Unbelievable- Benson Still Talking UNT/ULL

MeanGreen61 · October 16, 2011

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/sports/lamar/article/Lamar-does-not-fit-preferred-WAC-expansion-2220643.php#ixzz1ayMazVS0

Rudy · October 16, 2011

It WAS a better conference. "WAS" being the key word. If NT doesn't get into the MWC/CUSA, the Sun Belt will STILL be a better option. The WAC is about to die. If anything, the SBC should cherrypick the WAC and put it out of it's misery.

And let's make sure the SBC's HR department misplaces Benson's application.

PlummMeanGreen · October 16, 2011

Benson needs to wake up and l look at all this conference re-alignment climate again and attempt to figure out that the 'Belt is probably in a better position to cherry pick his league than he and the WAC are the SBC. Question: Which league has been the most stable the last 10 years?

Still doesn't want me to see UNT lose a big opportunity to get in the MWC and (maybe) even whatevers left of CUSA.

GMG!

Edited October 16, 2011 by PlummMeanGreen

bleedgreen4ever · October 16, 2011

It WAS a better conference. "WAS" being the key word. If NT doesn't get into the MWC/CUSA, the Sun Belt will STILL be a better option. The WAC is about to die. If anything, the SBC should cherrypick the WAC and put it out of it's misery.

And let's make sure the SBC's HR department misplaces Benson's application.

Uhmmm, excuse me, but if they get UNT and ULL, it won't be much weaker than the SB. The SB conference has for the most part been looked at as the worse conference in FBS for most of its existence. The WAC hasn't. Now, IF the SB can indeed cherry-pick the WAC, then so be it. However, that's exactly what the WAC is trying to do. They have a better overall reputation than the SB, even though they are dying out, I think they'll be able to regroup. The SB may end up being the conference that ceases to exist in the FBS. Take out FIU and MTSU for a CUSA/MWC. Take out UNT/ULL for the WAC. You're left with a declining Troy and an ASU desperately trying to get out of the conference. Texas State is joining the WAC, at least we'd have a good in-state rivalry. I don't see anything good or better about being in the SB. It has done nothing for NT.

Edited October 16, 2011 by bleedgreen4ever

UNT90 · October 16, 2011

Question: Which league has been the most stable the last 10 years?

And he would counter... Question: Which league has had zero, zip, nada teams move to a better conference the last 10 years, when moving to any other conference would have been a move up?

The Sun Belt has been stable because no other conference wants Sun Belt teams (except for the WAC, and just recently).

Denia Park Pedro · October 16, 2011

It suddenly occurs to me that if we can't get into CUSA or MWC going to the WAC with ULL wouldn't be terrible. With our two schools wouldn't it be a 9/12 league with only TX and LA schools in our non-football division? Merely thinking out loud, I've been pretty anti-WAC up to now and I'm not yet convinced it's a good option if we don't get into CUSA or MWC, but seems more worth consideration than it has in the past.

Keith7 · October 16, 2011

I understand why you guys don't want to go to the WAC now. But why are you guys salivating over the MWC? If Boise State leaves it will be nothing but the WAC 2.0.

We are still flying out to Hawaii, Nevada, Fresno, Wyoming, Colorado State, New Mexico. Wasn't the time of games and travel costs a big reason why we decided the old WAC was a bad idea?

UNT90 · October 16, 2011

I understand why you guys don't want to go to the WAC now. But why are you guys salivating over the MWC? If Boise State leaves it will be nothing but the WAC 2.0.

We are still flying out to Hawaii, Nevada, Fresno, Wyoming, Colorado State, New Mexico. Wasn't the time of games and travel costs a big reason why we decided the old WAC was a bad idea?

Because every single team you just named is more respected and well known than any in the Sun Belt Conference, right or wrong.

Not to mention the MWC isn't known as the worst fottball conference in FBS like the Sun Belt. Again, right or wrong.

That is the public perception, and going to the MWC would go a long way in changing UNT's perception inside the college football world, and, more importantly, with UNT's very own almuni.

El Paso Eagle · October 16, 2011

Not saying this would be my preference, but Benson has proven to be a very resourceful man over the years…. Maybe he knows something with respects to realignment we do not.

PlummMeanGreen · October 16, 2011

And he would counter... Question: Which league has had zero, zip, nada teams move to a better conference the last 10 years, when moving to any other conference would have been a move up?

The Sun Belt has been stable because no other conference wants Sun Belt teams (except for the WAC, and just recently).

+1 for that because you are absolutely right and thus the reason that some of us for awhile now have wanted a new conference. I mean isn't the American dream all about improving one's lot in life (or at least it used to be).

GMG!

