Should Nt Refuse To Play Utsa And Tsu-Sm (In Football) ?

[UNTFan23]

I think they have a decent baseball program down there

Their basketball program is several floors beneath the basement.

Edited December 28, 2010 by UNTFan23

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

I voted no.

I think we should play them. Southwest Texas was one of our longest rivals in the Southland Conference. I welcome any scheduling of them and New Mexico State.

Throw in UTSA as well. I'd love to see the coaching chess match between McCarney and Coker. Both have national title rings and excellent reputations.

I'd be interested into making a UTSA game an annual affair with Texas State, Tulsa, Louisiana Tech and New Mexico State sprinkled in every four years or so:

Year 1 - @ UTSA, home Texas State

Year 2 - home UTSA, @ Tulsa

Year 3 - @ UTSA, home Louisiana Tech

Year 4 - home UTSA, @ New Mexico State

Year 5 - @ UTSA, home Tulsa

Year 6 - home UTSA, @ Texas State

Year 7 - @ UTSA, home New Mexico State

Year 8 - home UTSA, @ Louisiana Tech

I'm for any schedule that gives us a good, winnable, out of conference games whether at home or on the road.

[MeanGreen61]

I think they have a decent baseball program down there

Baseball is just a passenger. Their basketball is horrible and football isn't much better.

[UNTLifer]

I voted no.

I think we should play them. Southwest Texas was one of our longest rivals in the Southland Conference. I welcome any scheduling of them and New Mexico State.

Throw in UTSA as well. I'd love to see the coaching chess match between McCarney and Coker. Both have national title rings and excellent reputations.

I'd be interested into making a UTSA game an annual affair with Texas State, Tulsa, Louisiana Tech and New Mexico State sprinkled in every four years or so:

Year 1 - @ UTSA, home Texas State

Year 2 - home UTSA, @ Tulsa

Year 3 - @ UTSA, home Louisiana Tech

Year 4 - home UTSA, @ New Mexico State

Year 5 - @ UTSA, home Tulsa

Year 6 - home UTSA, @ Texas State

Year 7 - @ UTSA, home New Mexico State

Year 8 - home UTSA, @ Louisiana Tech

I'm for any schedule that gives us a good, winnable, out of conference games whether at home or on the road.

I'd rather has TSU-SM over UTSA every year.

YouCanUseAMint:

The WAC is still in trouble when you all and UTSA join the leage, because you are still a team short from the mandatory number the NCAA requires. This leads to the loss of NCAA revenue, bowl game tie-ins, etc... I think the decision to join the WAC was a poor one by your administration.

Edited December 27, 2010 by UNTLifer

[MeanMag]

To raise our RPI, We should boycott everyone but teams in the Top 12.

[MDH]

Their basketball program is several floors beneath the basement.

As is the rest of the sunbelt , Southland>>S. Belt this year

[Green Dozer]

They get more press here than any place else. Let's fill the stadium and beat Houston! We have many challenges ahead of us to even give UTSA or TX State more than a "who cares" yawn.

[TheTastyGreek]

As is the rest of the sunbelt , Southland>>S. Belt this year

Very possible, but I'm not calling it until the final conference RPI numbers are in. There are a LOT of Southland teams with 2 or fewer D-1 wins, just like in our league. And nobody over there has done as well as we have.

[MeanGreen61]

They get more press here than any place else. Let's fill the stadium and beat Houston! We have many challenges ahead of us to even give UTSA or TX State more than a "who cares" yawn.

What he said.

[YouCanUseaMint]

The WAC is still in trouble when you all and UTSA join the leage, because you are still a team short from the mandatory number the NCAA requires. This leads to the loss of NCAA revenue, bowl game tie-ins, etc... I think the decision to join the WAC was a poor one by your administration.

