Big East not looking

[eulesseagle]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06200/706762-144.stm

The last paragraph.

[Got5onIt]

I know I'm dreaming here but.....

Why would the Big East pass up a chance at getting a foot into one of the best recruiting pools in the country? Yes folks, you know where I'm headed with this.

North Texas into the Big East in 2009!

[eulesseagle]

Got5onIt--

With the Big East expanding in football UNT would be part of the trickle down effect by the B.E. taking one or more schools from different conference....lets say CUSA or somewhere else which then other conferences would look for replacements.

The best chance for UNT to move up would be another conference shake up.

[SilverEagle]

You know, I'm getting kind of tired of us hoping for some "trickle-down" benefit from some conference shake-up. To me, it's like getting nothing but the left-overs at a meal.

I like Got5onIts' attitude. It's the same mind set that Hayden Fry used to have. (Yes! I've mentioned Hayden Fry again. If all you young board members don't like it, you can kiss my lime-green back-side.) Hayden Fry never talked about trying to get into the WAC, he talked about getting into the SWC.

I say we go to the B-12 and make an assertive presentation. I'd tell them that the Texas/OU game is only once a year. If we were in the B-12 conference, they would have more like 5 or 6 additional metroplex games to enhance their recruiting. I would point out that TCU's membership in the Mountain West has given that conference a multi-game presence in the Metroplex, and has the potential to erode one of the B-12's more fertile recruitment areas. I would also point out that SMU's CUSA membership has re-established CUSA presence.

I would then tell them that we were going to make the same presentation to the B-East and the SEC....and any other conference that was forward thinking enough to listen.

[Got5onIt]

I say we go to the B-12 and make an assertive presentation. I'd tell them that the  Texas/OU game is only once a year. If we were in the B-12 conference, they would have more like 5 or 6 additional metroplex games to enhance their recruiting.  I would point out that TCU's membership in the Mountain West has given that conference a multi-game presence in the Metroplex, and has the potential to erode one of the B-12's more fertile recruitment areas.  I would also point out that SMU's CUSA membership has re-established CUSA presence.

I would then tell them that we were going to make the same presentation to the B-East and the SEC....and any other conference that was forward thinking enough to listen.

←

Sounds like an excellent plan!

Just think of the look on the face of the Big 12 commissioner if he heard the Big East was meeting with North Texas.

[NT80]

You know, I'm getting kind of tired of us hoping for some "trickle-down" benefit from some conference shake-up. To me, it's like getting nothing but the left-overs at a meal.

I like Got5onIts' attitude. It's the same mind set that Hayden Fry used to have. (Yes! I've mentioned Hayden Fry again. If all you young board members don't like it, you can kiss my lime-green back-side.) Hayden Fry never talked about trying to get into the WAC, he talked about getting into the SWC.

I say we go to the B-12 and make an assertive presentation. I'd tell them that the  Texas/OU game is only once a year. If we were in the B-12 conference, they would have more like 5 or 6 additional metroplex games to enhance their recruiting.  I would point out that TCU's membership in the Mountain West has given that conference a multi-game presence in the Metroplex, and has the potential to erode one of the B-12's more fertile recruitment areas.  I would also point out that SMU's CUSA membership has re-established CUSA presence.

I would then tell them that we were going to make the same presentation to the B-East and the SEC....and any other conference that was forward thinking enough to listen.

←

The Big East is looking, they're not fooling anyone saying otherwise. Memphis fits their needs. If we act like we deserve and want a better conference like CUSA or better, they will take us seriously. It's all in the actions. Fry would say "can't" is not in his book. I miss that attitude.

[GreenEddieNT]

The Big East is looking, they're not fooling anyone saying otherwise.  Memphis fits their needs.  If we act like we deserve and want a better conference like CUSA or better, they will take us seriously.  It's all in the actions.   Fry would say "can't" is not in his book.  I miss that attitude.