Edited October 16, 2011 by PlummMeanGreen

rcade · October 16, 2011

If we don't get an invitation from CUSA-MWC, then I think NT should not completely continue to dismiss the WAC.

Joining the WAC would kill us. It's no better than the Belt and the travel and TV times are terrible.

Rudy · October 17, 2011

I beg to differ. Staying in the belt has already killed us. The WAC is far from ideal, but having TX State and a better reputation, joining them along with ULL possibly, would be better than staying in the Belt.

Really? Brand new stadium, new facilities all around, spending more $$ for a coach, etc. And how does having TSU, a baby D1 team, make the WACky a better conference?

bleedgreen4ever · October 17, 2011

Really? Brand new stadium, new facilities all around, spending more $$ for a coach, etc. And how does having TSU, a baby D1 team, make the WACky a better conference?

Uhmmm.....please do tell how being in the SB made us get better facilities and fiscal expenditures??? We have taken those initiatives on our own in order to get the heck out of the SB. And did I ever say that having TSU makes it a BETTER conference? I was talking about the potential in-state rivalry benefit. Something the belt never offered. ULL could have a better rivalry with LATech than with ULM. I don't follow your logic on how on earth the Belt is benefiting us.

Edited October 17, 2011 by bleedgreen4ever

GreenMachine · October 17, 2011

Not saying this would be my preference, but Benson has proven to be a very resourceful man over the years…. Maybe he knows something with respects to realignment we do not.

Impossible, posters on GoMeanGreen.com know absolutely everything.

CMJ · October 17, 2011

I beg to differ. Staying in the belt has already killed us. The WAC is far from ideal, but having TX State and a better reputation, joining them along with ULL possibly, would be better than staying in the Belt.

Really? I think the Sunbelt kinda saved us. Nearly every one of our sports, from football to tennis to basketball, has had a run of success in the Belt. I'm not saying the league is the be all end all or anything, but it's been very good for us across the board.

A conference that almost killed us was the Big West.

NM Green · October 17, 2011

Look at us trying to lick up to TSU to get into a conference with them.

WOW. Can next Saturday come soon enough!

Not to mention you take our bbal team into basketball venues that regularly draw 17k (The Pit) and UNLV which outdraws most to all bball progams in the west and you are in a better league. I say kill the WAC and develop a new conference but joining a WAC with Idaho, SJSU and USU is a tragic thought.

If we really want to be in a league with UTSA and TSU form a new league but this let's try to join a league so we can keep up with TSU and UTSA is frankly offensive.

GO MEAN GREEN!!!!!

P.S. - love the post about support your team. The homily today was entitled: Endurance Leads to Hope. Nut it up Nation and support this awesome team. We have risen from ashes before and we will do so again. GMG

bleedgreen4ever · October 17, 2011

Really? I think the Sunbelt kinda saved us. Nearly every one of our sports, from football to tennis to basketball, has had a run of success in the Belt. I'm not saying the league is the be all end all or anything, but it's been very good for us across the board.

A conference that almost killed us was the Big West.

I disagree. Just because we have been having good runs in other sports in the Belt, doesn't mean the conference itself has "saved" us. In football, which dictates everything for the most part, the SB hasn't helped us. In basketball, it's our coach who has strengthened the program, not the belt. Why hasn't any team in 10 years still not moved out of the belt? I doubt it's because they all enjoy being in the belt so much because it's such a prestigious conference. The WAC is tough to know whether it will survive and get stronger or die out. If we join along with a couple other FBS teams, then it will become stronger than the Belt. Thing is, should we take the risk? Sometimes you have to take risks. What we really want, of course, is to get an invitation from CUSA/MWC, and therefore not have this unnecessary debate.

Edited October 17, 2011 by bleedgreen4ever

TheTastyGreek · October 17, 2011

I disagree. Just because we have been having good runs in other sports in the Belt, doesn't mean the conference itself has "saved" us. In football, which dictates everything for the most part, the SB hasn't helped us. In basketball, it's our coach who has strengthened the program, not the belt. Why hasn't any team in 10 years still not moved out of the belt? I doubt it's because they all enjoy being in the belt so much because it's such a prestigious conference. The WAC is tough to know whether it will survive and get stronger or die out. If we join along with a couple other FBS teams, then it will become stronger than the Belt. Thing is, should we take the risk? Sometimes you have to take risks. What we really want, of course, is to get an invitation from CUSA/MWC, and therefore not have this unnecessary debate.

If I've got my timeline right (and you grew up in Flower Mound), you started attending UNT sometime in 2007.

You have no idea what the situation was like for our sports in the late 90's compared to how they changed when we joined the Sun Belt.

