Mwc: What Would North Texas Bring To The Table?

PlummMeanGreen · December 2, 2010

This is the old Master Plan pg 58. The image was taken from the mock-up from the UNT stadium site. The last thing I was that the new updated Master Plan was to be avaliable in the coming months but was recently put on hold due to the fact that they want to combine it with the Research Initiative and make it one document.

Thanks for the link, laxtonto...

One master plan I saw from the UNT official website did indicate at one time UNT would have a 35,000 seat stadium albeit will have to be SRO for that to happen; except, as I look at the stadium I am wondering where we put 5,000 more fans unless they are those special people dressed in green from the Wizard of Oz. :rolleyes:

GMG

GrayEagle · December 2, 2010

Through August 2010 there were 169 men and 170 women on (unduplicated) scholarships. I didn't check them all but having more women than men on scholarship is very rare. In most cases women form the greatest percentage of the student body.

wardly · December 2, 2010

Joking?

i would love to see us in mwc or cusa. however, i see a few problems when i remove my rose tinted glasses. we have a small fan base at present, no tv following,don't travel, poor financial support from alumni, and a underfunded athletic program. i realistically believe that winning solves some of these issues, and feel that with our new coach and stadium we have a chance to move forward. hovever, we have never seemed to address the following question; what do we want,[lexus], what do we need[transportation], and what are we willing to pay for[used pick -up truck]? until we open our wallets as much as our mouths we will continue to be a sleeping giant. just an observation.

GrandGreen · December 2, 2010

i would love to see us in mwc or cusa. however, i see a few problems when i remove my rose tinted glasses. we have a small fan base at present, no tv following,don't travel, poor financial support from alumni, and a underfunded athletic program. i realistically believe that winning solves some of these issues, and feel that with our new coach and stadium we have a chance to move forward. hovever, we have never seemed to address the following question; what do we want,[lexus], what do we need[transportation], and what are we willing to pay for[used pick -up truck]? until we open our wallets as much as our mouths we will continue to be a sleeping giant. just an observation.

A lot of bull, the facts are that NT is not trying or has to compete with the AQ conference members, and should be very comparable with the majority of the non-AQ's around. Not that NT doesn't suffer from a lot of problems you listed, but so do most of the other members of the MAC, Belt, MWC and CUSA, In fact, just about every university can cry lack of resources other than UT and Ohio State. There is always someone with something better. Look at the regional non-AQ competition. SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, and Rice all have money although not as much as you might think for athletes but have relatively small followings despite being in a better regional conferences. UTEP has the following and maybe the resources but they have also been at the bottom of the football pile throughout most of their history. Houston has some major donors and also the advantage most of these teams have of playing in the old SWC but their overall support has never been particularly good. La Tech just should not be able to compete with NT based on resources and geography. TSSM and UTSA are start ups that are going to prove a lot before they are real competition.

Yes the sleeping giant phrase has been overused and particularly at NT and NT does need more and better support. But you are blind if you don't see the progress that has been made at NT and hopefully will escalate from now on. New experienced coaching staff, new football stadium, and additional revenues from the student fees and stadium coming on stream. Plus the most important and rarest component NT, a pro athletic administration. These are tangible ingredients not pipe-dreams. There are a lot of politics involved in conference selections, so they are rarely just based on what an university can offer. But even in the back room policies involved with Rawlins, NT might just fare fairly well there too.

wardly · December 2, 2010

A lot of bull, the facts are that NT is not trying or has to compete with the AQ conference members, and should be very comparable with the majority of the non-AQ's around. Not that NT doesn't suffer from a lot of problems you listed, but so do most of the other members of the MAC, Belt, MWC and CUSA, In fact, just about every university can cry lack of resources other than UT and Ohio State. There is always someone with something better. Look at the regional non-AQ competition. SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, and Rice all have money although not as much as you might think for athletes but have relatively small followings despite being in a better regional conferences. UTEP has the following and maybe the resources but they have also been at the bottom of the football pile throughout most of their history. Houston has some major donors and also the advantage most of these teams have of playing in the old SWC but their overall support has never been particularly good. La Tech just should not be able to compete with NT based on resources and geography. TSSM and UTSA are start ups that are going to prove a lot before they are real competition.

