Utsa Signs Home Games With Houston, K-State

[NT80]

UTSA is loading up on scheduling some big teams to San Antonio. Games with Baylor were previously announced. Now more:

K-State http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/12353/k-state-schedules-future-series-with-newcomer-utsa

Houston http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/college/houston/6992928.html

Also signed home & home with Arizona State...

http://thesundevils.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/040910aac.html

and 3-game series with Arizona...

http://www.goutsa.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=13100&ATCLID=204927214

Edited May 9, 2010 by NT80

[MeanGreen61]

80, are you developing a UTSA obsession ?

[Mean Green 93-98]

It sounds like everyone is taking for granted that UTSA will successfully make the jump to 1-A in just a few years, when they have yet to play a single down of football. I'm not saying it can't or won't happen, but there are still some factors that will have to swing their way before they make the jump.

[stebo]

Well, if you are K-State - you look at this as a great opportunity. They recruit the state of Texas and would love to put on a show in San Antonio. What better way than by whipping up on the Roadrunners? They can't invite those recruits to Austin... or even Baylor for that matter, they might lose the recruit to the opposing team. But they can surely treat their kids to vacation and get an easy W in the process.

All that said, I highly doubt those home games will ever take place. The contracts all say that the games will be played if the Roadrunners are Div I... and they will not likely be Div I in 3 years, just not possible without a conference.

[wardly]

i don't understand why 1] unt is not being proactive in scheduling utsa, and 2] why the belt has not, to my knowledge, made membership overtures to them. look at the market! i bet that if the belt doesn't offer membership, cusa will at some point. in addition, a north texas game in the alamodome would not hurt recruiting in south texas.

[shaft]

Because we're a D1 team in an FBS conference with image problems. The SBC encourages its schools to play a full FBS schedule to help boost the reputation of the conference.

Other conferences and schools don't have these problems so they can dip down and not hurt their reputation. Also big schools dip down and play these body bag/fcs games to avoid playing landmine FBS schools.

[MeanGreen61]

UTSA is potentially taking away games that could be played in Denton. We can pretend they won't be a threat and won't qualify for FBS play but we know the way this is going. San Antonio is a tourist and recruiting destination like Orlando and Tampa; we know what happened there with startup programs.

UTSA hasn't really taken any future games away from UNT. At this point they are a school without a team, without a FBS classification and the scheduling future games doesn't necessarily mean they will be played.

Edited May 9, 2010 by MeanGreen61

[GreenN'walinsVet]

New Cowboy stadium has already taken away our future ability to host several teams because they are already scheduled for Arlington. Now other programs are opting for San Antonio as their Texas stop for recruiting. I believe UTSA has taken away opportunities for future games from UNT. Head in sand doesn't mean it won't happen.

Fortunatly Texas is a hugh recruiting market, and San Antonio and Dallas are far enough away that i could see some teams (especially those out of the BIG XII markets) could organize it that they visit UNT and UTSA on rotating years to really try and get a foothold in Texas.

[UNT90]

New Cowboy stadium has already taken away our future ability to host several teams because they are already scheduled for Arlington. Now other programs are opting for San Antonio as their Texas stop for recruiting. I believe UTSA has taken away opportunities for future games from UNT. Head in sand doesn't mean it won't happen.

Funny, I look to the day that UNT will be playing a high profile team in Cowboys Stadium because our new stadium just can't accomodate the large crowds that we are drawing.

A man can dream, right?

Edited May 9, 2010 by UNT90

[MeanGreen61]

New Cowboy stadium has already taken away our future ability to host several teams because they are already scheduled for Arlington. Now other programs are opting for San Antonio as their Texas stop for recruiting. I believe UTSA has taken away opportunities for future games from UNT. Head in sand doesn't mean it won't happen.

You're making assumptions and saying those who don't agree or accept what you say have their head in the sand. Rather than see scheduling problems caused by a non-existant team in South/Central Texas 300 miles away and Jerry World extravaganzas, we will most probably see more attractive OC home games with the opening of our new stadium.

Edited May 9, 2010 by MeanGreen61

[GrandGreen]

i don't understand why 1] unt is not being proactive in scheduling utsa, and 2] why the belt has not, to my knowledge, made membership overtures to them. look at the market! i bet that if the belt doesn't offer membership, cusa will at some point. in addition, a north texas game in the alamodome would not hurt recruiting in south texas.

May be because UNT does not want to help another football program to get started in Texas and the Belt doesn't need them. Do you really think NT playing in San Antonio is going to help recruiting in South Texas more than a brand new competitive football team in the area is going to hinder recruiting? UTSA and TS at San Marcos have a long way to go before they are going to be an asset to any fb division league.

UTSA and TSSM are going to be able to get games against some good programs because they are relatively cheap and offer little competition. Now filling out a 12 game schedule will be a challenge. I doubt I am the only one that sees two more lower tier poorly funded football programs competing for coverage and recruits in Texas as a negative.

