Why We Should Leave The Sun Belt

Eagle1855 · May 25, 2010

If for no other reason at all, take a look at ESPN's list of conferences and their rankings.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · May 25, 2010

Forgot us.

Green Lantern · May 25, 2010

They're too scared to even put the mighty Belt into the discussion.

Eagle1855 · May 25, 2010

I'm not trying to hash out the same tired old debates- I realize we are where we are and there's nothing we can do about it- but while the "build the belt" concept is noble, it in actuality is probably little more than a pipe dream.

IF UNT ever wants to be a BCS buster, we'll need a conference that people actually realize exists and is recognized as a legitimate player in Division 1A football.

Also, this article just put me in a mood this morning. Vent over.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Eagle1855

Harry · May 25, 2010

You make some good points. Lookit, when Dr. Pohl and everyone decided on the Belt it twasn't like we had a lot of options. That said, the Belt if you are winning and going to bowls/NCAA tourneys etc is not a bad place to be.

If you recall, a big part of the Belt over the Wac was the fact we could get to more away games due to the geographic proximity in the Belt. Since the football program has fallen to such a low level of play, most fans who like to go to away games are staying home. I think the Sun Belt is what it is. As Coach Dodge will attest, it is a competitive place to be and there are some very good coaches. With the stability/talent pool of Troy/MTSU and progression of the Florida schools there is no easy road to the top.

The Belt wasn't a bad place when Dickey won 4 straight bowls as I recall. New Orleans was a great choice for a bowl game and Waters deserves credit for that.

I also think that those who declared failure for La. Tech's decision to stay in the WAC should re-evaluate their stance. La. Tech, as much as anything was looking to differentiate itself from ULL and ULM. They brought in a top notch young coach (Dooley) and allowed him to hire a quality staff. Does La. Tech have to fly all over the world, yes - but in the end result does ULM MTSU or ULL ever fill up our stadium anyway? Frankly I would argue that having Boise and Fresno come into their stadium every other year makes for an interesting home conference match.

I tip my hat to La. Tech. Despite their geographic challenges, they have done well and maintained a competitive program through shrewd coach hiring and targeted player recruiting. Instead of crying over being left at the CUSA altar they moved forward and have done the best that they can to be well positioned for the next opportunity. They have also raised their academic standing. We could learn from them.

LongJim · May 25, 2010

I think it'd be great for UNT to be in a bigger conference, but to be honest, right now the MG are pretty much where they should be conference wise.

I'm of the belief that you build your programs within the your school, build your facilities worry about the things you can control, and dominate where you are. That, in theory (and in fact--see SMU last year) causes interest, donations, and all that cool stuff to happen, which makes you even more popular than the other fat chicks in the SBC.

Win, and take care of your AD checklist to build the program(s), and stuff will happen. UNT has so many advantages over the rest of the SBC, it isn't funny. Have to capitalize now on the things that are controllable, and see what happens.

Shuke-D · May 25, 2010

UNT has so many advantages over the rest of the SBC, it isn't funny.

A truer statement has not been uttered here, and it is the source for both forward-thinking arguments counseling a brighter future, and the usual laments complaining about why we're stuck here. Why all of these advantages haven't translated into a higher profile is NT's personal Gordian Knot.

meangreenbob · May 25, 2010

A truer statement has not been uttered here, and it is the source for both forward-thinking arguments counseling a brighter future, and the usual laments complaining about why we're stuck here. Why all of these advantages haven't translated into a higher profile is NT's personal Gordian Knot.

GreenStreet · May 25, 2010

The Sun "Belt" is just that; a "Belt" that holds D-1AA schools in the D1 level long enough to make a name and move to a bigger conference. None of the teams in the belt want to stay in the belt (yes even the ones who win Sun Belt Conference championships). After all that is why we want to win, not to be conference champions, but because the WAC and CUSA are new neighbors who have all the neat gadgets that we (UNT) or the SBC members want to touch.

