North Texas To The Wac Poll

Harry · June 17, 2010

Let's see what everyone thinks on this. Please vote!

Got5onIt · June 17, 2010

I voted yes. in another post I stated it's all about perception. If we can guarantee athletics can break even, NT should go to the WAC.

TIgreen01 · June 17, 2010

Kind of a difficult question to answer unless you read nothing into it and assume that joining the WAC means joining it in it's current state and exclude the notion of bringing along more central time zone teams should we join.

Unless someone provides some hard numbers that say otherwise, you have to say 'no' on the WAC for now.

GrandGreen · June 17, 2010

If the WAC was not a good option before, why would it be without Boise? Without some kind of wild conjured up regional division of the WAC, it makes no sense. At this point, the Belt is a better geographical fit, and I had just as soon see games against ULL, ASU, the Muts and Troy as anyone in the WAC.

Huff · June 17, 2010

I did not like being in The Big West and do not think I would enjoy going west again.

MeanGreen61 · June 17, 2010

Post by MonzanoWolf on the Belt board

WAC, Reduced TV Dollars, FCS Expansion Candidates

A good post by Yoda (Fresno State fan) on the WAC Board; another consideration is the fact that Boise and its BCS generated monies are now gone as well.

Benson knows perfectly well that the (TV) contract will be rewritten. He has long ago given his Presidents an idea of what to expect in terms of reduced income from such a rewrite.

And newsflash dude, if we added a new member, any of the commonly rumored candidates, we would still get hammered by ESPN. It is not any old school that we are losing. It is a school with a national reputation and one that draws a national television audience. There is no replacement that doesn't see us still get hammered. We could add BYU and we'd still get hammered. We could add TCU and still get hammered. We could steal Utah from the PAC and still get hammered. Get it?

So why be desperate? Let's say that our television contract is cut to $2 mil. Well you can divide that by 8 or you can divide it by 9 -- because if you add Montana or whomever, at the end of the day, you are still only getting $2 mil.

LA Tech would love to go to C-USA and the WAC would love to see them do so. We'd wish them the best. They are not a western school and the travel expenses have to be killing them. We understand that -- it kills us as well and each of us goes there far less often than they come here.

I think most of the conference Presidents would like to see us lose LA Tech to C-USA and Hawai'i to who cares just to save the travel costs. We could back fill with any of the FCS schools commonly mentioned and come out ahead financially. You may not like that and you may desperately need to blame someone, but it is not Benson's fault.

Here's another newsflash. If they are lucky, Fresno State and Nevada will end up in the MWC and LA Tech will end up in C-USA or the Sun Belt. Everyone else (and maybe those three schools as well) will either drop from FBS and/or will be aligned with Montana, Portland State, UC Davis, Sac State and Cal Poly as WAC members.

That is what most of the Presidents aspire to. That is all they aspire to. That is why they are not proactive. They long to recreate the old Big West football conference and the only way to do that is by attrition. Face it jediwarrior, you've been skipped over and your best days are well behind you. And it's not Benson's fault.

MeanGreen61 · June 17, 2010

Around 75% are saying NO THANKS to the WAC thus far.

VideoEagle · June 17, 2010

Post by MonzanoWolf on the Belt board

WAC, Reduced TV Dollars, FCS Expansion Candidates

A good post by Yoda (Fresno State fan) on the WAC Board; another consideration is the fact that Boise and its BCS generated monies are now gone as well.

Benson knows perfectly well that the (TV) contract will be rewritten. He has long ago given his Presidents an idea of what to expect in terms of reduced income from such a rewrite.

And newsflash dude, if we added a new member, any of the commonly rumored candidates, we would still get hammered by ESPN. It is not any old school that we are losing. It is a school with a national reputation and one that draws a national television audience. There is no replacement that doesn't see us still get hammered. We could add BYU and we'd still get hammered. We could add TCU and still get hammered. We could steal Utah from the PAC and still get hammered. Get it?

So why be desperate? Let's say that our television contract is cut to $2 mil. Well you can divide that by 8 or you can divide it by 9 -- because if you add Montana or whomever, at the end of the day, you are still only getting $2 mil.

LA Tech would love to go to C-USA and the WAC would love to see them do so. We'd wish them the best. They are not a western school and the travel expenses have to be killing them. We understand that -- it kills us as well and each of us goes there far less often than they come here.

