San Jose State Fan Here

NT80 · June 18, 2010

There's been a lot of talk on the WAC boards that UNT could get an invite to the WAC. If invited would UNT accept? How do most fans feel about the WAC or do you guys aspire to be in CUSA?

We also have a poll on our board about possible WAC membership.

http://spartanblitz.com/index.php?/topic/138-who-should-the-wac-add-to-replace-boise-state/

A WAC for us as just a bridge from NMSU to La Tech, not too much interest.

However, if we can bring friends with benefits (ie less travel and more central time zone games) such as forming an Eastern division, then yes I think you would find interest.

Edited June 18, 2010 by NT80

GreenStreet · June 18, 2010

There's been a lot of talk on the WAC boards that UNT could get an invite to the WAC. If invited would UNT accept? How do most fans feel about the WAC or do you guys aspire to be in CUSA?

We also have a poll on our board about possible WAC membership.

http://spartanblitz.com/index.php?/topic/138-who-should-the-wac-add-to-replace-boise-state/

UNT is not very open to change. While the WAC is not the first choice, we would get used to it. We cant do any worse, or get any less air time. However, Mandy the black plague of all things negative towards UNT athletics lives in California now, so there is really no need to travel any closer than we have to.

Edited June 18, 2010 by GreenStreet

babigos · June 18, 2010

No to the WAC. Not enough regional teams and not interested in late West Coast games that receive little to now local media coverage on the Saturday evening news or the Sunday morning paper. What bowls does the WAC still have? Boise will take the H-Bowl with them to the MWC, the Hawaii Bowl takes Hawaii and even if we qualified, how many fans can afford that trip during the holidays? What's the other bowl, the New Mexico Bowl? Sorry, but I put this below the appeal of New Orleans. The WAC is a poor fit for NT.

The Emerald Bowl in San Francisco - 2010 & 2013 (WAC vs Pac 10)

Hawaii Bowl- (WAC vs CUSA)

New Mexico Bowl - (WAC vs MWC)

Poinsettia Bowl - WAC vs MWC (2011 & 2012)

Humanitarian Bowl - (WAC vs MAC) - will be replace with a new bowl after BSU leaves.

Not sure what the Sun Belt has, but I think some of these are descent match-ups.

NT80 · June 18, 2010

The Emerald Bowl in San Francisco - 2010 & 2013 (WAC vs Pac 10)

Hawaii Bowl- (WAC vs CUSA)

New Mexico Bowl - (WAC vs MWC)

Poinsettia Bowl - WAC vs MWC (2011 & 2012)

Humanitarian Bowl - (WAC vs MAC) - will be replace with a new bowl after BSU leaves.

Not sure what the Sun Belt has, but I think some of these are descent match-ups.

That is a lot of Bowl tie-ins. What is the feeling about WAC expansion further east to get multiple FBS SunBelt teams vs FCS moveups? Would Benson explore the possibility of an eastern division?

babigos · June 18, 2010

That is a lot of Bowl tie-ins. What is the feeling about WAC expansion further east to get multiple FBS SunBelt teams vs FCS moveups? Would Benson explore the possibility of an eastern division?

Benson (A.K.A. Mr. Peanut) is not saying a thing. He has mentioned that the WAC is looking at every possibility west of Ruston. Some even seem to think (possibly dream) that UTEP could possibly want to come back. Not sure how true or false that is.

Also, Texas State has been mentioned as a possible addition. Now what Benson does or think, we'll never know.

Edited June 18, 2010 by babigos

NT80 · June 18, 2010

Benson (A.K.A. Mr. Peanut) is not saying a thing. He has mentioned that the WAC is looking at every possibility west of Ruston. Some even seem to think (possibly dream) that UTEP could possibly want to come back. Not sure how true or false that is.

Also, Texas State has been mentioned as a possible addition. Now what Benson does or think, we'll never know.

UTEP still has desires to play more historical natural rivals and western schools again someday...

http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_15298068?source=most_viewed

UNTflyer · June 18, 2010

If UTEP wants to move (they are in the same geographic position we are, being the western-most team of their conference) then the WAC gets a bit better for us.

I'm not saying join the WAC as it is today. The downside is the travel, and the WAC needs an eastern division for this to make sense for us. If UTEP moves, grab someone like Arkansas State or Tulsa. In this scenario, I suppose I'd be OK with Louisiana-Lafayette.

What I don't get is how our fans say the Sun Belt is just as good as the WAC. That's just crazy talk. The WAC is better in terms of bowl tie-ins, BCS appearances, and revenue.

UNTLifer · June 18, 2010

Is that why our only 3 games to be on regional television last season were Ohio, Ball State, and Army? Or because we currently get so much coverage playing against the sun belt schools?

My point was the time the games would begin/end leading to no local coverage in the Sunday paper or the Saturday night news. Monday is all about the Cowboys.