[wardly]

May be because UNT does not want to help another football program to get started in Texas and the Belt doesn't need them. Do you really think NT playing in San Antonio is going to help recruiting in South Texas more than a brand new competitive football team in the area is going to hinder recruiting? UTSA and TS at San Marcos have a long way to go before they are going to be an asset to any fb division league.

UTSA and TSSM are going to be able to get games against some good programs because they are relatively cheap and offer little competition. Now filling out a 12 game schedule will be a challenge. I doubt I am the only one that sees two more lower tier poorly funded football programs competing for coverage and recruits in Texas as a negative.

sort of like usa's new football program. i assume the belt wanted them because of the large mobile market[yawn]. i don't think utsa is going away, and i would bet if they are successful they will get a slot in cusa instead of us or la. tech. also, it would be nice to have a natural intrastate rival such as texas state or utsa. ours with smu is fairly one sided. we dislike them, they could care less about us. just an opinion.

[UNTflyer]

UTSA is loading up on scheduling some big teams to San Antonio. Games with Baylor were previously announced. Now more:

K-State http://espn.go.com/b...h-newcomer-utsa

Houston http://www.chron.com...on/6992928.html

Also signed home & home with Arizona State...

http://thesundevils..../040910aac.html

and 3-game series with Arizona...

http://www.goutsa.co...TCLID=204927214

Uh-huh. I recall some home games going on our schedule only to have them bought out. We'll see if UTSA actually plays Baylor, K-State, Arizona, Arizona State, or Houston at home.

[MeanGreen61]

sort of like usa's new football program. i assume the belt wanted them because of the large mobile market[yawn]. i don't think utsa is going away, and i would bet if they are successful they will get a slot in cusa instead of us or la. tech. also, it would be nice to have a natural intrastate rival such as texas state or utsa. ours with smu is fairly one sided. we dislike them, they could care less about us. just an opinion.

USA was already a member of the Belt making their new football team an automatic addition. USF and UAB were originally basketball schools in CUSA maing their startup football program automatic conference additions.

With the reported major conference shifts in the near future, who's to say that either/or Texas State/UTSA will make it to the FBS division ?

Edited May 10, 2010 by MeanGreen61

[GrandGreen]

sort of like usa's new football program. i assume the belt wanted them because of the large mobile market[yawn]. i don't think utsa is going away, and i would bet if they are successful they will get a slot in cusa instead of us or la. tech. also, it would be nice to have a natural intrastate rival such as texas state or utsa. ours with smu is fairly one sided. we dislike them, they could care less about us. just an opinion.

USA yawn, obviously is already a member of the Belt. Now, unlike when the Belt searched for more teams and were instrumental in moving FIU and FAU into FB Division football, the Belt does not need teams just to survive.

UTSA and TSUSM may not go away, but at this point it is certainly not a done deal that they make it into the FB Division. It certainly would be nice to have more geographically friendly league, however I don't remember any great rivalries being established when we were in the Southland. The closest thing NT had to a rival in that conference was NE La.

My guess is a lot of the wild excitement is going to go away after UTSA actually starts playing and starts getting pounded in front of meager crowds. If in time, they are successful then they will get deserved opportunities. They do have a big advantage of being the only game in SA, but as programs like UH, TCU, SMU, Rice and NT playing in a big population center doesn't guarantee much in support in a Big 12 and Pro dominated sports state.

Edited May 10, 2010 by GrandGreen

[MeanGoingGreen]

I, for one, would love to have TSU in the belt; UTSA would be a good matchup, but their fans are EXTREMELY stupid and annoying. Do you know what kind of attendance these schools could draw to the new stadium???

These came from TCU fans about their experience playing TSU last year...

"As for the crowd, I have to admit that I was surprised after attending games for 30 some odd years that we had more than 30K in the stands for Texas State, especially with the Tech-UT game on at about the same time."

"From a student perspective, there were a lot of students in the stands before the game even started. They came early, and in big numbers, which hasn't happened since the BYU game last year. I'd say that's pretty good for playing an FCS team."

After reading a few threads over on the Sun Belt BBS board, I am convinced that these schools will only help NT.

[wardly]

if/when conference realignment happens in the next 18 months or so, cusa eastern division could be adversely impacted. should ucf, ecu, or memphis end up in big east, then the belt is main conference for their replacements. the belt might then have a need for 1aa programs on the way up to 1a, such as texas state and utsa. i am only suggesting that the belt and unt be more pro-active. i also would much rather see tx st and utsa play in denton than fau/fiu.just an opinion.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

if/when conference realignment happens in the next 18 months or so, cusa eastern division could be adversely impacted. should ucf, ecu, or memphis end up in big east, then the belt is main conference for their replacements. the belt might then have a need for 1aa programs on the way up to 1a, such as texas state and utsa. i am only suggesting that the belt and unt be more pro-active. i also would much rather see tx st and utsa play in denton than fau/fiu.just an opinion.

Yes, if they become FBS, I'd rather have them than the Florida schools. The Sun Belt games are simply too far to realistically make road trips. Plus, having been to the FIU campus and Miami, I'd rather hit San Marcos or San Antonio.

