UT- Arlington To Join The WAC

Rudy · July 15, 2011

Dang. I don't mean to start anything hostile, but why all the hate? Do you guys really hate the WAC? I think the WAC is shaping up to be an improved version of the Southland for UTA. I really have no beef against the 'belt, but they seem to be a larger collection of former SLC schools than the WAC. Former SLC schools Troy, ASU, ULL, ULM and UNT are in the 'belt, vs TSU, UTSA and UTA in the WAC, right? Maybe Lamar and Sam Houston will get an invite as well, and that would make us even. Ya think?

Even after those defections, I think the Southland will survive with its collection of 4 remaining Louisiana schools, UCA, SFA and Corpus Christi. All except Corpus play FB.

We're not hostile towards you, just the WAC.

Yes, we really hate the WAC. Before the conference realignment, it was nothing more than 90% of the same teams we played during the Big West Conference days. The travel nearly killed our athletic program. The only teams that would have been worth playing in the WAC are now gone. We have been turning the WAC down for about a decade now, and Karl Benson should be charged with stalking. Now the WAC is the conference for FCS schools moving up.

Aquila_Viridis · July 15, 2011

We're not hostile towards you, just the WAC.

Actually I'm hostile toward them. UT system droppings need to dry up and quit using otherwise beneficial resources. They would maybe make a good UNT system campus. We will happily accept the PUF allocation.

Rudy · July 15, 2011

I was meaning him more as an individual.

SilverEagle · July 15, 2011

Here is today's ST coverage of UTA joining the WAC. Damn! it must be a slow news day because they got a big headline, and two stories in today's paper.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/07/14/3222925/wac-sees-whole-new-ballgame-on.html

"The University of Texas at Arlington is expected to welcome 36,000 students to campus this fall, making it the state's fourth largest university.

This isn't your uncle's UTA. Having long ago shed its commuter school label, today's UTA houses a greater percentage of its students on-campus than UT Austin.

It has 90,000 alumni who live in the North Texas area."

PlummMeanGreen · July 16, 2011

"The University of Texas at Arlington is expected to welcome 36,000 students to campus this fall, making it the state's fourth largest university.
This isn't your uncle's UTA. Having long ago shed its commuter school label, today's UTA houses a greater percentage of its students on-campus than UT Austin.
It has 90,000 alumni who live in the North Texas area."

So Just What Are Our Real Objectives & Aspirations Now That We Have A New Stadium? Same Thing We Did With The Super Pit For 30 Plus Years After It Opened? Hopefully.....Not.

Almost seems one is reading a blurb about UNT--almost. And before Fall, 2011, enrollment numbers are in UTA has already ranked themselves ahead of North Texas? Some of us watched about 10 D-1 football programs back in the 70's that we were their equal or even ahead of run right by us like, uh,.........that road-runners cartoon except few of us were laughing.

Is this what we have to look forward to in the next 2-3 years because other schools somehow stole our momentum red-handed?

(1) UT-Austin

(2) TAMU

(3) UH

(4) UT-Arlington

(5) Texas State U

(6) UNT

If UNT powers wants to wear that new stadium as a medalion of accomplishment (which for one year could rightfully & deservedly be done); yet if some on campus think the new MGS will on its own create an upwardly bound FBS football program or market itself the next few years on its own because it's there--it won't. We all know our program well enough to know it won't; Great people create great FBS athletic programs and it does not happen by osmosis.

The WAC's UTSA seems to have that cocky South Florida "get out of our way--here we come" attitude and will soon enough IMO have a better OOC home schedule than North Texas because they have the aggressiveness of a school that wants to prove it belongs. Yet at times we seem to be showing signs of being stuck in our Fouts Field-esque past with our M.O. At some point, something will have to give with that modus operendi because being the best in the Sun Belt thus far has mean't no Top 25 finishes for any of our football champions the last 10 years.

Yet, UTSA has their Alamo-Dome and a great destination city. It would be easy to predict that Texas Southern U (NCAA D-II?) will not be on the future schedule of the Road Runners any time soon, either. They will undoubtedly do things to go upward a la South Florida as their model rather than using UNT's "50 year plan" model and our much of that time having no real goals or destination points but rather "look how many teams we are suiting out now"; and during the last 32 years our having numerous staffers whose performances were judged not on wins but how long they've done us a favor and stayed in Denton; we've had every shade of green under the rainbow and with every new regime we could always expect a new logo, a new eagle (except we are the Mean Green, or are we?) and even periodical campus wide new brandings to accomodate the desires of newbie staff members and many non-UNT graduated newcomers who................always knew what was best for our alma mater over any one that had actually graduated from North Texas.

