The Case For The Wac

foutsrouts · June 24, 2010

Could the season hurry up and get here PLEASE. The off-season is way too long as indicated by this never-ending conference this or that stuff. Folks, sit back, relax...believe it or not, you (nor I) have anything to say or do about it. Let the folks that make their living messing with this stuff handle it. They will do what they believe is in the very best interests of UNT and its programs, and we can then watch UNT beat whichever team from whichever conference UNT is playing that day. And, it will do wonders for you blood pressure.

Please, God, let the season get here!

GO MEAN GREEN!

PS Yes, I realize I can just ignore it, but even in threads with different titles it seems to get back to conference realignment.

Not that a particular thread is likely to sway a decision one way or another, but since many of the decision makers do read these boards, the general tone set here by MeanGreeners could POSSIBLY influence the decision process. Besides, what else is there to talk about until 2-adays?

Edited June 24, 2010 by foutsrouts

Quoner · June 24, 2010

Not that a particular thread is likely to sway a decision one way or another, but since many of the decision makers do read these boards, the general tone set here by MeanGreeners could POSSIBLY influence the decision process. Besides, what else is there to talk about until 2-adays?

I've heard some strong rumors out of downtown Dallas about the need to form a secret committee with 4-6 specially selected members chosen from a pool of the same 8 people who've been posting about realignment for 6 years. They really want to find the best poster from Texas State as well and have narrowed that list to 4 candidates, with TulsaFaninTexas considered the wild card to replace all four.

More in VVIP.

Green Lantern · June 24, 2010

I've heard some strong rumors out of downtown Dallas about the need to form a secret committee with 4-6 specially selected members chosen from a pool of the same 8 people who've been posting about realignment for 6 years. They really want to find the best poster from Texas State as well and have narrowed that list to 4 candidates, with TulsaFaninTexas considered the wild card to replace all four.

More in VVIP.

Yeah, but what's your take on it?

Quoner · June 24, 2010

Yeah, but what's your take on it?

I'm forcefully adopting the SUMG "RIP University of North Texas athletics" stance on the issue.

LoveMG · June 24, 2010

I've heard some strong rumors out of downtown Dallas about the need to form a secret committee with 4-6 specially selected members chosen from a pool of the same 8 people who've been posting about realignment for 6 years. They really want to find the best poster from Texas State as well and have narrowed that list to 4 candidates, with TulsaFaninTexas considered the wild card to replace all four.

More in VVIP.

sure take a good thread and derail it. again

MCMLXXX · June 25, 2010

We of UNT don't need to be left in a MUT-less or Troy-less SBC.

As mentioned earlier, Troy isn't going anywhere. I think that that the schools that are most attractive in the eastern part of the SBC are MUTS, WKU, and USA.

Quoner · June 25, 2010

sure take a good thread and derail it. again

A Bleacher Report thread about WAC realignment? You're yelling at the dog for taking a dump in the cat's litter box.

Quoner · June 25, 2010

a little humor is fine. attempted highjacks on nearly every thread gets old. there are better ways to break into the comedy industry than on a unt message board looking to talk sports.

try this instead: http://www.ehow.com/how_2248109_become-comedian.html

Well, I'm humbled with that sick burn from one of the most habitually negative people around. I didn't know serious sports talk *tm was the angry caller persona where you list out reasons for change you pull out of the air and tell the people in charge you know more than them. You've been perfecting that for years, so I suggest you leverage this expertise into a stint with 105.3 The Fan. Maybe they'll sponsor the board or help with the stadium if you call in, text or email a really good idea of how to change college sports and improve the program.

Let's pick up from that comment about how Hawaii and Fresno are kicking BCS arse and really hash this out with some serious sports talk *tm.

Or we can just agree to ignore each other unless the conversation paths cross, not have a slap fight and move on.

VideoEagle · June 25, 2010

I finally read the actual article.

First, this is obviously a current student or very recent graduate and not someone used to actually fact checking before he types.

