UTSA to Sun Belt?

Coach Andy Mac · April 23, 2012

A local UTSA football blogger/podcaster tweeted today that UTSA won't be invited to the CUSA/MWC (and UNT will be) (for what it is worth).

Here's his twitter stream:

https://twitter.com/#!/CokerChronicles

If that's the case, will UTSA be in the Sun Belt in 2013?

How about Texas State?

Is the Sun Belt going to get to 12 football playing teams with a conference championship game?

Who is in the conference in 2013?

Would Sun Belters be happy with the addition of UTSA and Texas State?

View the full article

Jonnyeagle · April 23, 2012

Obviously just rumors now, but they're making me happy!

UNTexas · April 23, 2012

If we stay in the SBC having Texas State and UTSA in our conference would be cool. That being said, I don't think UNT will be in the SBC much longer. No matter what we have a bright future. After going to the Spring Game I am really excited about our team.

mgfan · April 23, 2012

"heard from a guy who knows a guy that says UTSA will not be invited to MWC/CUSA."

Good source.

UNTflyer · April 23, 2012

If we stay in the SBC having Texas State and UTSA in our conference would be cool.

No, it would be a disaster and would set the conference back several years. Expansion by bringing up FCS programs is going to permanently place the SBC in the armpit of college athletics.

If Benson were smart (and every indication suggests otherwise) he would be looking to bring what remains of the WAC (sans UTA and UTSA) into the Sun Belt, eliminating competition and weakening the position of the Alliance to expand.

untwillrise · April 23, 2012

Sunland conference

UNT90 · April 23, 2012

No, it would be a disaster and would set the conference back several years. Expansion by bringing up FCS programs is going to permanently place the SBC in the armpit of college athletics.

If Benson were smart (and every indication suggests otherwise) he would be looking to bring what remains of the WAC (sans UTA and UTSA) into the Sun Belt, eliminating competition and weakening the position of the Alliance to expand.

Can't get outta here fast enough.

It looks like Benson is bound and determined to make the Sun Belt the gateway to major college football, and in the process cement the Belt's reputation as the worst conference in major college football, a stigma the Belt has worked long and hard to debunk.

Dear Lord, please let the announcement that we are gone come quickly!

kalebschumann · April 23, 2012

I think the overall sentiment is this:

-Play crappy other Texas teams... But at least we don't have to travel out of state, so it'll be a fun day.

-Play not crappy teams... But we will have to travel out of state (or a long way in state).

From a fan's perspective- I don't care who we play, as long as it's near and we can win.

From a persepctive of the program in the long run- I want to get into the better conference.

Rudy · April 23, 2012

"heard from a guy who knows a guy that says UTSA will not be invited to MWC/CUSA."

Good source.

Did he say this before he passed out on 31 flavors last night?

Daddy Dumpsalot · April 23, 2012

If we stay in the SBC having Texas State and UTSA in our conference would be cool.

Seriously? Maybe we should invite SFA and Sam Houston too...and perhaps ACU. Nothing says progress like adding all these established power houses.

kalebschumann · April 23, 2012

Seriously? Maybe we should invite SFA and Sam Houston too...and perhaps ACU. Nothing says progress like adding all these established power houses.

The real question is: Which Community College do we bring in first?

GrayEagle · April 23, 2012

Can't get outta here fast enough.

It looks like Benson is bound and determined to make the Sun Belt the gateway to major college football, and in the process cement the Belt's reputation as the worst conference in major college football, a stigma the Belt has worked long and hard to debunk.

Dear Lord, please let the announcement that we are gone come quickly!

I agree with what you are saying except where do you get your replacements when we (and others) leave? The two Texas universities will technically be move-overs from the WAC. I don't think that the SBC would want Idaho and San Jose State, and maybe not even New Mexico State. So they have to refill membership from somewhere. If they get the best move-ups it will eventually strengthen the conference. They need to get the best markets available (Atlanta, Charlotte, San Antonio) and strong teams (Appalachian State) to buffer future raids by better conferences.

Just because the Sun Belt is an entry-level conference doesn't mean that they are/will be a weak conference. There won't be that many move-ups so the conference will become more and more stable. They could reach a limit and there will be no more FBS teams in number (or a new FBS conference is sanctioned). In the meantime the SBC will continue to improve and strengthen the conference. At least they're being aggressive in improving their conference. They have passed the soon to be defunct WAC and probably the MAC (they definitely have in attendance). They'll have their pick of the best area teams that want to move up so they should continue improving their status.

Those that want to advance from the FCS to the FBS will be eternally grateful.

wardly · April 23, 2012

whatever the Belt does in the future will not effect North Texas other that as interested observers. we are going to CUSA along with FIU."book em, Dano!"

UNTexas · April 23, 2012

Seriously? Maybe we should invite SFA and Sam Houston too...and perhaps ACU. Nothing says progress like adding all these established power houses.

Seriously? Sam Houston would have destroyed us in football last year. I don't get this attitude that we are some big bad powerhouse. We aren't. Sure things are looking up but get real. The numbers don't lie. Last time I checked we were a 1aa team trying to move up and it wasn't that long ago.

rjmunthe · April 23, 2012

Seriously? Sam Houston would have destroyed us in football last year. I don't get this attitude that we are some big bad powerhouse. We aren't. Sure things are looking up but get real. The numbers don't lie. Last time I checked we were a 1aa team trying to move up and it wasn't that long ago.

