Karl Benson ready to get to work on new-look Sun Belt Conference

[GL2Greatness]

I see this so often and just don't agree. I may be proven wrong, but USF was in an different position from the outset. Their basketball was already in CUSA and had a decent following and they were able to recruit based on upcoming CUSA membership. UTSA has never had a sports following of any kind. Even now they are relying on the community to go to KFC to get tickets. Not sustainable in my opinion. If S.A. gets and stays behind the program, I will be surprised and incorrect on my assumption.

By the way, I have no ill will toward UTSA, just don't think the USF comparison will prove valid.

well so far in spite of starting off at a lower overall place they have managed not only to beat, but to soundly beat the attendance marks set by USF and you can continue to bring up giveaways all you wish, but that is just pretending that USF did not do the same and that other universities have not done the same...and it might not be "sustainable" but it sure beats the hell out of getting 15 or 17K and struggling to work your way up from there

and for those that talk about TxState and UTSA "paying their dues like UNT did".....what exactly do you mean by that.....do you mean by waiting 15 years playing in a stadium with metal bleachers 500 yards from the field of play before making any kinds of improvements or building a new facility, waiting 15 years before getting students behind an increase in student fees, waiting 15 years to hire proven head coaches that have winning overall records in D1-A, and building fan support (especially outside of students and alumni) right from the start, getting the overall university and administration behind increasing the profile of athletics, and then getting into a D1-A conference even if it is one that might have issues and fall apart (shout out to the Big West)

putting all of the above off for 15 years is not "paying your dues" it is sitting down at the table and expecting something to be handed to you instead of actually doing anything at all to earn it

I don't think that you want TxState and UTSA to "pay their dues like UNT did" I think what you want is for them to make the same decade and a half of mistakes that UNT did so they can struggle for any recognition and fan support like UNT did

and so far they are doing the exact opposite of that which I think is what so many on this forum have a concern about

Edited February 25, 2012 by GL2Greatness

[UNT90]

and then getting into a D1-A conference even if it is one that might have issues and fall apart (shout out to the Big West)

Coming from a member of The Big West II, that's just funny.

UTSA has zero facilities and attendance at the borrowed Alamodome will wilt next year. Mark it. Everyone in San Antonio will be back in their UT gear on Saturday afternoons. They were headed that way last November.

You talk about our poor decisions and poor football facility. You have no history, no success, AND NO FOOTBALL FACILITY. And you just started making decisions 3 years ago.

Concerned? I'm concerned about being in a conference with the worst teams in college football. And I'm not the one trying to justify my school's athletic program to fans of "a school that has made bad decisions for 15 years." Whose really concerned here.

Come see us in 10 years.

Edited February 25, 2012 by UNT90

[GL2Greatness]

Coming from a member of The Big West II, that's just funny.

UTSA has zero facilities and attendance at the borrowed Alamodome will wilt next year. Mark it. Everyone in San Antonio will be back in their UT gear on Saturday afternoons. They were headed that way last November.

You talk about our poor decisions and poor football facility. You have no history, no success, AND NO FOOTBALL FACILITY. And you just started making decisions 3 years ago.

Concerned? I'm concerned about being in a conference with the worst teams in college football. And I'm not the one trying to justify my school's athletic program to fans of "a school that has made bad decisions for 15 years." Whose really concerned here.

Come see us in 10 years.

you are already in the conference with the worst football programs in D1-A....and you are one of them

and UTSA may have "no facilities" and in their first season....but they still averaged about 15K more fans for the entire year in a facility that is not theirs (as if that actually matters to anyone) than UNT has ever averaged in any year

I look forward to the conclusion of next season when UTSA has averaged more fans for the year in a facility they do not own than UNT has and we can all hear more of the "give tickets away" and "their fans will go back to UT"

and we can see more hand wringing over the better OOC schedule they are building and hear how all those schools are going to screw them on the home game in SA and leave them hanging

point out that two programs are doing things early on in the process of starting a program or moving up to D1-A VS waiting 15 years to do them is only "trying to justify" their program if UNT pointing out all the things they waited for 15 years to do is UNT "justifying" their program to others as well

and if things hold true to course TxState and UTSA will not need to come see UNT in 10 years they will have better opportunities to choose from for conference mates and on the field opponents

because TxState and UTSA are doing things now not 10 or 15 years later

[UNT90]

you are already in the conference with the worst football programs in D1-A....and you are one of them

and UTSA may have "no facilities" and in their first season....but they still averaged about 15K more fans for the entire year in a facility that is not theirs (as if that actually matters to anyone) than UNT has ever averaged in any year

I look forward to the conclusion of next season when UTSA has averaged more fans for the year in a facility they do not own than UNT has and we can all hear more of the "give tickets away" and "their fans will go back to UT"

and we can see more hand wringing over the better OOC schedule they are building and hear how all those schools are going to screw them on the home game in SA and leave them hanging

point out that two programs are doing things early on in the process of starting a program or moving up to D1-A VS waiting 15 years to do them is only "trying to justify" their program if UNT pointing out all the things they waited for 15 years to do is UNT "justifying" their program to others as well

and if things hold true to course TxState and UTSA will not need to come see UNT in 10 years they will have better opportunities to choose from for conference mates and on the field opponents

because TxState and UTSA are doing things now not 10 or 15 years later

So funny coming from a member of the worst conference in football, which is the WAC.

I'm not justifying UNT's program to anyone. I'm talking to UNT fans about what is best for UNT. You chose to stick your nose into a conversation on the UNT fan board, insult UNT's program and fans, and proclaim the greatness of a program with one year of history and no facilities.

Tell me again, who is trying to justify what?

