GL2Greatness

they can always go elsewhere and get a new job and Tony Benford is a home run hire and you were so dow on the hire coaches caravan I'll probably be there. and I'm no expert on St. Louis, Creighton, or Lehigh but I would think the Creighton game would be considered more of a must see than the St. Louis one. Maybe I'm completely off base here? Either way these games are gonna be a treat. and Really excited for this. An upset would be huge for us this season. We'll need a couple to get an at large bid if we don't win the SB Tournament. and I know I have green glasses on but y'all are Creighton from the MVC. Get off your high horse a little bit and prepare for that Mean Green butt kickin! and I'm really excited to see a complete Mean Green team with Tony, CJ, Jordan, everyone firing on all cylinders. and I remember my freshman year at NT (2009) There was maybe 2 or 3 dunks all season. There is so much athleticism on this team it could be 2 to 3 dunks a half. The guys looked great last night but were all really tired from 2 practices earlier that day. I'm incredibly excited for this coming season and can't wait to see where they go! GMG if only you had let everyone know how against the hire you were before you spouted all the crap above you would look like a genius instead of someone making up for a punch of spoiled babies that are playing like crap and giving poor effort because they don't want to do work the way their coach tells them to I would imagine they will give that same effort supersizing it in their future vocation if they keep up the attitude you are making excuses for

Our last year of D1AA we played Boise State in the playoffs and we were in the top 14 teams. I was on that team and you have no idea what you are talking about. GL2GREATNESS, your rants are ridiculous and epic in length. No one bothers reading this nonsense. What are you talking about? UNT was plenty successful then. from 1982 to 1994 while north Texas was in D1-AA (13 seasons) they were 66-77-3 went to the playoffs 4 times (30.7%) of the time....only made it past the first round one time ranked 4 times (30.7%) this as one of the largest (possibly the largest) school in D1-AA, in a metro area with several million people, that is a very hot recruiting area, in a state that is possibly the biggest recruiting area if that is considered plenty successful, rankings and playoffs to brag about, or that means I was incorrect in saying north Texas did not win that much.....well perhaps you need to up your expectations and standards ......a losing record over 13 seasons by a large margin and only making the playoffs 31% of the time and only making it past the first round one time is not really very good especially considering what is available in the DFW metromess and Texas to work with and considering the size of some of the schools in D1-AA and the size of their alumni base and media markets here are the season records 1982: 2-9-0 1983: 8-4-0 1984: 2-9-0 1985: 4-6-1 1986: 6-4-0 1987: 7-5-0 1988: 8-4-0 1989: 5-6-0 1990: 6-5-0 1991: 3-7-1 1992: 4-7-0 1993: 4-7-0 1994: 7-4-1 that is 6 winning seasons and 7 losing seasons and conference co-champs one time and conference champs one time....in the Southland with ULM and see you later McNeese State and the like a losing record overall, more losing seasons that winning, and only two conference championships (one shared) is not exactly doing well unless you have extremely low standards in 1982 on 12 teams went to the playoffs (about 10% of the D1-AA teams) so a school with the resources, size, and location that north Texas had should have been able to do better than those metrics above.....unless you think those are good metrics...

college isn't pros where you can go make a trade or a free agent signing to change your team in a single season in the pros the owner has much more freedom to make decisions about budgets and spending that might result in on the field results....in college you are limited by income, willingness of the administration and students to spend, and sometimes even state laws.....in pros the owner can even choose to go into debt if he wants to not all college teams can do that and many college teams do operate at a revenue deficite relative to what they take in from athletics not all universities use the same admissions criteria for athletics or the same policies about breaking rules....in the pros the requirement for admission is can you play at a level the ownership thinks is worthy of paying you and giving you a spot and the rules are generally handed down by the league as far as behavior if you want to see college athletics turn into a spending war you would implement a silly plan like this and then teams with resources would make sure they stayed where they wanted to be and teams with large donors would continue to get larger and larger donation while the bottom feeders would do what they do best feed on the bottom there is no evidence that playing at a "higher level" will lead to more support or fans for many programs.....north Texas will have the fan support they have and even if they somehow rotated into the upper league and there was even a small increase in fan support once north Texas fell back down to the lower level they would lose that support and probably a great deal more....Appy State, Sam Houston, NDSt and others are not going to suddenly develop huge new fan bases because they make it into the upper division and once the split is made most of the teams that are in the lower division would be losing support immediately and they would have next to no chance to move up and again if they did move up it would be short lived at best and then back you go....losing a few more fans along the way after it is proven you can't move up and stay up stop pretending that schools like north Texas and others do not have their chance now as it is.....all you have to do is win the games you claim you are capable of winning and perform the way you claim you are capable of performing and develop the fan base you claim you are capable of developing.....making the silly claim that "we can't because the big boys (and SMU) won't help us out" really just means you can't or won't ULM beat Arkansas, they had a decent Baylor team at home after that and lost to them and ended the season on a down note with small fan support overall and even after the Arkansas win their fan support was very small compared to even decent fan support from teams that are willing and able to develop long term support...if they were in the position of having to earn a chance to move up their support would drop to next to nothing VS what they have now which is the chance to at least compete and develop the best fan support they can develop for themselves even if it is small compared to many others also north Texas did not even win that much at the D1-AA level as a huge school, with tons of alumni in the area, and Texas as a recruiting base and north Texas would be one of the ones in the drop down group and there is little evidence that would be a chance to build winning momemtum and fan support at that level to move up and "dominate"......that was already tried and the move up was just moving up not even having to earn it.....and it was not a huge success or anything that would sustain staying at the higher level.....it would be the same for most every other team in the drop down league

