T-mac Responds

[Green Means Go!]

http://colleges.beloblog.com/

[Eagle1855]

there's only ONE T-Mac, and while he's not much of a journalist, he's a hell of a praying mantis hurdler...

[green_goblin]

It gets better....

Comments

"The Metroplex's Program"? Never going to happen.

TCU has been consistently winning for several years now, their games are broadcast on ESPN 103.3, and they have been ranked in the top 25 fairly often (though not 2 years ago after SMU knocked them off...). Despite all this, even Gary Patterson noted that he feels like a red-headed stepchild in the area, as the media seemingly always focuses on the pro teams or BCS schools like Texas or OU.

If TCU can't become the "Metroplex's Progam," then neither can UNT (or SMU). They have too many strikes against them...a weak current student fan base, a low-quality home stadium that is 40+ miles north of Dallas or Fort Worth, non-existent gameday activities, no TV exposure, and to top it all off they play in the Sun Belt. Who wants to watch them play New Mexico State, Arkansas State, and Western Kentucky every year?

You're not in Southlake any more, Todd. At least they played on ESPN every once in a while.

Posted by: Tim B | August 17, 2007 11:27 AM

[Eagle1855]

I completely disagree with TCU poster. UNT is going to be a ginormous (look it up, it's a word) school in a few years- one of the largest in the state. That means, odds are, somebody knows someone who is affiliated with, graduated from, or is attending North Texas. There's a connection there for most people in the metroplex. Not the case for the privates. TCU is very much FW's team, but I don't know that that translates to the rest of the metroplex.

UNT is located at the intersection of both 35's, equidistant from both Ft Worth and Dallas, and all the suburbs in between.

If ANY school could be the school of the Metroplex, it would be North Texas. Whether or not we are actually able to achieve that designation remains to be seen. I DO agree with the purple poster that wins will factor in heavily. A Boise-like season or at the very least showing the consistency TCU has show the past few years is absolutely necessary for this to come to fruition.

SMU is not, nor will they ever be relevant in this conversation, in my opinion. They are far too polarizing and they still havent posted better than a .500 record in 20 years.

Edited August 17, 2007 by Eagle1855

[MeanGreengdub]

I completely disagree with TCU poster. UNT is going to be a ginormous (look it up, it's a word) school in a few years- one of the largest in the state. That means, odds are, somebody knows someone who is affiliated with, graduated from, or is attending North Texas. There's a connection there for most people in the metroplex. Not the case for the privates. TCU is very much FW's team, but I don't know that that translates to the rest of the metroplex.

UNT is located at the intersection of both 35's, equidistant from both Ft Worth and Dallas, and all the suburbs in between.

If ANY school could be the school of the Metroplex, it would be North Texas. Whether or not we are actually able to achieve that designation remains to be seen. I DO agree with the purple poster that wins will factor in heavily. A Boise-like season or at the very least showing the consistency TCU has show the past few years is absolutely necessary for this to come to fruition.

SMU is not, nor will they ever be relevant in this conversation, in my opinion. They are far too polarizing and they still havent posted better than a .500 record in 20 years.

Well said.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

---The real problem at TCU..... despite winning they have no local rivals and the fan interest is poor... they don't care much if you beat a college a 1000 miles away... they don't know anyone there and almost no one they know is an alum from there. The SWC was all about regional teams with a lot of mixing of alums and students... and it created interest. This is sort of true on the Big XII as well but TxTech vs A&M games get better coverage than Colorado vs. A&M games... again more local interest from BOTH sides.. TCU better keep winning or interest in them will shrink to about nothing...as SMU's support has..

---We sort of have the same problem... not any real regional (local) rivals. Our attendence would jump if we did. We do have big advantage over TCU and SMU... a much larger alum base to pull from... We just need better name opponents (hopefully regional ones) and be successful at the same time.

---I am guessing that in 10-15 years.. we will be the "University Team " of the metroplex. The other two are smaller and don't have as wide of appeal... at least TCU has not managed to tick off the locals like SMU and their arrogant attitudes has.

Edited August 17, 2007 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[greenminer]

You want to shut those people up? Win. period.

[FirefightnRick]

---The real problem at TCU..... despite winning they have no local rivals and the fan interest is poor... they don't care much if you beat a college a 1000 miles away... they don't know anyone there and almost no one they know is an alum from there.

