Hated Rivals

Yellow Snow · December 5, 2010

It sucks not having a real rival in conference, eventhough I would say there is some blood with some teams like WKU and Troy, which is more of a basketball thing. But to be a true lover of the Mean Green you have to hate the school 30 miles south of Denton on the Hilltop, SMU!!!! One of my best friends is an SMU guy and Im tired of hearing his crap the last few seasons, ready for Coach Mac to change all that.

Go Mean Green!!!

Since I'm now a Mean Green fan, it would seem a good team for me to despise would be SMU... Consider it done.

Hopefully the NCAA gives them the death penalty again on Auburn's behalf.

Green92 · December 5, 2010

Would love an annual game with SMU. Fun to hate and everyone could attend the games each year.

Mean Green 93-98 · December 5, 2010

Since I'm now a Mean Green fan, it would seem a good team for me to despise would be SMU... Consider it done.

Hopefully the NCAA gives them the death penalty again on Auburn's behalf.

I cannot possibly give you enough +1s for this post. Ain't nothing wrong with the Yellow Snow.

stangbang · December 5, 2010

Would love an annual game with SMU. Fun to hate and everyone could attend the games each year.

You get your wish starting 2014.

NT80 · December 5, 2010

Since I'm now a Mean Green fan, it would seem a good team for me to despise would be SMU... Consider it done.

Hopefully the NCAA gives them the death penalty again on Auburn's behalf.

Smut is a rival by default (location). It's a rich-kids private school within Dallas city limits but nobody in Dallas will claim to be a fan of it. It has many out of state students and detached, rich alums who mail in checks or buy tickets but never attend games.

Our conference, Sunbelt, does not lend itself to develop rivalries due to the extreme distances of schools. I'll usually have a dislike for Troy, Muts, and WKU although if we suddenly left them behind and moved to CUSA I wouldn't give them a second thought.

Being an Iowa native and having attended NT during the Hayden Fry era here I always pulled for Iowa and ISU too.

SilverEagle · December 5, 2010

Since I'm now a Mean Green fan, it would seem a good team for me to despise would be SMU... Consider it done.

Hopefully the NCAA gives them the death penalty again on Auburn's behalf.

This would be a good place to admit that you ISU fans were pretty much right about Dan McCarney. It always pains me to admit that a yankee might be right about anything. :rolleyes:

eulessismore · December 5, 2010

Smut is a rival by default (location). It's a rich-kids private school within Dallas city limits but nobody in Dallas will claim to be a fan of it. It has many out of state students and detached, rich alums who mail in checks or buy tickets but never attend games.

Our conference, Sunbelt, does not lend itself to develop rivalries due to the extreme distances of schools. I'll usually have a dislike for Troy, Muts, and WKU although if we suddenly left them behind and moved to CUSA I wouldn't give them a second thought.

Being an Iowa native and having attended NT during the Hayden Fry era here I always pulled for Iowa and ISU too.

I hate to inform you, but SMU is NOT within Dallas City Limits, it's within the City Limits of University Park. In terms of urban geography, it could be called an enclave (or in geographic information systems terminology, a doughnut hole), as it and it's fellow "Park City", Highland Park are surrounded by the City of Dallas. There are probably few in Dallas who will claim to be a fan of it, because it's not in Dallas, and relatively few people in Dallas are alumni of SMU.

NT80 · December 5, 2010

I hate to inform you, but SMU is NOT within Dallas City Limits, it's within the City Limits of University Park.

I didn't want to bore him with the rich-ugly details, but feel free....

Stix · December 5, 2010

U of Houston would be the most obvious rival for us, DFW vs Houston, state schools, similar enrollments, etc - except that we haven't been in the same conference as them since the 50's (I think), and have played them only a few times. I'm really looking forward to that first game next year, not just because it's the opening of the new stadium.

eulessismore · December 5, 2010

I didn't want to bore him with the rich-ugly details, but feel free....

They may be details, but they are not minor. Perhaps to keep it on topic, would you want your football program to self-identify as within a city of over a million, or as within a town of less than 25,000 that has no place to grow. Then think about why your stadium may look somewhat emptier than you'd like, and whether you wish to project an image of being superior to virtually everyone within that city of over a million.

