untjim1995

See, I didn't really feel like those basketball victories over Tech or LSU registered that much with any DFW media outlet, but neither of those teams are very good this year in hoops so that didn't move the needle much. If we could have given Kansas a game in the 2nd half in Lawrence, that would have gotten attention--even if we had lost. All of this is to say, that you are right about the wins, especially in King Football, over SBC teams just doesn't register with the local media or the fanbase, for that matter. If next year, we beat UH, then that would at least get some attention from the local media outlets. The only problem there is that with this being McCarney's first team, a less-than-settled QB situation here, and the fact that Houston will probably be the CUSA favorite next year, a win over them seems pretty far-fetched right now. I still think they were a great choice for the stadium opener, but we just aren't at their level (with a presumably healthy Case keenum) yet. We'll see. And by the way, I'm from Ft. Worth, and the town has gotten behind TCU big time, but Gary Patterson will be the first to tell you that FW is not a TCU town. They just don't have the enrollment or alumni base to keep up with the huge public schools within a 5 hour drive.

I agree with your post about getting better in recruiting against the Belt teams first. We can have grandiose dreams, but that is all they are until we start winning games and moving away from the bottom end of the SBC. This next year, for me, is all about getting the right attitude ingrained in the team. We have lots of young guys, so making them believe that we can win is huge--but it is easier than taking over a veteran team that has only known losing for years and years. McCarney has all of the attributes to get that instilled. I know that we all think the Belt is a crapshoot every year, but the reality is that we have to get to where we can beat ULL, Arky State, and ULM regularly again, while mixing in a win or two over the big four Belt teams of the last few years (Troy, MTSU, FAU, and, now, FIU). The track record for new coaches who take over losing programs is not full of huge turnarounds and bowl bids in season one. If McCarney can get us to the point where we win 4-5 games next year, that will be a really good sign, especially to a team that hasn't won that many games since 2004 and has only won more than 5 games 3 times as a FBS team since 1995. Where SMU is at right now is because of their coach and $$$, nothing more. They can compete in their conference and their league right now, but if the coach goes away, will they stay up there? It is hard to say. But to insinuate that they could be the next TCU is a major joke. They may both be private schools in the Metroplex, but that is about all they have in common right now. TCU, right now, has the stability with the long-tenured coach, great facilities, and a place at the BCS table. SMU may have big money alums, but they don't sit at the BCS table and probably never will. Until they can even be in a conversation of being a BCS buster, they aren't going to be the next TCU--they will be more like the next Tulsa. All that being said, we aren't even in the same stratosphere of either of those schools, so it seems silly to try and be in that conversation with any of the other Texas schools right now. Lets get back to winning seasons in the SBC and we can work our way back toward respect.

DFW is a UT (and OU, A&M, and Tech) town, too, if you want to look at it that way, but SMU gets lots of coverage in the DMN and TCU gets lots of coverage in the FWST. Both private schools always get mentioned in both football and men's hoops on local TV sports coverage, no matter who they play. In Houston, Texas and A&M both have the most attention, but UH and Rice get plenty of coverage from the Houston Chronicle and the other local TV stations. We got the DRC, which feeds the DMN some stuff, but it is minimal, to say the least, and our local TV coverage in DFW is, well, not much. All I am saying is that UTSA doesn't have the issue that we have with media coverage. Maybe it won't matter a hill of beans, but they have something that we don't have. It COULD be an advantage for them, if they play their cards right.

This annoys me, too, especially since UTSA has yet to play one down of football, but it hits on two of the advantages that UTSA does have in this case. At UNT, we have had decades of losing (and apathy from fans and media) that hangs around our neck like kryptonite, which UTSA, as a newbie, doesn't have. Maybe they will go 0-12 every year going forward, but they don't have all of the losing to hang on their neck with the media and the fans, which leads to the other advantage they have on UNT. They have a big media market that actually has no local college (within Bexar County) team to cover, so they will get the benefit of the doubt from the San Antonio Express-News and their TV stations that we don't get currently from the DFW media. I think that for us at UNT, the situation we are in now has a bright upside because we finally have a legitimate stadium and a legitimate coach. We haven't had a combination of the two most important parts to college football these days (facilities and coaching) before, which makes most of us feel very excited about our future. We should be able to parlay this into much bigger success than we have seen in a while, especially since we are in the SBC. But, if for some reason, we don't see any winning come forward in the next 5 years and McCarney doesn't make it, I will really begin to wonder if we will can have sustained success here.