[cwb]

well so far in spite of starting off at a lower overall place they have managed not only to beat, but to soundly beat the attendance marks set by USF and you can continue to bring up giveaways all you wish, but that is just pretending that USF did not do the same and that other universities have not done the same...and it might not be "sustainable" but it sure beats the hell out of getting 15 or 17K and struggling to work your way up from there

and for those that talk about TxState and UTSA "paying their dues like UNT did".....what exactly do you mean by that.....do you mean by waiting 15 years playing in a stadium with metal bleachers 500 yards from the field of play before making any kinds of improvements or building a new facility, waiting 15 years before getting students behind an increase in student fees, waiting 15 years to hire proven head coaches that have winning overall records in D1-A, and building fan support (especially outside of students and alumni) right from the start, getting the overall university and administration behind increasing the profile of athletics, and then getting into a D1-A conference even if it is one that might have issues and fall apart (shout out to the Big West)

putting all of the above off for 15 years is not "paying your dues" it is sitting down at the table and expecting something to be handed to you instead of actually doing anything at all to earn it

I don't think that you want TxState and UTSA to "pay their dues like UNT did" I think what you want is for them to make the same decade and a half of mistakes that UNT did so they can struggle for any recognition and fan support like UNT did

and so far they are doing the exact opposite of that which I think is what so many on this forum have a concern about

My statements have nothing to do with comparing them to North Texas. I think UTSA is doing a fantastic job with what they have to work with. I simply don't think they will have the meteoric rise that USF has had. Stay on task please. I do think they will be able to have some success in 1A football though. That being said, if we do have to be tied to the hip with one of the twins, I would reather it be State because, even as touristy as it is, I dig that river. S.A.'s river is too much like Six Flags water.

Ain't getting in that. Needless to say, I do hope we are able to be with the likes of UTEP and Tulsa.

[PlummMeanGreen]

you are already in the conference with the worst football programs in D1-A....and you are one of them

and UTSA may have "no facilities" and in their first season....but they still averaged about 15K more fans for the entire year in a facility that is not theirs (as if that actually matters to anyone) than UNT has ever averaged in any year

I look forward to the conclusion of next season when UTSA has averaged more fans for the year in a facility they do not own than UNT has and we can all hear more of the "give tickets away" and "their fans will go back to UT"

and we can see more hand wringing over the better OOC schedule they are building and hear how all those schools are going to screw them on the home game in SA and leave them hanging

point out that two programs are doing things early on in the process of starting a program or moving up to D1-A VS waiting 15 years to do them is only "trying to justify" their program if UNT pointing out all the things they waited for 15 years to do is UNT "justifying" their program to others as well

and if things hold true to course TxState and UTSA will not need to come see UNT in 10 years they will have better opportunities to choose from for conference mates and on the field opponents

because TxState and UTSA are doing things now not 10 or 15 years later

With all that is between the lines of your post...we can feel your pain. We were in the same place about 30 years ago. Get ready for a lengthy, wild and bumpy ride.

History? This old coach knows our history. Heck, we played his Miami Hurricane team in 1980; in fact, played them quite well.

http://youtu.be/GzlvY65vvQI

This! (the first of many to come)

http://youtu.be/mtBKaoXmTe0

GMG!

[rcade]

I see this so often and just don't agree. I may be proven wrong, but USF was in an different position from the outset. Their basketball was already in CUSA and had a decent following and they were able to recruit based on upcoming CUSA membership.

You're right about them being in CUSA for other sports, but anyone they recruited in 1997, when they began playing football, never played in the top level of college football. They played the first four seasons as a FCS independent, became an FBS school in 2001 as an independent, then joined CUSA football in 2003. CUSA couldn't have been much of a recruiting advantage in those first five years.

As a Florida resident, I watched them rise up from nothing. They ran football out of trailers at the beginning. UTSA already has the same advantages they did -- football-crazy state, big city with no local college team, big enrollment -- and didn't start as small.

[rcade]

That being said, if we do have to be tied to the hip with one of the twins, I would reather it be State because, even as touristy as it is, I dig that river. S.A.'s river is too much like Six Flags water.

Ain't getting in that.

Hilarious. I'm surprised Six Flags isn't a Superfund site.

[UNTX]

you are already in the conference with the worst football programs in D1-A....and you are one of them

and UTSA may have "no facilities" and in their first season....but they still averaged about 15K more fans for the entire year in a facility that is not theirs (as if that actually matters to anyone) than UNT has ever averaged in any year

I look forward to the conclusion of next season when UTSA has averaged more fans for the year in a facility they do not own than UNT has and we can all hear more of the "give tickets away" and "their fans will go back to UT"

and we can see more hand wringing over the better OOC schedule they are building and hear how all those schools are going to screw them on the home game in SA and leave them hanging

point out that two programs are doing things early on in the process of starting a program or moving up to D1-A VS waiting 15 years to do them is only "trying to justify" their program if UNT pointing out all the things they waited for 15 years to do is UNT "justifying" their program to others as well

and if things hold true to course TxState and UTSA will not need to come see UNT in 10 years they will have better opportunities to choose from for conference mates and on the field opponents

because TxState and UTSA are doing things now not 10 or 15 years later

Hi, Checkfacts, TodgeRodge, roddog5, GL2Greatness:

Why do you keep coming up with new and different handles, on this and different forums? Your writing style and contempt for UNT will give you away every time.

Guys, this person is not, as far as I know, a Texas State or UTSA alum or even a fan of those schools. It's the same guy that's got a serious hate-on for UNT and that vomits that hatred on various forums all over the net. I don't think he's ever provided an actual accounting for why he despises UNT so much, or what UNT ever did to him.