Just because a school can raise the money to play with the SEC sand, that does not mean the SEC is going to give them a corner.

Edited May 25, 2010 by GreenStreet

Side Show Joe · May 26, 2010

You make some good points. Lookit, when Dr. Pohl and everyone decided on the Belt it twasn't like we had a lot of options. That said, the Belt if you are winning and going to bowls/NCAA tourneys etc is not a bad place to be.

If you recall, a big part of the Belt over the Wac was the fact we could get to more away games due to the geographic proximity in the Belt. Since the football program has fallen to such a low level of play, most fans who like to go to away games are staying home. I think the Sun Belt is what it is. As Coach Dodge will attest, it is a competitive place to be and there are some very good coaches. With the stability/talent pool of Troy/MTSU and progression of the Florida schools there is no easy road to the top.

The Belt wasn't a bad place when Dickey won 4 straight bowls as I recall. New Orleans was a great choice for a bowl game and Waters deserves credit for that.

I also think that those who declared failure for La. Tech's decision to stay in the WAC should re-evaluate their stance. La. Tech, as much as anything was looking to differentiate itself from ULL and ULM. They brought in a top notch young coach (Dooley) and allowed him to hire a quality staff. Does La. Tech have to fly all over the world, yes - but in the end result does ULM MTSU or ULL ever fill up our stadium anyway? Frankly I would argue that having Boise and Fresno come into their stadium every other year makes for an interesting home conference match.

I tip my hat to La. Tech. Despite their geographic challenges, they have done well and maintained a competitive program through shrewd coach hiring and targeted player recruiting. Instead of crying over being left at the CUSA altar they moved forward and have done the best that they can to be well positioned for the next opportunity. They have also raised their academic standing. We could learn from them.

I totally agree with you.

LoveMG · May 26, 2010

If for no other reason at all, take a look at ESPN's list of conferences and their rankings.

Notice anything peculiar?

a lot of the country feels this way about the sunbelt. sisters of the poor. we need out asap.

GrandGreen · May 26, 2010

a lot of the country feels this way about the sunbelt. sisters of the poor. we need out asap.

Unfortunately, NT in football is the poorest of the sisters. It sure is fun to bad mouth the Belt, does anyone ever considered were NT would be without it? The problem is outside of the even worst fit WAC; nobody else wants NT. CUSA which is obviously a better fit geographically may look great from NT' view but many of the Western Division members think it is in their best interest to exclude NT. The non-Texas members don't want another Texas team, and the Texas teams don't want to help an in-state rival. Even if CUSA wanted NT, has anyone looked at the budget differences between NT and CUSA teams. Part of those differences would be made up with more funds coming from the conference and possible reduced travel, but NT would still most likely be by far the poorest funded school in CUSA.

Yes, NT should always try to be better in athletics and academics and part of that is moving up the conference food chain. However, the Belt is not the problem and the continued my school is too good for the Belt mantra coming from supporters of every conference member is beyond old.

Side Show Joe · May 26, 2010

The Belt was good to us, but has the time come to move on? I'm not in favor of any move until we see how the realignment turns out. But I will say this, if after it is all said and done, we are still in the belt, I would be in favor of moving to the WAC, if it is unchanged from its current configuration.

Playing Boise, Fresno, L.A. Tech, New Mexico State, Nevada, and Hawaii every year sounds alot better then most of who we play in the Sun Belt.

I think it would be easier to recruit quality players if we were in the WAC. We were the Belt champs for four straight seasons. Now Troy has been the champs for four straight season, and nobody outside of the Sun Belt cares. Boise has proved that dominating the WAC will advance a program. L.A. Tech only has a budget of about $16.5 million and they play in the WAC. The athletic budget at North Texas is around $15.7 million. We should be able to afford the travel cost, especially with the new fee. I don't think the other schools in the Belt are seroius about building this conference. Monroe has a budget of $8.4 million. Arkansas State's is $9.1 million. Too many or our schools operate under wavier that exempt them from academic accountability. And many Sun Belt schools have terrible attendance numbers. I don't see these problems being addressed by these schools any time soon, and I don't think North Texas can afford to stay in the Sun Belt for another decade, hoping C-USA will invite us in next time expansion comes around.

