Just Wondering

[UNTFan23]

Yes, it is. Just a change is conference name would be a move up. No one's saying this scenario is ideal or even OK, but it is better than the Belt as it is now.

Was it better when USU, NMSU, and Idaho were in the Belt? If I recall, even in the days when we were slashing through the Belt unabated, we weren't setting any attendance records against those three teams.

A new shoulder patch and a slightly different set of teams isn't going to have the impact you think it will.

Edited July 2, 2010 by UNTFan23

[shaft]

Isn't it more likely that LA Tech will join the Sun Belt before the WAC expands to 12?

[NT03]

Isn't it more likely that LA Tech will join the Sun Belt before the WAC expands to 12?

yes

[GrayEagle]

We're complaining about one or two possible members coming from 1-AA? Every football-playing member of the Sun Belt came from 1-AA except Louisiana, Arkansas State and North Texas. In fact, every one of us had at one time been a member of 1-AA. How pious is that?

[CMJ]

We're complaining about one or two possible members coming from 1-AA? Every football-playing member of the Sun Belt came from 1-AA except Louisiana, Arkansas State and North Texas. In fact, every one of us had at one time been a member of 1-AA. How pious is that?

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think ULL was ever 1-AA.

[TXST_CAT]

We're complaining about one or two possible members coming from 1-AA? Every football-playing member of the Sun Belt came from 1-AA except Louisiana, Arkansas State and North Texas. In fact, every one of us had at one time been a member of 1-AA. How pious is that?

I agree. What many of you fail to see is that TXST and UTSA WILL bring close to if not more than 5k fans to your stadium. I'd like to know what team on the Belt does that now. A 30K seat stadium is nice but not if you only fill it with the same 16k fans. Any way the WAC can go to 10 without UNT and TXST and UTSA can separate themselves from UNT. Or look at I this way with two transition teams in your division you can have two wins in the year instead of one. At lead until we catchup.

[Arkstfan]

But ASU, UNT, and ULM were all I-A before the NCAA changed the rules between seasons with no chance to adjust. They like La.Tech (who also got shipped down) all relied on the expectation that if the rules changed, they would have an opportunity to adjust.

If Pacific hadn't had a large stadium and had played at South Carolina in 1981, San Jose State, Utah State and Fresno would have faced the dilemma that Tulsa, Wichita State, NMSU, ULL, and McNeese faced of going I-AA with their conference mates, going independent, or changing leagues. NMSU left the Valley for the Big West, ULL, Tulsa, and Wichita State went independent (the latter two while remaining in the Valley), and McNeese opted to stay with their league.

If not for Pacific and their chase dollars schedule philosophy, San Jose probably wouldn't have football today.

Remember also that while MTSU and WKU came up from I-AA without having been I-A before, that's the same path of Idaho and Boise. FIU and FAU had to play I-AA as part of their team creation but that's the same path South Florida took and the one UTSA, Georgia State, USA, and Charlotte intend to pursue.

Edited July 3, 2010 by Arkstfan

[wardly]

I don't know that it speaks to any trouble with the WAC, but rather to LaTech's isolation from other conference mates.

agreed. la. tech would like to join cusa/ west, as would we. hell will freeeze over before they join same conference as ulm. having said that, all lousiana schools are in financial trouble, with ulm the most as they have a very small athletic budget for a 1a program. if they are forced back to southland, then all bets are off regarding la.tech and the belt. in addition, we are being very shortsighted if we overlook the markets that texas state and utsa would bring to either the wac or belt. i think that with exception of ull, all existing belt members have a 1aa background. i don't understand thinking of those who look down on 1a want-a-be programs. the belt is just a glorified 1aa conference, and in fact is rated by polsters below several 1aa conferences. i have been a unt supporter since freshman year of 61', and lately with all discussions regarding realignment have come to believe that we have an inflated opinion of our value to any conference. just an opinion.

[ADLER]

So, brining most of the Sun Belt with us into the WAC is a move up? I thought [some] UNT fans wanted to distance themselves from the Sun Belt teams due to lack of their brand awareness with our fans?

The question is whether an eastern WAC division is a viable move for North Texas or any other of the eastern WAC candidates. It's not. The television revenue is disappearing and there's no financial incentive to align with west coast colleges.