Edited December 5, 2010 by eulessismore

oldschoollefty · December 5, 2010

read this board long enough and you'll be convinced that we have several hated rivals: smu, UT, The Dallas Morning News, Southlake Carroll High School, The Green Brigade, UNT-Dallas, EA Sports, the city of Denton, local sporting good retailers, rivals.com, Ramon Flanigan, Daddy Dumpsalot...

unfortunately, no hatred towards our conference opponents.

Great list but please let me add Denia, DD, Black Uniforms, Lee Jackson, and Windmills.

foutsrouts · December 5, 2010

Great list but please let me add Denia, DD, Black Uniforms, Lee Jackson, and Windmills.

And don't forget Helwig, Trilli, Hurley, mattress salesmen, short QB's, yellow shirts, crickets, urinal walls, and any high school coach with an ambition to move up to the college level.

Rudy · December 5, 2010

Since I'm now a Mean Green fan, it would seem a good team for me to despise would be SMU... Consider it done.

Hopefully the NCAA gives them the death penalty again on Auburn's behalf.

Careful. You are getting too far on our good side. Someone is bound to set you up with their daughter.

And don't forget Helwig, Trilli, Hurley, mattress salesmen, short QB's, yellow shirts, crickets, urinal walls, and any high school coach with an ambition to move up to the college level.

I don't see you could put Trilli on that list. He didn't win, but he was always polite with the fans and did start the change from thos gawd awful orange seats to the green ones in the Super Pit.

Pretty much any of our rivals have been said:

Lee Jackson - An evil chancellor who wants to move all of NT's ops to Dallas and make them the flagship

Helwig - Former AD who damn near killed NT athletics

New Mexico St - During the first couple of years in the SBC, we traveled there in 2001, only to have our fans treated terribly and nearly arrested without cause. We ended up winning in the final 18 seconds. The next year we hosted them in the final home game and punched our ticket to New Orleans

SMU - Their douchery knows no limits. They have, until recently, refused to play us, prompting a former coach to state that we would play them in a Safeway parking lot. There are also rumors that they attempt to block us from joining any conference they are in. When did did play them at Fouts a few years ago, one of their fans had painted on their window, "Cash beats trash."

Texas Tech -In the early 2000's we played them yearly, and it was a close series.

TodgeRodge · December 5, 2010

SMU - Their douchery knows no limits. They have, until recently, refused to play us, prompting a former coach to state that we would play them in a Safeway parking lot. There are also rumors that they attempt to block us from joining any conference they are in. When did did play them at Fouts a few years ago, one of their fans had painted on their window, "Cash beats trash."

Texas Tech -In the early 2000's we played them yearly, and it was a close series.

since 1922 you have played SMU 33 times and you are 4-28-1 against them

2010 - 1922 = 88 seasons

33/88 = .375

so SMU has played you 37.5% of the seasons of play since 1922.........hardly refusing to play you.......more like deeming you uncompetitive and moving on to something else.....that 37.5% of the time includes the period of time when UNT tossed in the towel and went back down to D1-AA so again you brought absolutely nothing to the table as far as SMU was concerned

once they had the death penalty who in their right mind would not think they should first and foremost pay attention to what their program needs instead of what the underfunded, under supported, and long underachieving public school up the road wants or needs

they have played you at least 2 times a decade (that is 20%+ for those that can't do basic math) since the 70s and they have more games coming in the next decade

if people on this forum showed even half the concern for their own program as they do other programs (and specifically SMU) who knows where UNT could be right now

PS. there is a little thing called Haden Frys memoirs that clearly states SMU did not block NTSU from joining the SWC......a link to that book and the specific passage has been on this very forum in the past

and even if SMU did block you.......it is not the job of the SMU athletics department to concern themselves with anyone but themselves and what is best for them...lets compare and contrast......TCU dumps the conference they and SMU have been sharing......breaks up the long standing rivalry to go on their own and they even don;t play for a couple of seasons.....I don't recall SMU fans whining and crying continuously for DECADES about it.......what I see is SMU further learning a lesson about investing in their program and also first and foremost doing what is important for THEIR program.......not sitting around crying about the past or being left at the alter.......while making absolutely ZERO investment in THEIR OWN PROGRAM to be better prepared for what the future may hold