I think the WAC has been good to L.A. Tech. I wonder where North Texas football would be right now if we would have left for the WAC back in 2004? We couldn't be worse then where we are right now, coming off a 5th straight losing season, and a 2-10 record.

H-towngreen · May 26, 2010

We will just have to wait this out. Once the shakeups at the top begin they will trickle down quickly. Hopefully RV has a plan mapped out as we are one of the few teams in the Belt that might be desirable to other conferences.

UNTFan23 · May 26, 2010

Until the WAC gets opponents closer to NT, I'm not interested in the conference. It's nice that Boise has really elevated their program, but outside of BSU there is no other program that is nearly as dominant. Take BSU out of the WAC and what do you have?

This year's WAC BBall tournament was held in Reno, NV so that rules me out of going to the tournament. I'd rather watch the game on the internet/TV then drop the cash needed to fly out for the WAC tourney. At least with the Sun Belt BBall tournament in Hot Springs, it provides NT fans with an affordable destination within a reasonable driving distance.

LoveMG · May 26, 2010

Until the WAC gets opponents closer to NT, I'm not interested in the conference. It's nice that Boise has really elevated their program, but outside of BSU there is no other program that is nearly as dominant. Take BSU out of the WAC and what do you have?

This year's WAC BBall tournament was held in Reno, NV so that rules me out of going to the tournament. I'd rather watch the game on the internet/TV then drop the cash needed to fly out for the WAC tourney. At least with the Sun Belt BBall tournament in Hot Springs, it provides NT fans with an affordable destination within a reasonable driving distance.

the southland is closer too. it is about quality not closer. the wac is more respected even without boise

Edited May 26, 2010 by LoveMG

CMJ · May 26, 2010

the southland is closer too. it is about quality not closer. the wac is more respected even without boise

The WAC is a big train to nowhere for us.

Edited May 26, 2010 by CMJ

MeanGreen61 · May 26, 2010

The WAC is a big train to nowhere for us.

The Belt isn't even a big train. Our choo-choo hasn't been able to climb the hill.

UNTFan23 · May 26, 2010

the southland is closer too. it is about quality not closer. the wac is more respected even without boise

In terms of football prestige, I'd put the MWC ahead of the WAC with CUSA behind the WAC. Take Boise out of the WAC and I'd put WAC even with CUSA and slightly ahead the MAC.

Eagle1855 · May 27, 2010

The WAC is a big train to nowhere for us.

I used to think this but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it is, but is C-USA really some sort of Panacea for North Texas Football? Is it really the height of our aspirations?

Would it be more desirable to be the lone Texas team in a more highly-regarded conference than just another middle of the road team lost in the shuffle of a conference with several?

MeanGreen61 · May 27, 2010

I used to think this but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it is, but is C-USA really some sort of Panacea for North Texas Football? Is it really the height of our aspirations?

Would it be more desirable to be the lone Texas team in a more highly-regarded conference than just another middle of the road team lost in the shuffle of a conference with several?

Even if CUSA is out, the Belt is running in neutral and somehow we need to find a new, better home.

Edited May 27, 2010 by MeanGreen61

Side Show Joe · May 27, 2010

The WAC is a big train to nowhere for us.

If the WAC is a train to nowhere, what is the Sun Belt?

The WAC has an average athletic budget of $20.7 million. The Sun Belt average is $13.9 million. The WAC has sent Boise to a BCS bowl twice. That's the nowhere I'd like to see North Texas at. We send our champ to a bowl that pays $350,000!?

