Conference Affiliations by Conference Affiliates

Mean Green 93-98 · August 30, 2011

I hate to be posting on conference realignment two days before the first game of the season. But I started responding to a post Flyer made about not wanting to be in the MWC, and got carried away. What I did is ranked the different schools in the three conferences of which we could realistically be a member in the next few years (MWC, C-USA, Belt). I ranked them in the order in which I would want North Texas to share a conference with them. I ranked them in order from 1 to 30, then averaged the ranking by conference.

Teams in the Belt, MWC, and C-USA ranked by desirability to share a conference:

1. Boise St. MWC

- Face it, they have become a perennial BCS team. It would be great to be in a league with them. We also have past history with them, from the 1-AA playoffs in '94 to a couple years together in the Big West. The travel would be terrible, but we'd get them in Apogee every other year. I don't see how that wouldn't sell out every time.

2. Houston, C-USA

- A team that has made a big splash on the national scene, shares a lot in common with UNT, would make great regional rivalry.

3. SMU, C-USA

- This wouldn't apply to any other team but UNT--we would love to be able to face them on an annual basis. Would instantly be our greatest rivalry.

4. Air Force, MWC

- I love all that goes with playing one of the service academies. Respected nationally.

5. Tulsa, C-USA

- They have made a name for themselves in recent years, would be a good regional rivalry.

6. Rice, C-USA

- Former SWC school, and that still means something. Their academic credentials add something to any conference.

7. San Diego State, MWC

- Not many UNT fans would put them this high, but we share some things in common with them. Began as "normal schools" around the same time, have been playing football a comparable amount of time, were both football powerhouses in the late '60's. But they have also competed historically at a high level, and are pretty well nationally known. Of course, have recently had a tremendous basketball team.

8. Colorado State, MWC

- Have made a splash on the national scene from time to time, pretty well known nationally, have a little grudge going back to the first N.O. Bowl.

9. Fresno State, MWC

- Have made a splash nationally, though not so much the past couple of years. It seems Boise State stole most of their thunder. Still a respected conference affiliate.

10. Memphis, C-USA

- Great basketball school. Haven't been a great football school lately, but they still have a decent name. Beating Memphis sounds better in the papers than beating Arkansas State, even though Arkansas State has had better teams recently.

11. UTEP, C-USA

- It doesn't excite me nearly as much as the other Texas C-USA teams, but it would be nice to whup up on them annually.

12. UNLV, MWC

- This is more of a basketball choice than a football choice, but what a basketball choice it is!

13. Nevada, MWC

- Been a regular bowl team in recent years, beat Boston College in their bowl last year. Good basketball school.

14. Marshall, C-USA

- Not sure why I have 'em this high, but I think Marshall would be pretty cool to play. Would provide a scenic road trip.

15. Louisiana-Lafayette, Belt

- I put them the highest in the Belt, even though many are picking them to be the worst football team in the Belt this year. But we have had a good history together in the Belt, we have stuck together when the WAC came courting. Plus, "Ragin' Cajuns" is one of the coolest team names in all of sports.

16. Hawaii, MWC

- A travel nightmare. But well known, pretty good football team, would be interesting to share a conference with them.

17. Southern Miss, C-USA

- A good team, ought to be good competition between us.

18. Central Florida, C-USA

- There tends to be that "directional school" stigma, but UCF has made a decent name for itself the past 10-15 years or so.

19. East Carolina, C-USA

- See Central Florida

20. Arkansas State, Belt

- See Louisiana-Lafayette

21. Middle Tennessee State, Belt

- Okay, we're getting into a little bit of a Belt run here. We have built up some history with the Belt teams, and the rivalries feel closer to real rivalries than what we had in the Big West, although still lacking the punch of UNT-SMU or UNT-Houston. MTSU has been one of the better rivalries, and is generally good across the board in athletics.

22. Troy, Belt

- Their academics have been a question mark (you might say a black mark), but they have brought more football legitimacy to the Belt than any other team.

23. New Mexico, MWC

- They were a pretty decent team, pre-Locksley. Had some really good basketball teams in the '90's. I'm not sure if they'll ever get back to that, but being in a conference with New Mexico makes reasonable geographical sense.

24. University of Wyoming, MWC

- Not much to say--this is where I put them.

25. Tulane, C-USA

- Might make a decent geographical rival.

26. UAB, C-USA

27. Western Kentucky, Belt

- I'm sure many would put them a whole lot higher. Great basketball team, good across the spectrum athletics. But they've still got that "just up from 1-AA" stigma hanging over them in football.

28. UL-M, Belt

- My personal feelings are to put them higher. They have always done the most with the least, and we have a whole lot of history with them. But their academics and athletic budget put a black eye on any conference they are in.

