[Looking to discuss, or debate: the future of CFB.]

The question that runs thru my mind is what happens to schools like ours for football and basketball? I mean, its very clear that the top levels could have as few as 24 schools up to 48, if you are only considering football. Add in college hoops and you'll add in some Big East schools and Gonzaga.

So what happens below this? Does another level get created? Is it a level that is based on money, TV markets, school size, or all of them? Do SMU and TCU preclude UNT from being in this level of play again? If they cannot, do we finally get to be in a situation that is full of regional schools that we have always wanted to be aligned with in a conference? If they do, should we fold it up like so many have wanted in Denton for so long? 

That's what I am most interested to see what this future holds for our athletic teams. Let's face it. If we had the support that a school of our size should have had all of these years, then we don't deal with any of these issues. But we have not had that, as the strong majority just flat out doesn't care about our teams at all. 

[In the new NIL era how should UNT athletics be focused?]

My guess is that there are some Power Schools and a lot of G5 schools that will end up playing some kind of FCS level of football in their future. Reduced scholarships, reduced NIL, and being controlled by the NCAA, while the Powerful 40-50 leave the NCAA and create their own level of play for their sports. These are the 50 brands that will vie for that new setup

Washington, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USCw, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Tech, OU, OSU, KU, KSU, Nebraska, Iowa, ISU, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, MSU, tOSU, Penn State, ND, Maryland, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Virginia, Va Tech, UNC, NC State, USCe, Clemson, Georgia, GTech, FSU, Florida, Miami. Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, MSU, LSU, Arkansas, Mizzou, Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisville, WVU, and Pitt.

I can see up to 32-48 of those programs being in a CFB setup, having a playoff system like the NFL, but using the big bowl locations for the quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals.

What it means for teams like SMU, Baylor, TCU, UNT, UH, etc...I have no idea.

[House v. NCAA settlement winners and losers: Athletes take monumental step, non-revenue sports at risk]

5 hours ago, TIgreen01 said:

As others have pointed out, breaking away doesn't stop them from raiding our rosters.  I'm afraid there is no going back.  We all need to push for player contracts.  

There is a very real probability that our school may be playing football at a club level in about 15-20 years if nothing changes in the current landscape for the better. Unless we get comfortable with being a juco/stepping stone for the folks up the food chain. 

[Jared Mosely upset and rightfully so]

8 hours ago, meangreenfaninno said:

When will some of the media types start standing up for the little guy?

This ain’t politics. College sports have very certain brands that make the networks money with eyeballs. The little guys aren’t any of those brands.

[House v. NCAA settlement winners and losers: Athletes take monumental step, non-revenue sports at risk]

12 hours ago, scratch1976 said:

Time for a law suit! 🤬🤬🤬

The problem is that the judges and legislatures are dominated by the Power Teams' alums, not to mention the $$$ those schools bring to their states. A lawsuit is DOA, I'm afraid.

What needs to happen is those 40-50 Power schools (or less) need to breakaway and play their own professional levels of football, basketball, and baseball. Let the rest of us start over again and play against each other in scholarship+stipend setups, with no transfers between schools without costing you a year, just as it used to be.

[House v. NCAA settlement winners and losers: Athletes take monumental step, non-revenue sports at risk]

42 minutes ago, wardly said:

Just asking, but will UNT even be able to afford a football program?

I’d imagine it will eventually get demoted to something that resembles true college football as we knew it. Scholarships only, maybe a stipend, but playing in purely regional games to bolster attendance since TV wont pay much for the non-power teams. 

[Group of Five Coaches Ranked - CBS Sports]

On 5/18/2024 at 4:28 PM, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Wtf... lol. 

No, they are not. They have a geographic upper hand on us. They claim large swaths and the people in them as their own. It's worked for them, and good for them. But they are by no means superior to us. Historically, they are bad to extremely mediocre in just about everything they do. Yeah, Yeah - touche, we are, too. I would call us 2 peas in a pod well before I called them superior. However, UNT at least has SOME history. 

I’ve never seen us ranked in football, much less ranked 2nd like Tech did. I’ve never seen us advance beyond the 2nd round of the ncaa tournament, much less lose a title in overtime like Tech did. 
 

They are FAR better than we could’ve ever dreamed of since we gave up in 1982.

[Group of Five Coaches Ranked - CBS Sports]

15 hours ago, NT80 said:

This is just another attempt to segregate out G5 programs away from FBS and P4's.  Same as before the Division l split into 1-A and 1-AA.    Give them their own rankings and they will be fine....