Like I said, things could be different after the realignment, but if the WAC is unchanged, and we are not in C-USA, I say it's time to bolt.

The Sun Belt is a train to nowhere. Too many schools in this conference are unwilling to do what is necessary to improve this conference. I have seen nothing that makes think the Sun Belt will ever be more then purgatory for teams wanting to move up to an established conference.

untjim1995 · May 27, 2010

If the WAC is a train to nowhere, what is the Sun Belt?

The WAC has an average athletic budget of $20.7 million. The Sun Belt average is $13.9 million. The WAC has sent Boise to a BCS bowl twice. That's the nowhere I'd like to see North Texas at. We send our champ to a bowl that pays $350,000!?

Like I said, things could be different after the realignment, but if the WAC is unchanged, and we are not in C-USA, I say it's time to bolt.

The Sun Belt is a train to nowhere. Too many schools in this conference are unwilling to do what is necessary to improve this conference. I have seen nothing that makes think the Sun Belt will ever be more then purgatory for teams wanting to move up to an established conference.

I tend to agree with a lot of your points here, but there is almost zero chance that Boise State will stay in the WAC. The MWC only has 9 teams as it stands now and if Utah/BYU leave, Boise will be the first pick up. I even believe Boise will move to the MWC no matter what, but that will get sped forward if BSU is playing for the MNC this season, which is very possible. Just for argument's sake, if Boise, Fresno, and Nevada left to join a new MWC, the WAC would be left with Hawaii, San Jose State, Idaho, Utah State, New Mexico State, and La Tech, which is apparently a top target of CUSA's next expansion. I just can't tell what league would be better for us, a watered-down WAC that looks like the old Big West, or the SBC, which could very well lose MTSU, FAU, or WKU to another conference. I do know that am 100% convinced we won't be in CUSA as long as SMU is there. The other schools feel that the DFW market is covered with SMU. It is also why I can see UTSA eventually moving into CUSA down the road because that is a large TV market to sell to a network that is interested in gaining broadcast rights.

CMJ · May 27, 2010

Basically UNTJIM made my point, but I'd just say once Boise leaves the WAC is little better in football than the current Belt. If Nevada and Fresno State also leaves - it is more and more like the Big West, which WAS purgatory if you remember it.

Basketball will be better top to bottom tho, so there's that.

GrayEagle · May 27, 2010

I tend to agree with a lot of your points here, but there is almost zero chance that Boise State will stay in the WAC. The MWC only has 9 teams as it stands now and if Utah/BYU leave, Boise will be the first pick up. I even believe Boise will move to the MWC no matter what, but that will get sped forward if BSU is playing for the MNC this season, which is very possible. Just for argument's sake, if Boise, Fresno, and Nevada left to join a new MWC, the WAC would be left with Hawaii, San Jose State, Idaho, Utah State, New Mexico State, and La Tech, which is apparently a top target of CUSA's next expansion. I just can't tell what league would be better for us, a watered-down WAC that looks like the old Big West, or the SBC, which could very well lose MTSU, FAU, or WKU to another conference. I do know that am 100% convinced we won't be in CUSA as long as SMU is there. The other schools feel that the DFW market is covered with SMU. It is also why I can see UTSA eventually moving into CUSA down the road because that is a large TV market to sell to a network that is interested in gaining broadcast rights.

What we need to see is if Boise joins the MWC. If the Pac-10 or Big 12 tap Utah/BYU/TCU then the WAC just became better than the remaining MWC. Air Force would become the premier program and the dropoff is pretty severe from there. So it could be that the WAC is the survivor, not the MWC. Neither league can afford to lose their top teams and survive unless they want to become the next Belt. There are no other teams that are likely to be an asset except Montana and unless there's a change by the Montana legislature they would have to include Montana State in expansion.

There are certainly worse fates than being in the WAC or MWC but CUSA might not be so bad in the final analysis.

Besides, based on last year, we would raise the quality of the Belt by leaving it.