29. & 30. (Either or) FAU, FIU, Belt

- Both have done pretty well, but being in a conference with them makes zero geographical sense. You could certainly say the same about Marshall, ECU, and UCF, but at least they have a little name recognition.

Average rankings by conference

MWC 11.7

C-USA 13

Belt 24

It's a mighty narrow margin, but to my surprise, the MWC came out the winner. I'm not opposed to "building the Belt" if that ends up being our lot for the foreseeable future, but obviously I'm not nearly as excited by our affiliation with the Belt teams as I would be by either of the other two.

As you can tell, I didn't do any significant research for this, and I'm sure my rankings would vary slightly if I did them tomorrow.

But what say you?

NorthTexan95 · August 30, 2011

Boise would kind of scare me. All they have to offer is winning football at this time. If that goes down then they offer absolutely nothing for us in a conference. I think they are working with a very slim margin. It's very hard to maintain a top ten program over the long haul and much, much, much harder to do it at a place like Boise. It wouldn't surprise me if five years from now they were fighting just to be in the top 20. I wouldn't be shocked if they were a .500 team. Maybe they can pull it off but the odds are against them.

Mean Green 93-98 · August 30, 2011

Boise would kind of scare me. All they have to offer is winning football at this time. If that goes down then they offer absolutely nothing for us in a conference. I think they are working with a very slim margin. It's very hard to maintain a top ten program over the long haul and much, much, much harder to do it at a place like Boise. It wouldn't surprise me if five years from now they were fighting just to be in the top 20. I wouldn't be shocked if they were a .500 team. Maybe they can pull it off but the odds are against them.

Yeah, that's one that could slide a couple slots if I did it again tomorrow. But only a couple of slots. Winning football may not be everything, but it's a whole lot. It's why Nebraska got an invite to the Big 10, while neither Iowa State nor Mizzou did. It's why TCU got an invite to a BCS conference, while neither SMU nor North Texas did.

And I'll have to disagree with your statement that Boise can't maintain a top 10 standing over the long haul. They have already done it over a pretty decent-sized haul. They've been there for long enough, I don't see anyone knocking them from their perch easily. Chris Petersen is only 46 years old, and it seems like he's there to stay. As long as he is, I don't see them staying out of the top 25 for more than a couple of years at a time.

akriesman · August 30, 2011

My top 10 from that list would be mostly geographic rivals, with some name recognition in either FB or Basketball.

Houston (regional and name recognition)

SMU (obvious)

Colorado State (name recognition from in state battles wtih Colorado U)

Air Force (armed forces draw well)

Memphis (name recognition in BB)

Southern Miss (much like NT, with a little more name recognition).

UTEP (texas school, even with distance)

Rice (texas school and regional)

New Mexico (still the top sports university in New Mexico

Tulsa (regional)

That's 4 schools from Texas.

ColoradoEagle · August 30, 2011

I would like to move to either conference, but CUSA has the edge now with their TV deal giving the conference a lot of exposure on FSN/FX. MWC had the opportunity to go to 12 by taking USU and UNT, but instead they decided to wait out the conference shift.

It may be a good decision in the end, but I can't help but feel like they're shooting themselves in the foot by not getting out of that awful "the Mtn" crap that no one outside of Colorado or Utah has access to unless they're on DirecTV. CUSA stands a real chance to pass up the MWC here in the next 3-5 years in perception unless the MWC can get its act together.

untcampbell · August 30, 2011

Throw in Tulane...every other year trip to New Orleans worth any downside.

Also, if you are going to mix a conference together with both public and private schools, it may be attractive to the SMU's and Tulsa's (Memphis also, right?) to have more rather than less private schools.

I am in KC and ICT today...lots of talk about A$M's move to the SEC.

This probably has been speculated in other arenas but the buzz up here is that Mizzou is a lock for a super conference, that Kansas best chance is to broker a partnership with Mizzou...and that Kansas State is unattractive in almost any scenario. I would guess an Iowa State may be viewed similarly.

I feel better about NT's chances in a super conference world if the remaining teams (current mid-majors, if you will) include some ex-major conference teams.

GMG

UNT Mean Green · August 30, 2011

Put:

North Texas

SMUt

Houston

Rice

UTEP

Tulsa

Tulane

La Tech

La-Monroe

Louisiana

New Mexico

New Mexico State

Arkansas State

Southern Miss

Memphis

Middle Tennessee

in a conference.

GrayEagle · August 31, 2011

Good exercise. I hadn't thought of doing it that way but probably because I know how it would come out. Seven of my Top 10 are in CUSA so they're bound to win.