Obviously, Johnny Jones must not be the man then to get us to where we want to go. I mean, look at all of the past SBC teams that are regularly ranked in the top 20 each year. If we can't come close to matching that list of teams, then we need some serious changes at the top. Oh wait... Having expectations raised is great. They should be raised--to realistic levels. We aren't anywhere close to being a top mid-major yet. When we get to a place where we have a deeper team than what we have now, then we can talk about going undefeated in league play and being a serious player in March. Otherwise, a team with 6 (maybe 7) componenets is not going to be able to bring it every night at a high level. It happens to a lot of schools when injuries and other issues pop up. See Western Kentucky the last two years. If this turns out to be a "step-back" year, it doesn't mean that we aren't making strides as a program still. We can't let these losses blind us to the fact that the program has made the Super Pit an awfully tough place to play and that we are getting major attention from recruits that this university would have never gotten before JJ's run over the last 5 years. If we are just gonna make this a black-and-white issue with absolutely no gray, then see my sarcastic paragraph above and take it to heart. Otherwise, lets let it play out and see where it goes. I know that we have some mind-numbing losses from the last few years and now this one. But it happens everywhere, even to top 10 teams--(Duke lost at Florida State, Villanova lost Providence).

Man, I hate to break it to you, but we were gonna have to win the conference tournament anyway to get to the NCAA Tournament. But, if by dance, you meant to include the NIT, which automatically includes regular season conference champions, then you are dead-on.

I have never thought a 13 seed was even plausible, and I have had my doubts on the 14 seed being even possible, unless we lost less than 5 games all season. The Sun Belt is just so bad this year that we were going to be on the down side anyway. Plus, with the new play-in game added, that adds two more teams who will vie for a 12 seed from major conferences, so that pushes all of the other conferences down a peg. At this point, just making it to the tournament would be huge again, no matter the seed, since it would be the 3rd year out of 5 to make it to the Dance as a conference champion. It would signify progression as a program that has jumped leaps and bounds over the last decade. Remember the Trilli years, anyone?

And they were not happy at all with the fact that growth was projected for Denton or within the college, so they decided to buy up as much land as possible in an area that is now located between Bonnie Brae and McCormick, south of I-35E. Now you know the rest of the story about Denia...

I've seen you post on the need for CUSA to move westward, especially if UCF and/or ECU move. For me, I just don't see how losing a huge public institution in the east being replaced by another huge public institution in Texas, especially in the backyard of one of the conference's small private schools, would pass muster with the remainder of the conference's membership. The four private schools vote as a block. The other Texas public schools look at us like we apparently do to Texas State and UTSA, that there is nothing to be gained by helping another Texas school move up the ladder. This isn't even talking about Memphis, UAB, and USM, who probably would like the added markets for the league that Nashville (MTSU) and Miami (FAU or FIU) would give to their TV footprint, especially replacing Greenville, NC and Orlando with much bigger locations. I think PMG is dead-on here about CUSA geography being perfect for what UNT needs, but its geography is a deal-killer for us unless SMU moves on or the conference leadership in Irving just overrides all of these concerns and lets us in. That last part seems very far-fetched to me, but I suppose there's always a chance.

So in the course of a month, we go to Louisiana State of the big, bad SEC and give them their worst loss in almost 20 years, but can't even guard anyone in a loss in freaking Lafayette. It sucks for us UNT fans. But, I will say that this is what makes college basketball, as a whole, the greatest sport for competitiveness and entertainment. In football, especially college football, the upset or near-upset happens, but it is nowhere near as frequent as it is in college basketball. ULL hits shots and UNT is flat, down goes the much better team, just as it does to other top teams in the major conferences. Its how Butler, Gonzaga, St. Mary's, Cornell, etc...can make a run in the postseason even when they play the high dollar majors. Not to mention the somewhat important fact that at least we still have our chance to play our way into something. Maybe I am just being overly optimistic, but I still think we will be ok as we head into the final stretch of conference play. Don't be surprised if we go up to Denver and beat them soundly. Just sayin'.