It had nothing to do with the competition, then again reading comprehension doesn't seem to be your strong suit.

eppy4life · June 18, 2010

Speak for yourself. Im green through and through. I cheer for a few other schools, but I cheer, support, and am a fan of NT

I don't think Daddy D is referring to anyone who would be reading this board. Look at our enrollment. look at our attendance. There are 25k students every semester who could get in free to the games but don't show up. Daddy is talking about those 25k.

UNTLifer · June 18, 2010

The Emerald Bowl in San Francisco - 2010 & 2013 (WAC vs Pac 10)

Hawaii Bowl- (WAC vs CUSA)

New Mexico Bowl - (WAC vs MWC)

Poinsettia Bowl - WAC vs MWC (2011 & 2012)

Humanitarian Bowl - (WAC vs MAC) - will be replace with a new bowl after BSU leaves.

Not sure what the Sun Belt has, but I think some of these are descent match-ups.

My point was the typical regular season conference road game will receive little to no coverage in the DFW media due to the time the games are completed.

No disrespect to those bowls, but the Humanitarian Bowl will leave with Boise, the Hawaii Bowl takes Hawaii if they are bowl eligible leaving the struggling Emerald Bowl and New Mexico Bowl that, in my opinion, are beneath the New Orleans Bowl. Plus, the New Mexico and Emerald Bowl are not as easy to travel to as the New Orleans Bowl, and the Sun Belt now has tie-ins to Papa Johns Bowl, the St. Petersburg Bowl and the PetroSun Independence Bowl.

It is just easier to travel regionally or to the east and the media coverage locally is much better where we are now than in the WAC. I would also feel comfortable in saying that the Sun Belt is a more stable conference at this time than the WAC and the competition is much the same. Besides, the only way most people would agree to a move to the WAC would be if Ark. St., ULL, etc... moved with us. What is the benefit of essentially playing the same teams we do now, but under the WAC logo? The WAC is the most unstable conference out there.

Cowtown · June 18, 2010

New Mex Bowl is an easy drive, about the same distance as NO. Dirt cheap air fare. And while Albq. sucks, I cant argue that it is anywhere near the party town of NO, it does have skiing just a few hours away. It would really work out well for those of us who ski in Northern NM/Southern CO. So I say yes, join the WAC so I can add football to my winter holiday.

Daddy Dumpsalot · June 18, 2010

My point was the time the games would begin/end leading to no local coverage in the Sunday paper or the Saturday night news. Monday is all about the Cowboys.

It had nothing to do with the competition, then again reading comprehension doesn't seem to be your strong suit.

Since when is GMG about people's "points"? Its only about facts right...

And again to your point about having no "local coverage"...you say this because we're currently getting a lot of coverage?

Communication must not be your strong suit.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Daddy Dumpsalot

CMJ · June 18, 2010

Since when is GMG about people's "points"? Its only about facts right...

And again to your point about having no "local coverage"...you say this because we're currently getting a lot of coverage?

Communication must not be your strong suit.

If you think the coverage is bad now, you weren't around when we were in the Big West.

Cerebus · June 18, 2010

Unfortunately our entire fan base is fickle random fans that happen to attend UNT and support other "larger" schools. Until we can entice those fans into coming to games and supporting we will always be where we are. The only way to entice them is by either giving them free shirts, a mustang, or putting a product that they know on the field.

Nobody in the WAC is going to make them come out any more than anyone in the SBC.

If we win, we sell seats, it's that simple. We don't need to incur the added costs of the WAC for nothing in return.

Cerebus · June 18, 2010

If you think the coverage is bad now, you weren't around when we were in the Big West.

+1

UNTLifer · June 18, 2010

Since when is GMG about people's "points"? Its only about facts right...

And again to your point about having no "local coverage"...you say this because we're currently getting a lot of coverage?

Communication must not be your strong suit.

Fact: A reading comprehension is lost on you.

Fact: During our Big West days, which is pretty much today's WAC, we received little to no coverage for our games, FB or BB, that ended late on the West Coast.

Fact: We currently receive coverage in the DRC, won't change, the DMN and the FWST in the Sunday paper. Won't happen when our games are completed after press time, and they won't show up on Monday following a Cowboys game.

Fact: The local stations announce the score of our road games and at least one typically sends someone to cover the local games. When road games finish up after the 10:00pm news, you get no coverage.

Fact: The Sun Belt is a more stabile conference than the WAC. The only reason we are mentioned is to be of help to La. Tech. If La. Tech wasn't currently a WAC member we wouldn't be mentioned. La. Tech made their bed and they can sleep in it. No love here La. Tech. If they need help they can come grovelling back to the SBC,at which time I hope the SBC says "No thanks."

Again, the WAC is the Big West revisited. It wasn't good for NT then and it won't be now.

greenjoe · June 18, 2010

When we were in the "Big West Conference" the name of the dorm, "West Hall" was changed to "Big West Hall" logo and all. I thought it was funny. I met a student and asked which dorm he lived in and he replied, "Big West Hall."

I'd rather build "Conference USA Hall"

GO MEAN GREEN

Rudy · June 18, 2010

If you think the coverage is bad now, you weren't around when we were in the Big West.