I think the fact that UNT is right in about the same position it was in (or probably worse) back when the SWC expansion talks were on going and the success of programs that were ask to join (during and even AFTER the SWC) shows the correct decision was made by the SWC to not invite UNT

9/8/2007 vs. North Texas (2-10) W 45 31

9/9/2006 @ North Texas (3-9) L 6 24

9/12/1992 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 28 14

10/6/1990 @ North Texas (non-IA) L 7 14

10/28/1989 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 35 9

9/22/1984 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 24 6

10/2/1982 vs. North Texas (2-9) W 38 10

9/12/1981 vs. North Texas (2-9) W 34 7

9/13/1980 vs. North Texas (6-5) W 28 9

9/22/1979 vs. North Texas (5-6) W 20 9

9/17/1977 vs. North Texas (9-2) L 13 24 @ Irving, TX

9/25/1976 vs. North Texas (6-5) W 38 31 @ Irving, TX

9/14/1974 vs. North Texas (2-7-2) W 7 6 @ Irving, TX

9/26/1942 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 26 7

9/27/1941 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 54 0

10/5/1940 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 20 7

10/7/1939 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 16 0

9/24/1938 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 34 7

9/25/1937 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 14 0

9/26/1936 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 6 0

9/21/1935 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 39 0

9/22/1934 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 33 0

9/23/1933 vs. North Texas (non-IA) L 0 7

9/24/1932 vs. North Texas (non-IA) T 0 0

9/26/1931 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 13 0

9/21/1929 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 13 3

9/22/1928 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 60 6

9/24/1927 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 68 0

9/24/1926 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 42 0

9/26/1925 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 48 0

9/27/1924 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 7 0

9/29/1923 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 41 0

10/7/1922 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 66 0

Edited December 5, 2010 by TodgeRodge

Coffee and TV · December 5, 2010

GTFO troll.

Yellow Snow · December 5, 2010

since 1922 you have played SMU 33 times and you are 4-28-1 against them

2010 - 1922 = 88 seasons

33/88 = .375

so SMU has played you 37.5% of the seasons of play since 1922.........hardly refusing to play you.......more like deeming you uncompetitive and moving on to something else.....that 37.5% of the time includes the period of time when UNT tossed in the towel and went back down to D1-AA so again you brought absolutely nothing to the table as far as SMU was concerned

once they had the death penalty who in their right mind would not think they should first and foremost pay attention to what their program needs instead of what the underfunded, under supported, and long underachieving public school up the road wants or needs

they have played you at least 2 times a decade (that is 20%+ for those that can't do basic math) since the 70s and they have more games coming in the next decade

if people on this forum showed even half the concern for their own program as they do other programs (and specifically SMU) who knows where UNT could be right now

PS. there is a little thing called Haden Frys memoirs that clearly states SMU did not block NTSU from joining the SWC......a link to that book and the specific passage has been on this very forum in the past

and even if SMU did block you.......it is not the job of the SMU athletics department to concern themselves with anyone but themselves and what is best for them...lets compare and contrast......TCU dumps the conference they and SMU have been sharing......breaks up the long standing rivalry to go on their own and they even don;t play for a couple of seasons.....I don't recall SMU fans whining and crying continuously for DECADES about it.......what I see is SMU further learning a lesson about investing in their program and also first and foremost doing what is important for THEIR program.......not sitting around crying about the past or being left at the alter.......while making absolutely ZERO investment in THEIR OWN PROGRAM to be better prepared for what the future may hold

I think the fact that UNT is right in about the same position it was in (or probably worse) back when the SWC expansion talks were on going and the success of programs that were ask to join (during and even AFTER the SWC) shows the correct decision was made by the SWC to not invite UNT