I think our admin sees the WAC for what it is - a highly unstable conference that has the possibility of losing its auto bid and title as a FBS conference; with that said, there are only so many opportunities one gets to make the move up. The decision was certainly a gamble, but Benson seemed fairly confident that new NCAA legislation will be adopted in January voiding the continuity rule (6 teams together for 5 years I believe). If what he believes comes to fruition next month, then I think you will see another school or two added. Benson isn't in full panic mode yet because he still has until June next year to find a match (assuming current WAC members don't find new homes).

Bowl tie-ins are certainly another issue as most of the WAC's bowl games have found new homes (sans boise's bowl which is still under contract). I do think you'll see a San Antonio bowl tie-in emerge in the coming years with the entrance of UTSA and Texas State.

Our athletic budget will be $18.34 million next year and we have facilities that show our commitment. If the WAC collapses (and assuming the new FCS-FBS transition rule passes), I would bet money that we'd go independent in football (FBS) until a conference like the Sun Belt is willing to hear what we have to say. We have invested too much money in this to turn back now.

Green Dozer, we played Houston last year. Not only was it one of their only sell outs, but even UH fans admitted that Bobcats travel extremely well. Like North Texas, we are one of the biggest state schools in Texas and have a lot of alumni. Houston is always smart to schedule, but an FBS (and to an extent FCS) Texas State would definitely bring out more fans than say a Rice type program.

[VideoEagle]

I think our admin sees the WAC for what it is - a highly unstable conference that has the possibility of losing its auto bid and title as a FBS conference; with that said, there are only so many opportunities one gets to make the move up. The decision was certainly a gamble, but Benson seemed fairly confident that new NCAA legislation will be adopted in January voiding the continuity rule (6 teams together for 5 years I believe). If what he believes comes to fruition next month, then I think you will see another school or two added. Benson isn't in full panic mode yet because he still has until June next year to find a match (assuming current WAC members don't find new homes).

Bowl tie-ins are certainly another issue as most of the WAC's bowl games have found new homes (sans boise's bowl which is still under contract). I do think you'll see a San Antonio bowl tie-in emerge in the coming years with the entrance of UTSA and Texas State.

Our athletic budget will be $18.34 million next year and we have facilities that show our commitment. If the WAC collapses (and assuming the new FCS-FBS transition rule passes), I would bet money that we'd go independent in football (FBS) until a conference like the Sun Belt is willing to hear what we have to say. We have invested too much money in this to turn back now.

Green Dozer, we played Houston last year. Not only was it one of their only sell outs, but even UH fans admitted that Bobcats travel extremely well. Like North Texas, we are one of the biggest state schools in Texas and have a lot of alumni. Houston is always smart to schedule, but an FBS (and to an extent FCS) Texas State would definitely bring out more fans than say a Rice type program.

I think TxSt was stuck and tried a desperate gamble to draw to an inside straight by joining the WAC. Be aware, it is NOT just hoping for the NCAA to pass a new rule but also interpreting that rule in a way the previous rule never was or the WAC looses the auto-bd status for all sports. And even if the rule passes AND it is interpreted in the WACs favor, the WAC still looses it's status as a FBS conference. You are not joining a conference but just a scheduling alliance by contract that anyone can leave at any time.

The idea of a new bowl game in San Antonio is interesting, but far from a certainty. The two cities currently hosting bowls - New Orleans and Orlando are very different that San Antonio. Yes, San Antonio is the biggest tourist destination in Texas, but it really doesn't compare to Orlando in terms of tourists or tourist facilities. New Orleans got a second bowl because a FBS conference was sponsoring one and still the second bowl only existed by be given office space for the first five years within the Sun Belt conference offices. It had no staff and the Sun Belt personnel filled those functions. Then there is the little detail of needing a recognized FBS conference to sponsor the new bowl - the WAC doesn't qualify as that any more.

The problem is the WAC collapses is maintaining the required number of home games against FBS teams. Yes, some will play you out of conference. But you are going to have to come up with really big guarantees in October and November.

Still, TxSt has some history to draw upon. UTSA has terrible basketball attendance and no history at all of football. Every school in the nation is willing to schedule them for a home game, but I think they will quickly find lots of buy outs for those return games in San Antonio. And if they don't win a lot and soon - San Antonio is not forgiving of loosing teams!

