TEXAS BOWL SNUB

[SilverEagle]

I'm kind of tired of our University being "Mr. Nice Guy"?

[FirefightnRick]

Absolutely. I see this as a huge opportunity to convince the state of Texas what North Texas' expectations are when it comes to D 1 athletics. It would also send a message to anyone on campus who might not understand where we stand in the realm of things athletically and possibly convince anyone sitting on the fence to get their feathers ruffled enough to GET ON BOARD.

Rick

[DeepGreen]

Oh, no! Don't do anything to draw attention to little, itty bitty North Texas. We are content to be in the backseat of all sports in the region, the state, and the nation. Gosh, please don't say or do anything. Let's just keep everything status quo forever.

I couldn't find a better way to sound sarcastic.

[HawaiianGreen]

Could not Hurt to do something.

[e-bone ver2.awesome]

The best thing to do would to be to have a great season and let them and everyone else know that they made a mistake. If we whine and turn in another bad season we will be the ones looking the fools.

[MeanGreen61]

The best thing to do would to be to have a great season and let them and everyone else know that they made a mistake. If we whine and turn in another bad season we will be the ones looking the fools.

←

Actions speak much louder than words.

[SilverEagle]

The best thing to do would to be to have a great season and let them and everyone else know that they made a mistake. If we whine and turn in another bad season we will be the ones looking the fools.

←

Who suggested that we whine? I have never (nor will I ever) suggested such a thing.

We've done more than enough things, football wise, to deserve to be treated with more respect.

Edited August 13, 2006 by SilverEagle

[GreenEddieNT]

The thing is that more than snubbing us they snubbed the Sun Belt. See they don't make tie-ins with individual schools, except in the case of independents, but rather with entire conferences. For example, the Texas Bowl has a contract to take a MWC team once over the next 4 years. Now, the idea is to invite TCU once over the next 4 years but even if TCU were unavailable or ineligible the Texas Bowl would still be contractually obligated to invite a MWC team once over that time period. Right now the Sun Belt has barely more clout with bowls than some 1-AA leagues. The Texas Bowl MIGHT want us once in a while, and even that is questionable as long as we're a Sun Belt team, but they sure as hell don't want MTSU, ULM, Arkansas State, etc...

I have said it before and I'll say it again. The Sun Belt is ONE OF THE THINGS that is hurting us. It served its purpose back when the Big West was in shambles and breaking up but we have outgrown it and it is holding us back from getting to where we'd like to be.

Edited August 13, 2006 by GreenEddieNT

[BleedGreen64]

Contacting the Bowl would be appropriate, but No whining and keep in on the QT.

If they advised us in print why we were excluded it might be embarassing.

I agree they would not be interested in much of the SBC (although possibly ULL and maybe ULM) and the MWC, but the inclusion of the entire CUSA negates that argument.

[UNT_playmaker]

Its been long overdue that we do something about this insult that has been handed to us by this SMU type decision.....

[GreenEddieNT]

As I understand it, over the next 4 years the Texas Bowl is contractually required to select:

1. A Big-12 team 3 times

2. A Big East team(or Notre Dame) twice

3. A CUSA team twice as well

and

4. A MWC team once.

Remember when the other Houston Bowl was dying and they were hatching this new version the conferences which attended the meetings were the Big-12, Big East, CUSA, and MWC. The 'Belt was never part of the plans. It's all about money and reputation if you want to be let into the club and the Sun Belt just doesn't bring either one.

Edited August 13, 2006 by GreenEddieNT

[GreenEddieNT]

Contacting the Bowl would be appropriate, but No whining and keep in on the QT.

If they advised us in print why we were excluded it might be embarassing.

I agree they would not be interested in much of the SBC (although possibly ULL and maybe ULM) and the MWC, but the inclusion of the entire CUSA negates that argument.

←

It's very simple. The general public in Houston doesn't want a Sun Belt team, the tv network and sponsors don't want a Sun Belt team, and the other conferences and Notre Dame don't want us in there as well. The Sun Belt just doesn't have the clout to muscle in on this. Even Wright Waters has conceded that the only way the Sun Belt will have a 2nd bowl tie-in is by starting another new bowl ourselves. None of the existing bowls, besides the NO bowl which the Sun Belt started and owns, want to be tied in to the Sun Belt except as a last resort. That's reality.

[RC Horn]

The way I see it is that if they're going to call it the "Texas Bowl", then folks in Houston should give every Div 1 Team in this state an opportunity to play in this game. If they're going to be making exceptions outside the Big XII-CUSA tie-ins for this game then they really need to include all Texas teams...no excuses. UNT would bring in a much larger fanbase than any of old SWC privates schools to that game if given the opportunity. Playing in this bowl game against a BCS conference would reap dividends for UNT whether you won it or not. IMHO, your athletic dept needs to be publically complaining about this snub...and they need to do it now!!!