Miami is a hole and FIU...you wouldn't know FIU was a university if there was no sign marking it. The campus is void of even a shred of architectural thought. It's like the U.S. Post Office designed all of their buildings. So, f'ing bland.

Part of what I miss about New Mexico State - other than I considered them a good, true rival - was that even in their barren land, the campus looked unique. I looked like a Western university. FIU is like UTD with a football program, campus-wise.

Also, let me address the chick-factor. Let's not kid ourselves, both Miami and San Antonio have heavily hispanic populations. But, for all of the hype about Miami, I can honestly say that the Mexican gals are, on the whole, easier on the eye than the Cubans, Hatians, and Dominicans that infest Miami.

I will say the that a couple of the Colombian gals we met in Miami were, indeed, hotter than fish grease. But, give me the Mexican/Texican gal over the Miami Latina - if we're choosing.

And, it kind of goes without saying that the women at Texas State are Texas hot already, yo. And, they're more giggly.

[RETSO]

I think I may have posted this scenario a few years back when the UTSA program was just starting...

for what it is worth my good friends wife is a Prof at UTSA so I picked her brain for the new programs info....she is NOT a sports fan so the info had to be translated by her husband

Here is what she said the UTSA plan was

1. follow the model of University of South Florida and U Central Florida

2. hire a big time coach and recruit the big cities

3. Dont get trapped into a small time conference...they are shooting for CUSA right out of the gate when they become D-1 or whatever the heck it is now.....

IMO they need to be our travel "partners" if and when we leave the BELT...more positives than negatives

[wardly]

I think I may have posted this scenario a few years back when the UTSA program was just starting...

for what it is worth my good friends wife is a Prof at UTSA so I picked her brain for the new programs info....she is NOT a sports fan so the info had to be translated by her husband

Here is what she said the UTSA plan was

1. follow the model of University of South Florida and U Central Florida

2. hire a big time coach and recruit the big cities

3. Dont get trapped into a small time conference...they are shooting for CUSA right out of the gate when they become D-1 or whatever the heck it is now.....

IMO they need to be our travel "partners" if and when we leave the BELT...more positives than negatives

i have never quite understood "travel partners", and the importance thereof. could someone knowledgeable please explain to one who admits ignorance on the subject?

[TheTastyGreek]

i have never quite understood "travel partners", and the importance thereof. could someone knowledgeable please explain to one who admits ignorance on the subject?

The concept is having geographically close pairs of schools so that (especially in non-revenue sports) conference mates can save money on road trip expenses.

For example, when the basketball teams have road games against the Florida teams, they generally play against one team (FAU or FIU) on Thursday and against the other on Saturday. Spend half the money on plane expenses and just spend one more night in a hotel.

Last year, we had basketball road trips to "travel partners" UALR/ASU and WKU/MTSU.

In conferences like the WAC, with Hawaii and La Tech so far removed in either direction from the rest of the schools, it's tough to schedule cost effective road trips that don't hurt the competitive balance. If you look at Boise State's conference basketball schedule, in February they had to play in Louisiana on a Thursday and then travel to New Mexico to play another game on Saturday. You can't shuttle bus from one to the other, and even flying will still cause fatigue. For example, Utah State went 14-2 in conference last year... And the only two games they lost were in back-to-back road trips to La Tech and NMSU, with the games two days apart.

Consider how it affects competition in all sports, then factor in the expense it adds for non-revenue sports. It may not be as big a deal financially for basketball, but when you're traveling for baseball, volleyball, and all the other sports that are usually net-negative revenue contests... It can really start to add up.

[wardly]

The concept is having geographically close pairs of schools so that (especially in non-revenue sports) conference mates can save money on road trip expenses.

For example, when the basketball teams have road games against the Florida teams, they generally play against one team (FAU or FIU) on Thursday and against the other on Saturday. Spend half the money on plane expenses and just spend one more night in a hotel.

Last year, we had basketball road trips to "travel partners" UALR/ASU and WKU/MTSU.

In conferences like the WAC, with Hawaii and La Tech so far removed in either direction from the rest of the schools, it's tough to schedule cost effective road trips that don't hurt the competitive balance. If you look at Boise State's conference basketball schedule, in February they had to play in Louisiana on a Thursday and then travel to New Mexico to play another game on Saturday. You can't shuttle bus from one to the other, and even flying will still cause fatigue. For example, Utah State went 14-2 in conference last year... And the only two games they lost were in back-to-back road trips to La Tech and NMSU, with the games two days apart.

Consider how it affects competition in all sports, then factor in the expense it adds for non-revenue sports. It may not be as big a deal financially for basketball, but when you're traveling for baseball, volleyball, and all the other sports that are usually net-negative revenue contests... It can really start to add up.

thanks for info. i think i would rather be la. tech's travel partner in w.a.c. than stay in belt. my thinking is that t.c.u. has a better shot at big 12 than we do at c.u.s.a. as long as s.m.u. is a member.