Checkfacts (or whatever of your multiple identities is currently manifesting itself),

We get that you think UNT is steaming pile of shit. You've been making that clear for years now. If you really want to make some kind of impact why don't you see if you can talk to UNT officials and get an audience to hear your complaints. This is a fan board for people who actually attended and care for our university. I don't get your psychlogical need to come over here and other places and constantly trash the school. It seriously just makes you look like a very troubled, unstable, and pathetic individual that doesn't have anything better to do other than mount a negative campaign against a university all over the Internet.

It's sad, but I don't feel sorry for you. Now piss off.

[UNT90]

Hi, Checkfacts, TodgeRodge, roddog5, GL2Greatness:

Why do you keep coming up with new and different handles, on this and different forums? Your writing style and contempt for UNT will give you away every time.

Guys, this person is not, as far as I know, a Texas State or UTSA alum or even a fan of those schools. It's the same guy that's got a serious hate-on for UNT and that vomits that hatred on various forums all over the net. I don't think he's ever provided an actual accounting for why he despises UNT so much, or what UNT ever did to him.

Checkfacts (or whatever of your multiple identities is currently manifesting itself),

We get that you think UNT is steaming pile of shit. You've been making that clear for years now. If you really want to make some kind of impact why don't you see if you can talk to UNT officials and get an audience to hear your complaints. This is a fan board for people who actually attended and care for our university. I don't get your psychlogical need to come over here and other places and constantly trash the school. It seriously just makes you look like a very troubled, unstable, and pathetic individual that doesn't have anything better to do other than mount a negative campaign against a university all over the Internet.

It's sad, but I don't feel sorry for you. Now piss off.

That explains a lot.

Thanks for the info.

[rjmunthe]

um...

the endowment information was linked....TxState has had a larger endowment since 2008....they are 10% higher now at 110 million VS 100 million for UNT

Uh, no, look at the statistics. This is not true. Where you are getting your info is beyond me...US News and World report disagrees with you...next time, stay away from Wikipedia statistics.

the admissions requirements for UNT are 950 SAT for 16-25% of HS class ranking.....they are 930 for TxState.....1050 for second quarter at UNT 1010 for TxState......they are both 1180 for 3rd quarter

First off, you have a 75.5% acceptance rate which is ridiculously stupidly high; a near open university and your ratings aren't even good enough to put you in a National Universities category, your school is still considered "Regional". Look at US News for proof. SAT scores are not the only option. Just because you have a blanket requirement doesn't mean you accept everyone with a 950+ SAT score...but keep trying.

http://www.admissions.txstate.edu/future/freshman/getting-accepted.html

http://www.unt.edu/vwbk/admission.htm

those are hardly significant differences considering those are not extremely high scores and that puts UNT pretty much below UH and TxState right below UNT in the emerging research and public universities in Texas

Once again, no, read up on statistics, our endowment, and academic standards are much higher and are getting even higher come Fall. No proof yet, but the statistics out are proof enough of our academic superiority

the name TxState is a great name and it was a wise decision to make the change and many UNT fans are upset they got the name when UNT had wanted the name and been denied in the past

You do realize how SWTSU got that name right? They conceded to the state of Texas and accepted Texas State-San Marcos. You are not Texas State, You are Texas State-San Marcos. Hyphen. Just like UTSA and hell, even UT-Tyler or UTA.

UTSA has a much lower admissions standard and they were near open enrollment until recently when the TAMU-K-SA campus opened and it became TAMU-SA and that will be the university to take students with lower admissions while UTSA will move towards higher selectivity and higher graduate enrollment

Where are you getting your info, once again?

and isn't it hard for a school that is 36K, with 5 million plus in the metro area, and 100K+ alumni in the area, a brand new stadium, and decades in D1-A to call out a school on attendance that is in a much smaller market, with lower enrollment, and fewer alumni nearby that is just moving up to D1-A for the first time...especially when the difference is only a couple of thousand

Well considering we've been piss poor for five years and have a history of apathetic football while UTSA is the only football in the area (attendance will not remain this high, I'd bet a thousand bucks on it. And Texas State can't sell out their mediocre sized stadium playing in the FCS Championships, why would they sell out a 34K stadium? Furthermore, our attendance would've likely been higher had the MTSU and FAU games not been a disaster weather wise. But that's an excuse; the point remains when we win, attendance will come. SWTSU wins in FCS and people still don't come.

and it is not trolling when factual information with verifiable sources is provided

So try again.

Edited February 26, 2012 by rjmunthe

[GL2Greatness]

So try again.

1. here is the listing for endowments....TxState has had the higher endowment since 2008

http://www.nacubo.org/Documents/research/2011_NCSE_Public_Tables_Endowment_Market_Values_Final_January_17_2012.pdf

372 Texas State University-San Marcos TX 119,711 94,709 26.4

390 University of North Texas TX 110,735 82,513 34.2

the US News does not use endowment specifically as one of their criteria and US News is just as bad of a source as wikipedia.....and I have not provided any wiki stats.....I have provided stats from recognized organizations that collect endowment data yearly from several hundred universities and I have provided stats from the THECB which audits all state universities and publishes those metrics......next time you should try and provide any proof of anything you are saying......because so far you have provided nothing and attempted to ignore the truth

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/09/12/methodology-undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights-2012

again endowment is not a listed criteria and you have provided no link to US News listing endowment information.....while I have provided a link to the NACUBO that conducts a yearly endowment study and has done so for about a decade or more