It's their media. Just like it's their politicians and legislatures. You can't do anything about it. They have the fans, the eyeballs, the power, and the money. If they're squeezing out the Texas Tech's and Oklahoma State's of the CFB world, there are a lot of folks who never had a chance to survive. It is what it is.

[Who was playing QB at your first CFB game?]

16 hours ago, Cr1028 said:

I was wondering when I posted mine if that nightmare was going to be someone’s first. That was difficult to watch even for us grizzled UNT vets. Worst quarterbacking performance I have seen at any level of football in the 40 years I’ve been watching it.

Those were the days of the Chico pre-game test to show your understanding of the offense, the bus driver mentality of Dan McCarney, and the roster of QBs that belonged nowhere near an FBS roster.

[Sonny Dykes predicts future split among P4, G5 schools: 'Alabama and La Tech aren't playing the same sport']

1 hour ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

How's that analogy hold up?  In the current setup, we still get to play P4 teams.  At least for now, the ones we have scheduled are all home-and-homes.  Do you have a comparable association with ex-Mrs. Brady?

You said that you didn’t want the G5s to run away from P4’s. I can promise you the ones running away from the other one is not the scenario you listed above. Yes, schedules will get played or paid out (more likely) between G5s and P4s over the next few years, but UNT isnt running away from playing Tech, for example, but just watch Tech run from playing here in a few years or playing us ever again in the 2030s and beyond. We’d love to play them more often, but they will only play us when they need wins and butts in seats in Lubbock, which UNT will help bring from our fans and their fans who have friends and families that are connected to UNT.

[Sonny Dykes predicts future split among P4, G5 schools: 'Alabama and La Tech aren't playing the same sport']

1 minute ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

There are different levels of "ignoring."  Relative to UT and A&M, the networks largely ignore Tech and Baylor.  The football world is far more aware of us now than they were when we were 1-AA.  When we hung with Georgia for a half, the college football world paid attention.  When we spanked Arkansas in a game that featured (one of?) the greatest special teams plays of all time, the college football world paid attention.  If we become part of the "new FCS," the media and average football fan will pay us less attention than ever.

I know the current NIL and transfer portal situation works against G5 schools, but I don't think running away from P4 schools is the answer.  And I could be mistaken, but I don't think the current scenario is sustainable for college football generally speaking in the long term.  I hope a solution can be found that can bring some semblance of amateurism back to college football.  And maybe it can bring a little parity between FBS schools along with it.

G5s aren't running from P4s. That's like me saying I'm running from Gisele Bundchen. The P4s are trying to find a place in the Power 2, which leaves us in the dust. G5s would LOVE to keep things as they are, just to have the P4 teams play them still and help pay the bills. Also, the crumbs that this level gets by allowing our best team to play a Power team in a playoff that is damn near stacked against them, the ADs and coaches at this level were fine with it as it could get them eyeballs from those power institutions. 

Then the portal business became law. And it has just bombed the rosters of G5s, as the resources aren't there to keep any kind of talent, nor do the G5 schools have the appeal that the Power schools have with these players that grew up dreaming of playing in Norman, Austin, College Station, Fayetteville, Baton Rouge, etc.

[Missouri State to C-USA]

Missouri State is not a bad pickup at all, but the fact that something called Jacksonville State and Kennesaw State are in your conference as FBS is making the point that Sonny Dykes makes. They are not the same as even UAB or Southern Miss, much less Alabama or Ole Miss.

[Morris signals it is over]

4 minutes ago, TIgreen01 said:

I’d distill it even further.  Only the schools with the richest donor base are benefiting.  This is why smu is legitimately able to include themselves in this next rung.  They have no fan support, and I suspect that they never will.  But they are rich.  Obscenely rich. That’s all it takes.

If schools can’t come together to create some kind of level playing field, then it’s not really sport anymore. I see no reason to support this current version of college athletics if all it boils down to is who has the most obscenely rich donor to bankroll player salaries.

I quit it all after 2022. It just sickened me to watch everyone with any talent just transfer away to the highest bidder. High school football has more staying power and name recognition than G5 football. And that won't change until/unless the portal rules get changes, which won't happen. 

Greed killed college football for me. I just can't stand watching it anymore.

[Morris signals it is over]

46 minutes ago, Green Otaku said:

What he's saying is why would those teams want to be associated with us? The hypothetical TCUs, Houstons, Cincys, Syracuses, etc would band together and form their own division, one that wouldn't include UNT. Why would those schools suddenly want to be associated with us? Would you want to be in a league with Angelo State and Tarleton? That's the same drop Baylor and Tech would view us as.