Second, most of his "proposals" have already clearly demonstrated to be bad ideas.

Third, a few new bad ideas include using the Great West conference as some sort of halfway house for wayward FCS programs. There is no reason at all to believe they would provide this community service at great expense to their current members by temporarily destroying their scheduling to accommodate programs over 1000 miles away.

But most importantly, this article clearly shows there is never anything worthy of reading posted on The Bleacher Report.

shaft · June 25, 2010

So how does the WAC get back to the BCS without Boise?

And if just quoting bad website and messages boards counts as a credible source, I would like to lower the bar and quote myself from the Scout/CFN board

North Texas is not going to join the WAC.

1. The Big West Conference failed. North Texas has already experimented with western time zones and didn't work. Fans don't travel, and the fans don't care about playing teams from the west coast.

2. The Super-WAC failed. The WAC has already proved it has nothing to offer the central time zone, just ask SMU.

3. Basketball. UNT has had two recent big dance berths and has no reason to give that up to over extend its BB team by traveling the globe as part of the WAC.

4. UNT said no before. North Texas passed on the WAC with the last round of realignment, the WAC is less attractive now.

5. Its CUSA or Bust. The 12th spot in CUSA was between UTEP, LA Tech, and UNT. CUSA is better regional fit.

6. LA Tech is leaving. Tech was only able to stay in WAC because of the unequal payments from the last realignment and Boise's BCS cash. With the new payment system, no more Boise, and State of Louisiana's economy LA Tech is not long for the WAC.

7. The WAC kind of sucks. The WAC has been a one trick pony and that pony is headed to the MWC. Whats the rush to re-kindle a rivalry with NMSU, Idaho, and Utah State who UNT owned when they were in the Belt.

Green P1 · June 25, 2010

sure take a good thread and derail it. again

Tobi?

VideoEagle · June 26, 2010

The problem is, we are in the best place we can be right now. Going Wacy doesn't make any sense. Basically, it would be a move simply for the sake of making a move - to prove we can move if you will. Our goal is NOT to play more teams in Texas, but rather to play teams that were a part of the Southwest Conference. Let's face it, we really don't care about playing TSSM. We don't mind, but compare the excitement of the Bobcats verses playing SMU or Rice or TCU or Houston and you see what I mean.

If the means of playing those former SWC teams is joining CUSA where most of them play, then going Wacy only proves we know how to fill out the paperwork to change conferences. I don't see how simply having patches on our uniforms that read WAC help. They certainly have not helped La Tech. They were not invited when SMU, Tulsa and Rice jumped from the Wac. They were not invited again when TCU left and CUSA took UTEP.

All NT can really do is try to improve our programs. I think that will do more for us than anything else. Simply going Wacy did not make Boise a power. It took years of steady, often ignored growth. From the Sun Belt board, I've read Boise first hit the polls in November of 2002 at #23 with a 9-1 record. They were 8-4 in 01, 10-2 in 00, 10-3 in 99 and 6-5 in 98 and were never ranked. It took them 5 years of winning records to get ranked at #23.

I keep reading since no one in the Sun Belt has ever been rank, then no one will ever be ranked. That logic is called the "Black swan" effect where people minimize the possibility of an event outside of the normal distribution. No black swans had ever been found therefore they can't exist. Then they were found. More recently, housing values have been rising so they can never decline. Then they did. No Sun Belt team has ever been ranked, at least since the Belt started playing football in 2001.

How many times have SBC teams gone through a five consecutive winning seasons, with four in a row of eight or greater wins? None have and that has more effect on the lack of being ranked than the name on the patch on the uniform.

Winning consistently will do far more for NT than going bankrupt without publicity in the Wac. It will even do more than joining CUSA!

wardly · June 26, 2010

i have a real interest in a wac/east division, but also some real concerns. i am unsure as to the health of ark. state's athletic budget, but as we know the louisiana schools are in real trouble. in addition, while new mexico state is trying to maintain 1a status, they were recently forced to reduce their athletic budget by $1.5 million. it appears that if ark. state is financially stable, and new mecico state has stopped the bleeding, moving to the wac with the red wolves now and adding texas st. and utsa later might work. however, a lot of "if's" and moving parts.