The funny thing is that with all of the facilities we have now that are high quality for athletics, the location of our school, and the number of UNT students and alumni, you would think that conferences like the MWC or CUSA would want us in their league because they could see how we would bring to the table if we were to start playing teams people know of each week. I have never understood why another conference's leadership couldn't see all of this potential. If we draw decently against Sun Belt teams, it seems like the MWC would drool over the idea of having this growing program get an energy boost by playing some of those schools in their conference, especially over all of the other competitors for the supposed 12th spot. Sure, winning brings more consideration, but it would seem that attendance and ratings would bring even more consideration from a conference standpoint. I can understand CUSA not wanitng us because of the influence from the other schools in the conference, but the MWC has no members to "block" us. San Jose State or New Mexico State don't even come close to having the eyeballs to surpass what we offer. I really believe that it will take a Craig Thompson-type that will have to just go by faith in what we can be and take us in. It is very frustrating to know that you are stuck in a conference that you would gladly jump out of, but the other conferences around you act as if you aren't really there (notable exception: The Weak Ass Conference). Its just hard for me to believe that it is only about winning for us to get consideration. Hell, 24K showed up for a game between UNT and Rice at a toilet of a stadium, which matched two of the worst teams in college football last year, just because people in the Metroplex have heard of Rice. Same thing happened when SMU or Tulsa came to town, as it did when Army or Navy came here. Why other conferences don't consider this when looking at us just bewilders me. I refuse to believe that it is due to a lack of communication between our school's leadership and those other conferences, especially since RV has made it clear for years that we would always be ready to move upward from the SBC. It just doesn't make sense to me.

What a surprise...I think that the only reason that the DMN is even reporting anything is just because they have the DRC under the Belo umbrella. Otherwise, it would be the same there, too. Or it would read former Dallas HS star declared ineligible at Missouri.

It might just be a good idea to back away from the keyboard for a little bit...

Well, there is some sad news to report here. Since we did not hire Jim Leavitt as our head football coach and have now enrolled Tony Mitchell, since Mizzou couldn't do it, I now fully expect that the ass-whipping poster known as MizzouTiger will never visit us again. Its a tough thing...

I just don't see us being like Texas Tech, but in a better location. I don't disagree with the better location part, but I think Texas Tech is hundreds of miles away, figuratively, from where we want to be. The thing that both helps Tech and hurts them is their reliance on UT. As long as UT stays in their conference, so will all the other major programs that come to Lubbock annually for games. It will always be easier to draw support, both in attendance and especially in $$$$, by having games that your alums want to pay to see. Getting Texas and Oklahoma in football every other year will always be huge. Even if Texas left, Tech would probably be, at worst, in the MWC, which actually would be a competitive league for them (they could actually win it every once in while). Either of those scenarios would still be way ahead of where we are right now and where we would go. I give Tech credit--they used their remote location to their advantage back in the 1950s when they got their invite to the old SWC. They literally had zero competition to hinder their acceptance. They had no private schools down the road to claim that they already controlled the market. Maybe Lubbock and West Texas doesn't exactly bring tons of eyeballs, but their leadership and their political ties in Austin have always protected them. I hate their school and their fans, but I am completely envious of what they have. I cannot fathom a time in the next century where we will be equal to them in conference prestige or financial support.

IMO, we ain't getting into CUSA as long as SMU is there. You will never convince me otherwise. They have the other private schools to vote with them and the eastern CUSA teams that don't want anymore Texas teams if they lose anyone else. I suppose that if SMU ever does leave, then I believe CUSA will be our home. But if we join, I wouldn't expect UH to be there, either. I really expect for us to either be invited to join the MWC soon or to be a part of the SBC for a long time into the future.