I agree with what he says, they would grab whatever the best of what's left over and we would be on the outside looking in.

So, if we are looked at that way by those guys, which is weird since the AAC doesn't look at us that way, but if they do and can create a level of play that is above G5, but not included in the Power Structure of these 40 behemoth programs, how many teams do they let in? In your view, Boston College, Syracuse, Wake Forest, Northwestern, Purdue. SMU, UCF, Cincy, UH, Mississippi State, Vandy, TCU, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Cal are gonna just play in their own setup? They have to have more teams. Even if you added 10 more demoted power schools, you'd find that they would need more programs. Well, that would mean teams from the top two G5 leagues, the MWC and the AAC, as well as anyone else that could compete.

If you are right and we would be relegated to a Sam Houston, SFA, and ULM level, then football at UNT needs to be discontinued. The drain is too much at that point. You wouldn't have bodybag games to pay for the rest of the athletic department anymore. But I just don't see us falling that low. UTEP or La Tech? Yeah, maybe so. But not us or UTSA. 

[Sonny Dykes predicts future split among P4, G5 schools: 'Alabama and La Tech aren't playing the same sport']

But the networks largely ignore 99% of G5s, too. 

[Morris signals it is over]

51 minutes ago, meangreenbob said:

Let’s assume you’re correct and more schools will be relegated down to what will be perceived as a lower class division. 

Think about what that does to us. Some of these schools routinely attract 45,000-65,000 fans on a typical Saturday. Sure that may drop off some if they are demoted but how do you think we stack up to them with our 8,000 game day fans? 

Should your hypothesis be correct than those schools would take the best of the current G5 and form a separate league with its own playoff system. ESPN and other networks would jump on it. Too much tradition with those schools  

North Texas would be excluded and fall back to 1AA. 

You can take that to the bank. 

 

Ok, that's ridiculous. We aren't keeping a football program if we are going down to a level that is playing SFA and ACU as conference mates. But playing in a setup where the current lower tier Power teams get relegated would actually benefit us greatly.

[Morris signals it is over]

22 minutes ago, NT80 said:

The separation now from P4 to G5 is informal.  The formal relegation of G5 to some lower tier is what I am against.  We have played top level football schools in all of our football history, just not as conference members usually.  Our first game ever was against TCU.  

The lineup you mention about would be great.  But Smut, TCU, Baylor, and Houston have visions of staying in the top "power" tier or whatever fake name they assign it.  

Whatever visions they all have aren't gonna matter to any of the Big 30-40 teams or their networks.

And whatever the history was for everyone but the huge powers in the CFB world flat out won't matter. Teams like BYU and Pitt are very likely to get relegated down, as will many others higher up the foodchain. The days of Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Northwestern, Purdue, West Virginia, Rutgers, Iowa State, Syracuse, Wake Forest, Boston College, and Cal, as more examples, of being power teams are ending sooner rather than later. Teams like Tech, OSU, and Kansas State are all on the line of either being included or getting excluded down the road. I figure there are 40 power teams when its all said and done for football. Probably about 60 teams for basketball. And that'll be it.

 

[Morris signals it is over]

16 hours ago, NT80 said:

It is exactly the same as 1-AA or FCS.  G5 is just a different title for it.

It's all money-driven.  More money needed from media for fewer elite teams to be able to pay player salaries.

Next will be Dl basketball splitting into Dl-A.  The Top 6-8 basketball conferences forming their own league.

All of this should happen, ASAP. 

The mistake you make about comparing 1-aa to G5s today is not true. We gave up in 1982 while the SWC and Big Eight were giants in the CFB world. Between 1981-1995, The SWC/Big Eight had Nebraska, Oklahoma, Colorado, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, SMU, Texas, Arkansas, Texas A&M, and Houston have teams that would finish in the Top Ten. Meanwhile, in Denton, we were playing conference games against something called Northeast Louisiana, Stephen F. Austin, Sam Houston, McNeese State, and Nicholls State. Literally, whatever little support we had got nuked.

Now today, playing schools in the same level of play like SMU, TCU, Baylor, Tulane, Tulsa, Houston, Rice, UTSA, UTEP, and Texas State would bring a lot more eyeballs to North Texas than anything we have ever seen in Denton. And then adding in the idea that we can legitimately play for a title in football, you'll get more interest tan UNT has ever had.

If you ever think we should be playing Texas, A&M, OU, etc...in equal standing, you'll be sorely disappointing. Its just not gonna happen. EVER.