←

Exactly. The Big-12 boat sailed the moment we didn't get into the SWC. Just to put it into proper perspective. When the Big-12 was formed Baylor was putting more than twice as many butts in the seats as we ever have, had better facilities than we have now, had more tradition than we have, and actually had a long time relationship with Big-12 schools. With all of that it still took some arm-twisting on the part of Ann Richards just to get Baylor the last Big-12 spot. So if Baylor who had more things going for it than we do right now was barely able to get in what makes anyone think we have a fighting chance. The DFW market is already Big-12 territory. It's owned by the Big-12 schools not by any of the local schools. On top of that we don't have anyone powerful in the government that is going to be twisting arms to get us in even if we suddenly started putting 50K butts in the seats for FB and 10K for BB and were winning enough to get the Big-12's attention. The only non-bcs school in TX that has FB and BB facilities and fan support even comparable to some Big-12 schools is UTEP and even they don't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting in. The Big-12 isn't looking for fillers at this point. They want schools that are going to bring in mega-millions of dollars. The BCS leagues aren't going to add anyone that doesn't add more money to the pot than what they take out. The only reason the Big East added non-bcs schools is because they needed at least 8 members for football. Even then they added only enough to satisfy their needs because any more would have ended up costing them money. I just don't see any non-bcs schools that bring in the big money that BCS conferences want so I don't see any more non-bcs schools moving up to one of the big six conferences. Our best chance to get out of the Belt was 2 years ago when we had a chance to join the WAC. At this moment I have a feeling our next chance to get out is going to be a long time in coming.

Edited July 21, 2006 by GreenEddieNT

[NDT]

Why would the Big East pass up a chance at getting a foot into one of the best recruiting pools in the country? Yes folks, you know where I'm headed with this.

North Texas into the Big East in 2009!

North Texas in the Big East makes about as much sense as putting the Dallas Cowboys in the NFC East. Where is Tex Schram when you need him?

[DeepGreen]

All I know is, when I hear the name Big East, a BCS freaking conference for crying out loud, I think of South Florida. Yes, <10 year old football program and they are now in a BCS conference. I use to laugh when I heard they were making the transition from 1AA to 1A for football. Now I'm crying.

[PlummMeanGreen]

All I know is, when I hear the name Big East, a BCS freaking conference for crying out loud, I think of South Florida.  Yes, <10 year old football program and they are now in a BCS conference.  I use to laugh when I heard they were making the transition from 1AA to 1A for football.  Now I'm crying.

←

And U of Central Florida is another upstart program that seems to be as ambitous with their big time plans as USF. Question: Who were both of these Florida school's football teams playing the same day the Mean Green beat the University of Tennessee back in 1975?

And DG, based on our long-standing tradition, history and uncanny ability to run-in-place and get nowhere fast with the occasional appearance of taking a giant step forward with athletics.............AND.............with new NT leadership and administrations wee-weeing their territory as to make their statements that they will definitely do things different than their predeccessors AND then with the usual(& subsequent) retreating of 2 or more giant steps backwards athletically; anyway, Deep Green, with the aforementioned as our constant mode of operation in Denton, where do you see Florida Atlantic U (who we have yet to beat in 2 attempts & one of those losses to a "then" 5 year old football program during a, uh, "bowl" year); anyway, where do you see FAU and Florida International U in 10 years (as compared to UNT)? I feel like our history would (unfortunately) give us a huge clue as for as the answer to that question goes.

I look at GrayEagleOne's post below and can easily understand how someone who has followed this program since the 1940's must feel even more frustration with what we are getting than those of use "late-comers" who started following this during the Hayden Fry era. It has been a constant roller-coaster ride with (seemedly) more valleys than peaks.

We all know what Darrell K Royal said about potential now don't we. Well, UNT (all these years later) still remains the (forever) sleeping giant with, uh, potential, but with changing leadership that always seems to vascillate on what direction they feel UNT needs to set its ship asail athletically (with hirings and contract extensions of those hirings of late that suggest they probably don't have much more plans to see us go up the NCAA D1-A ladder and present level, ie, the SBC/Bottom 10 AND..............

..............UNT leadership who seem to cannot ever identify and then hire the kind of campus fund-raisers who have all the right contact$ or abilities to develop the right kind of contact$ in our "Fortune 500 companies-rich" North Texas Metroplex or to raise the mega-bucks that could get UNT athletics jump-started like never before and in a direction that suggests higher athletic ambitons than the present. Most of all, though, to raise the the kind of Big Buck$ (could be wrong, but most likely not to be found from those of us registered with GMG.com) as to get us pointed in a positive and upwardly mobile direction and out of this constant annual state of UNT being the sleeping giant with all this, uh..............."potential."

Edited July 22, 2006 by PlummMeanGreen

[NT91]

The BIG 13?