Yes the sleeping giant phrase has been overused and particularly at NT and NT does need more and better support. But you are blind if you don't see the progress that has been made at NT and hopefully will escalate from now on. New experienced coaching staff, new football stadium, and additional revenues from the student fees and stadium coming on stream. Plus the most important and rarest component NT, a pro athletic administration. These are tangible ingredients not pipe-dreams. There are a lot of politics involved in conference selections, so they are rarely just based on what an university can offer. But even in the back room policies involved with Rawlins, NT might just fare fairly well there too.

why is the truth a lot of bull? the comments i made have nothing to do with joining a AQ CONFERENCE and everything to do with being attractive to mwc or cusa. no, i am not blind. i see the new facalities. i also see average football attendance at around 18,000 this decade. i also see aversge mens basketball attendance below 3,000. a dream without a plan is still a dream.

ColoradoEagle · December 2, 2010

why is the truth a lot of bull? the comments i made have nothing to do with joining a AQ CONFERENCE and everything to do with being attractive to mwc or cusa. no, i am not blind. i see the new facalities. i also see average football attendance at around 18,000 this decade. i also see aversge mens basketball attendance below 3,000. a dream without a plan is still a dream.

SMU and Tulsa are in the same range of football attendance even with us being abysmal until the last half of this year, and Houston and SMU have about the same or worse basketball attendance, all of this versus CUSA schools.

You act like there's no value to adding us due to a few down years in football. We're doubling down on football (literally), creating separation in basketball, and pumping $7+ million more a year, minimum, into athletics overall.

Attendance will come, but not against Sun Belt schools.

PlummMeanGreen · December 2, 2010

SMU and Tulsa are in the same range of football attendance even with us being abysmal until the last half of this year, and Houston and SMU have about the same or worse basketball attendance, all of this versus CUSA schools.

You act like there's no value to adding us due to a few down years in football. We're doubling down on football (literally), creating separation in basketball, and pumping $7+ million more a year, minimum, into athletics overall.

Attendance will come, but not against Sun Belt schools.

It is my hope that our Prez', our AD and Consultant will be at Craig Thompson's (MWC Commish') doorsteps very, very soon if they haven't already. UNT cannot stand idle and think these leagues are going to look at us based on our good feelings about our school. Sleeping giant and "potential" are words we are all tired of, but maybe they would't be so tiresome to others?

Coach JJ has Mean Green BB inside the Top 50 according to Rick V at the new conference the other day and for that we can all be extremely happy--just get our BB coach some more recruiting budget and he will get us inside the Top 25 in due time.

GMG!

Edited December 2, 2010 by PlummMeanGreen

wardly · December 3, 2010

SMU and Tulsa are in the same range of football attendance even with us being abysmal until the last half of this year, and Houston and SMU have about the same or worse basketball attendance, all of this versus CUSA schools.

You act like there's no value to adding us due to a few down years in football. We're doubling down on football (literally), creating separation in basketball, and pumping $7+ million more a year, minimum, into athletics overall.

Attendance will come, but not against Sun Belt schools.

smu has about 12,000 students, tulsa about 4,000. i wouldn't be too happy compairing football attendance,even with 6 down years. also, smu has poor basketball program, while we don't.[ i don't know what you mean by seperation]. regarding $7millon more annually into athletics, i assume this is based upon student fees, as i am sure its not increased alumni giving. since we are in the belt, are you saying attendance will not come? would it come vs cusa or mwc ?chicken or the egg? i am not saying we don't have some value to another conference. i just don't think its as much as it could/should be. we need to increase attendance regardless of conference,especially in basketball, and increase alumni giving by increasing our fan base. by doing so, we become more attractive to mwc and cusa. thats no bull.

