Baylor/TCU Cancel Each Other Out in B12--UNT's Time Is Now!

[PlummMeanGreen]

And yes, I know, here I am talking about two Big 12 schools with Baylor & TCU compared to a school in Conference-USA, but consider this which might make some degree of sense:

If Baylor was ever going to win a Big 12 football championship wouldn't this have been the season for the Top 10 Bears to do so? Well, they won't this year or the next or the next--that's just the way it will most always be in the Big 12 for the private schools Just too many UT, OU's and OSU's for that to ever happen for the Bears or the TCU Frogs.

TCU will most likely have a few bright moments from time to time much like in their old SWC days.......but just watch & see-- they will be like the TCU of that old (now defunct) Southwest Conference and spend most of their Big 12 years in its 2'nd division & when the Frogs are actually bowl elgible (which they are not this bowl season) they will play in similar bowl games North Texas will be participating.

So does said Texas HS or JUCO recruits want to play on a Big 12/2'nd Division TCU and play in a bowls like the Liberty, Holiday, Military or Hawaii Bowls or does that same recruit want to come help the University of North Texas Mean Green win a few Conference USA football championships and play in bowls no different than 2'nd division TCU (and many years even Baylor) will be playing in?

UNT's time is now--we need to put a string of winning seasons together with sellouts at Apogee Stadium (which I almost believe our growth will cause us to back into such crowds eventually).

GMG!

Edited December 1, 2013 by PlummMeanGreen

[MeanGreen01]

I know it's a little hard to think about recruits from Big 12 and ConfUSA but I see your logic and would agree with it. Just depends if TCU can start winning quickly in their first couple seasons in the Big12. If they can start winning and be in the running for Big12 championships then this isn't the case. But if they have similar seasons more regularly like they did this year, then recruits would be better off playing at North Texas. Especially if we continue to have seasons like we did this year. I really believe that if we can get a couple seasons in a row like this year, keep Mac for a long time, we will be invited to join the American Conference. I would love to see us playing for that conference. Later, being invited to the Big12 as well.

[emmitt01]

Ummm Baylor isn't out of the Big XII title discussion Plumm. If OU wins the "Bedlam" game, and Baylor beats UT, then Baylor would win the conference. This is FAR from an impossible scenario. Baylor will be favored in Waco and Auburn just proved what can happen in an inter-state rivalry game.

[FirefightnRick]

Better question is... Why did a football thread get moved to the Eagle Nest?

Rick

[EagleGreen]

Well, TCU does suck this year and UNT has been good this year but, so far, just one year. It's a good recruiting tool, but I don't think it's gonna change Texas CFB

[10Eagle10]

Ummm Baylor isn't out of the Big XII title discussion Plumm. If OU wins the "Bedlam" game, and Baylor beats UT, then Baylor would win the conference. This is FAR from an impossible scenario. Baylor will be favored in Waco and Auburn just proved what can happen in an inter-state rivalry game.

I expect Floyd Casey Stadium to be pretty raucous next Saturday in that game. Last game for the Bears before they move to their new palace on the Brazos. They're even adding new seats for this finale

http://www.wacotrib.com/sports/baylor/football/pulling-apart-the-case/article_4afc2290-4b19-5013-b9b4-e7ec9beb1012.html

Edited December 1, 2013 by 10Eagle10

[Harry]

With TCU and SMU down it certainly helps to have an 8-4 season.

[JRock]

Yes it does Harry. Yes it does.

[ragpicker]

Our potential is there and I think it is just a matter of time and continued winning.

[EagleGreen]

Continued winning is key! Just ask Florida.

Edited December 2, 2013 by EagleGreen

[GrayEagle]

I like the positive pub for North Texas but I don't exactly see how this relates to Baylor. Since there are no divisions in the Big 12, if both Oklahoma State and Baylor win next Saturday they are co-champs and Baylor will be in the Cotton Bowl and that would trump any bowl that we can be in.

Plus, Texas A&M will be in the Cotton Bowl and that will reduce a lot of our luster. What could be worse is that Texas wins over Baylor Saturday and they're the Aggies opponent. And, the two bowls are only a day apart.

We'll enjoy the day if we're in Dallas but we won't have the DFW area all to ourselves.

[PlummMeanGreen]

I like the positive pub for North Texas but I don't exactly see how this relates to Baylor. Since there are no divisions in the Big 12, if both Oklahoma State and Baylor win next Saturday they are co-champs and Baylor will be in the Cotton Bowl and that would trump any bowl that we can be in.

