Wac Trouble

Side Show Joe · June 14, 2011

This might get moved but I think it is UNT football related. The story states that the WAC still doesn't have enough FBS programs to move Texas State and UTSA up. Is it possible they don't become FBS programs?

My link

UNTFan23 · June 14, 2011

The WAC can pick up Seattle, Cal State Bakersfield and Utah Valley as non-football members, but that does little to assuage the anxiety of San Jose State & Co., for whom the conference has become, in the words of a former athletic director, a parking lot for schools without options.

Ouch!

UNT86 · June 14, 2011

I'm going to have a great big belly laugh when this all settles.

Either A.) One or more of these schools is going to have to hold their nose and ask to joing the Belt, or B.) they all decide to sink together and The Belt will be a far superior conference in a very short time.

Either way.... too funny!

Edited June 14, 2011 by UNT86

Mean Green 93-98 · June 14, 2011

I wish Texas State all the best. But UTSA is a different story. When UTSA alumni have insinuated time and again that that they are too good for the Belt, and their program is guaranteed to blow by UNT in a few years, I don't have as much sympathy as I otherwise might.

All About UNT · June 14, 2011

I wish Texas State all the best. But UTSA is a different story. When UTSA alumni have insinuated time and again that that they are too good for the Belt, and their program is guaranteed to blow by UNT in a few years, I don't have as much sympathy as I otherwise might.

This x10

Offer State the lifeline....it will be great. As for UTSA....offer them a tissue (but spit in it first).

Side Show Joe · June 14, 2011

This x10

Offer State the lifeline....it will be great. As for UTSA....offer them a tissue (but spit in it first).

North Texas and the Sun Belt have no need for either program. Let them stay in the FCS.

golfingomez · June 14, 2011

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/story/2011-06-14/seattle-to-join-western-athletic-conference

GrandGreen · June 14, 2011

I'm going to have a great big belly laugh when this all settles.

Either A.) One or more of these schools is going to have to hold their nose and ask to joing the Belt, or B.) they all decide to sink together and The Belt will be a far superior conference in a very short time.

Either way.... too funny!

Don't understand your comment, either team would quickly join the Belt if offered.

foutsrouts · June 15, 2011

North Texas and the Sun Belt have no need for either program. Let them stay in the FCS.

I agree. Let them pay their dues by trying out the Indy route if they want to play with the big boys. I feel no need to admit one school who has never even put on pads at any level, and another who has been a very mediocre (at best) FCS team since moving up from D2.

FirefightnRick · June 15, 2011

Traveling to San Marcos every other year for a conference game used to be pretty nice in our SLC days. TxSt would be very beneficial to us in many ways. They have a solid new stadium, great location near a major market, and have countless thousands of alumni in the DFW that would help fill our stadium every two years. And with Fran as their coach there is no telling what they will be capable of. I think the Belt is missing out.

Rick

Edited June 15, 2011 by FirefightnRick

shaft · June 15, 2011

The WAC added Seattle University today, so its a mute issue.

And no the SBC isn't missing out on Texas State. Texas State would have jumped ship to another conference the first chance they got.

Harry · June 15, 2011

Texas State is a great trip for our fans. They have hired a great coaching staff. I think they will bring fans to our games. Is the exclusion of Texas State in the best interest of the rest of the Sun Belt or North Texas?

GrayEagle · June 15, 2011

I understand why we have no friends. The best way to have a friend is to be one. Many on this board could care less about anyone else.

We have a long history with Texas State and could use a friendly rival within the state. An instate rival would reduce travel costs and increase attendance. I know that if the situation were reversed I'd sure appreciate the help for North Texas.

UTSA is another matter. They have no history in football and little history in the other sports. North Texas had been playing football for nearly forty years before we were able to move up to what is now the equivalent of the FBS (then called major college). I have no animosity towards them but they have not paid their dues so to speak. Maybe, if we are fortunate enough to upgrade to a higher conference then they will be allowed to take our place.

oldschoollefty · June 15, 2011

The WAC added Seattle University today, so its a mute issue.
And no the SBC isn't missing out on Texas State. Texas State would have jumped ship to another conference the first chance they got.

