Two-For-One

shaft · January 30, 2012

http://wvgazette.com/Sports/Marshall/201201290166

The local Marshall paper talks merger and the 7 win rule. Nothing really new, but it does make fun of SMU basketball.

UNTFan23 · January 30, 2012

The only way I can think UTSA gets any mention is the fact it is an upstart program. How can anyone know what they have to offer other than they're going to be an FBS school in a couple years?

meangreenbob · January 30, 2012

It's pathetic that UNT is not mentioned in that article. How sad that utsa, fiu, fau and latech are seen as a more viable candidates. FREAKING UNBELIEVABLE!

I guess our leaders are making sure everyone concerned knows WE are not interested in leaving the Belt because we have nothing to offer another league.

UNTflyer · January 30, 2012

The only way I can think UTSA gets any mention is the fact it is an upstart program. How can anyone know what they have to offer other than they assume they're going to be an FBS school in a couple years?

UNTflyer · January 30, 2012

It's pathetic that UNT is not mentioned in that article. How sad that utsa, fiu, fau and latech are seen as a more viable candidates. FREAKING UNBELIEVABLE!

I guess our leaders are making sure everyone concerned knows WE are not interested in leaving the Belt because we have nothing to offer another league.

It's West Virginia... they probably don't know how to spell UNT.

Mo Green · January 30, 2012

What the other school's have that we don't is a effective AD ( especially utsa).

VideoEagle · January 30, 2012

Nice find Shaft. My takeaway from the article is NO ONE has much by way of details on the merger yet since the details simply are not DONE yet. First they have to work out what they are going to do with the schools in CUSA and MWC, then they consider expansion. The writer of the article was clear there is no lack of potential candidates and just gave a few examples. He made clear his was not an exhaustive list. Calm down folks, the sky is not falling!

PlummMeanGreen · January 30, 2012

Nice find Shaft. My takeaway from the article is NO ONE has much by way of details on the merger yet since the details simply are not DONE yet. First they have to work out what they are going to do with the schools in CUSA and MWC, then they consider expansion. The writer of the article was clear there is no lack of potential candidates and just gave a few examples. He made clear his was not an exhaustive list. Calm down folks, the sky is not falling!

Of course, most the, uh, "finds" about anything CUSA is on the CUSA board. http://ncaabbs.com/s....php?tid=551823

Why Their Attitude Toward North Texas.....Possibly? The CUSA folks out east (all 2 of them) do not like North Texas ( at least the ones who've been out of their diapers a few years) because (a theory here) I'm sure some realize we have a true (albeit modest NCAA legacy) from the 50's, 60's, 70's and on (and they don't have even that) plus some older ones (especially from ECU) remember what UNT did as a Major Independent before we went into our 40 year walk in the wilderness of hiring assistant coaches non-stop to be HFC and then our hiring some of the worst ancillary athletic personnel in the history of the NCAA (some of whom kept getting extended contracts with under .500 career wins) and some who kept bullshitting our alums into thinking we were a real juggernaut of a program (albeit one with most varsity programs well under .500 in their multi-year stays in Denton) Get it? I digress, moving on......................... and also back in the day........

......an era when we were ranked near the top of Major Indy's for several years (even Top 20 polls a couple of times) and the East Carolina U Pirates as a Major Indy' were not and for what its worth their school was mostly back then a....................."WHO?" (And to many down here they're still a "who" with all their "un-noticed by the Big East Conference" success and outstanding attendance numbers. Unless the Pirates report those attendance numbers on these kind of boards (like their CUSA board, for instance) :rolleyes: the only ones who seemedly are going to know about those numbers are the ones who show up at their stadium for their games. The eastern seaboard media for damn sure are not impressed with ECU or they would be in the Big East now. Some from ECU (smack board posters lest we forget) would promote anything except North Texas with some of the above background as mostly likely their main reasoning and the glaring fact that North Texas is in a major TV market which is (unfortunately) inimidating to some in smaller markets who don't realize what such markets can do for their TV dollars take-home; but again, we are talking about posters from message boards who will not have a vote at the table when that day comes.

GMG!

Edited January 30, 2012 by PlummMeanGreen

emmitt01 · January 30, 2012

The only way I can think UTSA gets any mention is the fact it is an upstart program. How can anyone know what they have to offer other than they're going to be an FBS school in a couple years?

Let me make this simple. They averaged 35,521 last season in attendance.

35,521....even with the Rangers in the playoffs, even without southern California type weather every game, even with Texas/OU taking place. I KNOW IT WAS THE INAUGURAL SEASON...and I don't care. From the outside looking in (CUSA) all that matters is that a 1A startup with no football history CRUSHED a school with a brand new stadium, and well known aspirations to join CUSA, at the turnstiles.