[e-bone ver2.awesome]

Publicly complaining? Yep, all we need is to be seen as whiners. Read GreenEddieNT's posts again, assuming that you did in the first place. There are no exceptions for any schools that aren't affiliated with a conference that has a tie in to the bowl.

They aren't singling UNT out and saying that we aren't good enough to play in their bowl. They, along every other bowl except the one that the Sun Belt started, are saying that the Sun Belt frickin sucks and they don't want a Sun Belt tie in to the bowl. Here's a fun fact for you... UNT is in the Sun Belt.

[GreenEddieNT]

Publicly complaining? Yep, all we need is to be seen as whiners. Read GreenEddieNT's posts again, assuming that you did in the first place. There are no exceptions for any schools that aren't affiliated with a conference that has a tie in to the bowl.

They aren't singling UNT out and saying that we aren't good enough to play in their bowl. They, along every other bowl except the one that the Sun Belt started, are saying that the Sun Belt frickin sucks and they don't want a Sun Belt tie in to the bowl. Here's a fun fact for you... UNT is in the Sun Belt.

←

The Sun Belt is a joke, we all agree on that. The problem is that neither the Big-12, CUSA, nor MWC are after us at the moment. That leaves the WAC as the only league we might be able to get into...if they even still want us.

Positives:WAC still has more bowl tie-ins and a lot more NATIONAL tv games than the Sun Belt. It also has better basketball with nationally ranked teams and multiple NCAA bids.

Negatives: The big negative is this: http://insider.espn.go.com/ncf/recruiting/...d%3dconferences

Take a look at which conference is ranked last in FB recruiting so far, yes the WAC. Realignment seems to have made them less popular with the blue-chippers and if that turns out to be a long term trend it doesn't bode well for them or their schools. For an example of what happens when a league can't recruit with the big boys check out the Sun Belt. The WAC may become the Sun Belt west if their recruiting stays bad.

Ultimately, the solution is to gain entrance to CUSA. We'd all like the Big-12 but we don't have a realistic chance. MWC might be a possibility since TCU is there too and if we can't get into CUSA or if CUSA has no vacancies.

Edited August 14, 2006 by GreenEddieNT

[NT80]

It's very simple.  The general public in Houston doesn't want a Sun Belt team, the tv network and sponsors don't want a Sun Belt team, and the other conferences and Notre Dame don't want us in there as well.  The Sun Belt just doesn't have the clout to muscle in on this.  Even Wright Waters has conceded that the only way the Sun Belt will have a 2nd bowl tie-in is by starting another new bowl ourselves.  None of the existing bowls, besides the NO bowl which the Sun Belt started and owns, want to be tied in to the Sun Belt except as a last resort.  That's reality.

←

Sad, but true. That's why we need OUT of the SunBelt!

[good_ken]

Sad, but true. That's why we need OUT of the SunBelt!

We may want to dominate the 'belt first. Western Kentucky ain't exactly ready to give up their yearly pass to the "Big Dance" just yet.

[FirefightnRick]

Publicly complaining? Yep, all we need is to be seen as whiners. Read GreenEddieNT's posts again, assuming that you did in the first place. There are no exceptions for any schools that aren't affiliated with a conference that has a tie in to the bowl.

They aren't singling UNT out and saying that we aren't good enough to play in their bowl. They, along every other bowl except the one that the Sun Belt started, are saying that the Sun Belt frickin sucks and they don't want a Sun Belt tie in to the bowl. Here's a fun fact for you... UNT is in the Sun Belt.

←

Read the original article again, ASSuming that you did in the first place.

Houston Bowl gets a makeover

03:57 PM CDT on Thursday, August 10, 2006

By KEITH WHITMIRE / The Dallas Morning News

Houston's latest bowl game will have a statewide reach with its new name: the Texas Bowl.

The bowl's name and logo, in the shape of a western-style belt buckle, were unveiled Thursday. The new bowl, which is part of the entertainment arm of the NFL's Houston Texans, takes the place of the financially-strapped Houston Bowl.

"The name 'Texas Bowl' and this mark perfectly communicate our vision for the game," Lone Star Sports and Entertainment president Jamey Rootes said, "which is to create an annual celebration of the culture, heritage and football tradition of the Lone Star State."

The Texas Bowl name may be familiar to high school football fans around the state. FSN Southwest has marketed its state championship game broadcasts as the Texas Bowl. An FSN Southwest spokesman said the Texas Bowl brand has been relinquished to the new bowl.

"We've worked out that issue," Lone Star event manager David Brady said. "This will be the Texas Bowl."