I think most of the conference Presidents would like to see us lose LA Tech to C-USA and Hawai'i to who cares just to save the travel costs. We could back fill with any of the FCS schools commonly mentioned and come out ahead financially. You may not like that and you may desperately need to blame someone, but it is not Benson's fault.

Here's another newsflash. If they are lucky, Fresno State and Nevada will end up in the MWC and LA Tech will end up in C-USA or the Sun Belt. Everyone else (and maybe those three schools as well) will either drop from FBS and/or will be aligned with Montana, Portland State, UC Davis, Sac State and Cal Poly as WAC members.

That is what most of the Presidents aspire to. That is all they aspire to. That is why they are not proactive. They long to recreate the old Big West football conference and the only way to do that is by attrition. Face it jediwarrior, you've been skipped over and your best days are well behind you. And it's not Benson's fault.

Yoda has always been one of the WACs strongest supporters and best connected posters.

Again, why would we want to join a group that actively wants to recreate the Big West football conference?

NT80 · June 17, 2010

Kind of a difficult question to answer unless you read nothing into it and assume that joining the WAC means joining it in it's current state and exclude the notion of bringing along more central time zone teams should we join.

That was not Benson's desired route when we were offered in 2005. Today it makes more sense for the WAC to have Eastern and Western divisions, for conference security and less travel expenses, plus more media centers to show and support your product.

A WAC with just NMSU, UNT, and La Tech is marginally better than our current lineup and probably the reason most are voting no.

However, if UNT, La Tech, ULL, Ark St, Muts, WKU, and Troy, were suddenly in a single Eastern division then we have the best of the SBC merged with a complete Western division of a better-name WAC. That should get everyone's "yes" vote.

TIgreen01 · June 17, 2010

However, if UNT, La Tech, ULL, Ark St, Muts, WKU, and Troy, were suddenly in a single Eastern division then we have the best of the SBC merged with a complete Western division of a better-name WAC. That should get everyone's "yes" vote.

I'd, certainly, change my vote to 'Yes' in that scenario....

UNTLifer · June 17, 2010

I'd, certainly, change my vote to 'Yes' in that scenario....

Then why even move when we will be playing the same teams?

TIgreen01 · June 17, 2010

Then why even move when we will be playing the same teams?

B/c:

1) you eliminated the truly unrecognizable teams from the SBC (F?U/ULM)

2) kept the better teams from the SBC that are improving their programs and that our fans now look forward to playing (MTSU/Troy/ASU)

3) establish a rivalry with LaTech

4) get the NMSU rivalry going again

5) get the benefit of the casual fan's ignorant perception that the WAC is still better than the SBC.

Edited June 17, 2010 by TIgreen01

ColoradoEagle · June 17, 2010

B/c you eliminated the truly unrecognizable teams from the SBC (F?U/ULM), kept the better teams from the SBC that are improving their programs and that our fans now look forward to playing (MTSU/Troy/ASU), and then get the benefit of the casual fan's ignorant perception that the WAC is still better than the SBC.

At that point, there's no longer an SBC. Guess what the new SBC is.

TIgreen01 · June 17, 2010

At that point, there's no longer an SBC. Guess what the new SBC is.

Excellent point....then the "new" WAC would be strictly about survival of the program. No?

MCMLXXX · June 17, 2010

I voted yes. in another post I stated it's all about perception.

No.

Reality trumps percepton everytime. Reality in this case is in part that the SBC is less costly, better for student athletes, and in better time zones for media coverage.

NT80 · June 17, 2010

Reality trumps percepton everytime.

Ah, no. In conference membership perception has a lot to do with merchandise sales, ticket sales, media value, strength of schedule, and even value of your degree!

Is a Boise degree more valuable than a North Texas degree? Some would say it was just because they are now a MWC school. Perception has a great value in college athletics and college worth in general.

VideoEagle · June 17, 2010

Ah, no. In conference membership perception has a lot to do with merchandise sales, ticket sales, media value, strength of schedule, and even value of your degree!

Is a Boise degree more valuable than a North Texas degree? Some would say it was just because they are now a MWC school. Perception has a great value in college athletics and college worth in general.