2. the % of students admitted means nothing.....it is a bogus statistic because it assumes the university has control of how many students apply and the qualifications of those students......who applies to a university and how qualified they are is out of the control of the university.....anyone can submit an application and any quantity of people can submit an application, but that factor is out of control of the university which means the number is irrelevant

if one university has very high entrance requirements and they have 100 applicants and 100 of them are qualified they would have a 100% acceptance rate....while another university can have very low admissions standards and have 500 applicants and only 100 are qualified and they would have a 20% acceptance rate.......and the quality and quantity of those applicants are out of control of the university.......this always plays into the hands of private universities especially because those universities have individual applications and those universities have much more control of who they admit outside of their guaranteed admissions...so students will often apply hoping they will make alternate admissions......while state universities often have general state applications and have guaranteed admissions......just like it states on the UNT website below....GUARANTEED admissions...so students can use a single application and only apply to the schools they know they will be admitted to......which lowers the number of applicants VS privates that have much more flexibility in admissions and much more freedom to use financial aid as an incentive...so students will take a chance and hope to make alternate admissions or individual review and then look at any potential financial aid availability as well

it is a useless metric....the metric that is meaningful is what standards a student has to meet for admissions and what metrics those that were admitted had upon admission.....not a % of admitted that relies on factors outside of the control of the university like total number of applicants

some rankings use % admitted, but that is why those rankings are not respected....because those factors are meaningless and easy to manipulate as are many of the other factors they use

since I am sure you will question that as well

here is proof

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/03/rankings

3. the US News rankings and National VS regional categories are not based on a ranking....they are based solely on the number of PhDs graduated at a university

and the US News uses the Carnegie Foundation Classifications to make those categories.....to be classified (the Carnegie Foundation does not rank universities they classify) a DRU or higher by the Carnegie Foundation a university needs to graduate more than 20 research based PhD students per year.....the US News bases national universities on being a DRU or higher and regional as classified outside of the DRU.....TxState will have graduated 20+ research based PhDs and will be a DRU or higher when the next Carnegie Classifications come out.....which means they will be a US News national university....and the Carnegie Foundation specifically states their classifications are not a basis of quality

here is proof

http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/resources/faqs.php

Where are the Carnegie rankings?

The Carnegie Foundation does not rank colleges and universities. Our classifications identify meaningful similarities and differences among institutions, but they do not imply quality differences.

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/09/05/methodology-best-colleges-ranking-category-definitions

The Carnegie classification has been the basis of the Best Colleges sorting system since our first ranking was published in 1983,

and before you say any comments about UNT graduating more research based PhDs.....remember that TxState only has 10 PhD programs VS 35 for UNT and TxState still does more total research and more restricted research than UNT does with restricted research being the first criteria needed for NRUF funding

so with over a 3rd less Phd programs than UNT TxState still is a more productive overall research university and they are adding PhD programs while UNT is actually reducing PhD programs down from 50 in the past

4. http://www.unt.edu/admission/

notice where it says AUTOMATIC ADMISSIONS

notice where it says applicants will BE GUARANTEED ADMISSIONS

notice that website has the brand new tagline green light to greatness

http://www.unt.edu/vwbk/admission.htm

notice the dates on there.....admission for FALL 2012.....is MARCH FIRST 2012.....so that is this fall......with those GUARANTEED ADMISSIONS REQUIREMENTS

I provided the proof......right from the UNT and TxState websites......those are the fall 2012 guaranteed admissions standards for automatic admission......again anyone can apply, but all that meet those requirements will be accepted.....that is not debatable.....there is no super top secret selectivity......there are only the metrics listed for each university that each student must achieve to be guaranteed admission and the required deadlines for submitting proof of meeting those metrics.....and the metrics I linked to are for the fall of 2012

you do not have proof because what you are saying is false....it is proven false right there on the UNT website where the deadline for early admission for fall of 2012 is less than a month away.....and the guaranteed admissions criteria are specifically listed....so again the proof of what I am saying is right there and the disproof of what you are saying is right there

you can ignore that as you wish.....but you will be ignoring the truth

5. is this actually some type of argument...related to academics....the use of a hyphen in a name?

really you think that has some meaning?...seems more like desperation on your part sort of like ignoring the stated admissions requirements above.....but hey if adding -San Marcos to a name makes you feel academically superior in spite of multiple listed statistics then I guess that is what you will have to clutch at because you have provided nothing of value or any proof so far...but that does not seem to stop you

6. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/article/Regents-toughen-UTSA-admissions-requirements-3206561.php

there is proof that UTSA is raising their admissions

7.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf'>http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf

TxState averaged 12,805 in 2010 playing in D1-AA

UNT averaged 17,718

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf'>http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf

in 2011 UNT was 18,864 in their new 30K stadium

TxState was 15,107 still in D1-AA in a stadium that holds 15,968 after the first round of renovations

so if opening your new stadium and being 12K+ below available seating on attendance while having played in D1-A for the last 15 years makes you feel better then have at it

and UTSA averaged 35K+ (in a stadium they DO NOT EVEN OWN!) as if that makes ant difference to anything.....in their first year ever of football.....so they would have had to turn away fans if they "owned" a stadium the size of the one at UNT......while UNT was 12K short of a sellout average

and you bring up WINNING!...TxState was 6-6 last year in D1-AA.....UNT was 5-7 in D1-A

they were 4-7 in 2010...how many years back do you need to go to claim their fans don't show up

in 03 the best year for UNT in decades you averaged under 19K

TxState averaged 10,500 that year...and they were 4-8 in D1-AA

so it looks like TxState is growing their attendance while not doing much of significance and still not even fully in D1-A while UNT can claim about 18K when they win and about 18K when they open a new stadium

TxState will be D1-A this year and have a 30k+ stadium that has just been remodeled for the second time in the last few years after coming off of a 6-6 season in D1-A while UNT will be in the second year in a new stadium after going 5-7

so 2012 will be a great year to compare....I would not be looking to UNT to be much over what they had this year and I would look for TxState to be well over what they had last year

and UTSA was double both + some

so again sounds like a lot of excuse making on your part....but hey we can see from the above that you like to ignore the reality of readily available information and ignore words like GUARANTEED ADMISSION and the like in favor of some super top secret and yet to be revealed stats that you have that shows how superior UNT is Vs TxState.....and we have not even discussed total research, restricted research, or 4,5 and 6 year graduation %....which TxState is higher in

I am looking forward to your

Edited February 26, 2012 by GL2Greatness

[PlummMeanGreen]

(In response to GL2Greatness manifesto)

With all that then why aren't yall in the Ivy League for heaven's sake?