What makes Texas State any different from our own aspirations? Are we not looking to upgrade our conference affiliation at the first available chance?

oldguystudent · June 15, 2011

I understand why we have no friends. The best way to have a friend is to be one. Many on this board could care less about anyone else.

As I was reading through this thread, I couldn't help but be reminded of the "douchebaggery" on the MWC board when the topic of UNT moving over there arises.

untjim1995 · June 15, 2011

I understand why we have no friends. The best way to have a friend is to be one. Many on this board could care less about anyone else.

We have a long history with Texas State and could use a friendly rival within the state. An instate rival would reduce travel costs and increase attendance. I know that if the situation were reversed I'd sure appreciate the help for North Texas.

UTSA is another matter. They have no history in football and little history in the other sports. North Texas had been playing football for nearly forty years before we were able to move up to what is now the equivalent of the FBS (then called major college). I have no animosity towards them but they have not paid their dues so to speak. Maybe, if we are fortunate enough to upgrade to a higher conference then they will be allowed to take our place.

THIS. X 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000!!

What I want badly for UNT is to do one of two things. Upgrade the conference affiliation. If we can get into the MWC or CUSA, then great. I have no doubt CUSA will not be an option anytime soon as long as the private schools are in it together, so that leaves the MWC, which is a better league anyway. I would love to see us play Boise State and Fresno State at the new stadium, not to mention a road trip to the Air Force Academy or to watch our hoops team play New Mexico at the Pit in Albuquerque. I think the MWC would be a good fit for us, but that we would be a good fit for them, too, just like TCU was.

If we can't upgrade to a better conference, than make the SBC the best it can be for us. Texas State would give us a rival that we have played more than anyone, has a lot of alumni who can help fill the new stadium when we play, and we would get a nice market for the SBC to become a part of in Austin/San Antonio. If I were Wright Waters, I would be calling Texas State and New Mexico State right now to come aboard and get us to 12 members. If anyone else ever leaves, then you can look into adding La Tech or UTSA--otherwise, those two ingrates can die on the vine as far as I care, although I still think UTSA has way more potential than the rest of the possibilities out there.

UNT90 · June 15, 2011

Texas State is a great trip for our fans. They have hired a great coaching staff. I think they will bring fans to our games. Is the exclusion of Texas State in the best interest of the rest of the Sun Belt or North Texas?

No. It's not.

If this is going to be our long term home (which I hope it isn't, but there isn't exactly any other conferences, besides an almost defunct WAC, beating down our door) we don't need to be the steppnig stone conference. Let the Mac or the WAC hold that title. I know we have history with TSU, but I'm not willing to sacrafice the long-term well being of the conference just to have a fun road trip.

Let them prove themselves in the WAC and then we can give them an invitation after about 5 years.

ADLER · June 16, 2011

Adding Texas State and La Tech to the Sun Belt would be beneficial in so many ways.

First, it allows the Sun Belt to have two divisions which significantly lowers travel expenses and also makes a lucrative conference football game possible.

Next, and possibly most importantly, it kills the WAC's football aspirations and their rampant escalation of every FCS program in Texas to FBS. Texas is already saturated with ten FBS programs, two more have been added in Texas State and UTSA, and now the WAC is flirting with Lamar, Sam Houston State, and Stephen F Austin. Fifteen FBS schools is simply too many for a state that is already heavily recruited by schools from outside Texas. Elevating schools like SFA, SHSU and Lamar cheapens the very goal for which Texas State has spent decades preparing.

Add these two, then add Missouri State and Georgia State to enable the Sun Belt to have two stable seven team divisions. Suddenly the conference has many of the larger schools across the southeastern US and invaluable exposure in many of the region's major media markets.