[YouCanUseaMint]

I think TxSt was stuck and tried a desperate gamble to draw to an inside straight by joining the WAC. Be aware, it is NOT just hoping for the NCAA to pass a new rule but also interpreting that rule in a way the previous rule never was or the WAC looses the auto-bd status for all sports. And even if the rule passes AND it is interpreted in the WACs favor, the WAC still looses it's status as a FBS conference. You are not joining a conference but just a scheduling alliance by contract that anyone can leave at any time.

The idea of a new bowl game in San Antonio is interesting, but far from a certainty. The two cities currently hosting bowls - New Orleans and Orlando are very different that San Antonio. Yes, San Antonio is the biggest tourist destination in Texas, but it really doesn't compare to Orlando in terms of tourists or tourist facilities. New Orleans got a second bowl because a FBS conference was sponsoring one and still the second bowl only existed by be given office space for the first five years within the Sun Belt conference offices. It had no staff and the Sun Belt personnel filled those functions. Then there is the little detail of needing a recognized FBS conference to sponsor the new bowl - the WAC doesn't qualify as that any more.

The problem is the WAC collapses is maintaining the required number of home games against FBS teams. Yes, some will play you out of conference. But you are going to have to come up with really big guarantees in October and November.

Still, TxSt has some history to draw upon. UTSA has terrible basketball attendance and no history at all of football. Every school in the nation is willing to schedule them for a home game, but I think they will quickly find lots of buy outs for those return games in San Antonio. And if they don't win a lot and soon - San Antonio is not forgiving of loosing teams!

At this point, all we can be is optimistic and improve from within. It sounds funny saying this as a lot of disdain exists for the guy, but I am grateful we have Karl Benson at the helm. I just hope once the dust settles, the new line-up (assuming one exists of course) will appreciate their home more than the last bunch did and not look to piggy back off of one's success as much.

Edited December 28, 2010 by YouCanUseaMint

[UNTFan23]

I wish there was a "I don't care" option in this poll.

[UNTLifer]

At this point, all we can be is optimistic and improve from within. It sounds funny saying this as a lot of disdain exists for the guy, but I am grateful we have Karl Benson at the helm. I just hope once the dust settles, the new line-up (assuming one exists of course) will appreciate their home more than the last bunch did and not look to piggy back off of one's success as much.

I honestly don't understand why Texas State makes the jump to a rudderless WAC now. Why not stay in the Southland and wait for something better to come along. Going independent is nearly impossible and a financial drain unless you are Notre Dame or one of the service academies.

[YouCanUseaMint]

I honestly don't understand why Texas State makes the jump to a rudderless WAC now. Why not stay in the Southland and wait for something better to come along. Going independent is nearly impossible and a financial drain unless you are Notre Dame or one of the service academies.

Our only other option would be the Sun Belt, which looks to be stable and not interested in expansion. I spoke to someone in our AD before classes let out for the holidays and he said Texas State contacted the Belt more than once before accepting the WAC's invite to see if yall's league would be interested. We could have waited in the Southland, but even then who's to say we would get lucky in the next go around? Because your league isn't expanding right now, we took a gamble with the WAC. Like I said, there are only so many opportunities one gets to do this - goes back to the saying "beggars can't be choosers."

Definitely a risky move though.

[RabidRunner]

I honestly don't understand why Texas State makes the jump to a rudderless WAC now. Why not stay in the Southland and wait for something better to come along. Going independent is nearly impossible and a financial drain unless you are Notre Dame or one of the service academies.

The problem is UTSA wasn't waiting, they were going indy regardless if the WAC invite came or not. Prior to serious talk about the WAC there was already some grumblings that UTSA was gaining the upper hand, especially after the ease in building OOC schedules for the first few years. For them to see UTSA go FBS while they remained in the SLC would have been a very very tough pill to swallow. No way they could let that happen, it would alienate their fanbase and the alums who talk with their checkbook.