The inaugural Texas Bowl kicks off at 7 p.m. on Dec. 28 at Reliant Stadium. The bowl has agreements to pit a Big 12 team against a team from either Conference USA or the Big East.  TCU, which plays in the Mountain West Conference, also has access to the game.

It says nothing about there are NO EXCEPTIONS to get into the bowl game, in fact it hints at exceptions with the mentioning of TCU having access without no other other reason mentioning why? And it also does not mention having a contract with the MWC over four years as GreenEddieNT mentions. I know RV backs this up in his post tonight, but it's not mentioned here in the above original article that was posted three days ago, which is the reason for this thread.

I LOVE IT WHEN people slam the belt for not being the respective powerhouse football conference they think it should be in only it's 6th freakin season.

Rick

Edited August 14, 2006 by FirefightnRick

[buff64]

Folks, it's not the Sun Belt the Texas Bowl shunned, but North Texas. It has already been mentioned, but the failure to travel well to New Orleans Bowl, and the poor home attendance are the culprits. Butts in the seats that's what the bowl games want.

[PlummMeanGreen]

Folks, it's not the Sun Belt the Texas Bowl shunned, but North Texas. It has already been mentioned, but the failure to travel well to New Orleans Bowl, and the poor home attendance are the culprits. Butts in the seats that's what the bowl games want.

←

I speak as one who has not been to any of the 4 NO's Bowl due to (basically) the nature of a tech school recruiting job during an intense time of recruiting that part of December and the fact that the NOs Bowl was never played or tied to a weekend (but was played almost in the "middle of the week" with its Tuesday night schedule).

BUT............buff64, I beg to differ with you inasmuch as I believe UNT fans did for most of these 4 years travel in very impressive numbers to the Big Easy and that with a Tuesday night game to boot! I don't think a handful of the former non-Big 12/SWC schools would have traveled any better (truth be told) and especially for a Tuesday night bowl game. With the old SWC gang, though, if UNT had travelled 30,000 to each of those 4 bowl years that just wouldn't make a difference with the leadership of most of those ex SWC'ers because they (for the most part) are still bogged down in their own self-serving traditions that took a big kick in their respective a$$e$ when they suddenly discoverd that the Longhorns and Aggies (and thousands of their fans) were not coming to their respective stadiums every other year.

YET.................UNT and Mean Green fans could not help the fact that the SBC folks never really (effectively) got the general populace or citizenry of greater New Orleans to buy tickets for this bowl game (and thus the reason for most of the empty seats in the Super Dome for a Tuesday night bowl game).

SOME THINGS NEVER CHANGE IN TEXAS : UNT has been the whipping post of some of the old SWC/non Big 12 gang of schools for years and we will continue in that role until we build a better football stadium (or at least one equal) of the stadia of most of that former SWC group but more important than a new stadium in Denton..........when our program becomes a higher profile program than all the Texas non SWC'ers/non Big 12 schools year in and year out and we start beating the kind of (OOC) opponents that they themselves cannot beat.

UH received membership in the old SWC because they exceeded most of the SWC school's football (and basketball) programs and all but elevated themselves on even par with UT on the gridiron starting with their infamous 1968 20/20 tie game the first time UH ever played the University of Texas in football. Darrell K. Royal soon after said "lets get em' in so they have to recruit under the same rules" as the Horns and the rest of the SWC. (UH did have a renegade repuation in recruiting to many SWC'ers in that day although the Coogs' probably were breaking no more rules than most of the SWC back then).

FWIW & in a sense, the coalition of ex SWC/non Big 12 schools took a bigger kick in the butt than UNT has ever had to endure because it was their schools who got jump-kicked out of the (true) Big Time when they were (basically) told "thanks, but no thanks" by the Big 12 coalition of schools when it was time for each of their schools to be considered for membership to the new Big 12.

As we all know now, only 4 former SWC schools made the Big 12 cut. UNT in our entire history "NEVER" had to take such a kick in the butt as the SWC schools who didn't make the cut because after all, you cannot lose what you didn't have, right? Not even our being demoted to NCAA D1-AA in 1982 was as traumatic an expericence as what UH, SMU, TCU, Rice had to endure the day the SWC died AND................other than TCU, which former SWC school that didn't make it to the Big 12 has really ever recovered from their being ostracized?

So in all this regard, UNT does not have a complete corner of the market of not being invited to the party in matters relating to to preferred conference affiliation; and especially a party of such significance that the Big 12 became for UT, TAMU, TTech & Baylor.