9/8/2007 vs. North Texas (2-10) W 45 31
9/9/2006 @ North Texas (3-9) L 6 24
9/12/1992 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 28 14
10/6/1990 @ North Texas (non-IA) L 7 14
10/28/1989 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 35 9
9/22/1984 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 24 6
10/2/1982 vs. North Texas (2-9) W 38 10
9/12/1981 vs. North Texas (2-9) W 34 7
9/13/1980 vs. North Texas (6-5) W 28 9
9/22/1979 vs. North Texas (5-6) W 20 9
9/17/1977 vs. North Texas (9-2) L 13 24 @ Irving, TX
9/25/1976 vs. North Texas (6-5) W 38 31 @ Irving, TX
9/14/1974 vs. North Texas (2-7-2) W 7 6 @ Irving, TX
9/26/1942 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 26 7
9/27/1941 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 54 0
10/5/1940 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 20 7
10/7/1939 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 16 0
9/24/1938 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 34 7
9/25/1937 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 14 0
9/26/1936 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 6 0
9/21/1935 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 39 0
9/22/1934 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 33 0
9/23/1933 vs. North Texas (non-IA) L 0 7
9/24/1932 vs. North Texas (non-IA) T 0 0
9/26/1931 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 13 0
9/21/1929 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 13 3
9/22/1928 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 60 6
9/24/1927 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 68 0
9/24/1926 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 42 0
9/26/1925 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 48 0
9/27/1924 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 7 0
9/29/1923 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 41 0
10/7/1922 vs. North Texas (non-IA) W 66 0

I take it you are an SMU fan?

A few of points Id like to make about your post….

1. The series record between SMU and UNT, while interesting and all, isnt relevant to the discussion at hand. 1922 was a long time ago. By my math (according to your data provided) UNT is 2-3 against SMU since 1989. That to me would be a more logical place to start the head to head comparison as far as Im concerned. It doesnt matter one iota who beat who back when leather helmets were all the rage. As an Iowa State fan I get this type of argument all the time. That ancient history looks good on paper, but in no way indicates that SMU would continue to win with that regularity going forward. In fact, the evidence indicates exactly the opposite. The teams have been basically equal for the last 20 years, DESPITE all of the handicaps UNT has to deal with, whether self inflicted or otherwise.

2. I think the fact that UNT is right in about the same position it was in (or probably worse) back when the SWC expansion talks were on going and the success of programs that were ask to join (during and even AFTER the SWC) shows the correct decision was made by the SWC to not invite UNT.

This comment is also a bit of flawed logic. You are basically comparing apples to oranges. The lack of institutional support and supposed lack of athletic success you are posing as a reason the SWC didnt invite UNT is a direct result of the fact that they DIDNT get invited and not the other way around. I would argue that UNT would be in a position to be VERY competitive in any conference that would have them Conf-USA, MWC, WAC or even Big 12 (would need a bigger football stadium for this). The potential fanbase is there… the facilities are there… the local recruiting pool is there… Compare enrollments… SMU ~11k, UNT ~36 k… Football stadiums… SMU ~32k cap., UNT ~31.5k (old stadium?), basketball arenas… SMU ~9k, UNT ~10k. These are pretty comparable to me. What makes you so sure that UNT wouldnt be able to compete in Conf-USA?

I would argue that Iowa State recruits a higher level of athlete BECAUSE of conference affiliation than would be possible in a lesser conference. Kids want to play on the big stage. They choose I-State over other programs closer to home because they want to play on TV, get a chance to stick it to Texas for snubbing them, etc. Do you honestly think that UNT wouldnt recruit better if they were in a better conference? That is a bit naïve. In fact with their alumni base and enrollment, they would be in a position to be one of the better teams in Conf-USA (for example). SMU has benefitted from being in a "higher prestige" conference and still only managed to beat UNT 3 out of 5 times in the last 20 years. Yet - here you are...

Edited December 5, 2010 by Yellow Snow

rcade · December 5, 2010

We've had an on and off rivalry with New Mexico State. Currently I guess you could call Middle Tennessee and U La La our current rivals....but we don't really hate them. Actually we like U La La....those people know how to party.