1. the members of this forum need to get over the idea that just because you believe something is better for SMU or UH or anyone else that is actually better for them 2. you need to step into the reality that other programs look out of their own best interest first, second and third and if they bother to look out for someone else it will only be because it is best for them 3. TCU did very well in a conference with few if any other Texas teams and it was because TCU invested in their own program and they looked out for their own program instead of worrying about what others were doing. TCU even left behind their long time rival SMU because they felt they could do better in a different situation and they did better in that situation. Not every kid that lives in Texas is from Texas anymore and not every kid that is from Texas is interested in traveling to Houston 2 times, the dfw metromess 2 times, UTEP, and SA VS getting to see the east coast or the west coast....sure players are pretty much busy while they are on the road for a game, but at least they can say they have been somewhere else VS going around texas over and over and many of them might have already traveled all over Texas already for HS football or family trips ect. 4. the mega-CUSA would actually be as large as 26 teams and 22 teams (not 20) even if the teams that will probably have a chance to leave do leave Cincy UConn Boise SDSU Temple USF UH, SMU, Memphis, UCF, ECU, Tulane UAB, USM, Tulsa, UTEP, Marshall, Rice north Texas, FIU, UTSA, LaTech FAU MTSU UNCC ODU that is 26 damn teams and even if UConn and Cincy and SDSU and Boise can find other homes Temple and USF are probably not going anywhere and even if Temple can go to the MAC that leaves the awesome 21 team conference......how is that going to work out for scheduling.....it is not it is going to suck and if UConn and Cincy and SDSU and Boise leave or find a new home that is 4 teams that most want to be associated with.......who in the hell wants to be with 21 teams especially when many of them completely suck.......that would be the least stable conference on the face of the planet 5. the CUSA has a contract with poor money for 12 teams.....that contract flat sucks for 21-26 teams.....a collection of amature old folks home football teams could get better money than the CUSA contract for 12 divided by 21+ teams and as Troy Aikmen says....get real....if you think there is going to be some renegotiation to the CUSA contract even if they managed to add 50 teams....the ink is barely dry on that contract, the CUSA can't get out of it and ESPN has no interest in paying more money to that collection of teams period and the reality is where was the big new "look in" opened up SEC contract.....oh yea that never happened did it.....I have not even seen where ESPN and CBS gave them ore oney for adding TAMU and MU to equalize the money....they probably did, but they for sure did not have the SEC exercise any type of "look in" and open it up for huge new money.......same with the ACC.....the ACC contract is as fresh as the CUSA contract and again they have not reopened it for anything new and in fact it is still so "not good" that teams like MARYLAND are GTFO to go to the Big 10 because they will make better money even paying 50 million to leave the PAC 12 did not get a "new deal" because they added 2 teams they got a new deal because their old deal was finished and the reason their new deal was so "big" was not because they added two teams it was because their old deal was so crappy and their new deal is also back loaded and came with the expense of teams buying back 3rd tier rights.....and no one has any idea what their deal would have been with only 10 teams and USC and UCLA had enough concerns about the new deal with 12 teams they had an agreement in place to be copensated by the other teams if the deal did not meet particular metrics the only reason the Big 12 got a new deal now is because their deal with ESPN was up in 2015 and ESPN did not want to run the risk of the Big 12 going on the open market....the second part of that deal with Fox was basically kept the same and only the time period on it was adjusted to match the ESPN first tier new deal so the concept that ANY conference has reopened an agreement for huge new money because they have added teams is not reality and the bigger reality is that will not be happening for a 21+ team CUSA filled with moveups and Sunbelt teams 6. a conference with 6 Texas teams will never work and it will be a disaster especially for at least 2 or 3 of those teams if not more....the SWC did not work as an all Texas league, TCU did better on their own without other Texas teams and even UTEP was doing better in the WAC without a ton of toher Texas teams it will be a big enough disaster to get on TV in a conference that goes against the ACC, SEC, Big 12, Big 10, Sunbelt and MAC for TV time then you add in you are going against 20+ other teams for TV time in your own conference and you have a disaster.....then you as a Texas team would be going against 5 other teams just to get regional TV time....so anytime two of those other Texas teams are playing each other VS your team playing someone from out of state you can pretty much forget being on TV even regionally in Texas and then you still have the 6 other Texas teams (5 of which are in the Big 12 or SEC) to worry about takign TV slots and even if TxState does horrible in the Sunbelt at least their fans will not be faced with 4/5 weeks of going to work and hearing about having their ass beat by one of their "Texas Rivals" ......and that is exactly what will happen to at least a couple of Texas teams in a conference with 6 Texas teams.....eventually at least 2 of those teams if not more will sift to the bottom and they will never climb back out......you will have ZERO to offer a recruit other than come here and get your ass kicked by at least 4 or 5 other Texas teams week in and week out and probably a bunch of other beat downs as well rivalries are not made by 1-5 north Texas VS 0-6 UTEP and that crap surely does not get in TV either and over time when a program has "we are in the CUSA" to offer and "we play in Texas a lot" and 5 other teams have "we are in CUSA" and "we play in Texas a lot" and a few of those teams can mix in "we win more than we lose especially against other Texas teams" you will see recruits either look to go where they win or to go elsewhere (like out of state) 7. more reality.....GMG members laugh at how crappy the BE will be and yet they seem to be dying to get at least some of those "crappy members" back into a conference with north Texas (and a TON of other even crappier teams) only a fool would go into the CUSA with 21+ teams (and many of them looking to GTFO) ESPECIALLY when the football teams currently in the BE are 100% in control of their own destiny....they have weathered the storm of autobid issues according to all reports....the BB schools are goign away to form a new conference.....so the BE stays together and keeps the autobid and the BB schools are the ones concerned with getting an NCAA waiver.....so that is taken care of.....and the FB schools still have the ability to ask others to join them and most importantly they have the ability to negotiate a new contract because theirs is open now.....and if you think that the BE FB members will get some crappy TV contract.....what in the hell makes you think those schools + a bunch of crap in the CUSA (with a brand new poor TV contract) and some move ups is suddenly going to break that contract and get MORE money there are teams that bring some type of value and those that eat at the food bowl....UH, SMU, Memphis, UCF, USF, Temple, ECU, and Tulane along with Boise and SDSU (and UConn nad Cincy if the stay and so far no one else is calling) are 12 teams that will bring a hell of a lot more value than what the CUSA is tossing out there.....and that is just a proven fact because that was the collection of teams that in the CUSA brought more value than the collection of former Sunblet teams brought when they were in the belt and teams like USM, UTEP, Tulsa, and even Rice would jump in a heart beat to join those teams....and that is pretty much the old CUSA.....while the new CUSA is a collection of half belt teams and some moveups.....and half the belt teams and some moveups should get a TV contract about equal to the other half of the belt teams and their moveups......which is terrible.....so the half of the belt teams and their moveups that are in CUSA should be glad the CUSA has a TV contract that was negotiated before they were around.....and the BE filled with CUSA teams that were around when the CUSA deal was negotiated + Boise and USF and some others should be able to do better than they did before if only slightly.....and of course they will do a hell of a lot better than they would with 21-26 teams eating a meal made for 12 as it is now the BE has 12 teams that kick the crap out of the 14 the CUSA will end up with and even if the BE loses UConn and Cincy they can easily poach the two best (or more) from the CUSA and they have the ability to structure a much better TV deal for that potential occurance those BE FB teams have all the control they need.....they have the autobids for themselves and it is the BB schools issues to get theirs for the new conference.....they can sell the BE name to those schools......they can sell the ability for the BB schools to leave early (even if for cheap) once the FB schools get things settled and they most importantly have the ability to decide who they will be conference mates with VS reverting to what would be 21-26 teams they want nothing to do with UH, SMU, Memphis, UCF, ECU, and Tulane and every other program out there (sans apparently one) are going to continue to look out for their own best interest period and that does not involve hooking up with a huge bunch of schools they care nothing about or being in a conference with a half a dozen other Texas teams so they have nothing to differentiate themselves with and the CUSA TV deal is going to stay the same until it ends many years from now and the BE football teams (and whoever else they add or subtract) will almost certainly beat that deal even if for the fact that they have more experience to look at about how to craft a deal in light of what is happening with conference additions and subtractions and more so because they are a much more attractive collection of teams VS adding themselves to the 21-26 team CUSA