You have impressed all except our expected 37,000 enrollment for this Fall and 209,000 North Texas Exes living in the DFW Metroplex (and that among 300,000 plus world-wide alums). I'm going to venture out here with this but I will bet few will be persuaded to join the Bobcat Club based on your numbers and figures. We're impressed. You need to go impress those in the Sun Belt Conference now who will do the voting come expansion time.

Yet any school can find links to give it a lead on any other said school or to fit an agenda, but keep in mind these leads can only be of a temporary variety, especially when it versus a school like the main campus of the DFW- based UNT System. (We are not a one horse town here).

Endowment can fluctate just as quickly upward as they can downward and said school's investments have much to do with that. We just had an alum from Southeast Asia who gave UNT $20 million of which that is pocket change for what the man is worth and its been said that he will have much more for North Texas in the future and with that man's kind of monies it can very quickly become a game-changer in the area of a school's endowment coffers.

I do like your stadium but not too crazy about a track being inside it. We've been there-done that one.

GMG!

Edited February 26, 2012 by PlummMeanGreen

[NT71]

Harry in revisiting your post that began this thread and providing two quotes my greatest concern with Benson is his track record.

If memory serves correctly he was at the head of the conference (WAC) when the split occurred into the Mountain West and WAC. He currently is jumping ship from commissioner of the WAC to Sunbelt and you have the same issues that were in the WAC split.

Many of the former football schools in the WAC have been bailing or trying to bail some successfully into CUSA and others wishful thinking. The WAC is sinking and without a commissioner will probably fade into the sunset concerning football. Then the question begins of the remaining schools that play football will the Sunbelt become the new WAC/Sunbelt conference?

With the landscape of the Conference Shuffle still on-going my guess is that behind the scene activity between NT and other potential conference mates we maybe moving soon into the alliance. My rationale is the TV market and fertile recruiting ground in TX high school Metroplex. Only time will tell.

[tylermeangreen]

you are already in the conference with the worst football programs in D1-A....and you are one of them

and UTSA may have "no facilities" and in their first season....but they still averaged about 15K more fans for the entire year in a facility that is not theirs (as if that actually matters to anyone) than UNT has ever averaged in any year

I look forward to the conclusion of next season when UTSA has averaged more fans for the year in a facility they do not own than UNT has and we can all hear more of the "give tickets away" and "their fans will go back to UT"

and we can see more hand wringing over the better OOC schedule they are building and hear how all those schools are going to screw them on the home game in SA and leave them hanging

point out that two programs are doing things early on in the process of starting a program or moving up to D1-A VS waiting 15 years to do them is only "trying to justify" their program if UNT pointing out all the things they waited for 15 years to do is UNT "justifying" their program to others as well

and if things hold true to course TxState and UTSA will not need to come see UNT in 10 years they will have better opportunities to choose from for conference mates and on the field opponents

because TxState and UTSA are doing things now not 10 or 15 years later

YAWN!

[rjmunthe]

1. here is the listing for endowments....TxState has had the higher endowment since 2008

http://www.nacubo.org/Documents/research/2011_NCSE_Public_Tables_Endowment_Market_Values_Final_January_17_2012.pdf

372 Texas State University-San Marcos TX 119,711 94,709 26.4

390 University of North Texas TX 110,735 82,513 34.2

the US News does not use endowment specifically as one of their criteria and US News is just as bad of a source as wikipedia.....and I have not provided any wiki stats.....I have provided stats from recognized organizations that collect endowment data yearly from several hundred universities and I have provided stats from the THECB which audits all state universities and publishes those metrics......next time you should try and provide any proof of anything you are saying......because so far you have provided nothing and attempted to ignore the truth

US News and World Report reports on endowments. They have different numbers of the endowment dollars versus UNT and Texas State, thus the reason why UNT is ahead of TSU-SM in the Tier 1 race. THECB audits but is not official. We can agree to disagree. You got THECB from Wikipedia.

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/09/12/methodology-undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights-2012

again endowment is not a listed criteria and you have provided no link to US News listing endowment information.....while I have provided a link to the NACUBO that conducts a yearly endowment study and has done so for about a decade or more

The point there is that UNT is a far superior school to TSU-SM.