I'm not claiming to be a school historian... But I know what things were like in 1998, and I know how different they were in 2002. As much as I look forward to moving on, the Sun Belt was and continues to be a critical life preserver and an essential foundation that allowed us to build (literally: the AC and Apogee) for a much brighter future.

bleedgreen4ever · October 17, 2011

If I've got my timeline right (and you grew up in Flower Mound), you started attending UNT sometime around 2007.

You have no idea what the situation was like for our sports in the late 90's compared to how they changed when we joined the Sun Belt.

I'm not claiming to be a school historian... But I know what things were like in 1998, and I know how different they were in 2002. As much as I look forward to moving on, the Sun Belt was and continues to be a critical life preserver and an essential foundation that allowed us to build (literally: the AC and Apogee) for a much brighter future.

First of all, I did not grow up in Flower Mound, and I started attending UNT way before 2007. Nice try though. Second of all, I am fully aware of the bad athletic situation in the 90's. The SB was a fine conference to start up with in the 2000s, but it is not our savior and it is not the reason why, we, as an institution, decided to improve our athletics. Realize that this athletic turnaround has to do with the school's overall master plan, with an ultimate goal of becoming a tier 1 public research institution and national recognition leads to that, along with money to increase our endowment and research initiatives. If it wasn't for that, you could have forgotten about this school ever paying any attention to it's athletics. The SB can't be credited for the leaps the university has made, sorry. In that case, lets credit the WAC for forming such a potent Boise St football program, and good Nevada and Fresno State programs (all far superior to any SB team).

Edited October 17, 2011 by bleedgreen4ever

NT03 · October 17, 2011

The SunBelt won't be around too much longer. Once superconferences form we will probably be on the outside looking in unless MWC/C-USA gets raided and we somehow get in. Some act like it would be a shoe in , but the likes of La Tech,Troy,WKU,UTSA all have a shot.

If the Belt is raided it will not be able to survive unless it does somekind of merger w / the MAC or WAC. While every other conference commish sees this and is being proactive , our commish has done nothing. He pretty much retired a long time ago.

Say what you want about Benson , but the man sees what is about to happen. Only way to survive is to get as many teams as you can into your conference. The days of 10 to 12 teams per conference will soon be a thing of the past.

Take Seattle out and I'm all in for the WAC. It's bound to eventually happen unless the new MWC/CUSA gives us a look see.

Edited October 17, 2011 by NT03

Rudy · October 17, 2011

Uhmmm.....please do tell how being in the SB made us get better facilities and fiscal expenditures??? We have taken those initiatives on our own in order to get the heck out of the SB. And did I ever say that having TSU makes it a BETTER conference? I was talking about the potential in-state rivalry benefit. Something the belt never offered. ULL could have a better rivalry with LATech than with ULM. I don't follow your logic on how on earth the Belt is benefiting us.

Well, our athletics programs nearly went bankrupt in the days of the Big West. So, in that sense, the SBC has benefitted us. As to why no schools have moved "up", it probably has alot to do with many of the schools seem to not hve made a definitive goal to improve, until recently. As to why the MWC would be better than the WAC, the best schools from the WAC are now MWC.

bleedgreen4ever · October 17, 2011

Well, our athletics programs nearly went bankrupt in the days of the Big West. So, in that sense, the SBC has benefitted us. As to why no schools have moved "up", it probably has alot to do with many of the schools seem to not hve made a definitive goal to improve, until recently. As to why the MWC would be better than the WAC, the best schools from the WAC are now MWC.

LOL what??? When did I talk about the MWC not being better than the WAC?

CMJ · October 17, 2011

I disagree. Just because we have been having good runs in other sports in the Belt, doesn't mean the conference itself has "saved" us. In football, which dictates everything for the most part, the SB hasn't helped us. In basketball, it's our coach who has strengthened the program, not the belt. Why hasn't any team in 10 years still not moved out of the belt? I doubt it's because they all enjoy being in the belt so much because it's such a prestigious conference. The WAC is tough to know whether it will survive and get stronger or die out. If we join along with a couple other FBS teams, then it will become stronger than the Belt. Thing is, should we take the risk? Sometimes you have to take risks. What we really want, of course, is to get an invitation from CUSA/MWC, and therefore not have this unnecessary debate.

Okay...boil it down to football. Attendance since joining the Belt is so far above the Big West it can't be stated. If you really date back as far as the Big West days, you'll remember how bad some of those games could be. We're talking maybe 2K fans in the stands by November.

shaft · October 17, 2011

Die WAC Thread! Die!

The new WAC, MAC, & SBC all have the same payout. So why are we talking about going to a conference with less bowl tie-ins and foot print that drives up costs in all sports?