Pac-10 Expansion Hits Roadblock

[VideoEagle]

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

and one more

NO

[cdizzle86]

We can either be in a conference surrounded by Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii or be surround by ULL, ULM, FIU. It's a stepping stone people. We stay in the WAC for a few years and hope we get picked up by a better conference in the next realignment.

[TIgreen01]

Yeah. We shouldn't fool ourselves reaching for the sun. We'll just end up burning.

No offense, but if you're not even going to dream big...

Dream big is dreaming of the WAC? I think we happen to have a better chance of moving up and out by staying in the Sun Belt over joining the current WAC lineup. Boise had it's own bowl game for goodness sakes. If that's about to happen for us if we were to join the WAC then I'd be all for it.

Either way...you're one of the better connected folks on this board. Maybe you know something I don't and joining the WAC means that we do take Tulsa/UTEP/ASU with us....if THAT were on the table, and LaTech was staying WACky as well....then I'd be THRILLED to join that conference. I just want to see us making moves that create natural rivalries. Short of that, I'm not unhappy with staying in the Sun Belt while we continue building up.

I do have to wonder why you think either Tulsa or UTEP would leave CUSA for a backwards move to the WAC? I thought UTEP would never be caught dead in the same conference as NMSU? Tulsa,also, seems to be a good fit with the other private schools in the western CUSA division. Why would they leave?

Edited June 16, 2010 by TIgreen01

[MeanGreenTexan]

We can either be in a conference surrounded by Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii or be surround by ULL, ULM, FIU. It's a stepping stone people. We stay in the WAC for a few years and hope we get picked up by a better conference in the next realignment.

Folks, believe it or not, just like with the big boys... It's about money. If UNT gets an invite to another conference, it will need to be for more money. If that cannot happen, then we will stay where we are and be just fine.

If an invitation to the WAC/CUSA guarantees UNT $1 or $10mil more in profit over staying in the Belt, then the WAC/CUSA is where UNT will go. If the WAC/CUSA cannot guarantee UNT more money, we need to stay where we're at.

It's fun to prognosticate and dream of this or that conference ad nauseum, but in the end, it boils down to the Benjamins... just like it does for Texas/OU/et al.

[gangrene]

Nah. Let them pay their dues in the Sun Belt. We should take Arkansas State, UTEP, and Tulsa to the WAC.

The adage "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" might be appropriate for UTSA and Texas State right now. It remains to be seen if they are friends or enemies, but it sure would be hard to accept if either of those schools went to the WAC and turned that into a CUSA or MWC bid, while we sit and twiddle our thumbs in the SBC.

No WAC...and who would wantt to take Texas State and UTSA(who has no football team yet) to the WAC? the Sunbelt is much better...just try to add to the Belt...w/o boise the WAC stinks.

Surprisingly, those two schools have been mentioned as possibilities for both the WAC and CUSA, and not just by random internet posters. UTSA already has future games scheduled and contracted with Arizona, Arizona State, Kansas State, Houston and Baylor.

Boise had it's own bowl game for goodness sakes. If that's about to happen for us if we were to join the WAC then I'd be all for it.

You know, that's not a bad idea. The WAC is losing a bowl with Boise State and we just happen to be opening up a new stadium that same year. Coincidence? I happen to think our new stadium will be much better than the blue turf in Idaho.

[Rudy]

So The WACky is about to lose the inHumanitarian Bowl, possibly the Hawaii Bowl. What bowl games will they have left? Where is their conference champ going to play?

[GrayEagle]

The WAC even without Boise is a better conference than the Sun Belt. Look at power ratings. Check Phil Steele. Add them up...last year, this year, whatever. The Belt doesn't even match up to the MAC.

Stay in the Belt where we know that no one is leaving because no one else wants them? What is that? Move up!

Play what if for a moment. What if Karl Benson extended invitations to Louisiana as well? Also promised Montana and Texas State that they would get invites when the moratorium is lifted? Maybe even promised UTSA that if they were competitive and their attendance looked good that they would be added in a few years?

There could be divisions to lessen travel costs and when Montana and Texas State came on board there could be a championship game.

It could look something like this:

Hawaii

San Jose State

Fresno State

Nevada

Idaho

Montana

Utah State

New Mexico State

North Texas

Louisiana

Louisiana Tech

Texas State

I had still rather be in CUSA because of the closeness of the teams but this wouldn't be that bad an alternative.