2. the % of students admitted means nothing.....it is a bogus statistic because it assumes the university has control of how many students apply and the qualifications of those students......who applies to a university and how qualified they are is out of the control of the university.....anyone can submit an application and any quantity of people can submit an application, but that factor is out of control of the university which means the number is irrelevant

if one university has very high entrance requirements and they have 100 applicants and 100 of them are qualified they would have a 100% acceptance rate....while another university can have very low admissions standards and have 500 applicants and only 100 are qualified and they would have a 20% acceptance rate.......and the quality and quantity of those applicants are out of control of the university.......this always plays into the hands of private universities especially because those universities have individual applications and those universities have much more control of who they admit outside of their guaranteed admissions...so students will often apply hoping they will make alternate admissions......while state universities often have general state applications and have guaranteed admissions......just like it states on the UNT website below....GUARANTEED admissions...so students can use a single application and only apply to the schools they know they will be admitted to......which lowers the number of applicants VS privates that have much more flexibility in admissions and much more freedom to use financial aid as an incentive...so students will take a chance and hope to make alternate admissions or individual review and then look at any potential financial aid availability as well

it is a useless metric....the metric that is meaningful is what standards a student has to meet for admissions and what metrics those that were admitted had upon admission.....not a % of admitted that relies on factors outside of the control of the university like total number of applicants

So you don't understand statistics now? How they work? Obviously you got your education from TSU-SM. Have you ever applied to a Texas college? It's not guaranteed. The way it works is those are the requirements, but if 10K+ students with really good grades apply that are way above the minumum, obviously those get in over the minimum. So you don't understand statistics nor the College Board.

some rankings use % admitted, but that is why those rankings are not respected....because those factors are meaningless and easy to manipulate as are many of the other factors they use

since I am sure you will question that as well

here is proof

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/03/rankings

3. the US News rankings and National VS regional categories are not based on a ranking....they are based solely on the number of PhDs graduated at a university

and the US News uses the Carnegie Foundation Classifications to make those categories.....to be classified (the Carnegie Foundation does not rank universities they classify) a DRU or higher by the Carnegie Foundation a university needs to graduate more than 20 research based PhD students per year.....the US News bases national universities on being a DRU or higher and regional as classified outside of the DRU.....TxState will have graduated 20+ research based PhDs and will be a DRU or higher when the next Carnegie Classifications come out.....which means they will be a US News national university....and the Carnegie Foundation specifically states their classifications are not a basis of quality

here is proof

http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/resources/faqs.php

Where are the Carnegie rankings?

The Carnegie Foundation does not rank colleges and universities. Our classifications identify meaningful similarities and differences among institutions, but they do not imply quality differences.

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/09/05/methodology-best-colleges-ranking-category-definitions

The Carnegie classification has been the basis of the Best Colleges sorting system since our first ranking was published in 1983,

and before you say any comments about UNT graduating more research based PhDs.....remember that TxState only has 10 PhD programs VS 35 for UNT and TxState still does more total research and more restricted research than UNT does with restricted research being the first criteria needed for NRUF funding

so with over a 3rd less Phd programs than UNT TxState still is a more productive overall research university and they are adding PhD programs while UNT is actually reducing PhD programs down from 50 in the past

Do you understand what "endowment" dollars means? Obviously not. It doesn't show whether one is more productive than another. Furthermore, our endowment dollars are higher according to the report submitted by the state of Texas to US News.

4. http://www.unt.edu/admission/

notice where it says AUTOMATIC ADMISSIONS

notice where it says applicants will BE GUARANTEED ADMISSIONS

notice that website has the brand new tagline green light to greatness

http://www.unt.edu/vwbk/admission.htm

notice the dates on there.....admission for FALL 2012.....is MARCH FIRST 2012.....so that is this fall......with those GUARANTEED ADMISSIONS REQUIREMENTS

I provided the proof......right from the UNT and TxState websites......those are the fall 2012 guaranteed admissions standards for automatic admission......again anyone can apply, but all that meet those requirements will be accepted.....that is not debatable.....there is no super top secret selectivity......there are only the metrics listed for each university that each student must achieve to be guaranteed admission and the required deadlines for submitting proof of meeting those metrics.....and the metrics I linked to are for the fall of 2012

you do not have proof because what you are saying is false....it is proven false right there on the UNT website where the deadline for early admission for fall of 2012 is less than a month away.....and the guaranteed admissions criteria are specifically listed....so again the proof of what I am saying is right there and the disproof of what you are saying is right there

you can ignore that as you wish.....but you will be ignoring the truth

Guaranteed =/= Minimum. Sorry, child, your logic is embarrassing.

5. is this actually some type of argument...related to academics....the use of a hyphen in a name?

really you think that has some meaning?...seems more like desperation on your part sort of like ignoring the stated admissions requirements above.....but hey if adding -San Marcos to a name makes you feel academically superior in spite of multiple listed statistics then I guess that is what you will have to clutch at because you have provided nothing of value or any proof so far...but that does not seem to stop you

Name me some good hyphenated schools. I can name you good directional schools.

6. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/article/Regents-toughen-UTSA-admissions-requirements-3206561.php

there is proof that UTSA is raising their admissions

So, UTSA is raising standards to UTA levels. No longer open admission. Cool.

7.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf'>http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf

TxState averaged 12,805 in 2010 playing in D1-AA

UNT averaged 17,718

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf'>http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2011/Attendance.pdf

in 2011 UNT was 18,864 in their new 30K stadium

TxState was 15,107 still in D1-AA in a stadium that holds 15,968 after the first round of renovations

so if opening your new stadium and being 12K+ below available seating on attendance while having played in D1-A for the last 15 years makes you feel better then have at it

and UTSA averaged 35K+ (in a stadium they DO NOT EVEN OWN!) as if that makes ant difference to anything.....in their first year ever of football.....so they would have had to turn away fans if they "owned" a stadium the size of the one at UNT......while UNT was 12K short of a sellout average

and you bring up WINNING!...TxState was 6-6 last year in D1-AA.....UNT was 5-7 in D1-A

they were 4-7 in 2010...how many years back do you need to go to claim their fans don't show up

in 03 the best year for UNT in decades you averaged under 19K

TxState averaged 10,500 that year...and they were 4-8 in D1-AA

so it looks like TxState is growing their attendance while not doing much of significance and still not even fully in D1-A while UNT can claim about 18K when they win and about 18K when they open a new stadium