"Some" would say that? Exactly who? Certainly not any highering manager. Texas Tech and Oklahoma State are both in the Big XII(10) but a business degree from Rice will get you a job faster than either of those two!

Do you actually believe San Jose State sells more merchandise than NT? If your statement is correct, then they must since the Wacy is "perceived" to be better.

And, I'm sorry, but strength of schedule is based on the records of the teams you play, not some delusional "perception."

eppy4life · June 17, 2010

"Some" would say that? Exactly who? Certainly not any highering manager. Texas Tech and Oklahoma State are both in the Big XII(10) but a business degree from Rice will get you a job faster than either of those two!

Do you actually believe San Jose State sells more merchandise than NT? If your statement is correct, then they must since the Wacy is "perceived" to be better.

And, I'm sorry, but strength of schedule is based on the records of the teams you play, not some delusional "perception."

You're both wrong.

jdennis82 · June 17, 2010

You're both wrong.

+1 - a well thought out, insightful response. thank you.

DallasGreen · June 17, 2010

B/c:
1) you eliminated the truly unrecognizable teams from the SBC (F?U/ULM)
2) kept the better teams from the SBC that are improving their programs and that our fans now look forward to playing (MTSU/Troy/ASU)
3) establish a rivalry with LaTech
4) get the NMSU rivalry going again
5) get the benefit of the casual fan's ignorant perception that the WAC is still better than the SBC.

I FIND YOUR #5 PARTICULARLY INTERESTING--IF THE F?U SCHOOLS ARE SO UNRECOGNIZABLE WHY HAS FAU KICKED OUR REAR EVERY YEAR SINCE THEY HAVE HAD A FOOTBALL TEAM? WE HAVE FOUGHT FAN IGNORANCE FOR YEARS --LIKE IN 2002 WHEN YOU FILL FOUTS FOR BAYLOR AND PUT A 50 ON THEM, BUT YET DRAW HALF THAT A COUPLE OF WEEKS LATER FOR USF WHOM BAYLOR IS DESPARATELY TRYING TO GET OFF OF THEIR SCHEDULE BECAUSE THE BEARS CAN'T EVEN COMPETE WITH THE BULLS. THAT SHOWS A LOT ABOUT THE IGNORANCE OF YOUR FAN BASE.I JUST WISH ALL THE NAYSAYERS ABOUT THE SBC WOULD GO ON THE ROAD TO SOME OF THESE SCHOOLS IN THE SBC. IT WOULD OPEN MANY EYES AS TO JUST HOW BIG A GAP THAT NOW EXISTS DUE TO INACTION SINCE 2002.

GrayEagle · June 17, 2010

Yoda has always been one of the WACs strongest supporters and best connected posters.

Again, why would we want to join a group that actively wants to recreate the Big West football conference?

This is a difficult response. If we assume that we cannot get into CUSA and the net revenue is the equal of the Sun Belt or better, then I'd say yes.

I'd prefer it if Louisiana comes along as well as it would reduce expenses. I believe that it would be easier to recruit to the WAC because it is perceived to be a better conference (actually is).

To me, the Big West wasn't that bad because without it we would not have been in Division 1A. True, until Arky State returned in '99 we were the only school in the Central Time Zone and that made it a little awkward for us. The BWC was never the equal of the WAC during our tenure so there's no real comparison.

Lastly, our refusal in 2004 saved the Sun Belt Conference as it would have left them with only seven members so we refused for a different reason. We could have also left the next year when NMSU, Utah State and Idaho did leave but with only Troy coming in that would've left them three short instead of two. That's when basketball-playing FIU began football and 1AA FAU came aboard, leaving a viable (voting) conference. We could now leave without leaving the SBC in a lurch since WKU and USA have added football.

Rudy · June 17, 2010

Then why even move when we will be playing the same teams?

And how would the WAC be a step up?

B/c:
1) you eliminated the truly unrecognizable teams from the SBC (F?U/ULM)
2) kept the better teams from the SBC that are improving their programs and that our fans now look forward to playing (MTSU/Troy/ASU)
3) establish a rivalry with LaTech
4) get the NMSU rivalry going again
5) get the benefit of the casual fan's ignorant perception that the WAC is still better than the SBC.

FAU has been getting national exposure, and where do you think FIU, FAU, and ULM will go? They would either come with us to the Big West, or they would get into CUSA, which is where we want to be.