That is so very true. The only people in Fort Worth that have an interest in TCU is anyone who may have a connection to their corporate sponsorship partners and then of course their students and alumni, which doesn't count for very many. So few people in FW can relate to that school in any way because so few can afford it. TCU only relates to a very tiny group of kids in FW mainly Arlington Heights(not even so much nowdays) and the two wealthy private schools and maybe a hodgepodge of kids from surrounding suburbs, but that is it. To see an example of what Eagle1855 was talking about, look at how many kids from "Avid Golfer's Cart Girl of the Month" attend North Texas as compared to TCU..about 11 to 1. There just isn't that many folks who go to school there for whatever reason? And from a football standpoint, it is a shame because they have been one of the most consistently successfull programs the past several years now. Two years ago they had one of the best teams in the nation, but you wouldn't have known it at all around here because of course, tU won the Rose Bowl on national TV? That year in '05 TCU beat Oklahoma in Norman and finished the season 11-1, but you would have been hard pressed to see anything other than Longhorn this and that all over Fort Worth. It was truly a shame.

Rick

Edited August 17, 2007 by FirefightnRick

[Smitty]

You want to shut those people up? Win. period.

Exactly.

[JayDub]

Posted by: Tim MacMahon | August 17, 2007 12:06 PM

The Mean Green can become a media darling with the Dodge storyline, and UNT needs to be figuring out ways to maximize that, not limit it.

He's got a point...

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

SMU is not, nor will they ever be relevant in this conversation, in my opinion. They are far too polarizing and they still havent posted better than a .500 record in 20 years.

Fortunately (or unfortunately) they did have one season above .500. It was the season before we signed Dickey. In fact, the reason given was that he was the SMU coordinator from their first winning team since the death penalty. I remember that they were 6-5 and it was only the second year for him to be a coach on a winning team. I believe that the year was 1996 but I'm too lazy to look it up.

I assume that we are talking about the Metroplex's college team. Then, yes, we definitely have the potential to do that but not until we have at least a 50,000 seat stadium. Amon Carter seats 46,000 and who knows, another LT or a one-loss season could come near filling it. Until that happens, look for an average in the 30s. SMU might be solid some day but their glory years seem well behind them.

No one is saying that we are anywhere near being "the team" but since we have more alumni, students, family or friends of students and alumni than SMU and TCU combined and with the right coaching staff, we CAN be much larger in the nation's eyes, as well as those of the Metromess.

[Arkstfan]

If I did my math right, it costs 350% more to attend TCU than UNT. That sort of cost differential skews the demographic of students and alumni. It also means a significant portion of potential ticket buyers will never follow TCU because it is perceived as a rich kid school.

I suspect TCU draws a higher percentage of its student body from outside a 150 mile radius of campus than UNT. That means alumni more likely to disperse upon graduation.

Guesstimating, but I'd bet that TCU turns out 1/3rd fewer alumni each year.

Private schools have a tough battle to gain acceptance from the population at-large. I've lived in two places with private colleges and I've lived in two with state universities. State-supported institutions have a much easier time tapping into local civic pride. Now you of course have to always contend with those folks tying their loyalty to another bigger name in-state school but if you can trend correctly, you at least have greater potential to tap that market.

A long-time observer of college football once offered this analysis, accuracy? No idea. His contention was that some schools were built mostly on alumni support while others had done better reaching the full community. He contended that Texas A&M had been more alumni driven than Texas, Auburn more alumni driven than Alabama, and Florida State more alumni driven than Florida. Not that all don't reach a lot of fans who never attended, just that they got to that point relying more alumni devotion.

Now as to public vs. private. In general private schools are just flat facing an uphill battle.

ACC. The three worst drawing programs in the conference in football are all private, including second worst attended Wake Forest who won the league last year.

SEC. Worst drawing program in football was Vanderbilt last year.

Big 10. Worst drawing program in football last year was Northwestern.

Big 12. Worst was Baylor

Big East. Syracuse was only third worst, ahead of Cincinnati and South Florida.

Pac-10. The exception to the rule. USC leads the league, but in the last five years have not been ranked worse than 4th taken two national titles and won at least a share of the conference, heavily embraced by celebrity presence at games, no NFL competition, and they have an undergrad student body of 16,000 and another 16,000 grad students and have nearly 200,000 living alumni.

[gangrene]

SMU and TCU are both private schools and have less than half of the student enrollment and DFW alumni base of UNT. Those are the reasons they will never be the team of the DFW metroplex. And, one could argue that SMU actually had that title back in the Mustang Mania days, in spite of the aforementioned obstacles.