GrandGreen · June 26, 2010

i have a real interest in a wac/east division, but also some real concerns. i am unsure as to the health of ark. state's athletic budget, but as we know the louisiana schools are in real trouble. in addition, while new mexico state is trying to maintain 1a status, they were recently forced to reduce their athletic budget by $1.5 million. it appears that if ark. state is financially stable, and new mecico state has stopped the bleeding, moving to the wac with the red wolves now and adding texas st. and utsa later might work. however, a lot of "if's" and moving parts.

One question, other than message board fodder; is there one thread of evidence that the WAC wants an Eastern Division. Why would they, they have tried that before with a much better cast of teams and it ended in flames? They offered NT and apparently others a slot before because they wanted to replace existing teams and would accommodate La Tech with adding one close rival. NT turned them down and they took Idaho instead of adding more than one Eastern team. Things are different now, they have lost only one team and I expect they would love for La Tech to leave. I am sure if they added another Eastern team they would prefer NT to TSUSM and UTSA; but there is a good chance that they do not want another Eastern team. There is also a possibility that La Tech will exit the league even without a CUSA bid. They have one of the lowest budgets in the conference and with the loss of the Boise generated revenue and pending big reduction in state funding: they may have to limp back to the Belt.

eulessismore · June 26, 2010

So how does the WAC get back to the BCS without Boise?

And if just quoting bad website and messages boards counts as a credible source, I would like to lower the bar and quote myself from the Scout/CFN board

North Texas is not going to join the WAC.
1. The Big West Conference failed. North Texas has already experimented with western time zones and didn't work. Fans don't travel, and the fans don't care about playing teams from the west coast.

2. The Super-WAC failed. The WAC has already proved it has nothing to offer the central time zone, just ask SMU.

3. Basketball. UNT has had two recent big dance berths and has no reason to give that up to over extend its BB team by traveling the globe as part of the WAC.

4. UNT said no before. North Texas passed on the WAC with the last round of realignment, the WAC is less attractive now.

5. Its CUSA or Bust. The 12th spot in CUSA was between UTEP, LA Tech, and UNT. CUSA is better regional fit.

6. LA Tech is leaving. Tech was only able to stay in WAC because of the unequal payments from the last realignment and Boise's BCS cash. With the new payment system, no more Boise, and State of Louisiana's economy LA Tech is not long for the WAC.

7. The WAC kind of sucks. The WAC has been a one trick pony and that pony is headed to the MWC. Whats the rush to re-kindle a rivalry with NMSU, Idaho, and Utah State who UNT owned when they were in the Belt.

I find your points to be...salient. A few other things:

1. At one point, conferences were adding several teams at a time, and the creation of an "Eastern WAC" seemed more likely, because it actually happened once, and held together for a few years. The most recent "realignments" have been changes that have totaled no more than 2 added per conference. I wonder if Colorado would have jumped if they had realized they were the furthest from the Pacific of the "PAC 10 or 12". How would it be known that we would have other "Eastern WACers" coming along if we jumped first?

2. Maybe the loss of the eastern WAC schools follows a certain logic: A "Western" Athletic Conference probably has its best prospects further west.

3. If the guys in Utah know everything (don't tell the LDS family I married into that I said this), how come everybody thought the "PAC however many" knew everything and they turned out not to?