Here's a potential Sun Belt makeover for a few years down the road. It's contingent on several schools moving up to full division 1, and a couple already there solidifying that commitment.

Sun Belt 16

Sun Belt East Division FAU, FIU, Troy, MTSU, USA, WKU, ULM, and Georgia State.

Sun Belt West Division UNT, La Tech, Louisiana, Ark St, NMSU, Texas St, UTSA, and Missouri St.

Each team plays the seven teams in it's division and one cross divisional game. This leaves three dates for playing other regional teams on home and home series and one for a potentially higher profile 'money' game per year. No more 'bodybag games' allowed. The high profile game would have to be on a 2-fer-1 or 3-fer-1 basis with at least one guaranteed home date.

All four of the teams moving up football subdivisions, Texas St, Georgia St, Missouri St, and UTSA are large schools fully capable of supporting competitive Division 1 budgets. Texas State and UTSA are already making the necessary financial commitment and are building new facilities. The budgets at those two already exceed those of ULL, La Tech, ASU, and ULM. Georgia State and Missouri State could easily follow the same model.

[ColoradoEagle]

Drop UTSA and ULM from that (unless somehow they manage to stay FBS), and it doesn't look terrible. I doubt it would happen, though, unless those schools (Georgia State, Missouri State, TSUSM) can bring at least as much money to the table as they would take away from what already exists.

Edited July 3, 2010 by ColoradoEagle

[ADLER]

Drop UTSA and ULM from that (unless somehow they manage to stay FBS), and it doesn't look terrible. I doubt it would happen, though, unless those schools (Georgia State, Missouri State, TSUSM) can bring at least as much money to the table as they would take away from what already exists.

The only reason for expelling anyone from the conference is if they don't maintain set criteria for facility improvements, scheduling without guarantee games, or NCAA guidelines. Essentially they should be required to run their programs like true Division 1 schools.

The schools that are not already making the jump to FBS, Missouri State, Georgia State, and UTSA are very important because of their market presence during television negotiations. Likewise, the home stadiums for UTSA and Georgia State are either fully capable of hosting new bowl games or maybe gaining leverage with existing bowls.

[ColoradoEagle]

Not talking about kicking anyone out, it's just not seeming likely that ULM will be able to continue competing at the FBS level. They already operate on an FCS budget, and they're being squeezed even more.

Also, neither Georgia State nor UTSA are going to give the SBC any leverage with the Chik-Fil-A Bowl or the Alamo Bowl.

[greeneagleone]

With regards to all North Texas fans, the answer is no. North Texas would be a great addition to the WAC because the WAC wants access to the Texas market for recruiting. While the WAC is a slightly better conference than the Sun Belt it does not offer North Texas anything. Joining the WAC would bring in seven or eight teams more teams into North Texas recruiting territory. What territory does the WAC offer North Texas? See North Texas offers the WAC a lot.

Do not take this as an insult on the WAC because it is a great conference and the North Texas Athletic Department has great respect for it. It just happens not to be a good fit for North Texas.

As reported on Eagletalk.net, UNT can join the WAC at anytime, they have an open invitation to join and do not have wait for an invitation.

WAC fans, there is something you need to understand about North Texas and what I'm about to write will tick alot of North Texas fans off, but it should explain some things.

North Texas has so much to offer but North Texas Fans are browe beaten by other Texas schools and therefore they have an inferior complex. They are willing to accept a lateral move to a slightly upward move instead of looking at the big picture. North Texas can easiliy become one of the top three programs in the state.

Their leadership under Rick Villerreal, knows this and they are not willing to accept anything less than the best. He is not willing to accept lateral moves or slightly better moves and North Texas Fans should feel the same way about their school. They should not be willing to accept lateral or slightly better moves, they need to make big moves even if they have to wait.

It is time for North Texas fans to realize what they have and to demand better.

[Arkstfan]

Drop UTSA and ULM from that (unless somehow they manage to stay FBS), and it doesn't look terrible. I doubt it would happen, though, unless those schools (Georgia State, Missouri State, TSUSM) can bring at least as much money to the table as they would take away from what already exists.

Missouri State is the only one on the list that would assured of carrying their weight plus some because of basketball. They have a market that is as crazy about their team as Bowling Green is about WKU but its a market three times larger. Plus they would enter with the best basketball and baseball facilities in the league.

Everyone else is "potential".