Plus, Texas A&M will be in the Cotton Bowl and that will reduce a lot of our luster. What could be worse is that Texas wins over Baylor Saturday and they're the Aggies opponent. And, the two bowls are only a day apart.

We'll enjoy the day if we're in Dallas but we won't have the DFW area all to ourselves.

Jack, you are right. (BTW, enjoyed our visit at our last home game, too). And this thread title & theme more of a projection for UNT's future than the actual present.

What I call 2'nd division in the Big 12 are those schools who finish #7 all the way down to last. Probably a better term than 2'nd division.

On your last sentence which I highlighted: When have we ever had the DFW area to ourselves (ever) even with our over 200,000 UNT alums and a school enrollment which will one day be over 40,000? With those numbers and consecutive winnning seasons along with a few Top 25 ranked teams (a la the MAC seems to have every Fall) and some Mean Green bowl wins over significant schools we can for sure have a huge hunk of the DFW Metroplex and..................... dash forever TCU Coach Gary Patterson's thinking that his Froggies will "become the team for North Texas." (yuk-yuk). Last I checked, the Froggies have not fared too well in their first 2 years in the Big 12.

TCU Coach Gary Patterson: Listening to his post-game comments on the BU player who really should have been led out of ACS after his horrific personal foul on the TCU player but still this.........."come on, Gary, Baylor's coach lost his brother only days earlier in a car crash---give him a little slack, perhaps?" (Why didn't the Big 12 officials make sure that BU player was in the locker room in the first place and not back on the Bear's bench)?

Edited December 2, 2013 by PlummMeanGreen

[Eagle1855]

Plus, Texas A&M will be in the Cotton Bowl and that will reduce a lot of our luster. What could be worse is that Texas wins over Baylor Saturday and they're the Aggies opponent. And, the two bowls are only a day apart.

If I'm the Cotton Bowl, I'm taking LSU.

[UNTFan23]

If I'm the Cotton Bowl, I'm taking LSU.

If I'm a Arlington resident, I'm calling the city council to complain about the last time LSU came to town! I know of several instances where LSU fans busted down fences to apartment complexes in order to find places to park.

[Eagle1855]

If I'm a Arlington resident, I'm calling the city council to complain about the last time LSU came to town! I know of several instances where LSU fans busted down fences to apartment complexes in order to find places to park.

I didn't say they were the smartest fan base. They just travel -- and party -- well.

I don't imagine Baylor ends up in the Cotton Bowl unless they lose to Texas and OU beats OK State.

[untjim1995]

LSU will be in the Cotton Bowl--against either Texas or Baylor.

As far as TCU and Baylor, the Big XII is such a watered-down AQ league now, that teams like these two can actually win this league. Back in the original Big XII, Baylor was simply a cellar-dweller. I believe that they only finished above 5th in the South on one occasion, which was Mike Sherman's first year in College Station. From 1996-2007, they finished last every time. During the same time, TCU took advantage of being the lone Texas team in the MWC to rise up to national prominenence, just because BYU and Utah had some really good teams during that timeframe. They really had to get up for about three opponenets a year that were either better or about the same as they were. I always said that if Baylor hadn't allowed themselves to be whored out to the Big XII and had played in the MWC or CUSA like the other SWC leftovers, they would have enjoyed ever bit of the same success that TCU did. And if TCU had been in the Big XII back then instead of Baylor, they would've suffered the same fate that Baylor did. But all Baylor worried about was the $$$, receiving more bowl money than TCU did in a year that TCU finished in the top ten after beating Boise State in a bowl game while Baylor enjoyed yet another losing season in Waco. TCU is basicallky doing the same thing now, accepting 50% payouts from the Big XII, which is about $9 million more than they made in the MWC, while just enjoying a 4-8 season, which followed a 7-6 year in its first year in the Big XII. Their last two records in the MWC were 13-0 and winning the Rose Bowl and 11-2 in 2011.

As far as recruiting goes, though, the better question is going to be how we recruit against UH and SMU going forward, and how those two AAC schools will recruit against Baylor, TCU, and Tech. There is still a pecking order in college football, no matter how equal we want CUSA to be with the AAC and the MWC, or how much those two leagues want to be equal to the Big XII. The resources for those leagues are just higher than what CUSA offers, just as we are higher than the SBC.

[PlummMeanGreen]

LSU will be in the Cotton Bowl--against either Texas or Baylor.