Aquila_Viridis · December 3, 2010

My hope is that a better conference and its members would see that NT as a member of a better conference would achieve much better recruiting and support which will lead to more success and then even better recruiting and support and so on. Here in Austin, NT sports are covered in the 'Southland/other' blurb area if at all. In other words, the 'who cares?/doesn't matter' area. A new conference is the horse that will pull this cart.

ColoradoEagle · December 3, 2010

smu has about 12,000 students, tulsa about 4,000. i wouldn't be too happy compairing football attendance,even with 6 down years. also, smu has poor basketball program, while we don't.[ i don't know what you mean by seperation]. regarding $7millon more annually into athletics, i assume this is based upon student fees, as i am sure its not increased alumni giving. since we are in the belt, are you saying attendance will not come? would it come vs cusa or mwc ?chicken or the egg? i am not saying we don't have some value to another conference. i just don't think its as much as it could/should be. we need to increase attendance regardless of conference,especially in basketball, and increase alumni giving by increasing our fan base. by doing so, we become more attractive to mwc and cusa. thats no bull.

Obviously there are things we can do to improve, but so could every school. SMU has 2.5 million people in Dallas County, a superstar of a coach at $2m per year, a very nice stadium, and is going to a bowl game and averages about the same attendance as us not counting the TCU game. To me that says that SMU, barring a top 10 run like TCU, has reached its maximum potential.

Edited December 3, 2010 by ColoradoEagle

PlummMeanGreen · December 3, 2010

http://www.newstimes.com/default/article/UW-officials-see-benefits-in-TCU-s-departure-843316.php

Do MWC officials know we have more alums in the DFW metroplex than either University of Texas (Austin) or Texas A & M University? Doesn't that translate to more televisions in NT Exes homes which can translate into ratings?

Isn't it ratings is what the TV networks want rather than what a school did 75 years ago? What kind of coffee would that and a buck buy you in today's NCAA?

Will the MWC stay at 9 members or expand their footprint to 12 schools (and a larger TV coverage footprint) as to protect itself from any other defections while expanding their conference with the 5'th largest TV market, ie, the North Texas Metroplex and..............the one school that can deliver the best TV ratings because of UNT's "lights out," humongous (and still growing) constituency?

On behalf of Prez' Rawlins and AD Villarreal, should UNT turn Chuck Neinas loose on this re-alignment project, too, with him camping on the office doorsteps of MWC Commish' Craig Thompson?

GMG!

UNT versus SMU

(1) North Texas just brings far more to the table with a larger fan base,

(2) UNT with an enrollment that all but quadruples SMU's

(3) Approx. twice as many UNT students now living on/near campus than SMU and TCU's combined enrollments.

(4) With close to 100,000 NT Exes in the DFW Metroplex, we dwarf SMU's alumnus numbers

(5) Our football stadium and basketball facility combo vs. SMU's ? Let MWC officials visit both schools and decide for themselves--Anyone want to place some bets on who they'd pick as the school with the better facilities?

(6) Easy major airport access from either DFW Airport (25 minutes from Denton) or even Alliance Airport (15 minutes from Denton City Limits sign) !

(7) Big Mac "D" Attack On The Way At The New Mean Green Stadium with Chico the Man Wide Open Offense, Too!

GMG ! !

Bump up some of the original reasons for this thread.

wardly · December 3, 2010

Obviously there are things we can do to improve, but so could every school. SMU has 2.5 million people in Dallas County, a superstar of a coach at $2m per year, a very nice stadium, and is going to a bowl game and averages about the same attendance as us not counting the TCU game. To me that says that SMU, barring a top 10 run like TCU, has reached its maximum potential.

i think we are in violent agreement. regarding "every other school", you are right. however, my concern is north texas and what we can do to improve our program. i hadn't thought about smu maxing out in football attendance, but point well taken. probably reinforces need for regional conference. no one comes to see them play cfu, or us fau.