Edited August 17, 2007 by gangrene

[meangreendork]

"The Metroplex's Program"? Never going to happen.

TCU has been consistently winning for several years now, their games are broadcast on ESPN 103.3, and they have been ranked in the top 25 fairly often (though not 2 years ago after SMU knocked them off...). Despite all this, even Gary Patterson noted that he feels like a red-headed stepchild in the area, as the media seemingly always focuses on the pro teams or BCS schools like Texas or OU.

If TCU can't become the "Metroplex's Progam," then neither can UNT (or SMU). They have too many strikes against them...a weak current student fan base, a low-quality home stadium that is 40+ miles north of Dallas or Fort Worth, non-existent gameday activities, no TV exposure, and to top it all off they play in the Sun Belt. Who wants to watch them play New Mexico State, Arkansas State, and Western Kentucky every year?

You're not in Southlake any more, Todd. At least they played on ESPN every once in a while.

Posted by: Tim B | August 17, 2007 11:27 AM

BAAWWWW, I'm from a private school and all my conference mates are a million miles away, so they can't create any regional rivalries! BAAAAWWWWWW, TCU can't upstage UT or OU, so why even try?! BAWWWW, I'm a private school, so I don't draw as many students because they can't afford to go here, so our fanbase is limited BAWWW!

1. Cry river.

2. Build bridge.

3. Jump off it.

Way to have pride and faith in your alma mater. Is UNT the team of the metroplex now? No. Can it be with wins, a stadium and a new or a better conference? You freakin' bet.

Edited August 17, 2007 by meangreendork

[forevereagle]

Having grown up in Fort Worth, I can tell you that a lot of what is being said is true. I can't stand TCU. Even before I went to North Texas, I didn't like them. So many people in Fort Worth talk about how great the school is, but have never even set foot on campus. As much as the perception is that TCU is "Fort Worth's School," very few people go to the games or even keep up with the program. TCU needs to win Fort Worth before they go after the metroplex.

Sadly, the same could be said for NT and Denton.

[Arkstfan]

I don't think conference affiliation is that big of a deal in attendance. ^

It comes down to being entertaining and developing a sense of community.

People have to feel like they saw a show worth the money they paid and they need social connection of feeling like they are part of something good. Winning does tend to be entertaining but a team floating around .500 most of the time can be entertaining as well. The community aspect is the hard part. South Carolina has drawn 60,000 or better for years and years and years. Prior to joining the SEC, ranked three times ever and 0-8 in bowls with the Liberty being the biggest bowl they had made it to. Haven't gotten above .500 all-time against the current members of any of the BCS auto berth conferences. Yet they have developed an incredible community of support and draw well.

Now as to the ^ above.

Conference membership can significantly help attendance if you are playing opponents who come in with a bunch of fans. Downside is they help negate your home field advantage. Boise State averaged 101% of stadium capacity because people came to see Boise play. Most of their opponents are a long way away and won't bring fans and I doubt that many of their fans really give a crap about San Jose State or La.Tech as opponents.

[UNTflyer]

It gets better....

Tim B, North Texas HAS been on ESPN... several times over the last few years in fact. Oh sure, not as often as TCU or Texas or even Baylor. But we certainly were broadcast more often than SLC.

Never let facts get in the way of a good rant.

[UNTflyer]

---The real problem at TCU..... despite winning they have no local rivals and the fan interest is poor... they don't care much if you beat a college a 1000 miles away...

I would be willing to contribute money for an annual trophy going to the winner of a UNT-SMU-TCU series.

It can be a big silver eating utensil called The Trinity Fork (in reference to the river). It could generate local interest for all of the metroplex schools.

[meangreendork]

I would be willing to contribute money for an annual trophy going to the winner of a UNT-SMU-TCU series.

It can be a big silver eating utensil called The Trinity Fork (in reference to the river). It could generate local interest for all of the metroplex schools.

I'll see your Trinity Fork...but I won't raise you a Golden Triangle.

I'll use THE GOLDEN TRIFORCE.

[gksmith]

there's only ONE T-Mac, and while he's not much of a journalist, he's a hell of a praying mantis hurdler...

Unfortunately, this is the only way to get a poster of Shawn Bradley.

[Quoner]

Unfortunately, this is the only way to get a poster of Shawn Bradley.

Oddly enough, both Tim and Tracy have won the same amount of playoff series...