As far as TCU and Baylor, the Big XII is such a watered-down AQ league now, that teams like these two can actually win this league. Back in the original Big XII, Baylor was simply a cellar-dweller. I believe that they only finished above 5th in the South on one occasion, which was Mike Sherman's first year in College Station. From 1996-2007, they finished last every time. During the same time, TCU took advantage of being the lone Texas team in the MWC to rise up to national prominenence, just because BYU and Utah had some really good teams during that timeframe. They really had to get up for about three opponenets a year that were either better or about the same as they were. I always said that if Baylor hadn't allowed themselves to be whored out to the Big XII and had played in the MWC or CUSA like the other SWC leftovers, they would have enjoyed ever bit of the same success that TCU did. And if TCU had been in the Big XII back then instead of Baylor, they would've suffered the same fate that Baylor did. But all Baylor worried about was the $$$, receiving more bowl money than TCU did in a year that TCU finished in the top ten after beating Boise State in a bowl game while Baylor enjoyed yet another losing season in Waco. TCU is basicallky doing the same thing now, accepting 50% payouts from the Big XII, which is about $9 million more than they made in the MWC, while just enjoying a 4-8 season, which followed a 7-6 year in its first year in the Big XII. Their last two records in the MWC were 13-0 and winning the Rose Bowl and 11-2 in 2011.

As far as recruiting goes, though, the better question is going to be how we recruit against UH and SMU going forward, and how those two AAC schools will recruit against Baylor, TCU, and Tech. There is still a pecking order in college football, no matter how equal we want CUSA to be with the AAC and the MWC, or how much those two leagues want to be equal to the Big XII. The resources for those leagues are just higher than what CUSA offers, just as we are higher than the SBC.

Spot on, pal!

Still amazing to me (not really) is how unsuccessful TCU has been their first 2 years in the Big 12. Coach Patterson's frustration in his post-game media interview the other day was much more about than just the BU player who was ejected from the game who came back to the Baylor bench. He's beginning to see that the Big 12 is no Mountain West Conference.

Of course, I predicted right after the Froggies joined the B12 that they would start reminding many of us of the TCU of the old SWC and so far that has been the case--even with TCU having better quality teams.

I think TCU made a smart move to re-do their stadium (ONLY) about a month after we announced we were going to build Apogee, but I still think any ex SWC private school in the Big 12 competing against the UT's, the OU's and even the Texas Techs (some years) will spend most of their Falls fighting for a 4'th or 5'th place Big 12 finish.

IMO, Baylor U will wake up soon enough and gravitate back to the place that private schools gravitate to a la their old SWC history and I don't care if they have a new stadium & fancy fishing pier on the Brazos or not. As we know, new stadiums only stay new 1 year.

Speaking of New Stadiums or Re-Do's For Big 12 Competition? Anyone else notice how TCU and Baylor are not even matching their stadium seating capacities of old Amon Carter Stadium (50K) and Floyd Casey Stadium (also 50K)? I think I know why but that is not for this thread.

Edited December 2, 2013 by PlummMeanGreen

[UNTFan23]

Speaking of New Stadiums or Re-Do's For Big 12 Competition? Anyone else notice how TCU and Baylor are not even matching their stadium seating capacities of old Amon Carter Stadium (50K) and Floyd Casey Stadium (also 50K)? I think I know why but that is not for this thread.

Supply versus Demand. If you reduce supply you can justify increasing the price with demand remaining the same. It's a smart move on their part.

We had people crowing for Apogee to seat 40,000+ when we have had a handful of games where we only came close to a sell out. A two-thirds full stadium with 20,000 looks way better than a less-than-half full stadium.

[outoftown]

I know it's a little hard to think about recruits from Big 12 and ConfUSA but I see your logic and would agree with it. Just depends if TCU can start winning quickly in their first couple seasons in the Big12. If they can start winning and be in the running for Big12 championships then this isn't the case. But if they have similar seasons more regularly like they did this year, then recruits would be better off playing at North Texas. Especially if we continue to have seasons like we did this year. I really believe that if we can get a couple seasons in a row like this year, keep Mac for a long time, we will be invited to join the American Conference. I would love to see us playing for that conference. Later, being invited to the Big12 as well.

I don't agree. There is nothing really for north texas that says that the AAC is better than the C-USA. Maybe after new TV deals come out for c-USA and if they are bad. The AAC It is even more spread out, and the teams still in there have barely more name recognition than those in C-USA. No reason to leave for that place right now.

[UNTP1]

Spot on, pal!

Still amazing to me (not really) is how unsuccessful TCU has been their first 2 years in the Big 12. Coach Patterson's frustration in his post-game media interview the other day was much more about than just the BU player who was ejected from the game who came back to the Baylor bench. He's beginning to see that the Big 12 is no Mountain West Conference.