Our new stadium just gets us at the place we needed to have been at least a couple decades or so ago because we will never know all the many ways Fouts Field during that time cost us opportunities with a better conference, hence better recruits, better scheduling and maybe even better bowl opps, too, with Top 25 ranked opponents. Boise State proved to us so many things that we could have possibly duplicated at UNT the previous 32 years (except for our decade in & decade out albatross called Fouts Field) but BSU also had a formidable D1 football stadium in their program since the 70's; about the very time Fry left UNT for the Big 10 while leaving UNT literally stuck with Fouts Field another 32 years later. IMHO, the one thing that A.D. Fry could have done that he didn't was get us a new on campus stadium built when costs were not so exhorbitant. Yet........ never in my wildest dreams would I have believed that I would be 60 years of age before we would have a new football stadium in Denton, either. (It goes by faster than you willl ever want it to, Young Gun Alums, it really does).

Still.......the best part now is that we have a chance to do something way outside our usual box and thats only because of the new Mean Green Stadium. I know many of us just hope all the pieces to our puzzle for UNT are in place for us to do some serious catch-up and with the new Mean Green Stadium for us to not get left behind (again) at the train station. And now isn't it amazing that we now have 3 new FBS Texas-based schools to contend with; 2 of which could pass us up in enrollment which is not the end of the world but we know the symbolism that that alone will create within the state most of us reside.

Ever been to the race track and the horse that was supposed to win which you put your rmoney on limped out of the starting gates only to get surpassed by other horses that were supposed to not factor in that race at all? Still, the sports pages will report who won the race and who on paper was supposed to win but, shame, shame, shame.....it did not (and then the jockey had 100 other excuses as to why).

Edited July 17, 2011 by PlummMeanGreen

MDH · July 16, 2011

I'm tired of reading GMG posters be afraid of UTSA, Texas St and UTA. Do you really think that little of our program to see them as an immediate threat?? If you're afraid, then you have let them win.

Jesus Christ football season can't come soon enough.

UNTLifer · July 16, 2011

Does it really matter if UTA has a larger enrollment. They don't play football and probably won't for years. They will end up in the same baot as La Tech concerning travel costs except they will get to play TSU-SM and their 8,000 fans and UTSA that hasn't even snapped a ball yet. It's just a Texas version of the Southland, which is a better league than the WAC from top to bottom. Besides, when did football become a favorite sport of Asians?

UNTLifer · July 16, 2011

Does it really matter if UTA has a larger enrollment. They don't play football and probably won't for years. They will end up in the same baot as La Tech concerning travel costs except they will get to play TSU-SM and their 8,000 fans and UTSA that hasn't even snapped a ball yet. It's just a Texas version of the Southland, which is a better league than the WAC from top to bottom. Besides, when did football become a favorite sport of Asians?

Rudy · July 16, 2011

Simple solution to the enrollment issue, every alum register for one class this fall.

GrandGreen · July 16, 2011

UTA enrollment had a big jump reflecting a very aggressive online program and it is possible that is continuing to substantially increase their numbers. UTA is a good school that is closer to NT academically than the Texas Twins. However, despite their spin it is the epitome of a commuter college that has also done an excellent job of attracting international students. IMO, NT should concentrate on being more selective and improving their academic status than being concerned with overall enrollment.

Those blissfully unaware of the effect of more colleges moving up to fb status are dead wrong. Any new state or regional school further depletes the resources available, both in terms of recruiting and media coverage. The optimists among us will only see UTSA and TSSM as regional opponents that could provide some relatively local competition. The truth is that additional fb teams will only increase the already great competition for resources in Texas. No, none will be an immediate threat to NT but unless NT continues to substantially improve their athletic programs, they could in a few short years drop even further down in the state's athletic hierarchy.

PlummMeanGreen · July 17, 2011

UTA enrollment had a big jump reflecting a very aggressive online program and it is possible that is continuing to substantially increase their numbers. UTA is a good school that is closer to NT academically than the Texas Twins. However, despite their spin it is the epitome of a commuter college that has also done an excellent job of attracting international students. IMO, NT should concentrate on being more selective and improving their academic status than being concerned with overall enrollment.

Those blissfully unaware of the effect of more colleges moving up to fb status are dead wrong. Any new state or regional school further depletes the resources available, both in terms of recruiting and media coverage. The optimists among us will only see UTSA and TSSM as regional opponents that could provide some relatively local competition. The truth is that additional fb teams will only increase the already great competition for resources in Texas. No one will be an immediate threat to NT but unless NT continues to substantially improve their athletic programs, they could in a few short years drop even further down in the state's athletic hierarchy.

We have specialized most decades since I graduated (circa, 1976) somewhat like the old football drill called "running in place." That means we did a helluva' bunch of leg work but we weren't getting anywhere with it; that is, getting to a destination whereas our athletic accomplishments would be recognized as a Top 50 NCAA D1/FBS type of athletic program .

