Hated Rivals

[Yellow Snow]

SMU has played you 20% of the seasons this decade and in the last decade......some of this time was during the 11 game seasons.....so they had fewer OOC games to play.......some of this time was while they were in a different conference than TCU yet they were still maintaining the annual rivalry game with TCU or attempting to........much of this time was when SMU was playing in a conference with two or three other teams in Texas....and still playing TCU in the OOC.....so SMU had all the games they needed in Texas right on their schedule.......yet in the 90s and in the 2000s they still managed to get you on the schedule 20% of the time....in the 80s more......and before that even more

SMU has also had the ability to schedule multiple other Texas teams in the OOC like Tech or A&M........what % of the years in a decade do you need SMU to schedule you for before you will not say they are "scared of you"

as for joining the SWC....ISU was never in the SWC......they were in the Big 8 before they were in the Big 12......and the Big 8 was dominated by OU and Nebraska and it consisted entirely of programs in states that were not considered hot beds of recruiting and are very limited in population for the most part especially compared to Texas

do you think that UNT was the only program that wanted to be in the SWC......I am sure UTEP, La Tech, either of the New Mexico schools, Tulane, Tulsa, or dozens of other teams around the SWC area would have loved to be in the conference.....obviously UH brought more to the table....I would again say the success UH had while in the conference supports they were a good choice among those available

you make the claim that records from 1922 and leather helmet eras are not relevant to SMU playing you today......yet you are all to willing to use things from decades past to excuse the athletics performance of UNT even today.......ignoring that not getting into the SWC means you need to continue to under fund your athletics program, that you need to drop down to D1-A, that you can ignore TCU, SMU, and UH were KICKED OUT OF THEIR CONFERENCE a decade and a half ago and two of the three have managed to move conferences twice, one has been able to move conferences 4 times now (all for the better), and another was able to help build a conference into the conference that the vast majority of UNT fans would kill to join.....and you completely ignore that UTEP was never part of the SWC, is stuck miles and miles away from most of the states populations.....in a city of well under a million.....and they managed to build and maintain their program to a level that they were able to move conferences ahead of UNT and "take" the spot in the CUSA that UNT fans felt was "theirs"

so excuse me if not getting into a conference decades ago.....long before any current players were born and long before any of the administration around UNT today was at UNT, long after that conference has folded, while being a large state school, in a huge metro area, filled with D1-A talent, with athletics programs all over the state constantly making moves to improve their positions even after being DUMPED, having their program put on the death penalty, being smaller schools, with many fewer alumni, while UNT took a breather in D1-AA........excuse me if that "excuse" falls on deaf ears

not to mention that there are programs in D1-A ball today that were never in the SWC, were never in any good conference, and did not even have a dream of playing football because the university barely existed or it was a community college back when the SWC was a power.....that have had a great deal of success and continue to do so today

You make some very valid points…

I understand the OOC scheduling issue all too well. We’ll play Iowa and nine Big 12 games every year now. That makes it incredibly difficult to schedule games with other local (relatively) teams on a regular basis. Northern Iowa fans accuse us of ducking them too. Playing home and homes with Utah, UConn, Army, etc. dropped them from the non-con. However, since Nebraska is leaving we have UNI on the schedule going forward to replace the gate money (UNI games are always sell-outs).

That said, from an outsiders perspective, I can see why there is animosity here towards SMU. UNT has played you guys even up on the field for the last 20 years (when you play each other). I don’t know why you are surprised when your condescension elicits the responses you get.

Interesting discussion... One thing I do know is that all fanbases are basically the same.

[Got5onIt]

I would say most hate SMU. Our most recent SBC rival was NMSU. Now that they've left, maybe MTSU?

[TodgeRodge]

checkfacts as he is better known has been a long time troll against denton and unt. he flunked out of unt and is an smu fan at heart.

actually I left UNT of my own accord and was able to go to work for another university and to enter graduate school at a second university after my time at UNT.....so I did not fail out

I have never set foot on the SMU campus and only know a few friends from way back that went there.....I do cheer for them to win often when they are playing schools outside of Texas and I do like their stadium, coach, and I like their academic standing even if I do think they are too expensive

You make some very valid points…

I understand the OOC scheduling issue all too well. We’ll play Iowa and nine Big 12 games every year now. That makes it incredibly difficult to schedule games with other local (relatively) teams on a regular basis. Northern Iowa fans accuse us of ducking them too. Playing home and homes with Utah, UConn, Army, etc. dropped them from the non-con. However, since Nebraska is leaving we have UNI on the schedule going forward to replace the gate money (UNI games are always sell-outs).