Does it really matter, though? Sam Houston is FCS and that includes the stigma that follows them around. There isn't an attitude. However, we've paid our dues, dominated the Sun Belt for years pre-Dodge, and things are looking up. Furthermore, we have history.

Mean Green 93-98 · April 23, 2012

UTSA has clearly stated that they view whatever conference they enter as a stepping-stone to C-USA. And C-USA has apparently told UTSA, "Give it a few years in another FBS conference, and then there's a good chance." So both sides of that equation have effectively said, "We want to use the WAC/Sun Belt as our farm system."

I don't blame UTSA for having those ambitions, and I don't blame C-USA for taking that approach. But why would a conference (e.g., the Belt) help a school leapfrog the teams in its conference? Why would a conference knowingly help develop teams for another conference?

Edited April 23, 2012 by Mean Green 93-98

MeanGreenTexan · April 23, 2012

Seriously? Sam Houston would have destroyed us in football last year. I don't get this attitude that we are some big bad powerhouse. We aren't. Sure things are looking up but get real. The numbers don't lie. Last time I checked we were a 1aa team trying to move up and it wasn't that long ago.

And that's part of the reason why several of us are cool with bringing TX St. along. UTSA? Nah.

GreenFlag · April 23, 2012

I don't blame UTSA for having those ambitions, and I don't blame C-USA for taking that approach. But why would a conference (e.g., the Belt) help a school leapfrog the teams in its conference? Why would a conference knowingly help develop teams for another conference?

Because you want to be the best you can be and you never know what the future holds. Would you rather take a team that has no budget, facilities, market, or aspirations?

Mean Green 93-98 · April 23, 2012

Because you want to be the best you can be and you never know what the future holds. Would you rather take a team that has no budget, facilities, market, or aspirations?

UTSA has no facilities. As for aspirations, I assume every startup program has aspirations. The only thing I see UTSA contributing is TV market. And San Antone is the #37 market--while decent, it's nothing to get excited about.

Personally, I think the Belt should invite Texas State-SM and New Mexico State, thereby killing the WAC.

NorthTexan95 · April 23, 2012

UTSA has no facilities. As for aspirations, I assume every startup program has aspirations. The only thing I see UTSA contributing is TV market. And San Antone is the #37 market--while decent, it's nothing to get excited about.

Personally, I think the Belt should invite Texas State-SM and New Mexico State, thereby killing the WAC.

New Mexico State agrees with this post.

GreenFlag · April 23, 2012

UTSA has no facilities. As for aspirations, I assume every startup program has aspirations. The only thing I see UTSA contributing is TV market. And San Antone is the #37 market--while decent, it's nothing to get excited about.

Personally, I think the Belt should invite Texas State-SM and New Mexico State, thereby killing the WAC.

My point was get the best you can. I agree with you on UTSA's facilities.

UNT90 · April 23, 2012

UTSA has clearly stated that they view whatever conference they enter as a stepping-stone to C-USA. And C-USA has apparently told UTSA, "Give it a few years in another FBS conference, and then there's a good chance." So both sides of that equation have effectively said, "We want to use the WAC/Sun Belt as our farm system."

I don't blame UTSA for having those ambitions, and I don't blame C-USA for taking that approach. But why would a conference (e.g., the Belt) help a school leapfrog the teams in its conference? Why would a conference knowingly help develop teams for another conference?

Perhaps you should become more familiar with Karl Benson's body of work.

aztecskin · April 24, 2012

I just wanted to tell you all good luck. We are all counting on you.

Also, who trusts information from a UTSA blog?

TXST_CAT · April 25, 2012

No, it would be a disaster and would set the conference back several years. Expansion by bringing up FCS programs is going to permanently place the SBC in the armpit of college athletics.

If Benson were smart (and every indication suggests otherwise) he would be looking to bring what remains of the WAC (sans UTA and UTSA) into the Sun Belt, eliminating competition and weakening the position of the Alliance to expand.

Let's be honest. Most of you are not so concerned about us moving up so much as having to play us every year. What's worse playing in a conference with recent move up. Or losing to recent move ups. Truth is UNT has done little to separate from TXST and UTSA has a huge advantage with San Antonio. Doesn't matter if UNT goes to CUSA if you guys just remain at doormat status. Even if you guys try to avoid us on your schedule if we are winning and you guys are losing, we will be the better program.

UNTflyer · April 25, 2012

Let's be honest. Most of you are not so concerned about us moving up so much as having to play us every year. What's worse playing in a conference with recent move up. Or losing to recent move ups. Truth is UNT has done little to separate from TXST and UTSA has a huge advantage with San Antonio. Doesn't matter if UNT goes to CUSA if you guys just remain at doormat status. Even if you guys try to avoid us on your schedule if we are winning and you guys are losing, we will be the better program.

Let's be honest. No one here really spends much time worrying about losing to Texas State.

Edited April 25, 2012 by UNTflyer