Edited August 14, 2006 by PlummMeanGreen

[bigrobdsp]

we cant start whining about not being included untill we have a legitimate reason to be included. wheather we are in Texas or not no bowl official wants a team who is going to bring a weak crowd and get beat without putting up much of a fight. do I want to have a bowl tie in with them, of course I do. but whining about it publicly makes us look like the kid that didnt get picked and starts crying in front of everyone. I dont think we should whine. no one will listen anyway.

p.s. speaking of crying I got a little teary eyed when Pat scored on a 57 yard screen pass... my wife called me a queer.

[e-bone ver2.awesome]

Read the original article again, ASSuming that you did in the first place.

It says nothing about there are NO EXCEPTIONS to get into the bowl game, in fact it hints at exceptions with the mentioning of TCU having access without no other other reason mentioning why?  And it also does not mention having a contract with the MWC over four years as GreenEddieNT mentions.  I know RV backs this up in his post tonight, but it's not mentioned here in the above original article that was posted three days ago, which is the reason for this thread.

I LOVE IT WHEN people slam the belt for not being the respective powerhouse football conference they think it should be in only it's 6th freakin season. 

Rick

←

Let me get something straight. We can only use the "original article" as a source for information when discussing this topic? Even though it is 4 days old and our own athletic director says otherwise when concerning how TCU can be considered for the bowl? The article gives absolutely no specifics, just a very general statement on which conferences are affiliated with the bowl.

Another thing, you say the article "hints" at exceptions. I thought you were a staunch supporter of people having to say exactly what they mean and no other interpretation can come of it. Or is that only when you are criticizing me?

I love it when people start going crazy about an issue that they don't even have adequate information to judge, and then chose to ignore new information because it hurts their argument and it isn't included in a DMN blurb that contains no specifics and was published last week.

[Eagle1855]

Actually, it is the sunbelt that is the problem. This wouldnt even be a discussion if we were in C-USA.

It doesnt matter if it is 20 years down the line, I dont think the Sunbelt will EVER be considered anything more than some awkward phase in between 1A and 1AA. With schools named "Florida Atlantic" and "International", it will always be viewed as a stepchild. Who in Texas cares about these schools? Better yet, if we were in C-USA, would you care about them? I know I wouldnt.

The difference between NT and the rest of the belt is that there was actually a time when we were competitive with the top programs in that nation. We've been around for a long time, we arent just another directional start-up program. Correct me if I am wrong, but the rest of the belt cannot make that same claim. I expect more.

TCU got an exclusion to the rule because they have a really good program, have been called a "BCS buster" for a couple years now, and have a draw a decent crowd (they have a name). NT draws about 0 interest in Houston. Growing up here, I hadnt ever even heard of NT until I started looking at schools, and I sure didnt know it was the 4th biggest school in the state. I admit it has improved, but we still have a ways to go in the Houston market.

We have no leverage to get another bowl tie-in, because we cant even beat out the gaggle of spares in our own conference and lets not even discuss our lack-luster OOC performance.

Win games, people notice. Its that simple. Do the best with what you have been given, people will take notice, you will have leverage. We have had great schedules the last 2 seasons and done nothing. I hope this season is better, I wont be holding my breath.

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

we cant start whining about not being included untill we have a legitimate reason to be included. wheather we are in Texas or not no bowl official wants a team who is going to bring a weak crowd and get beat without putting up much of a fight. do I want to have a bowl tie in with them, of course I do. but whining about it publicly makes us look like the kid that didnt get picked and starts crying in front of everyone. I dont think we should whine. no one will listen anyway.

p.s. speaking of crying I got a little teary eyed when Pat scored on a 57 yard screen pass... my wife called me a queer.

←

I agree that no one likes a whiner but there is a vast difference to me from being discontented about a situation and whining. If you let it pass without saying a word it usually means that you have no objection to the requirements. If we were the ONLY Division 1A program in Texas that was excluded, for whatever reason, I would make my discontent known.

Now, where we would ever qualify is another matter. As I understand it, it would take a 7-4 record or better while finishing second in the SBC, no more than one qualifier from the Big XII, CUSA, or the Big East (all financial contributors), then we would be eligible for consideration. Rarely is better than never.

[VideoEagle]

The difference between NT and the rest of the belt is that there was actually a time when we were competitive with the top programs in that nation. We've been around for a long time, we arent just another directional start-up program. Correct me if I am wrong, but the rest of the belt cannot make that same claim. I expect more.

←

Louisiana was never in 1AA. They had ups and downs through the years, but always competed at the top level. Arkansas State was pretty good back in the 60’s and 70’s. The Independence Bowl in Shreveport was greated bacause ASU got snubbed by other bowls. From what I’ve read, ASU was the only school that was even considered byt the NCAA for an exemption when the 1A and 1AA split occurred.

But, your main point is correct, we are not a directional start-up program.

Edited August 14, 2006 by VideoEagle