Here's the question that is impossible to answer right now, but has to have the MWC and the WAC intrigued. If Boise State is ranked in the top ten and played UTSA at the Alamodome, what kind of attendance and attention would that bring? Would it bring a sellout of 50k or more to San Antonio or would it barely register? Would the San Antonio papers and TV cover it like it like it was a Big 12 game in Austin or would it treat it like it was a Southland game? What would it be like if UNT hosted a top ten ranked Boise State in Denton? I would assume it would be a sellout of 28K, but are we sure? And what kind of coverage would this game get in DFW from the local media outlets? Would it be huge or would it be nothing different? I think this is why a lot of people make the UTSA and South Florida comparisons. It could very well be that UTSA has no chance of becoming anything at all and will fail epically. But they do have advantages that we will never have. They have a big town to themselves with no other pro competition in football and play in a stadium that hosts a very successful bowl game every year. The SA media have nothing to look back sadly upon for UTSA Football, at least the way DFW media do toward us. I have said this forever, but UNT's location is both a blessing and a curse. We are able to draw lots of Metroplex kids to school who become local alumni, but those alums have lots of sports entertainment options available to them in the area and the major media is located an hour south of the campus, so they don't cover us the way they do the other schools in the area. UTSA will battle Trinity, St. Mary's, and Our Lady of the Lake for local college coverage in the SAEN. We battle TCU, SMU, and UTA for local college coverage and are farther away from most of those media outlets than the other three. Again, all of this doesn't mean UTSA will pass us by like so many others--far from it. But it is easy to understand why UTSA is intriguing to other conferences and other schools for OOC games.

This is part of the nightmare scenario that I posted about a while back. We get stuck in the SBC, which brings up some more FCS teams (especially in the East, like Georgia State, Georgia Southern, or Appy State) and we lose somewhere a long the way a decent team or two from the current SBC (MTSU, WKU, or FAU). Sure, Texas State or UTSA would provide nice trips and we would at least re-kindle a rivalry with our friends in San Marcos, so that would be better than adding eastern FCS teams, but it just won't help our image issue in any way with the media and the fans, both regionally or nationally.

If a new Big 12 gets formed, I assume it will still be as an AQ league. I think the only way it gets formed is if Texas becomes an independent. If that happened, immediately, A&M and OU will go to the SEC. That would leave the conference with KU, KSU, ISU, Mizzou, OSU, Tech, and Baylor. I personally believe that Mizzou will end up in the Big Ten eventually and that the Kansas schools will eventually join the Big East. But let's assume that they don't leave. At that point, lots of teams will be pin-pointed for an invite. TCU, UH, BYU, Memphis, UNM, Colorado State, etc..would be considered before us. Now, Baylor could block TCU (lots of bad blood here) I think eveyone would agree that UH would be a lock, so that gets you to 8 teams for sure. I then see Memphis being added for the market and for the bowl game, plus a strong basketball program, so now we are at 9. If offered, TCU would drop the Big East in a heartbeat for this conference, so that would get you to 10. If they wanted to go beyond 10, I could easily see BYU jumping, so that gets to 11. Now, the next team offered to get to 12, would be interesting, as those old MWC teams might not ever change, but a school like Colorado State can argue that they deliver the Colorado markets and they would get a huge raise if they left. As for us, I just can't see Baylor or Tech allowing us to join their league. I think that both would just have to bite their lips to consider UH and TCU as conference mates. The hardest thing that we have to deal with is that we have no other current FBS Texas school that wants to be in a conference with us. Sure, Texas State and UTSA would love it, but the schools we all want to be associated with have shown us that they want nothing to do with us. Our way upward is going to have to be a lot like TCU's has been. Winning their conference, beating OOC teams, and winning your bowl games. That's not even counting games they lost competitively against other top teams. What they did was basically say, the current Big 12 doesn't want us and never will want us, so let's do the same thing to the other Texas schools and make our own way. It worked better than anyone could have imagined. And it can be easily copied if you can duplicate the winning. I believe that McCarney and the new stadium could very easily bring more success to Denton than anyone since Fry, and an invite to the current MWC and future success (like TCU had) would provide MAJOR attention to our program. It cannot happen in the SBC--voters, media members, other conferences, and fans put no value in this league. Even when we beat teams from a peer conference (MAC) in bowl games 2-1 like this past year, we still get picked as the worst conference nationally.