1. what did their family do for their runnin' 'round money when they were not in college? 2. the vast majority of college athletics programs operate at a huge deficit so other students are already paying for athletes education 3. the vast majority of college football programs alone operate at a deficit so players are getting their education subsidized by others.....mostly by the tuition of other students that are trying to get an education and may be paying for some or all of it by working 4. if you pay football players you will have to pay all athletes and if you do that you can watch all sports besides football and the number of womens sports besides football go away 5. tax payers should not have to pay taxes to support football players if anyone wants to say that it is taxes not tuition that covers the runnin' money for athletes and in many states taxes can't go to athletics so it will be tuition from other students 6. the vast majority of college football players and many in other sports would not be able to sniff college if it was not for getting in because they were an athlete......if you want to now pay them fun money how about lets hold them accountable for meeting the academic requirements that any other student meets to get into that university.....or even better lets hold them to the level of requirements that students on academic scholarships have to achieve to get that money 7. if runnin' money is so important they are more than welcome to drop sports, get a job, and then live the good life.....oh wait it would be near impossible for many of them to even get into college without football, near impossible for many of them to get and keep a job, absolutely impossible for many of them to get and keep a job while making the grades to stay in college especially without all the academic support they get for being an athlete that most other students do not get for free and it would be 100% impossible for many of them to work stay in school and make enough to pay for work and school living and still have runnin' money 8. athletes get free housing that most academic scholarships do not, free food that academic scholarships do not, athletes can get a housing allowance if they do not want to live in a dorm.....never heard of that for an academic scholarship and as stated before athletes get academic support on a level that no other student gets.....if they want to give all that up and go get a job so they can have fun money and have it "easy" they need to make that CHOICE no one forces the vast majority of athletes to blow off high school, not have the grades to get into most decent schools with out athletics, and to not have the ability to earn an academic scholarship instead of an athletic one so they could then get all that free money and still have time to go work a job for huge new fun money and no one forced their families to have kids they could not afford to save money for college for if they were so worried about fun money plenty of kids that can't tote the rock and come from poor families still go to college and do without huge fun money.....why should they pay MORE for those that got ACADEMIC opportunity based in ATHLETIC ability especially when it is clear so many of those athletic types do not take their opportunity seriously even more kids that are not "ballas" and come from poor families do not ever get to college and just work and do not have huge fun runnin' handed to them......how about we toss them a bone too eh playing athletics is a CHOICE and for many it would be their ONLY choice to get into college.....if they are not happy with the multitude of benefits they get for that over and above ordinary students, academic standouts, and everyone else in society then they should step down from playing football and get on easy street filled with fun money and jobs that cover college tuition, living, and still leave you plenty of fun money and you don't have to worry about your name in the paper when you are stealing as well.....oh wait those jobs don't exist especially for people that probably should not even be in college anyway.....and even when you are getting hundreds if not thousands of dollars in shorts, shoes, shirts, and the like for "training" you still have to steal as well but yea lets pretend athletes have it rough and need some fun money at the expense of students that actually pay their own way for none of the freebies and pay the way of many athletes as well because college athletics is a money loser at the VAST number of schools with athletics programs

incorrect the basketball schools can't kick out the football members and if they vote to leave even if they take the Big East name they will still be forming a new conference and if they form a new conference they will not get an autobid in mens basketball for 8 years http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D113.pdf 20.02.5.4 Continuity. A multisport conference shall establish continuity. To establish continuity, a multisport conference must meet the requirements of Bylaw 20.02.5.1. In addition, the conference must meet the requirements of Bylaws 20.02.5.2 and 20.02.5.3 for a period of eight consecutive years. (Adopted: 1/15/11 effective 8/1/11) the CONFERENCE must meet those rules for 8 years.....a conference is more than just the name "Big East" if the basketball schools leave the conference they will not meet rule 20.02.5.4.....if the basketball schools disband the conference and form a new one even with the name "Big East" they will not meet rule 20.02.5.4 and the basketball schools can't just kick the others out and keep the Big East for themselves the basketball schools can disband the conference and join another conference and call it the Big East of they keep the name Big East, but that is the only way as of now they will get an autobid in mens basketball