We should consider ourselves rivals against New Mexico State. Because we've shared several conferences with them, we've played them more than any other team. In 32 games, we are 21-9-2. We even met them in the Sun Bowl in 1959 (a 28-8 loss).

rcade · December 5, 2010

Our conference, Sunbelt, does not lend itself to develop rivalries due to the extreme distances of schools.

Denton is only five hours drive to Monroe and seven to Lafayette and Jonesboro. Isn't that close enough to work up a healthy dislike for those schools?

TodgeRodge · December 5, 2010

I take it you are an SMU fan?

A few of points I’d like to make about your post….

1. The series record between SMU and UNT, while interesting and all, isn’t relevant to the discussion at hand. 1922 was a long time ago. By my math (according to your data provided) UNT is 2-3 against SMU since 1989. That to me would be a more logical place to start the head to head comparison as far as I’m concerned. It doesn’t matter one iota who beat who back when leather helmets were all the rage. As an Iowa State fan I get this type of argument all the time. That ancient history looks good on paper, but in no way indicates that SMU would continue to win with that regularity going forward. In fact, the evidence indicates exactly the opposite. The teams have been basically equal for the last 20 years, DESPITE all of the handicaps UNT has to deal with, whether self inflicted or otherwise.

2. “I think the fact that UNT is right in about the same position it was in (or probably worse) back when the SWC expansion talks were on going and the success of programs that were ask to join (during and even AFTER the SWC) shows the correct decision was made by the SWC to not invite UNT”.

This comment is also a bit of flawed logic. You are basically comparing apples to oranges. The lack of institutional support and supposed lack of athletic success you are posing as a reason the SWC didn’t invite UNT is a direct result of the fact that they DIDN’T get invited and not the other way around. I would argue that UNT would be in a position to be VERY competitive in any conference that would have them – Conf-USA, MWC, WAC or even Big 12 (would need a bigger football stadium for this). The potential fanbase is there… the facilities are there… the local recruiting pool is there… Compare enrollments… SMU ~11k, UNT ~36 k… Football stadiums… SMU ~32k cap., UNT ~31.5k (old stadium?), basketball arenas… SMU ~9k, UNT ~10k. These are pretty comparable to me. What makes you so sure that UNT wouldn’t be able to compete in Conf-USA?

I would argue that Iowa State recruits a higher level of athlete BECAUSE of conference affiliation than would be possible in a lesser conference. Kids want to play on the big stage. They choose I-State over other programs closer to home because they want to play on TV, get a chance to stick it to Texas for snubbing them, etc. Do you honestly think that UNT wouldn’t recruit better if they were in a better conference? That is a bit naïve. In fact – with their alumni base and enrollment, they would be in a position to be one of the better teams in Conf-USA (for example). SMU has benefitted from being in a "higher prestige" conference and still only managed to beat UNT 3 out of 5 times in the last 20 years. Yet - here you are...

SMU has played you 20% of the seasons this decade and in the last decade......some of this time was during the 11 game seasons.....so they had fewer OOC games to play.......some of this time was while they were in a different conference than TCU yet they were still maintaining the annual rivalry game with TCU or attempting to........much of this time was when SMU was playing in a conference with two or three other teams in Texas....and still playing TCU in the OOC.....so SMU had all the games they needed in Texas right on their schedule.......yet in the 90s and in the 2000s they still managed to get you on the schedule 20% of the time....in the 80s more......and before that even more