Sure, they will be some cozying up of the elites, but some will drop out, some changes will take longer than we know, and the influence of the media outlets may make things sufficiently muddled that we will still have a chance to improve our conference affiliation by having a winning season or 3, opening a beautiful new stadium, and filling it (with people, not just credits for tickets sold like SMU has done) for every home game. What about some quality ooc wins?

wardly · June 26, 2010

One question, other than message board fodder; is there one thread of evidence that the WAC wants an Eastern Division. Why would they, they have tried that before with a much better cast of teams and it ended in flames? They offered NT and apparently others a slot before because they wanted to replace existing teams and would accommodate La Tech with adding one close rival. NT turned them down and they took Idaho instead of adding more than one Eastern team. Things are different now, they have lost only one team and I expect they would love for La Tech to leave. I am sure if they added another Eastern team they would prefer NT to TSUSM and UTSA; but there is a good chance that they do not want another Eastern team. There is also a possibility that La Tech will exit the league even without a CUSA bid. They have one of the lowest budgets in the conference and with the loss of the Boise generated revenue and pending big reduction in state funding: they may have to limp back to the Belt.

great question. i think wac wants presence in texas, but also travel partner for la.tech.if la.tech were to exit wac, i think interest in wac/east dies. however, la.tech will not return to belt as long as ulm is a member. in addition, they still have cusa hopes, as does unt. what the belt should do to strengthen conference is to require a minimum athletic budget from its members in the $12 million range, give them 3 years to get there or else.

forevereagle · June 26, 2010

If one of the downsides, as well as what makes the SBC the bottom feeder it is portrayed as being, is that it is home to all of the recent 1AA move ups, then why is it that the WAC is more prestigious? They are talking about taking Montana, TSU, and UTSA. Last I checked, those are all 1AAs. So with the logic applied to the Belt, doesn't that make the WAC the bottom rung once they take one of whose schools?

Edited June 26, 2010 by forevereagle

TXST_CAT · June 26, 2010

Perception is everything in the FBS. The WAC has historicly produced contenders and recently BCS busters. when the Belt produces a BCS buster it could easily pass the WAC. Right now perception among voters is that the Belt will not. If UNT pulls off an upset victory over a BCS team al la Boise over OU then the Belt as a whole is elevated.

forevereagle · June 26, 2010

And who remaining in the WAC has done that?

MeanGreen61 · June 26, 2010

And who remaining in the WAC has done that?

Hawaii

CMJ · June 26, 2010

Hawaii

Hawaii got their ass kicked tho, right? Wasn't the question when has a WAC team beaten a BCS team(in I assume one of the big bowls)?

cdizzle86 · June 26, 2010

Hawaii got their ass kicked tho, right? Wasn't the question when has a WAC team beaten a BCS team(in I assume one of the big bowls)?

The way I see it, is that this coming year is really going to make things clear. If the Belt makes 3 big wins over BCS teams (1 from NT), then I think we stay in the belt. If not, then I think we try our chances in the WAC. The playoff scenario is inevitable, so we (NT and the Belt) have to make moves quick.

I am for us moving to the WAC if the Belt can't create some good buzz this season, but I also believe that if we have a breakout season this year (7 or 8 wins), then we will be noticed. Why? Well not only because of the investment that we have committed to, but also our location. Denton may not be the most supportive, but 40 miles away we have one of the largest markets in the country. So combine that with a university that's committed to athletics and winning...I think we can make a big jump.

TXST_CAT · June 26, 2010

And who remaining in the WAC has done that?

Again I'm referring to the perception of BCS voters and the teams within the conferences. Hawaii is still a favorite and Fresno, San Jose, Nevada, and even LATech with their new coach are looking like " contenders".

forevereagle · June 26, 2010

So Hawaii pulled off an upset like Boise over OU? When was that? I thought that Georgia sent them home with a thorough ass whipping. Hawaii didn't beat anybody good that year except Boise.

Edited June 26, 2010 by forevereagle

forevereagle · June 26, 2010

Again I'm referring to the perception of BCS voters and the teams within the conferences. Hawaii is still a favorite and Fresno, San Jose, Nevada, and even LATech with their new coach are looking like " contenders".

Since when do they look like contenders? They don't even look like they are going to contend for their conference title.