http://fs.ncaa.org/D...ylaws 20-21.pdf 20.02.6 Football Bowl Subdivision Conference. A conference classified as a Football Bowl Subdivision conference shall be comprised of at least eight full Football Bowl Subdivision members that satisfy all bowl subdivision requirements. An institution shall be included as one of the eight full Football Bowl Subdivision members only if the institution participates in the conference schedule in at least six men’s and eight women’s conferencesponsored sports, including men’s basketball and football and three women’s team sports including women’s basketball. A conference-sponsored sport shall be a sport in which regular season and/or championship opportunities are provided, consistent with the minimum standards identified by the applicable NCAA sport committee for automatic qualification. (Adopted: 10/31/02 effective 8/1/05, Revised: 12/15/06) 20.02.6.1 Exception. A Football Bowl Subdivision member institution shall be permitted to count as one of its required six men’s sports and one of its required eight women’s sports a sport in which its conference does not sponsor or conduct a championship, provided the sport is one in which it participates in another Division I multi- or single-sport conference. Different sports may be counted for men and women. (Adopted: 4/29/04 effective 8/1/05, Revised: 12/15/06) 20.02.6.2 Grace Period. A conference shall continue to be considered a Football Bowl Subdivision conference for two years following the date when it fails to satisfy the eight full Football Bowl Subdivision member requirement due to one or more of its member’s failure to comply with the bowl subdivision membership requirements. (Adopted: 4/28/05 effective 8/1/05, Revised: 12/15/06) ******************** So for D1-A football you need 8 teams that are full members, if you fall below 8 teams that are full members you have 2 years to make that up the Big East without the basketball schools has 8 football teams that are also full members the Big East has UConn, Temple, Cincy, USF, UH, SMU, UCF, Memphis even after Louisville leaves and before Tulane joins as a full member and if they have an issue ECU can easily be a full member so football is taken care of *********************************************************** http://fs.ncaa.org/D...11_AQ Bylaw.pdf 31.3.4.2 Requirements—National Collegiate Championship. [#] To be eligible for automatic qualification in National Collegiate Championship, a member conference must meet the following general requirements: (Adopted: 1/9/06 effective 8/1/06) (a) Have at least six active members that sponsor the applicable sport in any division (note: a provisional member in the process of becoming an NCAA member cannot be used to meet the requisite number); ( The six active members must have conducted conference competition together for the preceding two years in the applicable sport; © There shall be no waivers of the two-year waiting period; and (d) Any new member added to a conference that is eligible for an automatic bid shall be immediately eligible to represent the conference as the automatic qualifier. 31.3.4.3 Notification—Automatic Qualification in Jeopardy. A governing sports committee must issue a written warning one year in advance to a conference that is in jeopardy of losing its automatic qualification. (Note: This regulation does not apply to the following championships in which a play-in system has been established: baseball, women’s softball, women’s volleyball and men’s soccer.) (Adopted: 10/3/06) ********************************************************************** so for sports besides basketball you need 6 teams that have been together for 2 years and you get a one year notification so the Big East without the basketball schools in 2013 will have Cincy, UConn, Temple, USF UH, UCF, SMU, Memphis as full members those 8 members will not have been together for 2 years......but they have to get a 1 year advance warning so depending on when the NCAA sends the required 1 year advance warning things could get tricky......if the basketball schools state their intention to leave for 2014 then the NCAA could potentially give notice at the same time and if that comes very soon then the warning year would be 2013 so the Big East would still have an AQ because the basketball schools would still be members in 2013 and the Big East would meet the requirements but they would not meet them for a single year in 2014......but by 2015 the above schools would have been together for 2 years......2013 and 2014 so they would qualify in 2105 for an AQ bid so the most they could be out at this point is a single year for sports besides basketball ************* additional rules for mens basketball 31.3.4.5 Additional Requirements, Men’s Basketball. The member conference must include seven core institutions. For the purposes of this legislation, core refers to an institution that has been an active member of Division I the eight preceding years. Further, the continuity-of-membership requirement shall be met only if a minimum of six core institutions have conducted conference competition together in Division I the preceding five years in men’s basketball. There shall be no exception to the five-year waiting period. Any new member added to a member conference that satisfies these requirements shall be immediately eligible to represent the conference as the automatic qualifier. (Revised: 8/14/90, 12/3/90, 4/27/00, 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04) 31.3.4.5.1 Grace Period. A conference shall remain eligible for automatic qualification for two years following the date of withdrawal of the institution(s) that causes the conference’s membership to fall below seven institutions, or below six members with continuity of membership, provided the conference maintains at least six Division I members. (Adopted: 4/27/00, Revised: 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04) ***************** 7 core institutions (a core institution is a member that has been D1-A for 8 years)......in 2013 the Big East will have that.....in 2014 they will have that as well even without the basketball schools then you need 6 teams that have been together for 5 years......the Big East will have that in 2013 because the basketball schools will be there in 2014 they will not have that they will have UConn, Cincy, and USF that have been together for 5+ years and the will have SMU, UH, Memphis, and UCF that have been together for 5+ years......but of course all 7 have not been together for 5 years there is also a two year grace period that starts AFTER the teams that leave break the continuity so that two year grace period would be 2014 and 2015 if the basketball schools leave after 2013......so if the Big East (without the basketball schools) is not able to find a solution they would not get a basketball AQ bid for 2016 and 2017 and after 2017 the above 7 schools would have been together for 5 years (2013-2017) the solution for that is for the above 7 schools to find a way to get ECU (as a full member) and Tulane to join at the same time that UH, SMU, UCF, and Memphis join.......because if ECU (as a full member) and Tulane both move at the same time that SMU, UH, UCF, and Memphis move then they would have 7 core members and 6 of those core members would have been together for 5 years......because SMU, UH, ECU, Tulane, Memphis, and UCF would have been together in CUSA for at least 5 years and if they all move for 2013 then they would stay together the rule does NOT say you have to be in the same conference you were always in.....it only states you had to be together in A conference.....or really it says you had to have "conducted conference competition" for the previous 5 years and if UH, SMU, Memphis, Tulane, UCF, and ECU (as a full member) all move to the Big East that will be 6 teams that "conducted conference competition" for the previous 5 years and any of the others USF, Cincy, Temple and UConn would make the 7th core member......so that group would get an AG for basketball and all other sports immediately if ECU (as a full member) and Tulane can jump from CUSA for 2013 instead of 2014 now some clown like carebareus would say "screw them" and "let them rot", but that is where it could backfire for the CUSA in 2013 if Tulane and ECU are forced to stay the CUSA will have UAB, USM, Marshall, Rice, Tulsa, and UTEP along with ECU and Tulane so in 2013 the CUSA will have 8 schools that have been together for 5 years......if ECU and Tulane were allowed to leave they would have 6 which is the min needed they will add LaTech, FIU, UTSA, and north Texas in 2013 so in 2014 without ECU and Tulane they will still have 6 teams together for 5 years (USM, UAB, Marshall, Rice, Tulsa, and UTEP) and they will start towards having 4 more teams (the 4 new ones) working towards two years and 5 years of being together BUT if things happen very quickly and the Big East knows they need to act for the 2013 season to get Tulane and ECU in.....and the CUSA says no you can't leave.....then all the Big East has to do is say they are inviting any one of or several of USM, UAB, Marshall, Rice, Tulsa, and UTEP) and if the can invite them for 2014 that would mean the CUSA would get a one year notice for all sports besides basketball and that notice would possibly be for the 2013 season because as soon as the invites go out the NCAA would know there is an issue and just like with the Big East if the CUSA had any of the 6 leave in 2014 that would mean in 2015 the CUSA would not be in compliance and would be out of AQ for the olympic sports in the 2015 season and for basketball it would be 2017 missed for an AQ in mens BB because the 2 year grace period would be 2015 and 2016 and compliance would not be in place for 2017 because the 4 new members and at least two of the 6 would not have been together for 5 years.....so the CUSA would not get an AQ in 2017 for mens basketball and it could be much worse for the CUSA if the Big East wants to make it tough on them for saying no to Tulane and ECU moving in 2013 if the Big East teams decided to invite 5 out of the 6 members (Rice, UAB, Marshall, USM, Tulsa, and UTEP) that would mean the CUSA would also not be in compliance for 2018 as well......because FIU, north Texas, LaTech, and UTSA + one other school is only 5 members together for 5 years......and only when FAU, and MTSU join in 2014 would the clock start on 6 members together for 5 years......so the remaining members of CUSA could be out of an AQ bid for 2017 and 2018 just like the Big East if ECU and Tulane are not allowed to move for 2013 and at that point facing that you never know what might happen depending on who is not invited would some jump ship to the Belt or the MAC and depending on who it could get really ugly if the big East really wanted to play games they could see if the MWC is interested in Tulsa or UTEP and take the remainig 4 AND they could take one of the members joining in 2014....that would mean continuity of 6 members would not start until 2015 and the CUSA would not get an auto bid for mens BB in 2017-2019 (3 years) or the Big East could ask 5 of the remaining 6 to join AND take either FAU and MTSU......that would also put the CUSA into a position of not getting an AQ bid for 2017-2019 because again there would not be 6 members together until the 2015 season and there would be a two year grace period out of 5 and really if the Big East makes the right moves more than likely a team like Marshall or FAU or MTSU of left out of the movement and looking at 2+ seasons without an AQ for mens BB they would be jumping back the the Belt or the MAC so the reality is the CUSA could be faced with a choice of letting Tulane and ECU go for the 2103 season and hanging on to Marshall, Rice, UAB, USM, UTEP, and Tulsa to have 6 members together for 5 years or they could say no and watch the Big East invite one of those members (and then possibly one or two of them beg for the MWC) and then the CUSA would at best be facing one year of non-AQ bids for all sports besides mens BB and facing a non-AQ bid for a year in mens BB as well and if the Big East was mad about that they could force the CUSA into a position of actually missing 2 or even 3 mens BB AQ bids and that would probably lead to others going back "home" or the the MAC and the CUSA would be in a world of hurt then if any team out of Rice, UAB, USM, UTEP, Tulsa or Marshall leaves the CUSA by 2014 then the CUSA will miss at least one AQ mens BB bid in 2017 and if 5 teams out of that 6 leave then the CUSA could be looking at 2 or more seasons with no AQ bid

more than likely what will happen if the basketball schools leave is the remaining football members of the Big East will support ECU and Tulane filing a lawsuit to leave the CUSA for 2013 and then the combination of UH, SMU, UCF and Memphis with ECU and Tulane will be 6 conference members that have played together for the required period of time to meet all NCAA participation requirements for championships and bowl games that would leave with CUSA barely having the membership (6 teams) having played together for the required period of time to also meet NCAA requirements for football and basketball bowl game and championship participation UAB, USM, Marshall, Rice, UTEP, Tulsa if the CUSA wanted to get ugly about it then the Big East teams could try and convince the MWC to go ahead and move on UTEP, Tulsa, or Rice or all three and leave the CUSA without the needed teams having participated for the required time for bowl and playoff participation if the MWC decided not to move then the Big East could try and make a move for Tulane, ECU along with Rice, UTEP, and Tulsa all moving next year and leave CUSA without the required number of schools and even if they end up and cannot win in the courts for immediate participation in the Big East for any of the needed schools by taking Rice, UTEP, and Tulsa even in 2014 that would leave the CUSA in the position of not being able to participate in bowls or playoffs for at least a year maybe two which would probably drive some other members to look elsewhere as well UH, SMU, Memphis, and UCF are not coming back to the CUSA and at the worst they will go a year without bowl and championship participation and then force the same or worse on CUSA or they will work some type of deal with the MWC to be "members" until they have all played together long enough to break off on their own with the required number of teams and time together to participate in championships and bowls.....and if they have to go that route you can be assured they will take enough teams with them into that "alliance" from the CUSA to make CUSA be the ones ending up not meeting participation requirements for two years I believe the requirement is 6 teams having played together for at least the last two years so SMU, UH, UCF and Memphis is 4 and with Tulane and ECU that is 6 (if they can all move together at the same time with those 6 UCONN, Temple, and Cincy could stay or go either way same with Boise and SDSU that would leave the CUSA with UAB, USM, Marshall, Rice, UTEP, Tulsa that have been together for two years if CUSA says that ECU and Tulane can't go next year with SMU, UCF, Memphis and SMU then look for UCF, Memphis, SMU and UH and most likely SDSU and Boise to ask MWC to allow those 6 along with Rice, UTEP, and Tulsa to be members for two years and ECU and Tulane for one year (and any of UCONN, Temple, and Cincy for two years) before they break away again and form a new conference meeting the requirements.....that would leave CUSA not meeting the requirements for at least a year if not two the teams associating with the MWC could offer them some or all of the NCAA basketball and Olympic sports credits for those two years to keep upon disassociation as an incentive and maybe even some bowl game proceeds