[CMJ]

The idea of a new bowl game in San Antonio is interesting, but far from a certainty. The two cities currently hosting bowls - New Orleans and Orlando are very different that San Antonio. Yes, San Antonio is the biggest tourist destination in Texas, but it really doesn't compare to Orlando in terms of tourists or tourist facilities. New Orleans got a second bowl because a FBS conference was sponsoring one and still the second bowl only existed by be given office space for the first five years within the Sun Belt conference offices. It had no staff and the Sun Belt personnel filled those functions. Then there is the little detail of needing a recognized FBS conference to sponsor the new bowl - the WAC doesn't qualify as that any more.

San Diego has two as well.

[Texas Stranger]

I wish there was a "I don't care" option in this poll.

In retrospect, I wish I'd have put that in there.

Although, it would be ironic (and self-defeating) because you would have to care enough to actually select the choice. I've always felt that anyone who says they don't care is contradicting themselves without realizing it. They want to make sure others know their position on the topic at hand.

But Sean, you're right about the poll, it wasn't meant to be serious at all. Kudos to the 3 or 4 of you who "got" that.

Oh...and Neg-vote me if you love the Albino Squirrel.

[Shof]

The problem is UTSA wasn't waiting, they were going indy regardless if the WAC invite came or not. Prior to serious talk about the WAC there was already some grumblings that UTSA was gaining the upper hand, especially after the ease in building OOC schedules for the first few years. For them to see UTSA go FBS while they remained in the SLC would have been a very very tough pill to swallow. No way they could let that happen, it would alienate their fanbase and the alums who talk with their checkbook.

Can't go direct to INDY. Must have invite to FBS conference. Runners weren't going anywhere without an invite to WAC or Sun Belt; and Belt wasn't offering at this time.

[YouCanUseaMint]

Can't go direct to INDY. Must have invite to FBS conference. Runners weren't going anywhere without an invite to WAC or Sun Belt; and Belt wasn't offering at this time.

I could be wrong, but isn't this just a proposed piece of NCAA legislation rumored to replace the moratorium, of which expires next year?

[stebo]

I could be wrong, but isn't this just a proposed piece of NCAA legislation rumored to replace the moratorium, of which expires next year?

You are correct - which is why there is no way to tell if either one of you will actually be moving up. FAU, FIU, WKU, and soon to be USA all came up to FBS with the help of the Belt but they had to pay their dues by hitting all the other marks, too. I think that everyone should have to put their best efforts into a move up - simply being sponsored by a "bona-fide" conference sounds a little too easy. It has taken us a decade to stabilize but we are finally in the position to be picky about who we invite to the party.

I wish you luck - you are going to need a few things to go your way. For football, the FBS rules have to change, the moratorium will need to expire, and you will need a new interpretation of the continuation rule (for non-football related matters)... The MWC did not get a free pass when they broke away from the WAC and I doubt that the WAC will get a free pass this time. I think that the WAC will "kind of" survive; but will lose their auto bids (for every sport) - the WAC will also not be recognized as an FBS conference which means you will not get a piece of the BCS pie other than the same half-unit split that Army and Navy get. The WAC will also need to find a television package - I imagine it will be a lot like the Belt's - which is not much of anything. You will also need to find a bowl game. The Hawaii Bowl is going to the MWC, the Boise Bowl will likely shut down, The Fight Hunger Bowl is only available as a backup every other year, and the New Mexico Bowl has dropped the WAC. With the amount of bowl games these days - that might work out to your advantage. Who wants to go to Boise, anyway? Negotiating in the free market could be a better setup for the Texas WAC schools (and La Tech) due to geography.

Basically, you will be a collection of schools that have banded together for scheduling purposes. A lot like the Great West was for some wandering FCS schools. But you might finally accomplish the mission of the "Drive" and make it to FBS. I am so split on this. I want TSU@SM to make it - but UTSA just rubs me the wrong way. The "Runners" have about 15 ignorant dorky "fans" but they like to talk like they have 15K.