Edited July 22, 2006 by NT91

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

I'll have to agree that the Big East is not looking to expand at this time. They are already at 16 teams and adding either one or four football schools would make for a very unwieldy conference.

When the non-Division 1A schools break off to form a new conference, then the Big East may look to expand. Remember, for BCS bowl purposes Notre Dame is considered a member of the Big East. Louisville and West Virginia are doing well now and look for a resurgence from Pittsburgh. Why would they want to split the money more ways?

While I would prefer CUSA membership over any other conference, it looking less and less like that is where our future is. Even if there was an opening it's very possible that we would be as low as third in the choice for replacements. We could make a presentation to the Big XII, but we know that there is no opening and it is almost a lock that there won't be in the next couple of decades. The only possibility as I see it would be for the Big Ten to take either Missouri or Iowa State and that's highly unlikely. Almost as remote would be to become TCU's travel partner in the MWC. That would require a new stadium and getting the average season attendance to 30,000.

The only real chance to advance would be the WAC. I know, we say it's too expensive and in later time zones. Then tell me, how and why has Louisiana Tech survived? My observation would be because they want to be in a better conference and it's not as costly as we think it is.

What I expect us to do is nothing and stay where we are for well past my remaining lifetime. But, until we can get some teams up near the Top 50 the Belt is going to be considered the dregs of Division 1-A.

[NT80]

While I would prefer CUSA membership over any other conference, it looking less and less like that is where our future is.  Even if there was an opening it's very possible that we would be as low as third in the choice for replacements.  We could make a presentation to the Big XII, but we know that there is no opening and it is almost a lock that there won't be in the next couple of decades.  The only possibility as I see it would be for the Big Ten to take either Missouri or Iowa State and that's highly unlikely.  Almost as remote would be to become TCU's travel partner in the MWC.  That would require a new stadium and getting the average season attendance to 30,000. 

The only real chance to advance would be the WAC.  I know, we say it's too expensive and in later time zones.  Then tell me, how and why has Louisiana Tech survived?  My observation would be because they want to be in a better conference and it's not as costly as we think it is. 

What I expect us to do is nothing and stay where we are for well past my remaining lifetime.  But, until we can get some teams up near the Top 50 the Belt is going to be considered the dregs of Division 1-A.

←

CUSA would be choice #1 right now for what we can afford and with true regional (Texas) rivals but we have shot ourselves in the foot on that after last season. Otherwise, I agree, the WAC would be better than the SBC. I would pay more for a better quality product and better conference. Time for us to leave the Walmart of 1-A football conferences.

[Harry]

The Sun Belt has given us some very nice opportunities that we just haven't been able to take advantage of. Is it the Sun Belt's fault that we didn't make the most of our opportunities in the 4 bowl games we have particpated in? Is it the Sun Belt's fault that we haven't fared better in our non-conference slate?The Sun Belt certainly isn't the solution conference that CUSA could be but it sure isn't the source of all that ails us either.

[NT91]

The Sun Belt has given us some very nice opportunities that we just haven't been able to take advantage of.  Is it the Sun Belt's fault that we didn't make the most of our opportunities in the 4 bowl games we have particpated in?  Is it the Sun Belt's fault that we haven't fared better in our non-conference slate?The Sun Belt certainly isn't the solution conference that CUSA could be but it sure isn't the source of all that ails us either.

←

Yes, if we would have won all 4 bowl games in N.O. we would be in C-USA today!

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

The Sun Belt has given us some very nice opportunities that we just haven't been able to take advantage of.  Is it the Sun Belt's fault that we didn't make the most of our opportunities in the 4 bowl games we have particpated in?  Is it the Sun Belt's fault that we haven't fared better in our non-conference slate?The Sun Belt certainly isn't the solution conference that CUSA could be but it sure isn't the source of all that ails us either.

←

To some degree it is. Being the best of a collection of the lowest rated teams in 1A

does not automatically qualify you to be on par with teams with a winning record that are in stronger conferences. Now, who can be sure whether it is coaching or simply being overmatched that has caused our abysmal out-of-conference record?

Don't look at just our OOC record, look at everyone in the conference. With the exception of Troy's win over Missouri I struggle to think of any wins over a quality opponent by a SBC team. FAU beat Hawaii BEFORE they were a conference member. We beat a weak Baylor team that we probably couldn't stay within two or three touchdowns of today.

