Independence or Sun Belt?

The Fake Lonnie Finch · August 30, 2011

BYU is now independent. Navy and Army are. Of course, Notre Dame. Texas is at least sometimes mentioned as one who could go it alone.

I know it's been discussed here before, but I've forgotten the pros and cons. Off the top of my head the cons would be not being tied to a guaranteed bowl, and scrambling for money with no television contract.

I guess I can't really think of any pros, other than being able to set a schedule with high profile schools. You could pretty much have Army, Navy, BYU, and possibly Notre Dame every year or two because they are also looking to fill (remember, Notre Dame squeezed Tulsa in last year).

If there really are super conferences and schools are looking for games against programs that aren't traditionally as strong, I think we could make a decent schedule of it. But, who knows.

The A&M thing and the potential bust up of the Big 12 and other conference realignment means, though, that we should at least put every option on the table to be debated.

Cornflake. Cornflake. Frosted flake.

UNTflyer · August 30, 2011

It worked for Miami. They were able to schedule whoever they wanted and as a result put together a run of great season schedules that vaulted them to national prominence.

I just don't think an unknown school could ever do that again in today's football landscape.

Edited August 30, 2011 by UNTflyer

Green Mean · August 30, 2011

If we pumped enough money into the program combined with packing the stadiums then we can probably do it. Of course that is contingent on the fact that we can consistently put some great winning seasons along with beating good programs.

UNTflyer · August 30, 2011

The scheduling issue has its downsides as well. You don't have a conference guarantee of 8 games a season.

EAGLE83 · August 30, 2011

We tried that under Hayden Fry.It did not work.The other sports will suffer.

MeanGreen61 · August 30, 2011

We tried that under Hayden Fry.It did not work.The other sports will suffer.

+1

The Fake Lonnie Finch · August 30, 2011

But, under Hayden Fry wasn't the problem more of the school not really giving much attention and resources to the football program?

Again, I'm not advocating either way. I'm just saying with the new stadium and facilities surrounding it, it's obvious more attention and money are being put into the program now.

The Miami example is a great one. Although, they were headed for extinction before Schnellenberger arrived. Florida State is another. The Seminoles were independent from 1951 to 1991, joining the ACC in 1992. Again, they'd had some success here and there before Bowden, but he was really the one that made them take off.

We'll soon see whether Dan McCarney is that type of transformational coach that Schnellenberger was to Miami )and Louisville and FAU) and Bowden to FSU. I think it's true, though, that the climb would be steeper these days to transform an unknown independent into a power the way Miami and FSU did in the 80s.

Green Mean · August 30, 2011

We tried that under Hayden Fry.It did not work.The other sports will suffer.

The other sports would be affiliated with a conference. Kinda like what BYU is doing.

letsgiveacheer · August 30, 2011

I suspect it would be also very difficult to receive any type of television exposure as an independent. All the other schools you mention have quite a bit more name recognition than we do, unfortunately.

KRAM1 · August 30, 2011

UNT as an independent in football=not a good idea.

island eagle · August 30, 2011

UNT as an independent in football=not a good idea.

Amen....been there, done that.

GrandGreen · August 30, 2011

Comparing the name teams that are successful independents with NT at this time is way early. I don't think being independent works well, players like to play in a conference. Independence just about will destroy all the minor sports and even basketball would be tough to schedule. I see no advantages to being an independent for NT.