unfortunately the fact that this has never existed om GMG is exactly why the negativity has moved in so quickly there has never been an allowance for "varied" opinions on this forum much less a discussion based on anything close to facts or reality homerism, smoke up the butt blowing, green shunshine pumping, green koolaid and "the sleeping giant is going to awake and dominate" is all that has ever been allowed and when all that comes crashing down there will be a large % of those types that are angry their unbridled and ridiculous expectations are not met and they want someones head for that because of course they were 100% right that if things were done exactly how they wanted or imagined (even if their imagination was void of reality) then north Texas would be competing with the Cowboys for season ticket holders, taking fans from TCU, and joining the B1G or SEC or maybe having to settle for the Big 12 same with basketball.....ignoring the "team" was made up of guys that transferred in, guys that were not taking care of academics, and guys that could not deliver in the Sunbelt tournament and that with all the "success" north Texas had only been to 2 NCAA tournaments and lost in the first round of each.....then the coaching change.....but yet all these pieces were going to come together and just thrash the Sunbelt and probably make it to the round of 32 or maybe even the sweet 16 where anything could happen from there......instead we see the reality that coaching matters, it is hard to fit pieces into a team, and that players that leave other places for various reasons are often a risk and have trouble living up to their long ago expectations and hype same thing happening with BB at QB next year.....he has not played a down in two years......bounced all over the place without ever really even attempting to compete, but he is just going to light it up next year in a new conference that is suppose to be a move up from the Sunbelt having a conversation based on reality and on the fact that decades of apathy and ignoring athletics is not going to be turned around for the long haul in a season or two especially when you are just catching up to the lower/middle levels of NCAA sports in terms of financials and facilities fan and alumni support is still well below where north Texas sunshine pumpers consider it to be or should be is reacted to angrily and the "cool" GIFs and MEMEs come out and the other stupid comments from fools and then when things don't work out those same fools with the MEMEs and GIFs go even crazier

1. most any AD that had done half of what RV has done at north Texas would have left after Dr. Pohl left or for sure after Dr. B was fired because they would have realized they were in a place with unstable leadership 2. it is easy to say "hire this guy", but when your head coach makes 6 figures less than most coordinators in the Big 12 and SEC good luck hiring many of them in and even if you do manage to get one look at stAte and even places like Cincy that lose their coach every year or every other year.....it is pretty hard to build recruiting stability like that especially with the top recruits when they can look at Texas, OU, TCU, Baylor, OkState and others right in Texas and see they will most likely be playing for the same head coach the entire time I am sure RV ask many candidates if they would at least give some type of two or three year commitment and most probably said "I can't do that".....oook at the Ashton hire she specifically told RV she was here for the long term unless one school called and to RV do you really expect that coach G is going to resign from Texas the next year and that UT will call Ashton.....I am sure he figured he had at least 3 years with her and maybe longer because coach G would either get it worked out at Texas or Texas would look for a coach with experience.....well how did that work out 3. look how long it took JJ to get something going in BB and that takes a lot less players to turn it around.....if JJ had left after year 4 or even year 6 then north Texas might be on their 3rd coach since then if you want to give a guy 3 years to get it going 4. RV is one of the lowest paid ADs out there especially for having AD experience when he was hired and for being at north Texas so long....who are you going to get to replace him with any type of experience or are you looking for on the job training 5. some might say that RV did not leave after Pohl left or after Dr. B left because no one wanted him....I believe he wants things to work here, but even if they don't he is plenty confident he can get another AD job or even an associate AD job some place that will pay as well or nearly as well as north Texas so why just leave when he doesn't have to while a younger AD would have probably left first chance for more money or more administration stability and much more program resources...hell at this point RV could probably get back into coaching at a low level in college and with any success be making as much or more money than he makes as AD at north Texas 6. most ADs are not exactly young so why would a younger guy leave a program where they make about the same money (if not more money), they have more staff, they have more administrative stability, and they have more resources to make their job easier and they have the potential to take over when the old guy finally retires or they can move to another major program when their old guy retires 7. as was said RV had 250K to get a coach when Todge was hired......good luck getting someone that would win for that and good luck getting them to stay longer than 2 years.....it is a 50/50 chance they will win at all no matter who they are or what they are paid and sure it is nice to say "well at least stAte has those two years to talk about" but they could have just as easily had someone that did not win or they can end up sooner than later looking at a program that has a hard time recruiting because they lack program stability and the reality is their boosters were who paid the freight to hire the coaches and update the facilities it was not from a massive increase in fan support because they were winning and the boosters paid the freight for the upgrade BEFORE they were sure that Malzan would win.....just like SMU......SMU SMU SMU SMU did not wait until JJ was hired and got the program to a bowl game before they coughed up money they coughed up money to get him in the first place......what do you expect RV to do hold a gun to boosters heads and demand money I am sure he would welcome a check and some input on coaching hires and at this point if you don't trust him to make the hire then do what other programs do and cut a check to replace RV.....otherwise things are probably not going to change especially at north Texas as long as the budgets are in line, facilities improve, and gender equity stays in control and there are no major grade issues or recruiting/other scandals 8. the BOR and lee the idiot could care less about athletics and really the Denton campus in general the BOR for north Texas is a bunch of ride the pine types and "hey I am a BOR member for a university" types they have no vision they get that fed to them from lee the idiot and lee the idiot cares about econmic development plans in dallas and shifting the focus from Denton to dallas....VLR is not "athletics friendly" he is just not athletics adverse he never opened the check book at WSU or Memphis and he had issues with what Price was paid at WSU that helped lead to Price leaving so VLR is not going to spend cash to replace an AD and he is not going to open the check book for an AD with experience and a magic donations wand and a rolodex filled with coaches that come cheap and only win (as of that exist) so RV is going nowhere anytime soon unless RV wants to leave or unless someone cuts a check to pay for RV to go away

that would be very hard to do when the CUSA TV contract only pays out 1.17 million per year per team NCAA 30 pushes really hard for north Texas on the MWC forum

