to a future BCS bowl.

ESPN Football Blog.Ranking the Non-AQ conferences

Nothing really new........scroll down

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation

Danish42 · May 24, 2010

The BCS capping at 64 is a very real possibility. In reality it is already that way now with the 6 auto-BCS qualifiers and the 5 non-auto BCS conferences. The titling may change but the results the same, the haves and havenots for the $$.

As for UNT, I'm not sold on the SunBelt ever rising to the promised land. I'm in favor of any moveup to a more established conference. Image is everything. Otherwise, the best we can hope for is they keep us under some kind of BCS umbrella with very limited access to a future BCS bowl.

Jeff:

The other day in the DNC I responsed to a couple of people that posted that NT is not doing anything to recruit in Denton. I stated that it comes down to funding to get the 4 & 5 star recruits. Would you not say that that not having the money is the main reason we cannot move up to a better conference? I know that T Boone Pickens contributed a lot of his fortune to Sports at Okla. St.

untjim1995 · May 24, 2010

.

I agree with the post about needing to move up from the SBC, but my question goes back to this: if we can't move on to another conference, what is the long-term effect on our program? Can we continue making strides as a program in ten years if we don't share a conference with any Texas school? Or is the SBC capable of passing CUSA eventually as a better conference over a longer time frame?

GrayEagle · May 24, 2010

If we can get our programs together to the point where we can be a contributor, we will move to some conference. If not, we must do our utmost to make the SBC a conference of more-or-less equal status with the other non-qualifying conferences.

The 64 AQ colleges control the FBS now so it could only get worse if they tried to squeeze the qualifying and revenue sharing from the non-AQ members. The push may now be to increase the major conferences' revenue, and with increased membership, allow them a larger portion of the pie.

There are two ways to improve the lot of the non-AQ universities. We can be in a conference that would help maximize our revenues and/or we can be in more regional conferences that can help us reduce our (especially) travel expenses.

There's more than 1,500 miles between UTEP and three of its CUSA conference mates. It's more than a thousand miles from Denton to the Miami area where two SBC universities are located. If the same teams are left after realignment then the smart thing to do would be to realign the two conferences on a more regional basis which would save tremendously on travel costs. That would take an agreement between the two conferences which is unprecedented but necessary.

I don't worry that much about North Texas because they have too much going for them. We have 326,000 alumni. Most universities can't match that. UNT is in the fourth largest media market in the U.S. Only a half-dozen can match that. We are progressing well in men's basketball, men's golf, women's soccer, and women's tennis to the point of being in NCAA playoffs. We are about to have a first-rate football stadium to go with an already excellent basketball arena. The University of North Texas has a lot of pluses with few minuses. We need to be better in football and women's basketball and to add baseball. But first and foremost we must get our attendance up. An additional 5,000 per game in football would open a lot of doors. I really believe that soon-to-be-improved football will allow us to do that.

All eleven conferences will survive as long as they can have eight qualified members. If the Big East and the Mountain West should happen to lose two or three members each then they are likely doomed. Their members will have to hook on with other leagues. If either or both should happen then North Texas will have opportunities in an improved (revenue-wise) conference.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
Reading over the various possibilities on this subject has been extremely interesting to say the least, but it also has me wondering what would happen if the next big expansions involve the BCS conferences capping at 64, thus the rest of Division 1-A being left to sort of be the "minors" of college athletics . If this happens, and we don't get into an improved conference setup (i.e. a new SWC/CUSA league with more regional teams located in Texas), what does UNT's future look like for the next 20 years or so? We have made up so much ground since we got out of 1-AA purgatory, but would this scenario send us back to that level again if we are still in the SBC? Personally, I like the SBC for us right now and have enjoyed it very much, because it has been a place for us to build something up from the ashes, but I also realize that our athletic future of moving upward really does involve being in a conference with better names than what we have now. But my question is if we are left behind in this all, what does that mean for us? Does that force us to go the WAC, even though Boise and Fresno are probably gone? That would basically be a return to the Big West days, which didn't seem to work for anyone east of the Rockies. Does it mean we just have to come to terms with being in the SBC with the current teams, minus a team or two to the east that could potentially get gobbled up (MTSU, FAU, or WKU) which get replaced by programs moving up like USA, UTSA, and Texas State? As a UNT alum and fan, it is just hard to figure out what our "worst-case" scenario would be and how it would affect our university's support for athletics. We have just made so much progress in the last 15 years and I don't want it to get wiped away again over the next 15 years.

untjim1995 · May 24, 2010

.

This link lets everyone know what we are dealing with here. You can blame ESPN for being lazy, but this only adds fuel to the fire, IMHO.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=5214108

wardly · May 25, 2010

.
.the sunbelt is a glorified "1aa" conference, is considered bottom 1a rung on the ladder, and actually is listed below several 1aa conferences in football rankings according to national publications, such as jeff sarigan.[sic?] my long term goal would to either be in the western division of cusa, or eastern division of wac.in my opinion, this would probably be as close to a regional conference as we could hope for.i just can't believe that smu would ever allow us into the same conference with them. we do not have a rice/houston relationship with the hilltop, and addition of new law school in dallas did us no favors with their administration. unless we can bring something new to the table,we are odd man out in dallas and ft.worth. tcu refuses to play us in football, which at least for now smu seems willing to do.
.
.
.
.
.

I agree with the post about needing to move up from the SBC, but my question goes back to this: if we can't move on to another conference, what is the long-term effect on our program? Can we continue making strides as a program in ten years if we don't share a conference with any Texas school? Or is the SBC capable of passing CUSA eventually as a better conference over a longer time frame?