ColoradoEagle

I'm glad they built it so that should 20,000 people ever show up for a track meet, we'd be prepared.

The UALR one is definitely a combination of bad D with a hot shooting night. No one gets 71% from beyond the arc without a hot hand. The rest, that's bad D. And these teams are making it a point to exploit that.

Actually, while the travel costs are higher, so are the payouts. This won't change until the SBC remembers that basketball is important. Good point. Although all of them are at the bottom of the WAC. How many players have we picked up from Florida since FIU and FAU joined?

And that last sentence is really a good point for the near future implications of a large stadium. We get to schedule a mid-level BCS program like Oklahoma State, sell out the stadium or come very close to, and get the same money we would if we were on the road in Austin or Norman. Long term, building a stadium this size gives us a more realistic chance of ending up in a BCS conference. Every other sport is in DFW except for BCS football, and decent college basketball. I can't imagine it will be the same situation 20-30 years from now. The question is whether it's TCU or us, or both that end up in a BCS conference.

In my opinion, someone doesn't donate $1.5 million to start architecting the stadium without considering donating another chunk. I think the Goldfields are interested in helping the program further. Also the AD said in the past that they wouldn't launch the capital campaign until a significant portion of the stadium was paid for. This makes me think the naming rights have already, or will be very soon, sold. I wouldn't be surprised to see a ground breaking in 2008 from what I've seen so far, but I'm very optimistic on the situation.

Agreed. Part of what people aren't considering is that the atmosphere and view are so bad at Fouts, that it really keeps a lot of people away. It just doesn't feel like college football, it feels like a glorified high school game. That doesn't have anything to do with the coaches, players, fans, or anything else. It's all on Fouts. Once a real college stadium is built, people are going to come out just to be a part of the college football atmosphere. Students, alums, and even (gasp) people who never attended North Texas. On top of that, throw in games against Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Baylor, SMU, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, etc. Build it 40,000-50,000, and let the on the field product and marketing worry about filling the stadium.

Having a college baseball team that plays at Denton Ryan HS isn't really going to help our case for getting into a better conference.

Colorado and the PAC10 have been mentioned in the same breath since the Big 12 formed. Either Colorado being interested, or the other way around. The PAC10 has also been interested in the longhorns not just due to their athletics, but also their academics. All of this is well known. As far as I know, UT-Austin has never shown any interest in heading west, but I don't keep up with it too much. Their minds might change down the road if the Big 12 South ever gets as bad as the North.

Thank God.

True, but at the same time the Big 12 took away Nebraska's annual rivalry game with Oklahoma. Also there's more money to be made in the Big 10, and more prestige to be had. The main thing keeping them from having any chance right now is their academics. Also while I know there'll never be another Tom Osborne, their program has steadily deteriorated since going from the Big 8 to the Big 12.

I could see him being hired as a defensive coordinator somewhere, but I don't see why anyone in their right mind would hire him as an OC.

Our budget appears to be $60 million. For reference, SMU's new stadium was $42 million and seats 32,000.

That would put them up against regional rivals: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, etc. It was just an example of what could happen, not a prediction.

Not sure what you're asking in your first question. The second part of it is, like Adler said, building a stadium that's up to smaller BCS levels (40-50k) shows a commitment to athletics and pulls us away from all of the smaller schools. You're talking about building a stadium that would be great for right now, but that's why we're in this mess to begin with. Back in 1952, they built a stadium that was perfect for a small teacher's college. 55 years later we're stuck with the worst stadium in division 1A football. What would have happened if Hayden Fry had a 45,000 person, modern stadium when he was here? North Texas might've been in the south division of the Big XII for all we know. We have to assume that 20 years from now, North Texas will be a BCS school. If there's a major conference shakeup 10 years from now that sees Colorado move to the Pac 10, and Nebraska or Iowa State to the Big 10, we need to be ready. Maybe we would or maybe we wouldn't get into the Big XII (or whatever) at that point, but we would certainly have a much better chance with facilities that could match up in size and quality to any other non-BCS school in their footprint.

North Texas. "Think small." Agreed 100%. Very good post.

Why would you want it built at 30-35,000 instead of 45,000-50,000?

Neither of them do anything to help the PAC10, and Utah schools are very...odd. There's a reason why they haven't been added so far. If the PAC10 were to expand, it would be to take Colorado/Colorado State, Texas/Texas A&M, or Texas/Colorado.

Looks like UCF not USF? Perfect if it's built with the ability to expand to 70-80,000. I really like that design. No "UNT" on top of the pressbox, though.

The PAC-10 will never take BYU or Utah. Ever. Everything else sounds plausible.

No, everyone is proposing things that will only happen if given three wishes from a genie. In my two posts, I've laid out what's likely to unfold (if anything at all). And what I've typed is if there's a minor move. If, for example, Big East, MWC, CUSA, WAC, and the MAC all start changing things around, get ready for some nastiness.

West Hawaii Idaho New Mexico State Aggies San Jose State Spartans Utah State Aggies North Texas Louisiana-Monroe East Middle Tennessee Louisiana-Lafayette Arkansas State Western Kentucky Troy Florida Atlantic Florida International Ugly, but the most likely.

There are three realistic situations, should there be a shakeup. The most likely situation, is that the Sun Belt and the WAC combine, and we stay right where we're at. The second most likely is that the MWC picks up North Texas as a travel partner for TCU, but necessary for that to happen is a new 40,000+ football stadium in Denton. The third, and least likely in my opinion, is NT ends up in CUSA. I don't think this last option is very likely, because it would mean that the MWC would go to 12 and take UTEP. I don't think UTEP is their first choice for expansion otherwise they would have done it already (especially when the whole shuffle went down a couple years ago), which means that an expansion to 12 is likely the only event where UTEP goes to the MWC. That means that there are no open spots in CUSA West unless Tulane goes east, and they've made it known they don't want to go east. Don't get me wrong, I think the WACBelt with NT in it is the greatest possibility in some sort of reshuffle. The MWC scenario is far less likely, and the CUSA scenario is the least likely of the bunch for a multitude of reasons.

What's the incentive for CUSA West schools to drop UTEP, Southern Miss, Memphis, etc to pick up North Texas, ULL, and Ark State? What happens to Troy, MTSU, and Western Kentucky? Not to mention the real borderline schools, FIU, FAU, ULM?

For an example, Bracey Wright who came here a few years ago with Indiana, was the 17th pick in the 2nd round (17/30). I don't think we have anyone on our roster who's as good as he was.

You're joking, right?