Edited June 16, 2010 by GrayEagle

[VideoEagle]

Sigh

Let me start with I don't mean this as a slam against either TSSM or UTSA, but here is a little reality.

Let's start with Texas State. Since they have moved up from Division II to 1AA (now FCS) they have had a total of 4 winning seasons. That's right, 4 in the last 22 years. NT has been to more bowl games in the 2000s than TSSM has had winning seasons since the 80s. In their entire history they have one a total of 11 football conference championships, less than half of NT.

Now to the UTSA. Everyone does understand they don't have a team yet, right? And you do realize that all of the "contracts" to play in San Antonio don't kick in till AFTER they get to the FBS level. Who are they going to play to average the 15000?

For both of them, the Southland has announced that teams the confirm an intent to move to FBC ball must withdraw from the conference before they start the process. That means both need to make the transitions without any conference help or money. Neither will have any chance at any NCAA post season play for any of their sports - basketball, baseball, golf, etc. - as an independent.

Then there is the little matter of the moratorium on teams moving up from FCS to FBS ball while the NCAA re-writes the rules with the intention of making it more difficult. Already, a FCS school must be a member of a conference that sponsors FBS football before they are allowed to even begin the process, something neither of the school are.

I understand the tendency to think that a school has "passed you by" if they go to a bowl game in a year you didn't, or beaten your team once or twice, or for some even getting mentioned on a blog more often. This is a preposterous.

[GreenStreet]

Nooooo. NO, no, no, no, no, never, never, never, no, never, no, no, no, never.

I think its already official, unofficially.

[UNT90]

Is our opinion of our future so low that we really want to be in a conference with UTSA and TX ST? Really? One school that is still in FCS and one school that doesn't even have a football program yet?

I swear, sometimes we act like we are the battered woman in an abuse relationship. Zero confidence, zero self-esteem, and the thinking that this is the best we deserve, so we might as well stick with it.

Stay in the belt (over the WAC), finish the football stadium, turn our football program around, start a baseball program, and beat a ranked opponent or win a game in the NCAA tourney in basketball.

Get an invitation to a better conference (and I ain't talking about C-USA) AFTER we do all the above. Just think of the improvement to our self esteem. After all, how can you expect others to love you if you don't love yourself.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

The WAC has only been to a BCS bowl 3 times. And their members have included such no-names as Arizona, Arizona State, BYU, TCU, Colorado State, SMU, Air Force, and Boise State.

They can't hold a candle to the Sun Belt!

---You just named a bunch of teams that left..for greener pastures... None are current members..

---The WAC was a good conference... today it is not. The SWC was good conf. too... it is now defunct.

---The Missouri Valley when North Texas was a member was the best basketball CONFERENCE in America with Louisville, Memphis, Bradley, Cincinnati, Drake, and Wichita State. All of those have made the final four, some several times. My senior year 5 of the MVC members was in the top ten at the same time, with UTEP (eventual champ), Kentucky, and UCLA. The ACC was not so good... they used only white players which hurt them. The problem with that era was UCLA was the best TEAM and the rest of the PAC-8 wasn't very good. Once upon a time doesn't count... the MVC is not that great anymore. .........and neither is the WAC.

Stay away from them .... no sense in argueing... just come back in 5 years.... I think they are in trouble just as the MVC was in the mid 70's when the good teams left. ....

Edited June 17, 2010 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[Mean Green 93-98]

---The WAC was a good conference... today it is not. The SWC was good conf. too... it is now defunct.

You took the words out of my mouth. Yes, the WAC has a pretty good history, but once all the good teams left to form the MWC, the WAC dropped to around MAC level.

[cdizzle86]

You took the words out of my mouth. Yes, the WAC has a pretty good history, but once all the good teams left to form the MWC, the WAC dropped to around MAC level.

Perception is everything. I bet if you go ask 10 random sports fans, they would put WAC ahead of the Sun Belt. It has been said before in another thread, but even though the Sun Belt has had some great accomplishments, we still get no respect. Whereas the WAC has at least some respect. I think the Sun Belt has a way to go (3-5 years) in order to catch up to the WAC in perceived value, but the realignment is now. If our goal as a university is to eventually be in a BCS/playoff eligible conference, then we need to get out of the Sun Belt now.

I think we have to prepare for a playoff scenario, and that means we have to play better football and get our name out there. We don't have time to just sit around and wait for the Sun Belt to gain respect. We were conference champions 4 years in a row for heaven sakes and look where that got us.

I'm not saying the WAC isn't a risk, but the higher the risk, the higher the reward.