That said, from an outsiders perspective, I can see why there is animosity here towards SMU. UNT has played you guys even up on the field for the last 20 years (when you play each other). I don’t know why you are surprised when your condescension elicits the responses you get.

Interesting discussion... One thing I do know is that all fanbases are basically the same.

the Big 12 Round Robin is going to be a disaster.....one need only look at the PAC 10, their inability to get 2 teams into a BCS game most years, and the overall poor records of many of their teams at the end of the season

the Big 12 needs to go to a round robin -1 and they need to have it where the top teams and weakest teams over the last X number of years don't face each other......because UT Austin can always schedule a home game, make cash, and possibly buy a win while it would give a lesser program the opportunity to also schedule a home game from an even lesser team and hopefully get a win

if there are 10 teams playing 12 games that is 120 games total

with a true round robin you have 30 games OOC and 90 games in conference

with a round robin -1 you would have 80 conference games and 40 OOC games

mathematically you have to split the conference games.......so with 90 in conference games you are guaranteeing your conference 45 wins and 45 losses and 30 toss ups

with a RR-1 (80 conference games) you are only guaranteeing 40 wins and 40 losses and leaving 40 games as a toss up and hopefully proper scheduling would get those into the win column or most of them

so with a true RR schedule you are automatically guaranteeing your conference 5 more losses per year

[Yellow Snow]

actually I left UNT of my own accord and was able to go to work for another university and to enter graduate school at a second university after my time at UNT.....so I did not fail out

I have never set foot on the SMU campus and only know a few friends from way back that went there.....I do cheer for them to win often when they are playing schools outside of Texas and I do like their stadium, coach, and I like their academic standing even if I do think they are too expensive

the Big 12 Round Robin is going to be a disaster.....one need only look at the PAC 10, their inability to get 2 teams into a BCS game most years, and the overall poor records of many of their teams at the end of the season

the Big 12 needs to go to a round robin -1 and they need to have it where the top teams and weakest teams over the last X number of years don't face each other......because UT Austin can always schedule a home game, make cash, and possibly buy a win while it would give a lesser program the opportunity to also schedule a home game from an even lesser team and hopefully get a win

if there are 10 teams playing 12 games that is 120 games total

with a true round robin you have 30 games OOC and 90 games in conference

with a round robin -1 you would have 80 conference games and 40 OOC games

mathematically you have to split the conference games.......so with 90 in conference games you are guaranteeing your conference 45 wins and 45 losses and 30 toss ups

with a RR-1 (80 conference games) you are only guaranteeing 40 wins and 40 losses and leaving 40 games as a toss up and hopefully proper scheduling would get those into the win column or most of them

so with a true RR schedule you are automatically guaranteeing your conference 5 more losses per year

I see the round robin differently. It will increase the leagues chances of getting two teams in the BCS. Fact of the matter is that the lower tier teams will be the ones absorbing the five additional losses, not the likes of OU or UT. True, they will have to play an additional road game in a place like Ames, Iowa in the winter, but still…

By going round robin they avoid playing a championship game. This game automatically gives one of the two top teams another loss. In addition, by having the championship game, it is possible for the top two teams to meet TWICE in the same year.

[rcade]

the two words highlighted above in your quoted post are the only thing UNT fans have to be bitter about and the only reason UNT is where it is today

Putting it all on UNT is stupid, considering the fact that it's part of a public university system and bigger schools have more juice in Austin.

UNT was kept out of the SWC because member schools saw the direction we were going in enrollment. They were afraid we'd overshadow the smaller private schools in Fort Worth and Dallas by the sheer volume of our student body.

Over time, this is happening. You can't put as many alumni into the area as UNT has done the past 20 years and not become a regional player.

[TodgeRodge]

I see the round robin differently. It will increase the leagues chances of getting two teams in the BCS. Fact of the matter is that the lower tier teams will be the ones absorbing the five additional losses, not the likes of OU or UT. True, they will have to play an additional road game in a place like Ames, Iowa in the winter, but still…

By going round robin they avoid playing a championship game. This game automatically gives one of the two top teams another loss. In addition, by having the championship game, it is possible for the top two teams to meet TWICE in the same year.