[ColoradoEagle]

If the moratorium is lifted, and Missouri State gets the OK from the SBC to move up, what do you think the likelihood is of us adding them and bringing NMSU back? Seems like it would be a solid basketball conference with WKU, MTSU, Troy, NMSU, Missouri State, and NT at the top end.

[Arkstfan]

If the moratorium is lifted, and Missouri State gets the OK from the SBC to move up, what do you think the likelihood is of us adding them and bringing NMSU back? Seems like it would be a solid basketball conference with WKU, MTSU, Troy, NMSU, Missouri State, and NT at the top end.

Does Missouri State have the will or desire to be FBS? Are they willing to raise the money to add another 8,000 seats to their stadium?

My hunch is that out of Missouri State, Texas State, UTSA, Georgia State, Charlotte, La.Tech, and NMSU that Missouri State and Charlotte would have a 100% chance of being invited if they asked. La.Tech 99.9% chance, NMSU 60% chance, and the rest somewhere under 50%.

[wardly]

Does Missouri State have the will or desire to be FBS? Are they willing to raise the money to add another 8,000 seats to their stadium?

My hunch is that out of Missouri State, Texas State, UTSA, Georgia State, Charlotte, La.Tech, and NMSU that Missouri State and Charlotte would have a 100% chance of being invited if they asked. La.Tech 99.9% chance, NMSU 60% chance, and the rest somewhere under 50%.

the state of new mexico is basically broke, and nmsu recently reduced their athletic budget by $1.5 million. in addition, their football program is actually worse than ours, they are a 10 hr. drive from denton, and have about a 100,000 population base.i don't see that they bring much to the table,plus the belt might increase their travel cost.i also don't see any interest on their part in moving from the wac.in addition, texas state and utsa are the only two schools on your list that i am aware of presently committed to a 1a football program. has ark.st. indicated an interest in moving to the wac?

[UNT90]

North Texas has so much to offer but North Texas Fans are browe beaten by other Texas schools and therefore they have an inferior complex. They are willing to accept a lateral move to a slightly upward move instead of looking at the big picture. North Texas can easiliy become one of the top three programs in the state.

Their leadership under Rick Villerreal, knows this and they are not willing to accept anything less than the best. He is not willing to accept lateral moves or slightly better moves and North Texas Fans should feel the same way about their school. They should not be willing to accept lateral or slightly better moves, they need to make big moves even if they have to wait.

It is time for North Texas fans to realize what they have and to demand better.

Plus a gazillion for the 1st and third paragraphs.

As for the second paragraph, I really, really, really, really, really hope you are right.

Edited July 4, 2010 by UNT90

[Arkstfan]

the state of new mexico is basically broke, and nmsu recently reduced their athletic budget by $1.5 million. in addition, their football program is actually worse than ours, they are a 10 hr. drive from denton, and have about a 100,000 population base.i don't see that they bring much to the table,plus the belt might increase their travel cost.i also don't see any interest on their part in moving from the wac.in addition, texas state and utsa are the only two schools on your list that i am aware of presently committed to a 1a football program. has ark.st. indicated an interest in moving to the wac?

Dr. Wyatt stepped down as system president effective July 1, and now just has a teaching gig (also doing consultant work for some distance learning biz). If he were still system president he would have head slapped the Chancellor Dr. Potts if he even thought of joining the WAC because he president of the campus before the job was split when we were in the Big West.

Under his leadership just wouldn't have happened unless the league was falling apart and it was the only option to keep the program. He told me when USU, Idaho and NMSU left that it was great for both sides because he was sick of the travel and the distance and made it hard for him to create and work on joint academic efforts with those schools.

Dr. Potts? He's now acting president, but I don't know what his feelings would be but most of his career he worked throughout the south so probably is inclined to view a southern alliance as being more appropriate and he need only call across campus to get the advice of Dr. Wyatt.

Dr. Howard, the acting chancellor, I know little about other than he's been a prime advocate of raising admission standards and has run the international student program and used those funds to assist our club rugby team (Final Four in Division I this year!) and to assist funding of the recruiting efforts of ASU coaches recruiting international student-athletes.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Arkstfan

[PlummMeanGreen]

I know our conference options to go "upwardly bound" are almost nil, but these little cookie-cutter conferences that have been a regular staple from posters on GoMeanGreen.com since Day 1 of this forum's existence still look like football leagues whose champion will go to a bowl with a Bottom 25 footballl team. Certainly of late, ol' ugly is better than ol' nothing and any bowl would look good but..........