To an extent, you recruit to the quality of your (conference) opponents. Had we landed in CUSA we would have immediately caught the attention of on the radar recruits that would have previously ignored us. I would wager that in two or three years that Utah State, New Mexico State and Idaho will be able to beat us more times than we could win over them because the quality of their recruits will get better (or the coach will be gone).

[eulesseagle]

IMHO, the WAC or CUSA would be a step up from what we are currently doing now.

1. If UNT was offered a bid, tomorrow, to join the WAC would I do it? YES!

2. If UNT was offered a bid, tomorrow, to join the CUSA would I do it? YES!

3. Do I prefer one over the other? NO!

I really do not believe that if UNT had won all four bowl games that we would have been invited to another conference. UNT slapped the WAC in the face by saying no we do not want to move up and be in a more presitious conference than the SBC. To me the "university fathers" were blatently stating that we are complacently content to stay where we are in the worst D-1A conference in America were in any given year there are D-1AA conferences that end up with higher conference rankings than the SBC. My questions to the "university fathers are:

1. Do you just want to field sports teams "just" for entertainment?

2. Do you have any intentions to move this program forward to a better conference and more prestige?

If the "university fathers" insist that sports teams at UNT are for the expressed purpose of "entertainment" then why not go to a "non-scholarship" program and join the likes of Ausin College in their conference.

If the "university fathers" intentions are to move the program to the next level then they should be laying the "ground work" for the next level like:

1. Commiting manpower and financial resources for a new stadium.

2. Re-evaluating our current coaching situation. Remember that DD was 13-33-1 as an (un)offensive coordinator at UTEP and SMU and 39-55 as head coach at UNT. As a casual observer this unimpressive record tells me that Coach DD is not the man, including his staff, to lead us anywhere other than fighting it out in the SBC. His OOC record is abysmal, to be kind.

UTEP is made the move with a dynamic coach....and financial windfalls for the program.

Idaho is making the move with a dynamic coach.

TT (BB) made the move with a dynamic coach....and financial windfalls for the program.

NMSU is making a move....and.....I will have to agree with the poster who said that in a couple of years NMSU along with Idaho and Utah State will out pace UNT in our current and lathargic position.

Unfortuately, the UNT system is broke from top to bottom. IMHO, movement begins at the top and blame for the dysfunctional system, that we currenly operate under today, rests solely on the shoulders of the "university fathers."

1. What other system would the hiring of a coach with a 13-33-1 record as an OC?

2. What other system would allow a coach to be kept after a record of 39-55?

3. What other system would allow the OC to be kept after yelling at fans?

4. What other system would allow the HC to belittle the team, himself and fans on radio?

5. What other system embraces mediocracy as a guidepost to success?

My concern is that Troy, LaLa or MTSU may overtake UNT in athletics at our current pace. When the next conference "shake ups" take place (and they most certainly will) the current complacently content system that our "university fathers" so embrace today will keep UNT in an antiquated athletic system of yesteryear.

[GreenEddieNT]

I'll have to agree that the Big East is not looking to expand at this time.  They are already at 16 teams and adding either one or four football schools would make for a very unwieldy conference.

When the non-Division 1A schools break off to form a new conference, then the Big East may look to expand.  Remember, for BCS bowl purposes Notre Dame is considered a member of the Big East.  Louisville and West Virginia are doing well now and look for a resurgence from Pittsburgh.  Why would they want to split the money more ways? 

While I would prefer CUSA membership over any other conference, it looking less and less like that is where our future is.  Even if there was an opening it's very possible that we would be as low as third in the choice for replacements.  We could make a presentation to the Big XII, but we know that there is no opening and it is almost a lock that there won't be in the next couple of decades.  The only possibility as I see it would be for the Big Ten to take either Missouri or Iowa State and that's highly unlikely.  Almost as remote would be to become TCU's travel partner in the MWC.  That would require a new stadium and getting the average season attendance to 30,000. 

The only real chance to advance would be the WAC.  I know, we say it's too expensive and in later time zones.  Then tell me, how and why has Louisiana Tech survived?  My observation would be because they want to be in a better conference and it's not as costly as we think it is. 

What I expect us to do is nothing and stay where we are for well past my remaining lifetime.  But, until we can get some teams up near the Top 50 the Belt is going to be considered the dregs of Division 1-A.