UTSA should receive future consideration if they prove they are capable of fielding a successful FCS program, and could be an excellent replacement for ULM if ULM finally admits that their tiny school belongs in the Southland.

East Division:

Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Troy, Georgia St, South Alabama, Middle Tennessee, and Western Kentucky

West Division:

North Texas, Texas St, La Tech, Louisiana, Arkansas St, Missouri St, and UTSA

I would also prefer changing the conference name simply because the conference will have outgrown the traditional 'sun belt' area.

Edited June 16, 2011 by ADLER

Side Show Joe · June 16, 2011

Adding Texas State and La Tech to the Sun Belt would be beneficial in so many ways.

First, it allows the Sun Belt to have two divisions which significantly lowers travel expenses and also makes a lucrative conference football game possible.

Next, and possibly most importantly, it kills the WAC's football aspirations and their rampant escalation of every FCS program in Texas to FBS. Texas is already saturated with ten FBS programs, two more have been added in Texas State and UTSA, and now the WAC is flirting with Lamar, Sam Houston State, and Stephen F Austin. Fifteen FBS schools is simply too many for a state that is already heavily recruited by schools from outside Texas. Elevating schools like SFA, SHSU and Lamar cheapens the very goal for which Texas State has spent decades preparing.

Add these two, then add Missouri State and Georgia State to enable the Sun Belt to have two stable seven team divisions. Suddenly the conference has many of the larger schools across the southeastern US and invaluable exposure in many of the region's major media markets.

UTSA should receive future consideration if they prove they are capable of fielding a successful FCS program, and could be an excellent replacement for ULM if ULM finally admits that their tiny school belongs in the Southland.

East Division:

Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Troy, Georgia St, South Alabama, Middle Tennessee, and Western Kentucky

West Division:

North Texas, Texas St, La Tech, Louisiana, Arkansas St, Missouri St, and UTSA

I would also prefer changing the conference name simply because the conference will have outgrown the traditional 'sun belt' area.

I don't think ULM has said anything about dropping down into the Southland. Planning a future version of the Sun Belt without them seems wrong. Expanding the conference and further splitting the revenue without a guaranteed increase in payouts to each member sounds like a bad idea. I'd prefer to build with what we have. The Sun Belt has been a gateway conference for too long. If we were to expand, I think we should stick with the current conference policy of only considering FBS programs. The WAC is losing ground right now, I don't think the Sun Belt should join them.

SilverEagle · June 16, 2011

Adding Texas State and La Tech to the Sun Belt would be beneficial in so many ways.

First, it allows the Sun Belt to have two divisions which significantly lowers travel expenses and also makes a lucrative conference football game possible.

Next, and possibly most importantly, it kills the WAC's football aspirations and their rampant escalation of every FCS program in Texas to FBS. Texas is already saturated with ten FBS programs, two more have been added in Texas State and UTSA, and now the WAC is flirting with Lamar, Sam Houston State, and Stephen F Austin. Fifteen FBS schools is simply too many for a state that is already heavily recruited by schools from outside Texas. Elevating schools like SFA, SHSU and Lamar cheapens the very goal for which Texas State has spent decades preparing.

Add these two, then add Missouri State and Georgia State to enable the Sun Belt to have two stable seven team divisions. Suddenly the conference has many of the larger schools across the southeastern US and invaluable exposure in many of the region's major media markets.

UTSA should receive future consideration if they prove they are capable of fielding a successful FCS program, and could be an excellent replacement for ULM if ULM finally admits that their tiny school belongs in the Southland.

East Division:

Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Troy, Georgia St, South Alabama, Middle Tennessee, and Western Kentucky

West Division:

North Texas, Texas St, La Tech, Louisiana, Arkansas St, Missouri St, and UTSA

I would also prefer changing the conference name simply because the conference will have outgrown the traditional 'sun belt' area.