ColoradoEagle · December 3, 2010

i think we are in violent agreement. regarding "every other school", you are right. however, my concern is north texas and what we can do to improve our program. i hadn't thought about smu maxing out in football attendance, but point well taken. probably reinforces need for regional conference. no one comes to see them play cfu, or us fau.

Sure, and I think we will improve attendance in all sports as football rises. Point is just that there's this thought among our fan base that we're not good enough, but if you look at SMU, Tulsa, Rice, Tulane, UAB, Colorado State, UNLV, Wyoming, etc, all very close to us in football attendance, and not all of them offer the market and exposure that we do.

Just pointing out that most of these deals happen in the back room, which is why I'm glad that Dr. Rawlins is here.

PlummMeanGreen · December 3, 2010

This should be a big part of the selling point...

The fact that the AD is willing to admit the deficiencies that UNT athletics have and are already planing to correct them put them a leg up on a lot of other smaller schools....

The faster UNT gets to having the entire Mean Green Village complex completed the better a target UNT becomes. I have to admit the closer the stadium gets to being completed the more random UNT chatter I hear from the various commuters about UNT. That will translate to even more name recognition as the areas surrounding the Mean Green Village get filled and the planned media/advertising coverage starts in the late summer....

Bump...can't wait to see the new master plan when it comes out.

And...might there be paddle boats for the kids on the largest pond?

GMG!

Edited December 3, 2010 by PlummMeanGreen

UNTLifer · December 3, 2010

Is there a new master plan?

wardly · December 3, 2010

last 2010 football attendance numbers i recently saw had us with about a 17,000 average, ranked 7th in belt. this number would put us 8th in cusa, and last in mwc. these figures have slightly changed since k.state home game. this is fyi,not trying to stir anything up, but just wanted to see where we stand in comparision.

ColoradoEagle · December 3, 2010

These are last year's numbers. It's too much work to do this year's (unless you know of a site that has all of the averages). We're closer to the bottom than the top, yes, but we're only about 7k from the middle. I think the new stadium alone takes care of that number for next season. If we start winning, and winning out of conference games, I could see us posting around the same numbers as UTEP and UNM. There's just not a whole lot of separation in either of these conference in attendance until you reach the top 5 or so programs.

ECU CUSA 41742

UCF CUSA 38078

AFA MWC 36656

Fresno MWC 33578

Boise MWC 32782

USM CUSA 30696

UTEP CUSA 29010

UNM MWC 26944

Memphis CUSA 25795

Houston CUSA 25242

Tulane CUSA 25147

SDSU MWC 24464

CSU MWC 23643

UNLV MWC 22775

Tulsa CUSA 22502

Marshall CUSA 22236

SMU CUSA 21348

Wyoming MWC 19494

UNT SBC 18228

UAB CUSA 17987

Reno MWC 17500

Rice CUSA 13552

Edited December 3, 2010 by ColoradoEagle

wardly · December 3, 2010

if you google mwc[or cusa]2010 football attendance, you get estimates, which has tcu 1st in mwc with about 41,000,nevada last at 18,000. cusa has ecu 1st at 50,000, uab last at 18,000. belt fan board has mtsu 1st at about 20,000, wk last at 14,500. unt,asu, ull,and fiu all average 17,000+,one slot above w.k. i agree with you that it should be easy to increase attendance next year with new stadium, plus indiana and houston at home. at 80% ,{24,000], we average as much or more than tulane,memphis,smu,rice,tulsa and uab in cusa, unm,csu,unlv,wyoming and nevada in mwc. good times are comming.