I should just let this go, but I disagree with your post so much that I just couldn't resist. Obviously, your opinion, which you are completely entitled to, is that the ACC is some kind of gauntlet to run through, but the name value of their major teams is MUCH higher than their current strength. Miami, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, and UNC are nowhere near as good now as they have been at different points over the last two decades. In the last five years, if you could have both Boise State and TCU play those ACC teams as conference mates, either one of them would have won that conference.

I think we have been fool's gold to a lot of coaches over the years because of those numbers. But the reality had always been that the students had no vested interest in the football program or any athleics at all. But with the new student fee and the stadium being built, they have something that tangibly affects them. And I think that is great--we aren't the cheapest value in the country anymore, but we do offer value and a full college experience if someone wants to enjoy athletics and education at the same time. The harder reality is that it will take a long time to make this happen. Obviously, winning will help, but the DFW media give SBC wins almost zero credit. In other words, you have to win against OOC name teams AND SBC teams to get their attention. The 2002-2004 proved this. We won the SBC with winning records for three straight years with overall records of 8-5, 9-4, and 7-6. In 2002, we beat Cincinnati in the NO Bowl and Nicholls State in OOC, along with the rest of the SBC for our 8 wins. In 2003, we beat in OOC an awful Baylor team and the other SBC members to get to 8 wins, but lost to Memphis, AFA, Arkansas, and Oklahoma. In 2004, we beat the SBC teams, but lost in OOC to Texas, Florida Atlantic, Baylor, and someone else, along with Southern Miss in the NO Bowl, to finish at 7-6. None of those three seasons even gave us better coverage than some extremely awful SMU teams got from the DFW media. That's is why it is more than just win and it will all change. It is really, just like we are seeing in men's hoops, beat teams that media members care about and it will change things.

I completely agree with your assessment here. Notre Dame wants nothing to do with the Big Ten, for whatever reasons. Their alumni are vehemently against joining that league. I don't know if it is due to the other schools in that league being close competitors or because most of the Big 10 is publically funded. If the the Bevo Conference were to add BYU (which I completely believe will happen), they will court Notre Dame on three huge facets: 1.) You get to keep your NBC deal to yourself + share in funds from conference earnings. 2.)You will be the in a conference that gives you the Midwest to yourself within the conference(basically) but opens up the fertile Texas recruiting grounds even more to you. 3.) You will be in a conference with the largest Mormon school and the largest Baptist school in the country--faith based institutions that may not have much in common theologically, but certainly have common traits in higher learning. BTW, all Notre Dame is scheduled to play both schools in the next few years already.

[Good news for ULL is that quick turnarounds aren't that difficult in the Sun Belt." CUSA has 1 school (Memphis) in the Bottom 10.

That Reno game you are talking about with Dennis Parker was in 1991. Nevada was ranked #1 in I-AA at the time and we had just lost to Oklahoma in Norman 40-2 the week before. We got beat 72-0, which was the worst loss in school history. When the team got back, Parker opened up competition at every position and a true freshman QB got his first start in the next game, which we tied against SW Missouri State. And that is how Mitch Maher got his start at UNT. Now you know the rest of the story...

This is my worst nightmare for UNT going forward. If we get lost in the shuffle and get stuck here in the SBC with non-Texas schools and the SBC doesn't have MTSU, FAU, and/or WKU, this will kill any momentum that the new stadium and McCarney are bringing to UNT right now. Could you imagine this: MWC (if UTEP left and Utah State got taken): UTEP, Utah State, SDSU, Nevada, UNLV, Fresno State, Colorado State, AFA, New Mexico, Hawaii, Wyoming, and Boise State CUSA: UH, SMU, Tulsa, Rice, La Tech (SMU's choice), Tulane, USM, UAB, ECU, Marshall, MTSU, and FAU (lose Memphis and UCF) SBC: South Alabama, Western Kentucky, Florida International, Troy, ULaLa, ULM, Arkansas State, North Texas. I could handle this if we also had NMSU, UTSA, and Texas State join the SBC just to get some regional rivalries going. But if we got stuck without any of the last three mentioned and our closest league game is still in Monroe, Louisiana or Jonesboro, Arkansas, we will have really gotten the shaft in all of this conference shuffle. All this said, I think we will eventually be in the MWC. If we can start winning in football, it could be very soon, like within three years or less.