Jump to content

Did Benson Offer Unt Again ? Also Ull ?

MeanGreen61

By MeanGreen61
in Mean Green Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

NT80 Grand Master

NT80

Posted
Posted

Quote:

Originally Posted by CorinthEagle

Dwayne,

Were NT and U-la-la offered this time around or were you speaking of a previous invite?

Yes, they were both offered yesterday...

AC reception desk: "RV, Commish Benson of the WAC is on the phone". RV: "Tell him NO!".

I'm sure Benson has called any FBS schools he can think might take the bait before he has to invite the FCS moveups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PlummMeanGreen Grand Master

PlummMeanGreen

Posted
Posted (edited)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CorinthEagle

Dwayne,

Were NT and U-la-la offered this time around or were you speaking of a previous invite?

Yes, they were both offered yesterday...

AC reception desk: "RV, Commish Benson of the WAC is on the phone". RV: "Tell him NO!".

I'm sure Benson has called any FBS schools he can think might take the bait before he has to invite the FCS moveups.

This Benson feller seems to me like a real glutton for self-induced punishment. Wonder if we should send UNT alum Dr. Phil for a visit with the commish'? :unsure:

GMG!

PS: Hey Dwayne of Minden! I'm MrGreenJeans over at BB&B, but I can't get a post in edge-wise. I'm a kinder/gentler poster as I near age 60 this November. What up?

Edited by PlummMeanGreen
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VideoEagle Mentor

VideoEagle

Posted
Posted

The Belt should offer a spot to LA Tech & UTSA as soon as possible.

Kick out Monroe if that's what Tech wants.

Would not want to kick out Monroe even if La Tech is clearly an upgrade. ULM joined in football when we needed a team after La Tech bailed while the conference was forming. Then they moved the rest of their teams over when we needed them for all sports even though they have more of a Southland budged and were faced with higher costs in the Belt. They did the Belt a favor twice when it was not really to their advantage to do so.

Conferences don't kick out schools easily. How many years has Denver been given and if they can't find another home I'm sure the conference President's will grant them an extension. School that do get kicked out actively do something to deserve it.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MeanGreen61 Newbie

MeanGreen61

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Though he didn't say so directly, he indicated that North Texas, which has repeatedly been mentioned as a potential candidate, will not leave the Sun Belt.

“North Texas was not in (Tuesday's) meeting,” he said. “Right now, we're focusing on the five schools we met with.”

Benson sez North Texas not an option.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/utsa_notebook_104130484.html

Edited by MeanGreen61
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NT80 Grand Master

NT80

Posted
Posted (edited)

Though he didn't say so directly, he indicated that North Texas, which has repeatedly been mentioned as a potential candidate, will not leave the Sun Belt.

I'd rather see that rephrased as "...will not leave the Sun Belt for the WAC (in it's current form)...but is open to other offers." :rolleyes:

Edited by NT80
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FirefightnRick Proficient

FirefightnRick

Posted
Posted

Would not want to kick out Monroe even if La Tech is clearly an upgrade. ULM joined in football when we needed a team after La Tech bailed while the conference was forming. Then they moved the rest of their teams over when we needed them for all sports even though they have more of a Southland budged and were faced with higher costs in the Belt. They did the Belt a favor twice when it was not really to their advantage to do so.

Conferences don't kick out schools easily. How many years has Denver been given and if they can't find another home I'm sure the conference President's will grant them an extension. School that do get kicked out actively do something to deserve it.

Excellent post.

Rick

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TxStBobcat Newbie

TxStBobcat

Posted
Posted

I'm curious as to why UNT is turning down the offer for the WAC? Please no smack talk.

Is it just because they've stuck with the Sunbelt for a decade now that they've got some loyalty?

Have they actually developed real rivalries with Sunbelt teams?

Do they feel the Sunbelt will be easier to win in the future than the new WAC?

Is it an ego thing and not wanting to be associated with Texas State and UTSA?

Is it because of bad memories of being in Western-centric conferences?

Is it because of potential budget issues for the olympic sports?