GrandGreen · December 3, 2010

why is the truth a lot of bull? the comments i made have nothing to do with joining a AQ CONFERENCE and everything to do with being attractive to mwc or cusa. no, i am not blind. i see the new facalities. i also see average football attendance at around 18,000 this decade. i also see aversge mens basketball attendance below 3,000. a dream without a plan is still a dream.

I stated nothing about joining an AQ conference, actually I said the exact opposite that NT does not have to compete with schools at that level. I think for a badly losing school in the Belt, NT's football attendance stands up well. NT basketball attendance is certainly poor relative to the team's performance.

Back to a not having a plan, what are you talking about? You don't think building all those facilities is a result of a plan. I think NT definitely has multiple plans and options for it's athletic program, a lot of which most of us are not privy too. Do you really think that NT isn't and hasn't got a strategy for moving up in conference affiliation?

Yes I think your comments were bull not because the individual statements were not true, but the tone of your post was that NT just could not compete. I gave you rationale to why I think they can. You can agree or disagree but I find it amazing that anyone can not see the progress being made or chooses to complain about were the program is at a time that any NT fan should be excited about the future. I guarantee I can cite NT athletic deficiencies with the best of you, I have been called the most negative person on this board multiple times for stating what I thought was obvious. However, now NT is doing the right things and the future is the brightest it has been in my fairly long life time.

wardly · December 4, 2010

I stated nothing about joining an AQ conference, actually I said the exact opposite that NT does not have to compete with schools at that level. I think for a badly losing school in the Belt, NT's football attendance stands up well. NT basketball attendance is certainly poor relative to the team's performance.

Back to a not having a plan, what are you talking about? You don't think building all those facilities is a result of a plan. I think NT definitely has multiple plans and options for it's athletic program, a lot of which most of us are not privy too. Do you really think that NT isn't and hasn't got a strategy for moving up in conference affiliation?

Yes I think your comments were bull not because the individual statements were not true, but the tone of your post was that NT just could not compete. I gave you rationale to why I think they can. You can agree or disagree but I find it amazing that anyone can not see the progress being made or chooses to complain about were the program is at a time that any NT fan should be excited about the future. I guarantee I can cite NT athletic deficiencies with the best of you, I have been called the most negative person on this board multiple times for stating what I thought was obvious. However, now NT is doing the right things and the future is the brightest it has been in my fairly long life time.

i don't see how you can read a negative tone into my post unless you are just looking for one. the point i was trying to make is what is the plan to increase attendance , which has peaked in football for the past 10 years, and our alunmi giving to athletics? this has nothing to do with bricks and sticks. you can say "build it and they will come," but will they pay and stay? i never said we could not compete. what i suggested was what we needed to do to compete. if you don't understand marketing 101, you might need a refresher course. whatever you learn you can apply to increasing the pathetic attendance at our mens bb games, unless of course, its a lot of bull.

GrandGreen · December 4, 2010

i don't see how you can read a negative tone into my post unless you are just looking for one. the point i was trying to make is what is the plan to increase attendance , which has peaked in football for the past 10 years, and our alunmi giving to athletics? this has nothing to do with bricks and sticks. you can say "build it and they will come," but will they pay and stay? i never said we could not compete. what i suggested was what we needed to do to compete. if you don't understand marketing 101, you might need a refresher course. whatever you learn you can apply to increasing the pathetic attendance at our mens bb games, unless of course, its a lot of bull.

I guess I am looking for one, I will forgo that marketing101 that you recommended. However, I can already manage these earthshaking proposals; NT needs to increase donations and attendance. Anything above that may be the 200 course level. The fact is basketball attendance though improving is far from were it should be and I have no solutions. Do you, please share. I can almost guarantee you that any sane and doable things you come up with have already been tried multiple times. Do give aways, short term and hasn't worked. More advertising, payout has proven small in the past. Better schedule, yes that would work but it is very difficult to achieve. Concurrent events, been big failures in the past. Win, that is the best answer and its works although much slower than you would think. An aside, as we should all know that basketball has very little to do with moving up in conferences. See TCU and Kansas for examples.