TxState will be D1-A this year and have a 30k+ stadium that has just been remodeled for the second time in the last few years after coming off of a 6-6 season in D1-A while UNT will be in the second year in a new stadium after going 5-7

so 2012 will be a great year to compare....I would not be looking to UNT to be much over what they had this year and I would look for TxState to be well over what they had last year

and UTSA was double both + some

Texas State won the FCS Championship in 2010. Surely you'd expect fans to come out, right, to support their championship team? Nope, they don't. And when they end up 1-11 for a few years in the WAC, it will continue to drop. Do you really think they'll come in and own the FBS and people will want to come watch them? Nope. And as of right now, UTSA has a leg up in attendance. But like a new relationship in a honeymoon period, you can expect it to drop next year. The fact of the matter is, when you have seven losing seasons in a row...see how your attendance would go then. Our attendance when we were good is irrelevant; we had just come up from FCS, and played in the worst stadium in the NCAA. Houston and Indiana attendance prove there is a fanbase out there. We pulled 29K to a game versus Houston opening a new stadium after an embarrassing loss on the road, then 22K after an embarrassing loss to Houston to open our stadium, oh and don't forget about Alabama game.

so again sounds like a lot of excuse making on your part....but hey we can see from the above that you like to ignore the reality of readily available information and ignore words like GUARANTEED ADMISSION and the like in favor of some super top secret and yet to be revealed stats that you have that shows how superior UNT is Vs TxState.....and we have not even discussed total research, restricted research, or 4,5 and 6 year graduation %....which TxState is higher in

And you fail at being able to read and analyze things, or use accredited sources. Of course Texas State-San Marcos grad rates are higher, lower standards and it's easier to get into...obviously they will have a better graduation rate. Total research $ UNT outnumbers Texas State-San Marcos.

I am looking forward to your

Please stop calling Texas State-San Marcos Texas State.

Edited February 26, 2012 by rjmunthe

[UNT90]

This D-bag should be banned for using the new marketing slogan as his screen name in a Terribly veiled attempt to make it seem like he is a UNT fan.

BIH, Checkfacts.

[GL2Greatness]

US News and World Report reports on endowments. They have different numbers of the endowment dollars versus UNT and Texas State, thus the reason why UNT is ahead of TSU-SM in the Tier 1 race. THECB audits but is not official. We can agree to disagree. You got THECB from Wikipedia.

can you provide the US News endowment listings

I have not sourced WIKI one time....I sourced the NACUBO....The National Association of College and University Business Officers...that is clear in the link....you have sourced out of your ass so far

and do you even know what the THECB is.....it is the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board....they have nothing to do with wiki and they are the STATE organization that is in charge of approving public university programs, degree programs, reporting on Texas public universities, and keeping track of all the metrics dealing with those universities including the metrics for NRUF funding

and the first metric that must be met before all others to obtain NRUF funding is 45 million in restricted research.....TxState is ahead of UNT in restricted research funding.....one of the 6 criteria that must have 4 of them met is 400 in endowment....TxState is ahead of UNT in that as well

here is a link again from the THECB (not wiki and nothing to do with WIKI and audited by the STATE organization that is in charge of reporting on university performance)

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gJ2Q-CXdV1UJ:www.thecb.state.tx.us/reports/xls/1260.xls+UNT+total+research+expenditures+2011&cd=29&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

here is a direct link to it for those that have Excel or Excel viewer.....for those that do not have a clue Excel is a spreadsheet program....nothing to do with wiki

www.thecb.state.tx.us/reports/xls/1260.xls

here is further proof of the restricted research expenditures for UNT for 2010 and 2011

for those that do not understand how the internettubes works that link below is a direct link to an actual UNT website that tracks restricted research expenditures for UNT....it is not a wiki link....it has nothing to do with wiki......and the numbers for 2010 and 2011 match exactly with the numbers from the THECB.....which is a state organization not wiki......and for those that do actually understand statistics the THECB website shows that TxState is doing over 1/3 more restricted research than UNT is in 2011

http://research.unt.edu/sites/default/files/FY11_RR_Expenditures.pdf

2011-2007

Univ. of Houston $53,100,109 $56,564,687 $50,130,712 $38,787,095 $37,471,361

Texas Tech $50,205,458 $50,071,546 $35,030,672 $27,098,487 $28,701,355

UT at Dallas $43,659,514 $40,906,393 $36,829,369 $36,768,849 $32,842,019

UT at El Paso $40,179,653 $37,813,868 $30,227,283 $26,067,537 $25,954,436

UT at San Antonio $30,429,992 $28,084,442 $25,526,758 $21,013,453 $19,598,686

UT at Arlington $29,869,344 $32,288,186 $26,555,703 $23,138,951 $19,905,338

Texas State - San Marcos $19,078,112 $17,778,634 $13,336,491 $11,300,309 $8,137,690

University of North Texas $14,476,509 $13,293,480 $11,240,239 $9,378,481 $8,178,519

So you don't understand statistics now? How they work? Obviously you got your education from TSU-SM. Have you ever applied to a Texas college? It's not guaranteed. The way it works is those are the requirements, but if 10K+ students with really good grades apply that are way above the minumum, obviously those get in over the minimum. So you don't understand statistics nor the College Board.

do you understand how ANYTHING works....do you understand what it CLEARLY says on the UNT website.....do you even know how to READ....do you understand what the terms GUARANTEED ADMISSIONS means

if 10,000 students apply to UNT with being in the top 16%-25% of their high school class and a 950 on their SAT they are GUARANTEED admissions to UNT......that is what the term GUARANTEED means.....and if they are in the second 25% and have a 1050 they are GUARANTEED admission

if 10,000 students apply to TxState and are in the top 16% to 25% and have a 930 on their SAT they are GUARANTEED admission and for the second 25% if they have a 1010 they are GUARANTEED admissions

so UNT has GUARANTEED admissions that are only slightly higher than TxState.....and since the date for early admission for UNT in the fall of 2012 is less than a week away....UNT is not increasing their admissions for 2012.....GUARANTEED

as for the stats comment....obviously you do not understand how anything works....because the number of applicants to a university is out of control of the university and the quality of those applicants is out of control of the university so that means the denominator in the stat for acceptance % for a university is out of control of the university.....which means that statistic is meaningless in comparison of a university to another based on % admitted

what is "the college board".....is that one of the super top secret organizations and things you are making up to try and pretend you know what you are talking about?