SMU has also had the ability to schedule multiple other Texas teams in the OOC like Tech or A&M........what % of the years in a decade do you need SMU to schedule you for before you will not say they are "scared of you"

as for joining the SWC....ISU was never in the SWC......they were in the Big 8 before they were in the Big 12......and the Big 8 was dominated by OU and Nebraska and it consisted entirely of programs in states that were not considered hot beds of recruiting and are very limited in population for the most part especially compared to Texas

do you think that UNT was the only program that wanted to be in the SWC......I am sure UTEP, La Tech, either of the New Mexico schools, Tulane, Tulsa, or dozens of other teams around the SWC area would have loved to be in the conference.....obviously UH brought more to the table....I would again say the success UH had while in the conference supports they were a good choice among those available

you make the claim that records from 1922 and leather helmet eras are not relevant to SMU playing you today......yet you are all to willing to use things from decades past to excuse the athletics performance of UNT even today.......ignoring that not getting into the SWC means you need to continue to under fund your athletics program, that you need to drop down to D1-A, that you can ignore TCU, SMU, and UH were KICKED OUT OF THEIR CONFERENCE a decade and a half ago and two of the three have managed to move conferences twice, one has been able to move conferences 4 times now (all for the better), and another was able to help build a conference into the conference that the vast majority of UNT fans would kill to join.....and you completely ignore that UTEP was never part of the SWC, is stuck miles and miles away from most of the states populations.....in a city of well under a million.....and they managed to build and maintain their program to a level that they were able to move conferences ahead of UNT and "take" the spot in the CUSA that UNT fans felt was "theirs"

so excuse me if not getting into a conference decades ago.....long before any current players were born and long before any of the administration around UNT today was at UNT, long after that conference has folded, while being a large state school, in a huge metro area, filled with D1-A talent, with athletics programs all over the state constantly making moves to improve their positions even after being DUMPED, having their program put on the death penalty, being smaller schools, with many fewer alumni, while UNT took a breather in D1-AA........excuse me if that "excuse" falls on deaf ears

not to mention that there are programs in D1-A ball today that were never in the SWC, were never in any good conference, and did not even have a dream of playing football because the university barely existed or it was a community college back when the SWC was a power.....that have had a great deal of success and continue to do so today

Edited December 5, 2010 by TodgeRodge

VideoEagle · December 5, 2010

Denton is only five hours drive to Monroe and seven to Lafayette and Jonesboro. Isn't that close enough to work up a healthy dislike for those schools?

Yes, it is. And I think we have a rivalry with Middle Tennessee. In the last six years, we have not done as much to keep it up, but there is one.

rcade · December 5, 2010

do you think that UNT was the only program that wanted to be in the SWC......I am sure UTEP, La Tech, either of the New Mexico schools, Tulane, Tulsa, or dozens of other teams around the SWC area would have loved to be in the conference.....obviously UH brought more to the table....I would again say the success UH had while in the conference supports they were a good choice among those available

UNT is a much bigger school than all of the ones you mention that would have wanted to be in the SWC, except for New Mexico. But New Mexico never wanted to be in the SWC -- it belonged to the WAC and then the MWC.

The reason that UNT fans are bitter about being excluded from the SWC is that our school had the best argument for being included, out of all the possible schools that could have been added back in the day. Our enrollment, geography and football success under Hayden Fry justified it. Yet for whatever reason, we got screwed over.

Because of that snub and the disastrous decision of our leadership to drop to I-AA, North Texas has been a football nobody for decades. We're hoping that has finally ended forever with the new stadium and the McCarney hire.

VideoEagle · December 5, 2010

UNT is a much bigger school than all of the ones you mention that would have wanted to be in the SWC, except for New Mexico. But New Mexico never wanted to be in the SWC -- it belonged to the WAC and then the MWC.

The reason that UNT fans are bitter about being excluded from the SWC is that our school had the best argument for being included, out of all the possible schools that could have been added back in the day. Our enrollment, geography and football success under Hayden Fry justified it. Yet for whatever reason, we got screwed over.

Because of that snub and the disastrous decision of our leadership to drop to I-AA, North Texas has been a football nobody for decades. We're hoping that has finally ended forever with the new stadium and the McCarney hire.

