untjim1995

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.

Combine this with the fact that the SBC is waaaayyyy down from usual in hoops this year and that is why I believe that we will be a 15 seed again if we win the SBC Tournament. Unless we only lose two more game this year, I just don't see us getting a 14 seed. And that is we win it all. Another SBC team could be a 16 seed, easily. Add in the fact that there are quite a few SBC teams who blatantly sandbagged in the OOC for conference play and are now showing signs of being very competitive in league play (Denver, Troy, Ark State), the rest of the road to Hot Springs will be much more difficult than most of us imagined it would be just a few weeks ago.

SMU played a bowl game against Army at SMU, UCF played in the Liberty Bowl in Memphis, Tulsa played in the Hawaii Bowl, East Carolina played in a bowl in Washington DC, USM played in St. Pete's bowl game, and UTEP played in the Albuquerque Bowl game against an MWC team (albeit one that is leaving in BYU). Boise State played in the LV bowl against Utah, Hawaii played Tulsa at home bowl game, Fresno State lost in the Boise Bowl, San Diego State played at home in the Poinsettia bowl, AFA played in the Indy Bowl in Shreveport, and Nevada played in the SF bowl game. 6 bowl teams for each conference, based on the new alignment for the MWC. Going forward, the MWC has teams that will continue to host bowl games in Boise, Hawaii, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, and San Diego. The bowl game in San Francisco probably will involve an MWC team going forward, too. It seems that would be just as good a lineup as anything that CUSA throws out there. I just don't buy the MWC gets less respect thatn CUSA. All I have ever read for a decade is how if the AQ-BCS added a league, it would have been the MWC. Heck, there were years where the mighty SBC held their own against CUSA. CUSA is definitely above the MAC and the SBC, and now the remnants of the WAC, back it is no where near as prestigious in football or mens hoops as the MWC. I pray that the MWC wants back in Texas so badly that it will take us in if UH or SMU decline the invite.

Its funny how this stuff works. When I talk to my TCU friends, it was always about the fact that Todd Dodge wouldn't schedule TCU becasue we weren't ready to play them. When I talk to my UNT friends, it is always about the fact that TCU won't play us because they ahve nothing to gain. It would do wonders for these two schools, along with SMU, to play each other every year in OOC, since no one wants to be in a conference with each other (except for us, of course, we would LOVE to be in one with either of them). Travel costs are cheap, get a good draw at the gate, and solid coverage from the local media that always thinks Big XII first, then AQ-BCS, then TCU/SMU, then, maybe, UNT, if there is still time. The biggest hurdle to us playing TCU is that TCU doesn't need us, nor do their fans want to play us. Not because they are worried about losing, but because they think that a game against us does nothing to help their schedule. Back in 2002, we played in Ft. Worth and lost 16-10 to a very solid TCU team. We were also good, too, as we would go on to win our bowl game. Yet all we ever heard during the game and after that game from TCU people was how they hated playing us, that they should only schedule games against other old SWC teams, that at least are alums care about playing those schools. My guess is that we will see TCU play us again when they drop down from their current perch and IF we are still around our perpetual level of the last 30 years, kind of like SMU.

Tulsa did go to the Elite Eight in 2000, where they lost to UNC in Austin. That was Self's last game there, as he went off to Illinois right after that.

I will be really surprised if Texas State doesn't do very well over the course of the next 5 years or so. Fran's expertise is in turning around downtrodden programs and he always hires big names for assistants. If he gets Dickey, Van Malone, Mike Schultz, along with his son, Brad, their recruiting connections in Texas will be very strong. I see thme being very good, again much faster than UTSA.

If you think the MWC is "just" a glorified WAC, I will match with the fact that CUSA is just a glorified SBC. CUSA, although having other Texas schools, offers very little in national prestige or coverage. With Boise State, Nevada, Fresno State, and Hawaii all having strong success over the last 5 years and knowing that San Diego State, Air Force, Colorado State, and New Mexico have had good teams over parts of the last decade, I will take those teams everyday over SMU, Rice, Tulsa, Tulane, UAB, Southern Miss, UCF, etc. TCU made their way by ditching the Texas teams and making their way through the MWC. We can do the same thing.

That was a really nice win by Colorado at Kansas State last night, especially since it followed a home win over Top Ten Mizzou on Saturday. Maybe the Buffs ahve soemthing this year. I bet it is fun times around Frank Martin's house right now...

Reading the names Trilli and Helwig was truly a Mean Green Nightmare. At least we had RV to go with the Dodge disaster.

What if they already do that and it still doesn't get covered?

Recruiting always seems to take a dive after a new head coach gets hired, but the next few years should be good, as you mentioned above. With everyone putting emphasis on recruiting linemen, I expect that we won't get too many recruits on either side of the ball this year. Unless McCarney and staff can pull off a miracle or two on the recruiting front, I imagine that the staff will look at moving some guys around to see if they can develop a playmaker or two. When he was Iowa State, those lines became his strength, even though it took five years, which he won't have here. But, if he can get recruiting up over the next few years, I expect that he will have us winning again in 2012 and beyond. I am not writing off 2011, just because its the Sun Belt and anyone can feasibly win this league in any given year, but our DLine is small and our OLine needs depth. When you have both of these staring at you, you probably aren't looking at a ideal situation. It will be up to Coach Mac and staff to take some lemons and make lemonade this next fall!!