Is it because they feel a C-USA invite is close?

I would imagine, it's a mixture of all of them, right guys?

Anyways, I hope TXST and UNT start an on-going or every other year type of OOC rivalry over the next few years.

Cheers,

TXSTBOBCAT

I will attach some Sagarin ratings to show how the Sunbelt and new WAC/soon-to-be-WAC teams compare as of right now.

I know these ratings are just that, only ratings. But I think it shows that the new WAC will be FAR from "clearly the worst FBS conference" that is getting thrown around a lot. I'm not attaching these ratings in an attempt to flame anything, but as pre-emptive strike against any uninformed responses that will probably be along the lines of "Because the new WAC will be sooo weak, duh."

Sagarin Ratings

Hawai'i - #80 > Troy - #81

Idaho - #86 > MTSU - #104

San Jose St. - #106 > Arkansas State - #116

La Tech - #109 > Florida Int'l - #120

Montana - #117 > Florida Atl - #125

Texas St. - #130 > Louisiana - #137

Utah St. - #133 > WKU - #144

New Mexico St. - #163 < ULM - #149

UT - San Antonio - No football team at this time < UNT - #151

Sagarin ELO-Chess comparison

Hawai'i 80

Troy 82

San Jose State 88

Idaho 105

MTSU 113

Texas State 116

Tech 117

Montana 126

FAU 127

ULL 129

Ark St 130

FIU 137

Utah St 141

UNT 142

WKU 143

ULM 147

NMSU 162

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Green Mean Contributor

Green Mean

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm curious as to why UNT is turning down the offer for the WAC? Please no smack talk.

Is it just because they've stuck with the Sunbelt for a decade now that they've got some loyalty?

Have they actually developed real rivalries with Sunbelt teams?

Do they feel the Sunbelt will be easier to win in the future than the new WAC?

Is it an ego thing and not wanting to be associated with Texas State and UTSA?

Is it because of bad memories of being in Western-centric conferences?

Is it because of potential budget issues for the olympic sports?

Is it because they feel a C-USA invite is close?

I would imagine, it's a mixture of all of them, right guys?

Anyways, I hope TXST and UNT start an on-going or every other year type of OOC rivalry over the next few years.

Cheers,

TXSTBOBCAT

I will attach some Sagarin ratings to show how the Sunbelt and new WAC/soon-to-be-WAC teams compare as of right now.

I know these ratings are just that, only ratings. But I think it shows that the new WAC will be FAR from "clearly the worst FBS conference" that is getting thrown around a lot. I'm not attaching these ratings in an attempt to flame anything, but as pre-emptive strike against any uninformed responses that will probably be along the lines of "Because the new WAC will be sooo weak, duh."

Sagarin Ratings

Hawai'i - #80 > Troy - #81

Idaho - #86 > MTSU - #104

San Jose St. - #106 > Arkansas State - #116

La Tech - #109 > Florida Int'l - #120

Montana - #117 > Florida Atl - #125

Texas St. - #130 > Louisiana - #137

Utah St. - #133 > WKU - #144

New Mexico St. - #163 < ULM - #149

UT - San Antonio - No football team at this time < UNT - #151

Sagarin ELO-Chess comparison

Hawai'i 80

Troy 82

San Jose State 88

Idaho 105

MTSU 113

Texas State 116

Tech 117

Montana 126

FAU 127

ULL 129

Ark St 130

FIU 137

Utah St 141

UNT 142

WKU 143

ULM 147

NMSU 162

My thing is what will those ratings look like once BSU, FSU, and Nevada are permanently gone? Other than Utah State and Hawaii if they turn things around....no team will really be worth a dang. Ok I don't mind being in a conference with LT and NMSU but they aren't world beaters by any stretch of the imagination. I don't think anybody has issue with being the same conference as TSU/UTSA...but we all acknowledge that you guys are touting the WAC because that's the only conference that will talk to you. I for one have always been a huge proponent of the WAC but that was because BSU, FSU and Nevada were in there and top that with Hawaii, I thought it was a very decent conference and way better than the SBC. But with the new WAC coming, I don't forsee those ratings increasing or even staying afloat. What's funny is the WAC can only turn to FCS schools and let us be real here...that will not improve the conference profile or even be the same as it is now.