Again, there was no option about dropping to 1AA. The NCAA set a retroactive rule that would have required NT to play all of our games during 1981 at either Texas Stadium or the Cotton Bowl but they didn't set it until AFTER the season. There was no magic form that was not filled out - the only way we could have avoided 1AA was by traveling back in time and replaying the 1980 and or 1981 seasons someplace other than Fouts. Arkstfan has posted the requirements to remain 1A and we could not have possibly fulfilled them. A number of schools asked for waivers and NONE were granted. The closest any school got was actually Arkansas State and they were turned down as well.

rcade · December 5, 2010

Again, there was no option about dropping to 1AA. The NCAA set a retroactive rule that would have required NT to play all of our games during 1981 at either Texas Stadium or the Cotton Bowl but they didn't set it until AFTER the season. There was no magic form that was not filled out - the only way we could have avoided 1AA was by traveling back in time and replaying the 1980 and or 1981 seasons someplace other than Fouts. Arkstfan has posted the requirements to remain 1A and we could not have possibly fulfilled them. A number of schools asked for waivers and NONE were granted. The closest any school got was actually Arkansas State and they were turned down as well.

Thanks. I thought there was something we could have done to avoid our fate.

TodgeRodge · December 5, 2010

UNT is a much bigger school than all of the ones you mention that would have wanted to be in the SWC, except for New Mexico. But New Mexico never wanted to be in the SWC -- it belonged to the WAC and then the MWC.

The reason that UNT fans are bitter about being excluded from the SWC is that our school had the best argument for being included, out of all the possible schools that could have been added back in the day. Our enrollment, geography and football success under Hayden Fry justified it. Yet for whatever reason, we got screwed over.

Because of that snub and the disastrous decision of our leadership to drop to I-AA, North Texas has been a football nobody for decades. We're hoping that has finally ended forever with the new stadium and the McCarney hire.

the SWC already had two teams in the DFW area.......it already had a massive amount of alumni from every program in the conference living in the DFW area

they had a single program from a small school that was slowly becoming not competitive in Houston (Rice) that was a founding member of the conference, brought academic prestige, and was not going anywhere at that time

it was a trip on much smaller roads to TAMU, TAMU was only a decade away from when they were 14,000 students, The City of Houston was one of the fastest growing cities in the USA, and UH was growing as well

Denton was well off the beaten path, still very small, UNT was just one of several state universities in and around the DFW area, and had much smaller enrollment than it did today

so enrollment is not a justification (I am sure UH was just as big if not bigger back then) the SWC already had the DFW geography covered and could have just as easily talked to UTA, and you had a few good years before you let your coach get away because of lack of administrative support

the two words highlighted above in your quoted post are the only thing UNT fans have to be bitter about and the only reason UNT is where it is today

the success of those picked instead of UNT for the SWC, the continued decades long lack of commitment to athletics by UNT even while the college sports landscape goes through huge changes and the SWC folds, and the ability of other programs to have success in areas with many fewer of the "advantages" UNT fans claim yet UNT has never availed themselves of shows that UNT had no right to, claim on, or really any reason to be the first choice of the SWC

LoveMG · December 5, 2010

the SWC already had two teams in the DFW area.......it already had a massive amount of alumni from every program in the conference living in the DFW area

they had a single program from a small school that was slowly becoming not competitive in Houston (Rice) that was a founding member of the conference, brought academic prestige, and was not going anywhere at that time

it was a trip on much smaller roads to TAMU, TAMU was only a decade away from when they were 14,000 students, The City of Houston was one of the fastest growing cities in the USA, and UH was growing as well

Denton was well off the beaten path, still very small, UNT was just one of several state universities in and around the DFW area, and had much smaller enrollment than it did today

so enrollment is not a justification (I am sure UH was just as big if not bigger back then) the SWC already had the DFW geography covered and could have just as easily talked to UTA, and you had a few good years before you let your coach get away because of lack of administrative support

the two words highlighted above in your quoted post are the only thing UNT fans have to be bitter about and the only reason UNT is where it is today

the success of those picked instead of UNT for the SWC, the continued decades long lack of commitment to athletics by UNT even while the college sports landscape goes through huge changes and the SWC folds, and the ability of other programs to have success in areas with many fewer of the "advantages" UNT fans claim yet UNT has never availed themselves of shows that UNT had no right to, claim on, or really any reason to be the first choice of the SWC

checkfacts as he is better known has been a long time troll against denton and unt. he flunked out of unt and is an smu fan at heart.