We had coverage then? I remember us being in the corner be the team's tunnel with the rest of the Talons one game. The band was playing before the team came out, and the music was litterally bouncing off of the aluminum stands, due to there being maybe 2k fans there. You and I looked at each other like we were about to be physically ill.

CMJ · June 18, 2010

I remember a news report on a home game here or there. Usually it was about a 25 second video package with Dale Hansen or someone talking about our lone score. They always made sure and get a shot of the Model A tho! The only times we usually got coverage was when we had a noon kickoff.

Rudy · June 18, 2010

I remember a news report on a home game here or there. Usually it was about a 25 second video package with Dale Hansen or someone talking about our lone score. They always made sure and get a shot of the Model A tho! The only times we usually got coverage was when we had a noon kickoff.

Have you seen the Model A now? She looks GREAT. And she runs too.

Lord I hated those noon kicks. We hadn't figured out the whole tailgate thing yet.

Daddy Dumpsalot · June 18, 2010

Fact: A reading comprehension is lost on you.

You might want to revisit this. I don't think your sentence structure is correct.

Fact: During our Big West days, which is pretty much today's WAC, we received little to no coverage for our games, FB or BB, that ended late on the West Coast.

I understand your point. But again...it's no different than our coverage now.

Fact: We currently receive coverage in the DRC, won't change, the DMN and the FWST in the Sunday paper. Won't happen when our games are completed after press time, and they won't show up on Monday following a Cowboys game.

This makes sense, however, you're saying that we never read about any Pac10 games in the Sunday paper?

Fact: The local stations announce the score of our road games and at least one typically sends someone to cover the local games. When road games finish up after the 10:00pm news, you get no coverage.

I understand your point. But again...it's no different than our coverage now.

Fact: The Sun Belt is a more stabile conference than the WAC. The only reason we are mentioned is to be of help to La. Tech. If La. Tech wasn't currently a WAC member we wouldn't be mentioned. La. Tech made their bed and they can sleep in it. No love here La. Tech. If they need help they can come grovelling back to the SBC,at which time I hope the SBC says "No thanks."

This isn't a "fact" at all. And you still haven't explained why the SBC is more stable than the WAC. Thanks for the clarification.

VideoEagle · June 18, 2010

I understand your point. But again...it's no different than our coverage now.

Actually it is a huge difference. Back then we had football games that had no local TV mention at all. That does not happen anymore - at least one station, usually two or more, report on all of our football games.

This makes sense, however, you're saying that we never read about any Pac10 games in the Sunday paper?

Nice try, but those are games that start at 2:30 or 3 Pacific time. Occasionally there will be a story a Pac10 game that started at 5 PT.

And you still haven't explained why the SBC is more stable than the WAC.

Because we have not had 13 teams desert in the last 12 years. I know some of our fans actually think joining another conference just to leave - a mere stepping stone conference - is somehow a good thing. I notice from reading news lately from Wacy land is they all think it is terrible. In fact the goal of any Wacy expansion is to find teams that are NOT GOING TO LEAVE SO THE CONFERENCE CAN BE STABLE AND THUS MAKE MONEY FOR ALL THE TEAMS! One of the biggest indictments of the Wac listed by the Honolulu paper was it has become a mere stepping stone conference.

When you join another conference, you pay a fee to the conference you are leaving. Usually this is in the form of forfeiting any conference revenue for the last two years of membership. You also pay a fee to join the new conference, usually by forfeiting the first two to three years of any conference revenues. That's four to five years of conference revenue lost per change. Some of you are suggesting we would some how be better by forfeiting five years of revenue to we can then forfeit the next five years of revenue with another conference change! That is not rational.

eppy4life · June 18, 2010

When you join another conference, you pay a fee to the conference you are leaving. Usually this is in the form of forfeiting any conference revenue for the last two years of membership. You also pay a fee to join the new conference, usually by forfeiting the first two to three years of any conference revenues. That's four to five years of conference revenue lost per change. Some of you are suggesting we would some how be better by forfeiting five years of revenue to we can then forfeit the next five years of revenue with another conference change! That is not rational.

This is the information those of us who know nothing about a switch like that need to hear. Thanks.

forevereagle · June 18, 2010

Here is food for thought for those of you claiming that the WAC is an improvement.

Not one charter member of the WAC is still in the conference.

Since we are saying that "all schools leaving left for a promotion," how do we explain Tulsa, Rice, SMU, TCU, and UTEP going to CUSA? Are we saying that CUSA is a better conference? If so, let's just try to get to CUSA and forget the WAC altogether.

eppy4life · June 18, 2010

Here is food for thought for those of you claiming that the WAC is an improvement.

Not one charter member of the WAC is still in the conference.

Since we are saying that "all schools leaving left for a promotion," how do we explain Tulsa, Rice, SMU, TCU, and UTEP going to CUSA? Are we saying that CUSA is a better conference? If so, let's just try to get to CUSA and forget the WAC altogether.

I think everyone admits that CUSA is the ideal place. That's not the arguement. What we're questioning is whether the WAC is better than the Belt.