Someone will trot out the same old lame excuses now but the only FACTS that exist are this. UTSA drew against teams that people have truly never heard of...we drew flies for a 4-2 home record in a new stadium.

SilverEagle · January 30, 2012

Let me make this simple. They averaged 35,521 last season in attendance.

35,521....even with the Rangers in the playoffs, even without southern California type weather every game, even with Texas/OU taking place. I KNOW IT WAS THE INAUGURAL SEASON...and I don't care. From the outside looking in (CUSA) all that matters is that a 1A startup with no football history CRUSHED a school with a brand new stadium, and well known aspirations to join CUSA, at the turnstiles.

Someone will trot out the same old lame excuses now but the only FACTS that exist are this. UTSA drew against teams that people have truly never heard of...we drew flies for a 4-2 home record in a new stadium.

You mean like the same lame excuses for why schools like Boise State (not a university until the 70's) South Florida (no football team until late 90's) FAU, who until recently consistently owned us, have passed us by?

This is the time of the year when planning for this fall takes place. If changes are to be made IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NOW! Please don't let another spring go by with the "same ol', same ol' still in place.

forevereagle · January 30, 2012

Let me make this simple. They averaged 35,521 last season in attendance.

35,521....even with the Rangers in the playoffs, even without southern California type weather every game, even with Texas/OU taking place. I KNOW IT WAS THE INAUGURAL SEASON...and I don't care. From the outside looking in (CUSA) all that matters is that a 1A startup with no football history CRUSHED a school with a brand new stadium, and well known aspirations to join CUSA, at the turnstiles.

Someone will trot out the same old lame excuses now but the only FACTS that exist are this. UTSA drew against teams that people have truly never heard of...we drew flies for a 4-2 home record in a new stadium.

Just out of curiosity, didn't UTSA give away free tickets to people who were just walking by? Don't they get to count all "sold" tickets towards attendance? If I recall, pictures from the stadium during games didn't look like they had 35k+ in the stands. Maybe my memory is just bad.

untbowler · January 30, 2012

What the other school's have that we don't is a effective AD ( especially utsa).

Shhhh!!! That's blasphemy on this board.

UNTLifer · January 30, 2012

Let me make this simple. They averaged 35,521 last season in attendance.

35,521....even with the Rangers in the playoffs, even without southern California type weather every game, even with Texas/OU taking place. I KNOW IT WAS THE INAUGURAL SEASON...and I don't care. From the outside looking in (CUSA) all that matters is that a 1A startup with no football history CRUSHED a school with a brand new stadium, and well known aspirations to join CUSA, at the turnstiles.

Someone will trot out the same old lame excuses now but the only FACTS that exist are this. UTSA drew against teams that people have truly never heard of...we drew flies for a 4-2 home record in a new stadium.

Honestly, since when did attendance become a requirement for conference affiliation? SMU draws 12,000 a game, reports more and is now in the Big East. Gasp, they've also done it without a baseball team. There is much more that goes into conference movement than attendance, and I would bet it is way down the line of importance.

SilverEagle · January 30, 2012

Honestly, since when did attendance become a requirement for conference affiliation? SMU draws 12,000 a game, reports more and is now in the Big East. Gasp, they've also done it without a baseball team. There is much more that goes into conference movement than attendance, and I would bet it is way down the line of importance.

Care to list the reasons why SMU continues to move up then? I'm not challenging you or anything.......I'm just stumped.

I mean, how do these guys keep getting invited when they have very minimal attendance, an alumni base that would cheat like hell if someone wasn't watching them all the time, and a very small # of graduates in the metroplex.

What the hell is it?

SilverEagle · January 30, 2012

Shhhh!!! That's blasphemy on this board.

Not as far as I'm concerned.......

untjim1995 · January 30, 2012

Care to list the reasons why SMU continues to move up then? I'm not challenging you or anything.......I'm just stumped.

I mean, how do these guys keep getting invited when they have very minimal attendance, an alumni base that would cheat like hell if someone wasn't watching them all the time, and a very small # of graduates in the metroplex.

What the hell is it?

They have lots of cash, tradition, and name recognition. Because of Doak Walker and the Death Penalty, SMU is still well known across the country. Heck, there are some media outlets that show "sympathy' for SMU for getting that death penalty because of the damage it inflicted. To me, it was very well-deserved, but you hear this line all the time when another college is in trouble for violations: "The NCAA will NEVER issue the death penalty again after it saw what happened to SMU."

SMUs location obviously helps them, too. They have lots of help from the local media in Dallas, esepcially at Belo owned subsidiaries. Add all of this together, and its not hard to see how they have moved upward--and help use their sway to keep other down...