Great people, ie, nicely paid staffers, make great athletic programs. It does not happen because of who we used to have, who we wish we'd had or just living on the "boy-howdy, our potential at UNT is unlimited" as our non-stop yet unrealized battle cry.

What will sink many of our ships or spirits (if you will) is "IF" UTSA were to actually pull a South Floiida type rise from athletic nothing-ness, leaps in an upwardly bound manner from one league to a much better league and what it has taken North Texas about 100 years to do of playing football the Road Runners do it USF-style in less than 10 years. (Lest anyone forget, FAU in our own league has been playing football about 10 years (give or take) and we have hardly dominated them even losing to them one year we went to a bowl game when they were not yet official members of the SBC.

Again...."If' that were to happen even down in the Alamo City, that would create a very awkward moment for whoever our UNT leaders are (if not the same ones still on payroll) trying to explain why we would still be in the midst of some kind of "you name the number" year plan in Denton that still has not come to fruition at a truly recognized level of success somewhat like Boise State's.

GrandGreen I do think we should pay close attention to your below quote because some of us have seen countless other football programs pass us by post our Missouri Valley Conference membership years and your quote : "The truth is that additional fb teams will only increase the already great competition for resources in Texas. No one will be an immediate threat to NT but unless NT continues to substantially improve their athletic programs, they could in a few short years drop even further down in the state's athletic hierarchy."

Edited July 17, 2011 by PlummMeanGreen

untgeorge · July 17, 2011

Congrats to UTA. I'm surprised by this move. I'm really surprised the WAC is adding non-football members. I get Seattle a little but I think they should have waited. Since it looks like Big East isn't going to make another addition this year, I thought the WAC finally had a chance to take another run at some of the football schools they were looking at (Montana schools, ULL, North Texas, etc). I thought there would be 1% they could grab Sun Belt school but this was first time one of those schools might have jumped (nobody would jump if there was chance CUSA, etc might have to expand if they lost a team, etc).

If UTA is going to add football (I've read some rumors they are looking at 2016), North Texas needs to get football going again. Since North Texas is finally serious about football we should be to a point where UTA can't touch us. If we aren't any better than we are today, UTA having football could actually cost us a few recruits. WAC could actually get some coverage in Texas (although Southland really doesn't get much coverage). This probably impacts our non-revenue sports some. WAC with all the Texas schools might be more attractive to volleyball, track, softball, etc.

I bet La Tech fans are pissed. They were pissed when Seattle was added. They want football schools.

UTA Pres says football not in their plans.

Adub4ever · July 17, 2011

We have specialized most decades since I graduated (circa, 1976) somewhat like the old football drill called "running in place." That means we did a helluva' bunch of leg work but we weren't getting anywhere with it; that is, getting to a destination whereas our athletic accomplishments would be recognized as a Top 50 NCAA D1/FBS type of athletic program .

Great people, ie, nicely paid staffers, make great athletic programs. It does not happen because of who we used to have, who we wish we'd had or just living on the "boy-howdy, our potential at UNT is unlimited" as our non-stop yet unrealized battle cry.

What will sink many of our ships or spirits (if you will) is "IF" UTSA were to actually pull a South Floiida type rise from athletic nothing-ness, leaps in an upwardly bound manner from one league to a much better league and what it has taken North Texas about 100 years to do of playing football the Road Runners do it USF-style in less than 10 years. (Lest anyone forget, FAU in our own league has been playing football about 10 years (give or take) and we have hardly dominated them even losing to them one year we went to a bowl game when they were not yet official members of the SBC.

Again...."If' that were to happen even down in the Alamo City, that would create a very awkward moment for whoever our UNT leaders are (if not the same ones still on payroll) trying to explain why we would still be in the midst of some kind of "you name the number" year plan in Denton that still has not come to fruition at a truly recognized level of success somewhat like Boise State's.

GrandGreen I do think we should pay close attention to your below quote because some of us have seen countless other program pass us by post our Missouri Valley Conference membership years and your quote : "The truth is that additional fb teams will only increase the already great competition for resources in Texas. No one will be an immediate threat to NT but unless NT continues to substantially improve their athletic programs, they could in a few short years drop even further down in the state's athletic hierarchy."

USF was a sleeping giant much in the way that UNT is but we havent capitalized.... UTSA is going to be horrible for years at football and its going to be hard for them to get good attendence at the Alamodome with Idaho, Utah St, and San Jose St. coming to town....(it would be that much harder if UTA started football)

I think USF kinda had the perfect storm the way they started 1aa then as Indy. They did it right by recruiting kids to stay home in South Florida, which ultimatley led to Bowl games and a Big East invite through conference reshuffling.... UTSA wont be passing UNT anytime soon... im more concerned about Tx St-SM...