I have to respectfully disagree.....I don't see the current PAC-10 getting two teams into the BCS nearly as often as the Big 12 or the SEC

also UT and OU in most seasons can beat up on about anyone so they don't need to play Baylor or ISU or anyone else to get a win most years....and hell they can probably buy in an even easier win most years.....no conference will survive with just two top schools and a bunch of 7-6/6-7 teams......over time you will just be seen as the best of the worst

I am not sad the conference championship is gone.....but I don't like the guaranteed 5 extra losses for the conference every year

TV contracts, bowl tie-ins, and bowl payouts improve with better conference mates......they decline even for the top teams with horrible conference mates

Putting it all on UNT is stupid, considering the fact that it's part of a public university system and bigger schools have more juice in Austin.

UNT was kept out of the SWC because member schools saw the direction we were going in enrollment. They were afraid we'd overshadow the smaller private schools in Fort Worth and Dallas by the sheer volume of our student body.

Over time, this is happening. You can't put as many alumni into the area as UNT has done the past 20 years and not become a regional player.

UNT was not part of a university system at the time the SWC was expanding.....UNT was a stand alone university with it's own BOR......UNT only became a member of a "system" in about 2001 when UNT-d was created and the UNT system was formed.....so there was no "system" to have any interference......TCU, Rice, SMU, and Baylor are all private.....so no Texas university system political conspiracy fits there.....Arkansas was at that time and still is located in Arkansas.....so no Texas university system political conspiracy there......Texas Tech was not part of a system then and was a stand alone university......UT and TAMU are in different systems......UH was a stand alone university.......forgive me if can;t see any real conspiracy amongst a bunch of universities that were only affiliated by the conference they were in or being in the same state for others

SMU and TCU were very long term members and strong players in much of the history of the SWC.....so the fact that any members much less TCU and SMU were giving any thought to them should be expected (similar to those on this forum that trash TxState or UTSA and want nothing to do with them)

the last 20 years of UNT athletics VS the last 20 years of SMU or TCU athletics and more so the last 5 or so years shows that it is indeed possible to discount all the alumni UNT has in this area......and all those alumni don't really mean a thing as far as over shadowing anyone......decades after not getting into the SWC and a decade and a half after the SWC ceased to exist

at least 2 conferences agree with me across the board for both teams and 4 conferences seem to agree with me concerning TCU......no conference other than the Sunbelt seems to agree with you as of yet

Edited December 5, 2010 by TodgeRodge

[NT80]

Again, there was no option about dropping to 1AA. The NCAA set a retroactive rule that would have required NT to play all of our games during 1981 at either Texas Stadium or the Cotton Bowl but they didn't set it until AFTER the season. There was no magic form that was not filled out - the only way we could have avoided 1AA was by traveling back in time and replaying the 1980 and or 1981 seasons someplace other than Fouts. Arkstfan has posted the requirements to remain 1A and we could not have possibly fulfilled them. A number of schools asked for waivers and NONE were granted. The closest any school got was actually Arkansas State and they were turned down as well.

Then why were there some schools at our attendance level and stadium size that did not have to drop to 1-AA?

Edited December 5, 2010 by NT80

[rcade]

UNT was not part of a university system at the time the SWC was expanding.....UNT was a stand alone university with it's own BOR...

I was referring to the entire system of public universities and colleges in Texas. Not smaller university systems.

[rcade]

the last 20 years of UNT athletics VS the last 20 years of SMU or TCU athletics and more so the last 5 or so years shows that it is indeed possible to discount all the alumni UNT has in this area...

UNT alumni haven't had much to be excited about where football is concerned. When that changes and UNT earns an invite into a conference that casual fans care about, we'll see how much our alums can be discounted.

Your sneering dismissals of all things UNT make me question why you are hanging out here.

[TodgeRodge]

UNT alumni haven't had much to be excited about where football is concerned. When that changes and UNT earns an invite into a conference that casual fans care about, we'll see how much our alums can be discounted.