Football attendance has peaked, just maybe that has something to do with six straight mostly very bad years of football. It seems to me that the administration has done a lot to turn that around. There is a slight possibility that a new stadium and coaching staff may improve attendance. Yes, that is short term if NT doesn't start to win a lot more often. Back to winning, aren't we.

As much as I enjoy this debate, you win particularly as you redefine your past statements with each new post.

wardly · December 4, 2010

I guess I am looking for one, I will forgo that marketing101 that you recommended. However, I can already manage these earthshaking proposals; NT needs to increase donations and attendance. Anything above that may be the 200 course level. The fact is basketball attendance though improving is far from were it should be and I have no solutions. Do you, please share. I can almost guarantee you that any sane and doable things you come up with have already been tried multiple times. Do give aways, short term and hasn't worked. More advertising, payout has proven small in the past. Better schedule, yes that would work but it is very difficult to achieve. Concurrent events, been big failures in the past. Win, that is the best answer and its works although much slower than you would think. An aside, as we should all know that basketball has very little to do with moving up in conferences. See TCU and Kansas for examples.

Football attendance has peaked, just maybe that has something to do with six straight mostly very bad years of football. It seems to me that the administration has done a lot to turn that around. There is a slight possibility that a new stadium and coaching staff may improve attendance. Yes, that is short term if NT doesn't start to win a lot more often. Back to winning, aren't we.

As much as I enjoy this debate, you win particularly as you redefine your past statements with each new post.

what did you expect from an obama yellow dog democrat? in football winning and a new stadium will improve attendance and giving. i don't have a clue what we can do about basketball, except keep throwing spitballs at the wall and hope something sticks[.tcu and smu would kill for our bb program.] i agree 100% with you that this is a great time for unt athletics, and am looking forward to the future. i think that is something we both can agree upon.

Aquila_Viridis · December 4, 2010

It is hardly even relevant to look at our attendance as member of Sun Belch. As a member of CUSA or MWC, attendance will increase dramatically because there will be dramatic change how our program and school is perceived. I am concerned about CUSA because I think they will lose members. As a member of Big XII we would blast past Baylor and Tech. We are not going to get the vote of confidence from a real conference based on anything we do in our current conference. They need to consider only what will happen when we get the vote of confidence. You know people's perceptions on NT will change entirely based on this alone. We need someone who can develop and explain a vision how this change for NT will be good for the new conference not just NT. I think them seeing that we have people in control who 'get it' is much more important than any Sun Belt history.

NT80 · December 4, 2010

An aside, as we should all know that basketball has very little to do with moving up in conferences. See TCU and Kansas for examples.

Football attendance has peaked, just maybe that has something to do with six straight mostly very bad years of football. It seems to me that the administration has done a lot to turn that around. There is a slight possibility that a new stadium and coaching staff may improve attendance. Yes, that is short term if NT doesn't start to win a lot more often. Back to winning, aren't we.

I agree basketball has little to do with moving up, even to a basketball-rich conference like the Big East (see TCU's invite with an average to poor basketball team). Conference moveups are mainly all about Football appeal (again see TCU and a conference 1500 miles away drooling over them).

I disagree that NT football attendance has peaked. It has actually been going up, to some of the highest season averages we've ever had, all while losing. It is certainly higher than even during the glory years of Hayden Fry. The reasons vary, mainly tailgating is better and the games are more like events than just games.

The new stadium and quality OOC opponents next year will continue the attendance rise. A better conference, and better known, closer conference opponents would only help attendance in the future...and needs to be the next step for RV and Co.

Edited December 4, 2010 by NT80

GrayEagle · December 4, 2010

Didn't we pay Chuck Neinas to formulate a plan for advancing our football future? His contacts with the NCAA and CUSA in particular should keep us in good stead and pay off handsomely in the end. It already has in the coaching search.