Houston (natural rival, similar in size, academics and close enough for easy travel)

SMU (would be a great backyard brawl)

Air Force (always great to play a service academy and I actually have a discharge from the USAF)

Rice (well-known and close; should be a decent draw every year)

UTEP (Texas school and we have a good history with them)

Memphis (would help our basketball recruiting even more)

Louisiana (I love me some Cajun food)

Tulsa (some history from the MVC and a good regional opponent)

Colorado State (Mean Green vs. lean green)

Southern Miss (a lot of our staff passed through there)

Boise State (only because they're so good)

San Diego State (selfish; my daughter and her family live there)

Tulane (I love me some Cajun food...didn't I already say that?)

UNLV (great trip; I've made that one before)

New Mexico (good basketball; Southwest flies there)

In spite of that I think that the MWC will have the better teams and thus a higher ranking. It would not disappoint me if we were able to land in that conference. Our having the largest number of alumni in the DFW market would benefit the Mountain West moreso than CUSA.

Frankly, I don't expect that East Carolina and UCF will be in CUSA much longer if the Big East expands. If that happens CUSA may not even look as attractive as it does now. That's still not enough to dissuade me from eight teams that I'd really like for conference mates.

I also think that the Sun Belt will show improvement albeit at a slower rate. They should consider going to 12 teams even if it means a smaller payout for awhile.

Rudy · August 31, 2011

Personally, I would love to be in the MWC, but I do love the thought of playing Marshall every year. Huntington is very scenic and I love going up there for family reunions. It would be kind of fun to engage in a little trash talk with them since they are all Marshall fans, if not alums. Plus it would supply my dad and I with a nearly endless supply of Stewart Hot Dogs and Snyder Potato Chips.

Texas Stranger · August 31, 2011

Average rankings by conference
MWC 11.7
C-USA 13
Belt 24

It's a mighty narrow margin, but to my surprise, the MWC came out the winner. I'm not opposed to "building the Belt" if that ends up being our lot for the foreseeable future, but obviously I'm not nearly as excited by our affiliation with the Belt teams as I would be by either of the other two.

As you can tell, I didn't do any significant research for this, and I'm sure my rankings would vary slightly if I did them tomorrow.

But what say you?

What's skewing your MWC 'surprise' is Hawaii way too high (the travel is way too bad, La Tech B-S notwithstanding), and USM and especially Memphis too low.

untcampbell · August 31, 2011

I think we have to think about the next conference alignment regarindg teams that don't make the top 64 (4 conferences of 16 teams). Someone smarter than me can name the 64 teams but there will be some pretty interesting names that don't make the final. Then you start looking at where the remaining teams are regionally.

And most of all, mi amigos, the teams that aren't in the top 64 MUST agree that none of US plays one of THEM for less than $3million/game (unless they want to do a home and home).

Those 64 need a break from playing Alabama, LSU, Florida every week.

As a group, we cannot cheapen the currency. An "easy" week is worth a lot of money to the 64.

You won't go 12-0 against the other 63 teams...you will have to go through us to do that.

DON'T CHEAPEN THE CURRENCY.

(and yes, I expect that some of those "easy" games will backfire on the 64)

untjim1995 · August 31, 2011

My rankings on this are based on who would North Texas fans want to be in a conference with and who would give the most value to be associated with, athletically speaking.

1. Boise State--football powerhouse

2. SMU--rivalry for the Metroplex

3. Houston--school most like us

4. Air Force--nationally recognized program

5. UTEP--school very simlar to us

6. UCF--school we should have tried to emulate 15 years ago

7. Memphis--lots of benefits here, could get into BE eventually

8a. Colorado State--solid name program

8b. Fresno State--see CSU

9a. Nevada--old Big West school that has grown in name value

9b. UNLV--old hoops powerhouse that still has name value

10. Rice--old SWC team that gave us the low point of our FBS return in 2009 (77-20, could have easily been 105-20)

11. New Mexico--traditionally strong at hoops, solid name value

12. New Mexico State--old rival, not much history of success

13. Louisiana Tech--school that thinks much higher of itself than it should, easy road trip, better following than ULM

14. Southern Miss--solid football program, always an after-thought in their state because they aren't SEC (sound familiar?)

15. Hawaii--name program that provides travel nightmare

16. Texas State--oldest rival, in-state school that looks like us

17. MTSU--closest football "rival" we ever had in SBC

18. Western Kentucky--strong hoops, testy football games, only school Todd Dodge loved to play

19. ULL--nice road trip, usually bad football, great nickname

20. Arky State--old SLC/SBC rival, completely overshadowed by UA

21. Troy--Solid football program results, shady recruiting, small

22+ All others

CUSA has closer schools, no doubt, but none of them have ever shown an inkling of interest in being affiliated in a conference with us, especially SMU. MWC has some solid programs, but travel is more expensive--still would be a great conference to be a part of for both of the major sports. SBC is ok and the WAC sucks. That my $.02.