[Why the NCAA model is dying and will be replaced]

2 hours ago, NT93 said:

It’s absolutely ridiculous that some college athletes make more than professional athletes.  Makes me think of the old Sports Illustrated bit: Signs of the Apocalypse.  
 

I stated this in another thread, but I strongly believe that the players are not the engine that drives the machine, it’s the universities.

Ive got a theory that I believe to be true and hopefully I am able to explain it in a way that makes sense.  Let’s say that next year, all the talent dropped a level.  So Alabama, etc. had the talent usually associated with UNT.  UNT had the talent usually associated with SFA.  SFA had the talent usually associated with aTm Commerce, etc., etc.  Most fans won’t care and most won’t notice the drop off in talent.  All most fans care about is their team winning.  If we had the talent level of SFA, but we won the American, no one would care that we’re not as talented.  I’ll even go a step further and say that must fans would think we were better.  Bottom line is that the universities are the ones making the money, not the players.  No one is forcing them to play.  If they don’t want to play for FREE tuition, don’t play.  There’s a line of people wanting to take their place.  I was working 25-30 hours a week in a warehouse while going to college, so forgive me if I don’t have sympathy for people who have the opportunity to do something that I wasn’t quite talented enough to do.  **That being said, I don’t have a problem with legitimate NIL**

The problem is that boosters will always pay to get players and the Supreme Court made that legal. This will never go away. I truly believe that universities will own their team and play in leagues that features paid players, players that don’t even go to school. They’re employees. Texas could sign Vince Young to be their QB for 7 years to keep him. Same with the Aggies with Manziel. You get the idea. They’ll have coaches and GMs and be able to trade players, sign players to extensions, and develop players in minor league setups.

The rest of us are the ones that have the chance to actually play amateur college sports. Players are students who play for scholarships and stipends, all of which is governed by a NCAA type entity. And I believe that there will be a market for this level of play. I believe that watching traditional college sports will get eyeballs. Even if the Power 40 play their own semi-pro league.

[Texas Tech season tickets sold out this year]

38 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Ahhh, yes. Thank you. It's amazing. 

How many people in that photo even care that we have a football team? 

[Texas Tech season tickets sold out this year]

8 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Their isolation is definitely beneficial to them. But as to our lowly attendance figures, it has nothing to do with the cowboys during our football season and the mavs during our basketball season. If anything that should be beneficial to us. Do whatever it takes to get named players in front of our players, students, and alum. Partner with them like we did with Frisco, etc. But a Sunday afternoon Cowboy game has very little/nothing to do with our 14k in attendance on Saturday. 

I've said forever that the Cowboys aren't keeping someone from going to a North Texas game. Now, I do believe that Texas, A&M, Tech, OU, OSU, and Arky are reasons people won't go to our games, but that has so much more to do with the fact that we nuked our fanbase with the 1-aa debacle, which gave those schools tons of t-shirt fans with UNT credit hours and diplomas, as well as the fact that those schools play people that fans want to watch. 

But I blame the fact that the university's history is to have a football team, but making it cool to not support it. That mindset has prevailed in every facet of the UNT Family and community.

[Why the NCAA model is dying and will be replaced]

Sources: New college athlete compensation model may cost power schools $300M each over 10 years - Yahoo Sports

[Texas Tech season tickets sold out this year]

12 hours ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Dog shit excuse. It has nothing to do with anything. It's one of the same several excuses used in an attempt to put a curtain up and around the real problems. 

You're correct in that this really has nothing to do with us, as our town, our alumni, our students, and our faculty/administration don't give a crap about our teams in any decent percentage. 

But Tech does have a lot of advantages of having an entire region of a very wealthy state that has lots of oil money out west. And the biggest advantage to all of that might just be that West Texans like sports, particularly Tech sports. And they have legit school spirit amongst the folks that I listed above that either loathe our teams' existence or just flat out don't care.

[Texas Tech season tickets sold out this year]

7 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

Don't care.  They sell their program to their alumni, students and people in the region

They do have a lot of advantages in that an entire region of the state is theirs. 

[Why the NCAA model is dying and will be replaced]

1 hour ago, NT80 said:

I agree the entire NCAA needs revised or taken over by another entity (not named SEC or Big10).  

But to drop is down to G5 National Champion status is no different then 1-AA or FCS National Champ.  No Thanks.  Next option?

The next option is not what you want…to continue as a nomad that gets paid for OOC body bag games or play in a conference that gets no chance to ever win a title. Playing teams like the Power Teams in the B1G, SEC, most of the Big 12 and some of the ACC is not in the best interests of any G5 school anymore. The money is too much for them to ever let us fight fair.