this has been discussed plenty, but people refuse to accept the reality of it and that is part of the issue 1. who are you A. a large catch all university on the fringes of a very large metro area with other better known universities B. you have a large respected music school, but even it does not bring huge attention because it is poorly supported by the university overall and it does everything it can to distance itself from the university as a whole.....there are also a number of other mucis programs in Texas that are well known, have particular subsets of music that are as respected if not more respected and those programs have much better funding and interact and represent the university as a whole much more proactively C. other than music pretty much every other program out there that has respect has at least one if not more programs right in the metro area that are as respected if not more respected especially when it comes to the recognition programs....as flawed as the US News rankings are people read them and for individual programs and areas of study there are few other rankings Business....SMU, TCU and UTD all much better known and more respected and I don't see anything that places north Texas ahead of UTA either Education.....not really a program that relies on rankings to help with job prospects, but TCU is only a few places behind and The State of Texas has a number of other higher ranked programs including UT that has been ranked #1 Baylor is ranked higher and so is UTSA Hard and Physical Sciences.....between UTD, UTA, and SMU just in the metro area there are going to be programs ranked higher if not much higher in most every area and that is just in the metromess and really the offerings are not that strong....no Geology or geosciences, geography is just so so, and the other areas lack any real strong focus in any specific area of any recognition Soft and Social Sciences......same as hard and physical sciences and other programs....RTVF.....it has some good job placement because of the DFW metro area, but it is bloated as far as the number of students admitted relative to the number of faculty and facilities and a vast majority of the graduates will get a piece of paper and go to work in something else....the program would be MUCH better served by limiting enrollment, investing a great deal more money, and then not allowing students to declare that as a major until after 60 hours and perhaps after serving some type of internship or working at the student radio in a lower level position as well......but north Texas is a numbers game and anything that limits warm bodies is highly frowned upon and that is one of the main issues overall along with lack of focus on anything other than music and even then it is poorly funded and supported relative to other respected programs.....because north Texas does not raise private money well period Hotel Restaurant......this should be something north Texas excels at......instead it is just like RTVF only without the known graduates and with even less funding and less faculty support.....and in Texas UH is the top dog and one of the best in the USA and Texas Tech is well ahead of north Texas as well and does much better placing graduates in that field especially in the DFW area...surprisingly UTA, SMU, or TCU has not looked at this program to start one and UT and TAMU do not offer it either...so north Texas should be much better known.....but they drop the ball on support and on managing enrollment.....and just in general Library Science.....most schools don't offer this....highly ranked at north Texas......but TWU is also well respected and if you are going to be in a small program some would just assume be in a small program at a smaller school right in the same city and it is still a very female oriented degree program and north Texas has a lot of focus on distance and adult/post graduate education in this field.....which means people not being sports fans or even on campus for.....sport......and there is the UT factor where they are #8 and have a much broader and better supported program as well and they have....sport programs that are still in demand as far as jobs go Engineering.....north Texas is extremely weak even in the metro area with UTA, SMU, and UTD all much more respected and with much more broad programs and if you get outside the metro area it just gets worse for north Texas Health Care.....non existent at north Texas...no nursing, the pharmacy program is not up and running yet and when it is they have specifically designed it and are marketing it as a program that does not need people to even attend a 4 year university (much less one in Denton) before applying for admission and it will belong to TCOM in Fort Worth, no focus on healthcare management other than in the Library Science program and that is record keeping D. admission.....north Texas is much further from the schools they wish to be compared to and much closer to those they wish not to be compared to UT, TAMU, UTD, SMU, TCU all with much higher admissions requirements and Tech is much higher as well and has been for decade or more it is a simple fact that can be proven by looking at the current admissions standards and by looking on the webarchive site for past admissions......and UH is not slightly above north Texas and UTA and TxState are basically the same and UTSA is moving to be the same as well though UTSA guarantees individual reviews at lower metrics so they don't kill their enrollment by raising them so rapidly plenty will argue this as always, but it is all right there on the WWW under GUARANTEED admissions for each school and then the webarchive has past admissions pages stored if you do not believe that some schools have been much higher for a long time or if you want to see how some schools have increased theirs over time so again a large catch all school that has several other better known schools right in the metro area or at least one if not several other schools in the metro area or especially the state that offer better known or larger and better supported individual programs of study and the few where north Texas might have an edge are either very small programs even at north Texas or they tend to attract people that are not as interested in....sport 2. How did we get here A. poor administrative leadership......north Texas tends to choose man off the street or guy already sitting in a chair in the office next door as a leader and the one time in recent history they went outside of that to hire someone it ended in disaster (shout out to Dr. in 1981 al the fool hurley had been at north Texas for about a year and a half as some admin paper pusher and when the current president retired al happened to occupy the chair in the office next door I guess so they just tapped him......enter 19 years of "leadership" that focused on warm bodies and tuition collection....no fund raising....no organized effort to make any specific popular/"name" program of study into something special.......most everything was done on the cheap....RTVF, Hotel Restaurant, Business, all pretty much ignored and allowed to just get warm bodies in the door and to churn out degrees with little facilities or faculty support.....the RTVF building was pretty much a disaster most of the time until it was remodeled in the very late 90s and even then enrollment is still too large and knocking down the old house that housed KUNT was not a popular decision at all especially since they knocked it down for no good reason other than to knock it down......while college inn still stands today! business cramped up in the two buildings they used to have....no fund raising, no real areas of focus.....just a large collection of tuition paying warm bodies keeping al and the gang in a job engineering....the move from the department of engineering technology to a college of engineering was a disaster....they had to drop civil engineering technology (and any chance of a civil engineering program/department) because it was not going to get accredited and that left many students in a bind....right before the economic/building boom of 2000 to 2007.....they finally changed the name/focus to construction engineering technology and were able to get accredited in 2010 the CS department was placed on accreditation probation the Mechanical Engineering Technology department that became mechanical engineering has STILL not been ABET accredited as mechanical (and energy) engineering though the mechanical engineering technology focus in the ETEC department is the Materials Science department is not accredited and has had a large turnover in faculty because of lack of support and they lost many well respected professors over that time period only electrical has been able to get accredited as a full engineering program without issues the nuclear engineering technology program is basically in a coma....again an area where north Texas could have something few offer and it is allowed to wallow in nothingness B. finally the warm body in the chair al hurley retires.....well why not just bump up Pohl.....because after all we have been doing "so well" all these years with no plan lets keep that plan going C. Pohl knows that degree programs need to be dumped, tenure requirements need to be elevated, new focus areas need to be developed and probably even some new degree programs.....but alas he is just the old right hand man from the last warm body.....so he wisely gets out while he can D.Dr B comes in......the focus goes to "peas studies".....full scholarships for C students.....but at least she realized that tenure requirements are horrible....but the guy from Syracuse she hires to help out turns out to be a disaster and is caught plaigerizing the "goals" right off the SU website and he alienates a large portion of the faculty with his tenure handling (which also shows how ingrained the old warm body faculty attitude is after 20 years of al and company) but at least Dr. B is smart enough to see that the "system" and lee the idiot are robbing north Texas-Dentn blind with the UCD, law school, south dallas, and the movement of the system offices....she stands up to al....she is fired north Texas gets a retired guy while they look for "the guy"...."the guy" turns out to be the retired guy in the chair already after next to no real search old multipage goal oriented and focused university plan with actual dollars and cents goals spelled out clearly is dumped for new tagline, swag bags, and cold hot dogs E. still no organized fundraising of any significance since 1981....meanwhile Tech, UT, and TAMU have had at least two if not three endowment campaigns in that time period....sure there is a mention of a campaign from sometime in 2000 on the WWW for 120 million, but it was clearly not advertised, never actually went public, and the meeting of the "goal" is questionable at best......which is why out of the 8 emerging research universities in Texas north Texas is 6th in endowment and well behind Tech, UH, UTD, and UTEP and all of those 4 are in the middle of or just closing in on the end of campaigns and TxState is just ending one and UTSA has just had a very successful start to one and UTA probably will shortly after they get a new president....meanwhile in lil' ole' Denton there was talk (on this forum) about a big September announcement.....well as usual that came and went with nothing other than 2 million for renovating an old gym for BB practice so no leadership, no fundraising, no focus on specific areas of study, no looking to the future of areas of study, resistance to change, poor handling of change, lack of administration leadership for 20 years followed by rapid turn over in leadership, plans that were developed scrapped for dogs and swag, more "guy in the chair" hires, focus on unneeded and highly wasteful and THECB non-recommended dallas economic development programs at the great expense of Denton all while SMU, TCU, UTD, Tech, UH, Baylor marched on and even while UTSA woke up and UTA is waking up and moving quickly especially on campus atmosphere and while TxState had very aggressive leadership that saw the need to develop in demand degree programs SUCCESSFULLY like nursing, other health related areas, and engineering and they did so with a very sharp focus on specific areas of those fields of study that were being ignored by others around them or that were in high demand in the area they are in....and they raised a lot of private and corporate dollars to help do so along the way.....and they had a large amount of faculty support and city support.....and they also put together a very focused from the top administration down athletics development program and then successfully executed it which gets us to 3. north Texas athletics specifically A. for pretty much all of the north Texas existence the question was not "why not north Texas" and that was because the answer was already there....."because it is not going to be north Texas".....no ability to raise money......facilities are what they are.....coaches are just the guy in the chair from somewhere that we can get cheap......take a back seat to ANYTHING else going on with the university or university facilities.....north Texas simply had an administration that wanted to put no time, effort, and especially cash into athletics and they were proud of that and al hurley was there for nearly 20 years of that from 1981 to 2000 when the greatest changes in college athletics, TV, ESPN, and everything else was going on....and al sat in his warm chair smug in his decisions and just happy to collect his check and attract apathetic warm tuition paying bodies like he always did that leads to A. alumni that will never care....because they will never care about athletics because they never did care B. alumni that have moved on to NASCAR, their spouse or spousal equivalents university sports teams, pro sports, the fun team in what area they currently live in that values them as a ticket holder and supporter C. lack of fund raising even when finally allowed to be solicited D. poor facilities that are decades behind all of that combines to make the ability to catch up a monumental task that requires exponentially greater investments of money and effort than what the others around you (that are still making sometimes very large investments of their own) are doing so you have a small donor base, that is not used to giving, a reputation as a school to go to to not be around obnoxious sports oriented "students", alumni that have moved on, and a huge need to invest time and effort......after 20 years of some of the largest growth in investment in sports at the college level in history...everyhwere but at north Texas (and anywhere else that does not care) so leadership that not only did not care, but was against sports investment....the greatest growth period for sports investment wasted and allowed to pass by, a massive alumni base that might never come back or that has moved on and will only come back after the hard work is done if ever and even when investments were finally made leadership turnover at the top was still in play and will be in play again.....and the truth is VLR is not so much "athletics friendly" as he is not "athletics adverse" as past administrations were.....so the exponential investment of resources and time is just not going to come......while others still invest and some do so at very high rates because they have those past alumni, their support, and their cash and they have nice facilities and are just adding more to those instead of catching up so in the end you are just "a university" out of a large number to choose from in the metro area, in the state, and even in the region (where OU, OkState, and Arkansas recruit top Texas students with in state tuition wavers and ther financial support).....for most every area of study you can mention there are others often several in the metro area that can say the same much less in the state and region......most of them have "sport" as well and have for a long time......you still have the rep as the place to go to avoid the cult of TAMU, or the Burnt Orange Crazed UT fan (ther than those on your own campus) and you have all those wasted years and decades and you still have catching up to do after very large increases in spending and you will have more admin turnover sooner than later and the admin you have now is not the type that will make exponential increases in athletics spending especially after all that has been recently spent and more than likely with lee the idiot at the very top the next hire will be very "man in the chair" like and will not be athletics-centric and will sit by and watch more resources diverted to dallas economic development plans