Edited by Green Mean
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TxStBobcat Newbie

TxStBobcat

Posted
Posted (edited)

My thing is what will those ratings look like once BSU, FSU, and Nevada are permanently gone? Other than Utah State and Hawaii if they turn things around....no team will really be worth a dang. Ok I don't mind being in a conference with LT and NMSU but they aren't world beaters by any stretch of the imagination. I don't think anybody has issue with being the same conference as TSU/UTSA...but we all acknowledge that you guys are touting the WAC because that's the only conference that will talk to you. I for one have always been a huge proponent of the WAC but that was because BSU, FSU and Nevada were in there and top that with Hawaii, I thought it was a very decent conference and way better than the SBC. But with the new WAC coming, I don't forsee those ratings increasing or even staying afloat. What's funny is the WAC can only turn to FCS schools and let us be real here...that will not improve the conference profile or even be the same as it is now.

Yeah that's a good point about the best WAC schools leaving.

So, if the WAC schools get moved down a notch, instead of being mostly above the Belt, it would probably be a more even mixing of Belt/WAC teams.

So they'd be about even and ratings would depend on which conference does best in OOC. So again, the argument that the WAC will become "clearly the worst conference in FBS" goes out the window again.

I guess I just don't understand why UNT wouldn't want a pair of in-state conference rivals. I am not super familiar with UNT rivalries, but are Ark State and Troy big games for you guys? Plus, (and this is only my personal opinion), the WAC has a better "brand name" than the Sunbelt. Could maybe get an increasingly interested fanbase in Denton, what with the new stadium and all.

I agree with you, there's no doubt that the WAC is the only team interested in taking FCS upstarts right now. The Belt's past history has shown it's interest in FCS upstarts as well, it just finds it's membership to be at a good number of teams right now.

Edited by TxStBobcat
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mean Green 93-98 Grand Master

Mean Green 93-98

Posted
Posted

Utah State, Hawaii, and La Tech have very itchy feet to get out of the WAC. If they didn't have to eat so much crow to do it, La Tech would probably accept an invite to come back to the Belt at this point. While the Belt is not great, it doesn't show all the signs of a sinking ship that the WAC does. I would love to have a rivalry with Texas State-SM once they establish themselves at the 1-A level, but I'm not willing to join the present WAC to do it. UTSA doesn't interest me at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daddy Dumpsalot Contributor

Daddy Dumpsalot

Posted
Posted

Would not want to kick out Monroe even if La Tech is clearly an upgrade. ULM joined in football when we needed a team after La Tech bailed while the conference was forming. Then they moved the rest of their teams over when we needed them for all sports even though they have more of a Southland budged and were faced with higher costs in the Belt.

Yeah this makes a lot of sense; "We'll show you La Tech, even though you're better all around and better for the Sunbelt....we remember".

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daddy Dumpsalot Contributor

Daddy Dumpsalot

Posted
Posted

My thing is what will those ratings look like once BSU, FSU, and Nevada are permanently gone? Other than Utah State and Hawaii if they turn things around....no team will really be worth a dang. Ok I don't mind being in a conference with LT and NMSU but they aren't world beaters by any stretch of the imagination. I don't think anybody has issue with being the same conference as TSU/UTSA...but we all acknowledge that you guys are touting the WAC because that's the only conference that will talk to you. I for one have always been a huge proponent of the WAC but that was because BSU, FSU and Nevada were in there and top that with Hawaii, I thought it was a very decent conference and way better than the SBC. But with the new WAC coming, I don't forsee those ratings increasing or even staying afloat. What's funny is the WAC can only turn to FCS schools and let us be real here...that will not improve the conference profile or even be the same as it is now.

Great post. Couldn't agree more.

It's funny that the WAC is doing the same thing that the belt has done for the past few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


WE BELIEVE IN THE MEAN GREEN!

News

Recruiting

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.