←

Independently of all the mistakes we have made in hiring incompetent coaches and at times incompetent administrators the biggest errors we made when it came to conference affiliations were going down to 1-AA(and staying there as long as we did) and turning down the chance to join the WAC in 2004. How many real rivals do we have in the 'Belt? At least in the WAC we'd have Louisiana Tech and NMSU. We'd have a much easier time recruiting also because the WAC has more respected football and basketball programs and the WAC puts teams on tv more often than the Sun Belt does. Not to mention the fact that the WAC actually sends multiple teams to bowl games and to the NCAA basketball tournament. Yes, I know that we want to be in CUSA but being in the WAC would actually improve our chances, assuming that CUSA is even going to need any new members in the near future and that's looking doubtful. We are where we are because we have been making bad choices for a long time. The last time we made good decisions was when we left the watered-down MVC and hired Hayden Fry. However, ever since then we've been our own worst enemy.

Correction:returning to 1-A was a good decision too...we stayed in 1-AA too long but better late than never I suppose.

Edited July 22, 2006 by GreenEddieNT

[GreenEddieNT]

IMHO, the WAC or CUSA would be a step up from what we are currently doing now. 

1.  If UNT was offered a bid, tomorrow, to join the WAC would I do it? YES!

2.  If UNT was offered a bid, tomorrow, to join the CUSA would I do it? YES!

3.  Do I prefer one over the other? NO!

I really do not believe that if UNT had won all four bowl games that we would have been invited to another conference.  UNT slapped the WAC in the face by saying no we do not want to move up and be in a more presitious conference than the SBC.  To me the "university fathers" were blatently stating that we are complacently content to stay where we are in the worst D-1A conference in America were in any given year there are D-1AA conferences that end up with higher conference rankings than the SBC.  My questions to the "university fathers are:

1.  Do you just want to field sports teams "just" for entertainment?

2.  Do you have any intentions to move this program forward to a better conference and more prestige?

If the "university fathers" insist that sports teams at UNT are for the expressed purpose of "entertainment" then why not go to a "non-scholarship" program and join the likes of Ausin College in their conference.

If the "university fathers" intentions are to move the program to the next level then they should be laying the "ground work" for the next level like:

1.  Commiting manpower and financial resources for a new stadium.

2.  Re-evaluating our current coaching situation.  Remember that DD was 13-33-1 as an (un)offensive coordinator at UTEP and SMU and 39-55 as head coach at UNT.  As a casual observer this unimpressive record tells me that Coach DD is not the man, including his staff, to lead us anywhere other than fighting it out in the SBC.  His OOC record is abysmal, to be kind.

UTEP is made the move with a dynamic coach....and financial windfalls for the program.

Idaho is making the move with a dynamic coach.

TT (BB) made the move with a dynamic coach....and financial windfalls for the program.

NMSU is making a move....and.....I will have to agree with the poster who said that in a couple of years NMSU along with Idaho and Utah State will out pace UNT in our current and lathargic position.

Unfortuately, the UNT system is broke from top to bottom.  IMHO, movement begins at the top and blame for the dysfunctional system, that we currenly operate under today, rests solely on the shoulders of the "university fathers." 

1.  What other system would the hiring of a coach with a 13-33-1 record as an OC?

2.  What other system would allow a coach to be kept after a record of 39-55?

3.  What other system would allow the OC to be kept after yelling at fans?

4.  What other system would allow the HC to belittle the team, himself and fans on radio?

5.  What other system embraces mediocracy as a guidepost to success?

My concern is that Troy, LaLa or MTSU may overtake UNT in athletics at our current pace.  When the next conference "shake ups" take place (and they most certainly will) the current complacently content system that our "university fathers" so embrace today will keep UNT in an antiquated athletic system of yesteryear.

←

There are 6 conferences that we fit into geographically.

1. Big-12

2. SEC

3. CUSA

4. MWC

5. WAC

6. Sun Belt

The first 2 we have no chance at because, outside of the fact they are already full and aren't looking for new members, they would only accept Texas, Arkansas, Florida State, etc...type schools.

The next two we could be candidates for but we'd have to pass other schools that have jumped ahead of us in line.