Of course, I predicted right after the Froggies joined the B12 that they would start reminding many of us of the TCU of the old SWC and so far that has been the case--even with TCU having better quality teams.

I think TCU made a smart move to re-do their stadium (ONLY) about a month after we announced we were going to build Apogee, but I still think any ex SWC private school in the Big 12 competing against the UT's, the OU's and even the Texas Techs (some years) will spend most of their Falls fighting for a 4'th or 5'th place Big 12 finish.

IMO, Baylor U will wake up soon enough and gravitate back to the place that private schools gravitate to a la their old SWC history and I don't care if they have a new stadium & fancy fishing pier on the Brazos or not. As we know, new stadiums only stay new 1 year.

Speaking of New Stadiums or Re-Do's For Big 12 Competition? Anyone else notice how TCU and Baylor are not even matching their stadium seating capacities of old Amon Carter Stadium (50K) and Floyd Casey Stadium (also 50K)? I think I know why but that is not for this thread.

As long as Briles and Patterson are there, both Baylor and TCU will be good. If TCU had a decent QB this year their record would have been better despite having a very young team. Both coaches are relatively young and in their prime and will only get better at recruiting as they now have first class facilities and resources. And I'm pretty sure that both of their new stadiums were built for easy expansion just like most new college stadiums are.

[Mean Green 93-98]

I don't agree. There is nothing really for north texas that says that the AAC is better than the C-USA. Maybe after new TV deals come out for c-USA and if they are bad. The AAC It is even more spread out, and the teams still in there have barely more name recognition than those in C-USA. No reason to leave for that place right now.

I'm not sure how broad a definition you're extending for "barely". . . . But I would say that the name recognition and general perception of the teams in AAC is significantly better than C-USA teams.

Ranking name perception/general perception:

1. Cincinnati - AAC
2. UConn - AAC
3. Memphis - AAC
4. Houston - AAC
5. Navy - AAC
6. Tulsa - AAC
7. South Florida - AAC
8. Central Florida - AAC
9. Marshall - C-USA
10. East Carolina - AAC
11. Southern Miss - C-USA
12. SMU - AAC
13. Temple - AAC
14. Rice - C-USA
15. UTEP - C-USA
16. LaTech - C-USA
17. North Texas - C-USA
18. Western KY - C-USA
19. Tulane - AAC
20. UAB - C-USA
21. MTSU - C-USA
22. Charlotte - C-USA
23. Old Dominion - C-USA
24. FAU - C-USA
25. FIU - C-USA
26. UTSA - C-USA

There's nothing scientific about that list--it's obviously pretty subjective, and I'd probably have some changes if I did this ranking again in a week. But pretty much anyone is going to have the top of his list entirely AAC teams and the bottom of the list C-USA teams.

C-USA is a great place for us to be right now. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep an eye open for options that present itself in the future; and once the AAC gets lined up with a better TV contract and more bowl tie-ins, I would think it would be a very attractive option for us should it present itself.

[GrayEagle]

Not that I'm advocating leaving but right now the AAC is a better conference. Why wouldn't they be? They took the best from CUSA. It has been stripped of its structure which may take a while to build but CUSA has been stripped of its most successful members and that may take awhile to build as well.

The AAC still wins the media market battle but CUSA isn't lagging all that far behind. Still, when TV contracts are renegotiated the American Athletic Conference will have the most lucrative contract of the G5 conferences.

The AAC has taken away the attendance leaders from CUSA. The American teams have several members capable of averaging 35,000; CUSA will have none. We will have three, maybe four who won't even average 20,000 which I believe that every team in the FBS should do annually; especially those in conferences who consider themselves above the MAC and the Sun Belt.

The best of the teams on the field have departed as well. Houston, UCF, East Carolina and Tulsa were consistently among the top CUSA teams over the years are gone leaving only a currently depleted Southern Mississippi to carry the torch. I believe that the additions of North Texas, Louisiana Tech, Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky and UTSA, along with a pretty solid Marshall program and the rebounding of USM will allow the conference to return stronger than ever. I also don't think it will take long for Old Dominion to join the upper group. I'm hopeful for UTEP to gain real strength and make the West Division a group of teams that will be great competition. My fears are for FAU, FIU and UAB; not so much for what they will put on the field but the lack of what they will put in the stands.

What I feel is that it will take 5-10 years to rebuild these teams into a conference that will be equal to or better than it was in 2012.

[outoftown]

First: I will believe Navy will not chicken out and really play in the AAC when I see them on the field with the logo on their chest.