got the program out from under gender equity issues raised more money for athletics than robably all of the previuos ADs combined helped convince the admins to build the athletics village got the stadium built got the golf team some nice facilities facilities for tennis helped convince the admins to buy the Liberty Christian campus no sports have been cut from a school that is mostly bad in every program and that has a very small athletics budget, poor fan and financial support in their entire history, and that has a lot of debt from building/aquiring new facilities ADs are hired to me administrators and while they are responsible for coaching hires all they can do is hire the best candidates that are realistically available for the actual money available to pay them the wins and losses are on the coaches as long as the program is within budget, maintaining/building new facilities as possible, and there are no major issues with grades and the like across all programs an AD is usually safe the reality is RV helped north Texas move conferences as well......there was not a chance in hell that it was realistic to expect north Texas to move into the CUSA the first time around.......sure the sunshine pumpers and the BSers can claim that the "sleeping giant factor" was there for them to want, but that is a joke in the eyes of anyone, but idiots.....there was ZERO committment to athletics at north Texas the first time the CUSA expanded and that had changed by the time things changed conference wise again......sure conferences had blown up completely by then and north Texas was pretty much the only option for CUSA, but the truth of the matter is UTSA got in as well and TxState was considered and if things had been going along as they had before with fouts, and not much else some other program would have gotten the call the reality is north Texas has BARELY caught up to the schools that many consider they have been "competiting with" or "equal to" for the last 2 decades and those programs are NOT sitting still so just because you finally caught up does not mean they are not looking to leave you behind again it is a simple FACT that RV had interferance in "his job" dealing with DD and it is a fact RV had interferance in "his job" dealing with Dr B and the 26.4 meters of heat shanice stephens hire RV has been here through 4 president changes and again the truth is north Texas is probably going to be changing presidents again sooner than later because the current one was "hired" as a temp and then took over with NO SEARCH for a replacement and is going into his late 70s also the reality is that VLR is not "athletics friendly" he is more "athletics tolerant" here is a thread from the WSU forum talking about Mike Price and WSU and VLR http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=137&f=1995&t=10508335 half way down it starts talking about how VLR is not comfortable spending huge money on coaches salaries and having them make more than the university admins that I am sure has not changed now at north Texas.....the VAST majority if not all of the student fee is going towards the stadium fee....that was not new found fun money......most of it is spent and is spent for the next 20+ years there was not even a hwimper of talking about the "automatic fee increase" that everyone on this forum was so sure was just going to automatically get a rubber stamp......and next year..I would say it is 99.99% sure to NOT be increased again if you change ADs now there is no guarantee you will get what you want.....RV is paid VERY LOW compared to most ADs out there so you are not going to get some heavy hitter that is proven to come in and make that kind of money.....VLR is NOT going to pay for a heavy hitter period......and no matter who you get there is no proof that their grand new plans will make it with whoever replaces VLR while you might not like the RV plan or the results it would be much harder for a new president to go against the plans that have been in place and moved forward through the previous 4 administrations and it would e very easy for them to go against the new plans of an AD that had been in place for only a few years before they took over as president you are not going to make up for 4+ decades of totally ignoring athletics, having a total university rep as apathetic to athletics, and decades of poor budgets over night period.....you can wish it is so, but it is not.....so if you are willing to take the risk of getting an on the cheap young unproven AD with litte sway and proven history, having him in place for yet another president change over.....and possibly looking at "well we are in CUSA with a stadium that is that" well then go for it......but when it results in more of what went on for 3 decades before RV arrived well you can complain about that 30 years from now when you maybe start to invest in athletics again at ANY level RV hires who is available with the MONEY THAT IS AVAILABLE and there is not a hge money tree out there and if there was RV would be shaking it....and if it was a north Texas money tree it would drop plug nickles and Canadian pennies

hell I would fire Nick Saban if he found a way to lose to a team that is not on the schedule and it is win/LOSS column