...............are we of North Texas not in the chase for the kind of bowls that Boise State, TCU, Utah and others similar seem to set as their standard of football excellence? If not, I guess we can keep playing Robin Hood on GMG.com, that is, putting all these cookie cutter conferences together and bring all these other schools "up?" to our standards of football excellence in the Sun Belt?

Speaking of LaTech: LaTech has had some impressive OOC wins in past years starting with a Big One against the Crimson Tide of Alabama in recent years. Didn't the Dawgs just a few years ago even beat a ranked WAC team on a week night national TV game, too? Crimson Tide? Can't remember us being in a game with the Tide that would be considered even close to being a moral victory.

If the Sun Belt is to start expanding, lets start with a school like LaTech. Lets all from both sides bury the hatchet to make it happen. The possible demise or downgrade of the WAC to another "cookie cutter" league of no-names may make it happen sooner than later for the LaTech Bulldogs. My impression of La Tech has most always been they think much bigger for their program than all these other potential SBC upstarts who will merely keep us grounded in a "never a chance for a BCS bowl a la TCU" type of football conference the next 2 or 3 generations. With a spanking new modern stadium and our (always) growing numbers on and near campus, isn't that a bad case of "under-kill" or always thinking of "dipping downward" for us of the University of North Texas?

CUSA? Pleeeeezzzzzz............As our crack U.S. Vice President Joe "foul mouth" Biden might say it; as long as these following 3 words are an active member of CUSA and they are.......S M U........................we of UNT can kiss off any idea of CUSA.

It's just the way politics in Texas football goes, folks. We don't have cooties at UNT, we're just a football program in the wrong geographical location to be considered by CUSA IMHO And FWIW..........it's really not just SMU, because it really does go back to the the old argument that there are already too many Texas schools in CUSA (like they used to say about the SWC) and they just don't want another one no matter--especially a humongous system university who will one day figure out that with all the right personnel in place and with the stars of the galaxy in alignment that the sky is the limit.

GMG!

Edited July 6, 2010 by PlummMeanGreen

[UNTMBA05]

With regards to all North Texas fans, the answer is no. North Texas would be a great addition to the WAC because the WAC wants access to the Texas market for recruiting. While the WAC is a slightly better conference than the Sun Belt it does not offer North Texas anything. Joining the WAC would bring in seven or eight teams more teams into North Texas recruiting territory. What territory does the WAC offer North Texas? See North Texas offers the WAC a lot.

Do not take this as an insult on the WAC because it is a great conference and the North Texas Athletic Department has great respect for it. It just happens not to be a good fit for North Texas.

As reported on Eagletalk.net, UNT can join the WAC at anytime, they have an open invitation to join and do not have wait for an invitation.

WAC fans, there is something you need to understand about North Texas and what I'm about to write will tick alot of North Texas fans off, but it should explain some things.

North Texas has so much to offer but North Texas Fans are browe beaten by other Texas schools and therefore they have an inferior complex. They are willing to accept a lateral move to a slightly upward move instead of looking at the big picture. North Texas can easiliy become one of the top three programs in the state.

Their leadership under Rick Villerreal, knows this and they are not willing to accept anything less than the best. He is not willing to accept lateral moves or slightly better moves and North Texas Fans should feel the same way about their school. They should not be willing to accept lateral or slightly better moves, they need to make big moves even if they have to wait.

It is time for North Texas fans to realize what they have and to demand better.

I tried to google to Eagletalk.net and it took me to a Southern Mississippi website.

EAGLETALK.NET

Jul 3, 2010 ... Community site based on The University of Southern Mississippi Athletics program.

www.eagletalk.net/ - Cached - Similar

Are you sure that is where the report you reference is? If so I sure can't seem to find it.

[Arkstfan]

Why is it that Tech beating Bama is 1999 gets mentioned all the time, but ULM beat them in 2007 and Tide fans got the fun a driving past this on the way to the Independence Bowl.

[DeepGreen]

Why is it that Tech beating Bama is 1999 gets mentioned all the time, but ULM beat them in 2007 and Tide fans got the fun a driving past this on the way to the Independence Bowl.

College Football. How I love it so.