I'm not sure how broad a definition you're extending for "barely". . . . But I would say that the name recognition and general perception of the teams in AAC is significantly better than C-USA teams.

Then: yes there may be a bit more recognition at the top of the AAC, but it is not the kind of recognition that gets recruits panties wet, nor the kind that gets you thousands more spectators in the stands.

C-USA is a great place for us to be right now. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep an eye open for options that present itself in the future; and once the AAC gets lined up with a better TV contract and more bowl tie-ins, I would think it would be a very attractive option for us should it present itself.

The two things you say are not about to change much for the better for the AAC. Their tv contract is clearly better than C-USAs.... but it is brand new if i recollect correctly. The problem is more that C-USA s contract will come up and with the new membership it might get a worse one (or it might not, hard to say right now, but the timing for C-USA seems more favorable than it was for the AAC who did the tv deal in the middle of realignment insecurity).

The bowls... well I guess the fat lady has not entirely sung there yet, but even the guys on the AAC fan boards opined that Banowsky thoroughly wiped the floor with Aresco when it comes to bowls, and with the new contract period starting next year...

The main problem with staying in C-USA is more that if the AAC asks someone like southern miss or let's say Marshall, they might jump to be with their 'old rivals'. If C-USA manages to remain together for 2-3 years without any bad noise about someone leaving, then I think the conference will erase a good bit of the perception deficit it has against the AAC.

Edited December 2, 2013 by outoftown

[PlummMeanGreen]

As long as Briles and Patterson are there, both Baylor and TCU will be good. If TCU had a decent QB this year their record would have been better despite having a very young team. Both coaches are relatively young and in their prime and will only get better at recruiting as they now have first class facilities and resources. And I'm pretty sure that both of their new stadiums were built for easy expansion just like most new college stadiums are.

But how soon do larger public universities snatch both Art Briles and even Gary "I Shall Not Be Moved" Patterson?

Both have very nice contracts now, but ask most any NCAA FBS/P5 head football coaches if they prefer to coach before 80,000 or 40,000 (and we all saw pics of TCU's almost empty student section at 1 or 2 of their games this season, right)?

[Mean Green 93-98]

Then: yes there may be a bit more recognition at the top of the AAC, but it is not the kind of recognition that gets recruits panties wet, nor the kind that gets you thousands more spectators in the stands.

Kind of a gay picture there, but okay . . . I would have to say that your average football recruit and fan would be far more excited about games against Houston and UCF than about games against MTSU and UTSA. No, it's not Notre Dame or Texas, but it's clearly a difference. And I would think that your average basketball recruit and fan would be far more excited about games against Memphis and UConn than games against LaTech and Western KY. There's unquestionably separation there.

The two things you say are not about to change much for the better for the AAC. Their tv contract is clearly better than C-USAs.... but it is brand new if i recollect correctly.

Yes, I should have worded that differently. Aresco was stalling and playing hardball for a better deal when he was being offered very good money, and all the teams headed to what was then the "Big East" thought they were getting that deal. It ended up being a mere fraction of that, but it is better than C-USA's, maybe twice as much. But what my thinking was it that we are likely to see continued separation between the two, if all things continue as they presently appear to be.

The two things you say are not about to change much for the better for the AAC. Their tv contract is clearly better than C-USAs.... but it is brand new if i recollect correctly. The problem is more that C-USA s contract will come up and with the new membership it might get a worse one (or it might not, hard to say right now, but the timing for C-USA seems more favorable than it was for the AAC who did the tv deal in the middle of realignment insecurity).

The bowls... well I guess the fat lady has not entirely sung there yet, but even the guys on the AAC fan boards opined that Banowsky thoroughly wiped the floor with Aresco when it comes to bowls, and with the new contract period starting next year...

That might be true, but we are already seeing C-USA's #1 bowl tie-in (The Liberty) migrating to the American. Regardless of the ineptitude of Aresco, bowls want to associate with winners and fanbases who travel. The AAC has that in spades over C-USA.

The main problem with staying in C-USA is more that if the AAC asks someone like southern miss or let's say Marshall, they might jump to be with their 'old rivals'. If C-USA manages to remain together for 2-3 years without any bad noise about someone leaving, then I think the conference will erase a good bit of the perception deficit it has against the AAC.

That's a significant problem, IMO. The AAC still has its pick of any C-USA teams it wants. If they start to hurt for members, they can still cherry-pick. If that happens, we need to hope that we are one of the next to be cherry-picked rather than being left in a conference worse than the old Sun Belt.