Do you understand what "endowment" dollars means? Obviously not. It doesn't show whether one is more productive than another. Furthermore, our endowment dollars are higher according to the report submitted by the state of Texas to US News.

do you know what you are talking about.....we already discussed endowment above....I have provided proof from the NACUBO study.....and I do not believe that the THECB submits anything to the US News as far as endowments usually it is US News contacting the individual universities and or they are the ones that use wiki....because their numbers are always wrong.....and PS you answered something dealing with RESTRICTED RESEARCH talking about endowment...again in a feigned attempt to try and have something in a huge bag of nothing

Guaranteed =/= Minimum. Sorry, child, your logic is embarrassing.

what is embarrassing is that you clearly can't read and do not understand what the words GUARANTEED ADMISSIONS means.....and if I am a child then I am a child that is completely embarrassing you in this discussion....that would be great for you if this website was not a website open for all in the world to see....and to see your poor reading abilities, your poor grasp of the term GUARANTEED and your childish attempts to insult someone instead of actually supporting what you are stating...I do not think anyone would be impressed with UNT as a university based on your responses much less your grasp of well....anything

Name me some good hyphenated schools. I can name you good directional schools.

again as this means anything.....but just to further embarrass you lets see

here is a list of AAU members....for those that do not know the AAU is considered the most prestigious academic organization in the USA and has nothing to do with WIKI

http://www.aau.edu/about/default.aspx?id=5476

UC Davis

UC San Diego

UC Irvine

UCLA

UC Berkeley

UC Santa Barbara

University of Colorado @ Boulder

University of Wisconsin-Madison

University on Illinois @ Urbana-Champaign (has @ and a hyphen!!)

SUNY-Buffalo

University of Maryland College Park

University of Michigan Ann Arbor

Indiana University Bloomington

University of Minnesota Twin Cities

University of North Carolina Chapel Hill

University of Texas @ Austin

University of Missouri-Columbia

SUNY-Stoney Brook

there is one directional USC so you have hope!!

hey wow for a moment there I thought you might be onto something with that whole hyphen hype.....but then it all came crashing down like all the other extremely weak replies you have offered so far

excuse making about attendance

your excuse making about attendance is not worth more than this reply...

and oh yea....it was Eastern Washington that won the 2010 D1-AA championship.....TxState has never even played in one much less won one at least since 1978....so again do you even have a clue?

perhaps you are mistaking Sam Houston playing in the 2011 game for TxState.....TxState was 4-7 in 2010....so no I would not expect their fans to support a false championship that does not exist for a team that was 4-7.....but I do expect you to reply with more made up BS because that is all you have done so far...besides showed your inability to read or know what you are talking about...or source any of your claims....and make attendance excuses...but other than that you are on to something

And you fail at being able to read and analyze things, or use accredited sources. Of course Texas State-San Marcos grad rates are higher, lower standards and it's easier to get into...obviously they will have a better graduation rate. Total research $ UNT outnumbers Texas State-San Marcos.

lets see here...you have provided no sources.....you have ignored the links right to the UNT admissions site that have GUARANTEED written all over them....you do not even know what the THECB is and think it has something to do with wiki.....and the idea that lower admissions and being slightly easier to get into is a reason their graduation rates is higher seems counter intuitive at best....but hey that type of false logic has not stopped you so far.....it seems your inability to read is holding you back though....and your inability to know what you are talking about

and what is "college board"

unfortunately for you many others can read this.....and that is not looking good for you or for UNT...because they will actually have a clue, read the links that I provided, notice your lack of links to anything, your made up "college board".....your lack of logic, and your desperation

but hey you have to go with what you have!

This D-bag should be banned for using the new marketing slogan as his screen name in a Terribly veiled attempt to make it seem like he is a UNT fan.

BIH, Checkfacts.

so by default UNT fans have to trash other schools with impunity, ignore the information that is readily available from multiple credible sources including the UNT website and the THECB and excuses about attendance are only allowed for UNT.....and if you do not like the truth then it is ban them

pretty uninformed and clueless way to go through life and sounds like a good way to always be wondering why others are doing the things you wish to be doing.....or is that because of SMU.....even though the SMU holds us back is easily proven false as well and not even using wiki

Edited February 26, 2012 by GL2Greatness

[UNT90]

so by default UNT fans have to trash other schools with impunity, ignore the information that is readily available from multiple credible sources including the UNT website and the THECB and excuses about attendance are only allowed for UNT.....and if you do not like the truth then it is ban them

pretty uninformed and clueless way to go through life and sounds like a good way to always be wondering why others are doing the things you wish to be doing.....or is that because of SMU.....even though the SMU holds us back is easily proven false as well and not even using wiki

Your still here?

Why do you use our new marketing slogan to pretend to be a fan of a school you so clearly hate?

D-Bag move. Go back to whatever rock you crawled out from underneath.