DMac has a new stajium the school "owns" right on campus.....a new billion dollar athletics village with two ponds and a bridge (finally)......a stable conference to recruit to......bowl tie ins.......two milleniums of "history".......his record from ISU......his ring from Florida...... oh wait that is all for some other thread what is the excuse for TxState they have 3 wins so far with a game left against one of the worst programs in D1-A one of their wins was D1-AA, but Stephen F. Austin is way better than TSU and Idaho is about like USA and they beat UH at UH and on fact pounded them so that is at least good as the Louisiana win so if they beat NMSU they will have the same record as north Texas......in a stajium that seats a few hundred less....that was only remodeled not new.....with a smaller budget.....moving up this year not 18 years ago.....no bridge.....and their ponds are not on the stajium grounds and one used to have a PIG swim in it and no TMitch! and no billion dollar athletics compound and Fran does not have a MNC ring and he eats little debbies

doesn't one kind of have to ask what the belt is losing when they "lose" FAU?

if you get "your ducks in a row" for that nonsense you will be floating in a cesspool all on your own because there is little if any chance of that happening you can dream stupid dreams all you wish, but reality says they are not going to happen so there is no snese dreaming them Texas and OU are not going west to the PAC period.....the LHN is bad enough for UT fans as it is and then to go west and lose the LHN and the cash to have games on at midnight is a non-starter for them it would be a total failure also you are pretending that teams like KU, OkState, KSU and the like that have actually been to and won BCS games in recent memory are going to be left out in the cold while Wake Forest, several members of the old BE, and other crappy teams will somehow not be ditched by their conferences if for some reason conferences started to ditch teams the SEC did not sign up with the Big 12 for a Sugar Bowl game to watch the Big 12 fall apart suddenly and for their members to scatter and the conference to fold or worse for the conference to "reload" after UT and OU leave.....the SEC could have signed the same deal with the ACC if they wanted to and they looked to the Big 12 and they looked to the Big 12 with TCU, Baylor, Tech, KU, KSU, and OkState in it and they signed the deal with that CONFERENCE not with UT and OU and wherever OU and UT end up "going" you are pretending that UT, OU, and WVU are somehow going to "get the call" and two of them are going to the PAC to play teams that mostly suck that their fans don't give a damn about, and WVU is going to the ACC or SEC and they are going to leave their TV deal and money behind and their deal with the SEC for the Sugar Bowl behind for WHAT?????? and you are pretending that the 7 out of 10 teams that would be left behind would not be able to find 3 teams to step in and take that money and championship spot with 3 phone calls and instead they would have to look at sunbelt and Conference USA leftovers to form up a new conference that has nothing....good luck with that wish even if UT and OU did leave for some reason why would WVU leave....to go to the ACC....for less TV money, a crappier bowl deal....and to get out from the conference they wanted to be in and get into the conference others are LEAVING......oh yea that makes sense..... pay a ton of money or give up TV rights for over a decade to make LESS money in the ACC with a crappier bowl game and LESS stability...BRILLIANT!

1. the only revenue that would ever have any possibility of being "shared equally" (and that possibility is zero) is TV revenue and even if you took 100% of the TV revenue away from UT they would still have 100 million more in budget than north Texas and you are not entitled to their ticket or merchandise sales or their private donations even if you are an obama voter 2. there was no black balling Hayden Fry has said this in his book it is clear as day others can try and refute that, but he was the AD and the coach at the time and he has put it in writing the others have "his memory is slipping" as their proof which is pure BS 3. the reason north Texas has no allies is because others are busy building their own programs and don't have the time to drag north Texas along with them kicking and screaming the whole way......I don't see north Texas helping out UTSA or TxState and in fact I see many on here that would love to have them go away look at the above stupid 120 "equality" divisions above......notice how it leaves out UTSA and TxState and two other schools......yet north Texas still expects charity from others.....pretty pathetic 4. north Texas has not accepted "black balling" because it has not happened.....north Texas fans, supporters, and administrators have accepted praticipation trophies and demands for "equality" (while trying to black ball others and leave them behind and not associating with them) because they don't care to actually do the work temselves they prefer to demand others do it for them and then cry when others laugh at that and move on for themselves 5. what are the benefits of SMU and TCU being with north Texas.....TCU got into the Big 12 without the "help" of north Texas and SMU got into the CUSA and Big East without north Texas....and what is the media going to make them "answer for?".....not dragging the little sisters of the poor along?.......doing something that Hayden Fry has stated in writing was never done?......looking out for their own programs as they should?........doing the same exact thing that north Texas fans want to do to UTSA and TxState?.....should north Texas have to answer for not championing the cause of UTSA and TxState as well? 6. you said it yourself.....what should UTEP "answer for?" the refusal of north Texas to care or have a vision or make any effort to me anything more than the lowest rung on the ladder

I would put it well below the irony of of a thread on a message board for a team that has not had a winning season in nearly a decade and that has a single NCAA bowl win in their history pointing out the "downfall" of teams that played in a won a bowl game last year and that have won more bowl games in the last few years than another program has won in their history (UH and SMU) or a team that is probably going to win more games this year than the last three years combined for north Texas (La Tech) but other than that carry on!

one issue that can't be ignored is that while the team will be older, more experienced, and have played together as a group for a while some of that benefit is lost upon moving to the new conference.....now those guys that know the tendencies of players and coaches from other teams based on past experience will not have that they will be starting over fresh watching all new teams in the conference with all new game film, all new tendencies, and all new habits so while they will have the years of playing together to help them they lose the benefit of being the knowledgeable veteran filled team that knows what to expect when they enter into the stadium and game of other teams in the conference sure the other conference teams will not know what to expect from north Texas as well, but that is just a single game for them VS an entire conference slate of games...and north Texas and Tulsa did play last year, but they have a new coach since them and relying on players that did not work out at their former schools and that have not played a down of football for at least a year and possibly more if you count meaningful minutes or more than mop up time is quite a stretch especially at the QB, running back, and WR positions......that is quite a lot of rust to wear off and jell right out of the shoot.....and that is if those players are close to being as imagined this experience can be relived pretty much any morning, noon, or evening in New Orleans any time of the year

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/player/_/id/73058/tony-mitchell Scout Grade 95 8 POSITION NR REGIONAL NR STATE 24th ^^^^ is 4*s http://espn.go.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/player/_/id/113689/danuel-house Scout Grade 97 6 POSITION 5 REGIONAL 5 STATE 19th ^^^^^ is 5*s so one star higher, 2 position rankings better, ranked in regional and state, and 5 positions better in the ESPN 100. and 2 points higher in the scouting grade so much for that discussion I am pretty sure that many members of Phi Slamma Jamma, several NBA hall of famers, Carl Lewis, a Heisman Trophy winner, several multi-PGA event winners, and numerous NFL stars would also be glad to compare their accomplishments and probably even their "recruiting ranking" from way back when they were in high school as well.....we won't bring up the sore spot of baseball.... but even if you want to just stick to high school recruiting rankings there is an example already from just last year where UH signed a higher ranked player than north Texas did and in basketball even

which means they stay put 99% chance

SEC is not a chance in hell and Big 12 is very little if any chance especially if the ACC is going to lose teams

to where CUSA?

probably a good move