That leaves the WAC and Sun Belt as the only leagues that want us or wanted us. I know the WAC offered us an invitation in 2004. When we turned it down they added Idaho so who knows if the invitation they made to us still stands. The point is the WAC represents a higher step on the ladder. We are currently on the lowest rung. From the WAC we'd be a much more viable candidate for the MWC or CUSA and even if we ended up staying in the WAC at least it would be better than the Sun Belt.

[NT80]

The point is the WAC represents a higher step on the ladder.  We are currently on the lowest rung.  From the WAC we'd be a much more viable candidate for the MWC or CUSA and even if we ended up staying in the WAC at least it would be better than the Sun Belt.

←

The WAC is a step up, and no one says it has to be forever before the next step up. I see it a better road to CUSA thru the WAC than the SunBelt.

[CajunNation]

There are 6 conferences that we fit into geographically.

1. Big-12

2. SEC

3. CUSA

4. MWC

5. WAC

6. Sun Belt

The first 2 we have no chance at because, outside of the fact they are already full and aren't looking for new members, they would only accept Texas, Arkansas, Florida State, etc...type schools.

The next two we could be candidates for but we'd have to pass other schools that have jumped ahead of us in line.

That leaves the WAC and Sun Belt as the only leagues that want us or wanted us.  I know the WAC offered us an invitation in 2004.  When we turned it down they added Idaho so who knows if the invitation they made to us still stands.  The point is the WAC represents a higher step on the ladder.  We are currently on the lowest rung.  From the WAC we'd be a much more viable candidate for the MWC or CUSA and even if we ended up staying in the WAC at least it would be better than the Sun Belt.

←

As long as the WAC remains intact, they will not expand eastward except for UTEP.

Now, if Boise were to go to the MWC, that leaves the WAC with 8. La Tech would be in a position of power now. They could demand addition of an eastern WAC or else leave, thus puting the WAC below the rerquired 8. Idaho could be removed as well, who adds nothing.

If Boise leaves(probable), this is a real possibility

HAWAII

FRESNO STATE

SAN JOSE STATE

NEVADA

UTAH STATE

DENVER

NEW MEXICO STATE

TEXAS STATE

UT-SAN ANTONIO

NORTH TEXAS

LOUISIANA TECH

LOUISIANA

12 basketball

10 football

9 baseball

This cuts down on travel considerably.

10 football schools would be the only way that Hawaii/Fresno/Nevada would go for it. Everybody plays everybody.

This lineup only requires trips to Hawaii every other year.

If we don't do this, this will be the SBC lineup come 2010:

NORTH TEXAS

ULM

LOUISIANA TECH

LOUISIANA

ARKANSAS STATE

WESTERN KENTUCKY

MIDDLE TENNESSEE

TROY

FAU

FIU

Edited July 22, 2006 by CajunNation

[NDT]

The WAC had 8 teams and UNT or ULL could have been the 9th. We both declined and then they invited Idaho. If they had gone to ten and include UNT and ULL or had gone to twelve and included ASU and either Troy or MTSU we would have joined. The Eastern WAC would have been UNT, ULL, ASU, La Tech, NMSU and one other SBC school. The Western WAC would have been Hawaii, Boise, Nevada, Utah State, Fresno, and San Jose. They only wanted to add one school and did not want to divide the pie that big.

[NDT]

If we could swing an invite to the MWC and become TCU's travel partner I would take it in a heartbeat.

[LongJim]

The only scenario I even remotely like re: WAC is the one proposed by Cajun. Otherwise, CUSA is the best bet for UNT IMO, for several reasons:

1. In state rivalries/games w/Texas-familiar teams.

2. Better regional TV opportunities.

3. Easier travel for fans-->better attendance-->more $$ for program.

4. Easier/more effective potential recruiting opportunities in Texas.

Getting a seat in the WAC at this point in UNT's D1 "adventure", and with the current teams would be a kiss of death for UNT's football program at the level it is right now. If UNT was TCU, then, go ahead and make the jump.

Tulsa, Rice, and SMU all got out of the WAC at the earliest opportunity, and it has made them better, because they are benefitting from the above items.

[Harry]

I have a feeling that CUSA will be keeping an eye on the SMU game in Denton this year. I know that Rice, UofH, Tulsa, Tulane heck even UTEP would love to play a game in DFW every year as it would help their DFW recruiting. As it stands now they only come every other year in football. In a way TCU leaving opened up some opportunity for us.