[mrsgreengoblin]

I'm not saying the WAC isn't a risk, but the higher the risk, the higher the reward.

I think NT tried to use that philosophy with the last head coach we hired and you know how well that has turned out so far. Just sayin...

Edited June 17, 2010 by mrsgreengoblin

[LongJim]

How do you sell a Boise-less WAC to Mom in the recruit's living room? How? What do you say differently that you couldn't say with the Belt? Just curious.

Edited June 17, 2010 by LongJim

[cdizzle86]

How do you sell a Boise-less WAC to Mom in the recruit's living room? How? What do you say differently that you couldn't say with the Belt? Just curious.

You sell the history of the conference and all the successful schools that were in the WAC and now in better conferences.

[greenminer]

How do you sell a Boise-less WAC to Mom in the recruit's living room? How? What do you say differently that you couldn't say with the Belt? Just curious.

Friend, those are questions the Belt needs the general sports fan to start asking itself. It is the only way we are going to shake the knee-jerk perception that the Belt is still the bottom feeder. People need to start looking at what has actually been happening on the field and compare with MAC/WAC.

I think there have been some bumps in the road, but I see a Belt really getting better. If you think it is hard being in a perceptively bad scenario, imagine being in a WAC that really has been dying in slow motion for the last 10 - 15 years. And then having to watch it in mountain/pacific time zones. The charter members of the MWC saw the writing on the wall (what was it, 1997?).

I also maybe a minority here, but I think the road trips in the Belt present a far better return of investment than most of the WAC.

I am also not so sure we can use Boise as a model (using the WAC as a stepping stone). They were winning far before they got into the WAC and they will continue to win wherever they play. We really don't have the same foundation...not yet, anyways.

My opinion: jumping into the WAC hoping for eventual CUSA would be building a house of cards and a risk not worth taking.

//Having said all that, I really really really miss NMSU.

[cdizzle86]

I think NT tried to use that philosophy with the last head coach we hired and you know how well that has turned out so far. Just sayin...

Say what you will, but since we hired him our recruiting has been outstanding. Also we have a brand new $78 million dollar stadium being built right across the highway. Of course I would like to have more wins, but we have made progress since he's been here. When I found out Todd Dodge was coming to North Texas, I was not expecting him to turn our program around in less than 2 years.

[wardly]

The WAC even without Boise is a better conference than the Sun Belt. Look at power ratings. Check Phil Steele. Add them up...last year, this year, whatever. The Belt doesn't even match up to the MAC.

Stay in the Belt where we know that no one is leaving because no one else wants them? What is that? Move up!

Play what if for a moment. What if Karl Benson extended invitations to Louisiana as well? Also promised Montana and Texas State that they would get invites when the moratorium is lifted? Maybe even promised UTSA that if they were competitive and their attendance looked good that they would be added in a few years?

There could be divisions to lessen travel costs and when Montana and Texas State came on board there could be a championship game.

It could look something like this:

Hawaii

San Jose State

Fresno State

Nevada

Idaho

Montana

Utah State

New Mexico State

North Texas

Louisiana

Louisiana Tech

Texas State

I had still rather be in CUSA because of the closeness of the teams but this wouldn't be that bad an alternative. montana has not expressed, to my knowledge, a desire to move up, while utsa has.also, i would put ark. st. in the mix. an eastern division with unt,ark. st, ull,la.tech, n.mexico st., and texas st. would work.

[Cerebus]

You sell the history of the conference and all the successful schools that were in the WAC and now in better conferences.

You mean those schools that are mainly in the west, and now are aligned with regional conferences? That is exactly what we should be doing also.

[cdizzle86]

You mean those schools that are mainly in the west, and now are aligned with regional conferences? That is exactly what we should be doing also.

If you are hinting to being in CUSA, then I have no argument there. I would much rather be there than the WAC, but I just don't see that happening unless some schools leave.

[Quoner]

I'm not saying the WAC isn't a risk, but the higher the risk, the higher the reward.

Maybe so, but that still doesn't mean that speed dating at an AIDS clinic is a smart idea.

[cdizzle86]

Maybe so, but that still doesn't mean that speed dating at an AIDS clinic is a smart idea.

It is if you want AIDS. Just sayin.

[MeanGreenTexan]

It is if you want AIDS. Just sayin.

If you want AIDS, you deserve to move down to I-AA.

[Quoner]

It is if you want AIDS. Just sayin.

Touche.