Your sneering dismissals of all things UNT make me question why you are hanging out here.

what has UNT done to earn an invite from another conference

what did UTEP, Rice, or SMU fans have to be excited about....or Tulsa...or UH for years and years

while you are being concerned with MY "sneering dismissal" of the claims by UNT that what happened decades ago is still highly relevant to what happens today

I am trying to show you that others (like all the conferences you wish to be affiliated with) seem to be dismissing all your claims of what you bring to the table

and perhaps it is time to quit looking decades back to justify why things that did not exist a decade back are dismissing all your claims.....and perhaps it is time to give a realistic evaluation to all those claims and if they actually mean something to anyone besides those on this fan forum

sorry if a differing opinion (in my opinion supported with some reasonable conclusions) does not sit well with you.....but sitting around chanting the same mantra and ending up with the same less than satisfactory results decades later does not seem to sit well with you either

I was referring to the entire system of public universities and colleges in Texas. Not smaller university systems.

but yet the SWC had let Tech in in 1956......and it was another public university in Texas (UH) that was let in as well....why did all the others have something against UNT specifically

unless they just did not see all the things you are claiming were there at that time and they decided those things were somewhere else.....like in Houston at UH

not to mention the massive amount of conference movement especially with Texas schools involved....other than UNT...in the time since the SWC folded

the consistent thing about all of it is...other schools were ready to act when they needed to......even if being caught off guard when the SWC or the WAC imploded around them......even if having a number of glaring weaknesses when they needed to act

and when one or more schools were compared against UNT.....conferences went with the other guy or guys

SMU is only a member of one conference at a time and they are only one of 9-12 votes......there was never anything stopping UNT from contacting, shopping themselves to, or positioning themselves for any other conference be it the MWC, Big East, CUSA, WAC

there was nothing stopping them from doing that after being turned down by the SWC and there was nothing stopping them from doing that in the decade and a half since the SWC folded

but they didn't.......you blame that on SMU......I place blame elsewhere

I don't know what UTEP, TCU, Rice, or UH thinks or does about what SMU is trying to do to be a spoiler for them.....but clearly their administration has been much more successful in foiling those attempts by SMU

Edited December 5, 2010 by TodgeRodge

[UNT90]

the last 20 years of UNT athletics VS the last 20 years of SMU or TCU athletics and more so the last 5 or so years shows that it is indeed possible to discount all the alumni UNT has in this area......and all those alumni don't really mean a thing as far as over shadowing anyone......decades after not getting into the SWC and a decade and a half after the SWC ceased to exist

Keeping the focus on SMU...

They had 16k for their home opener after a bowl winning season. We had 24K for our home opener after 5-32 the previous 3 years. Imagine what the numbers would have been in Denton had we had similiar success last year.

Ignore and discount it if you want, but having 97K almuni in the DFW area is huge for UNT. Win, and you will draw their interest.

Also, many of the media types in the DFW area are grads of the UNT radio//television degree program. Give them something to be positive about, and they will be happy to give you some free publicity. Hell, even Craig Miller had nice things to say about his old school after the K St game.

But you just stay on the old SMU band wagon, Todge, it's a good place for you.

[TodgeRodge]

Keeping the focus on SMU...

They had 16k for their home opener after a bowl winning season. We had 24K for our home opener after 5-32 the previous 3 years. Imagine what the numbers would have been in Denton had we had similiar success last year.

Ignore and discount it if you want, but having 97K almuni in the DFW area is huge for UNT. Win, and you will draw their interest.

Also, many of the media types in the DFW area are grads of the UNT radio//television degree program. Give them something to be positive about, and they will be happy to give you some free publicity. Hell, even Craig Miller had nice things to say about his old school after the K St game.

But you just stay on the old SMU band wagon, Todge, it's a good place for you.

I would imagine this was the exact same thing you said during the DD years of 4 straight in the Belt correct

to quote famed UNT alumni Dr Phil.

How is that working out for you...

[UNT90]

I would imagine this was the exact same thing you said during the DD years of 4 straight in the Belt correct

to quote famed UNT alumni Dr Phil.

How is that working out for you...

Huge changes since the DD era (see: 24K turning out for this years home opener for a 5-33 team), but these little inconvenient facts don't help your "UNT will always suck" argument, so you ignore them.

Come talk to me at the next UNT home game that you attend, I'll give you a beer and we can continue this discussion. See you in..... 2016?

[TodgeRodge]

Huge changes since the DD era (see: 24K turning out for this years home opener for a 5-33 team), but these little inconvenient facts don't help your "UNT will always suck" argument, so you ignore them.

Come talk to me at the next UNT home game that you attend, I'll give you a beer and we can continue this discussion. See you in..... 2016?

please point out in any of my past post where I have made the claim that UNT will always suck

I made the claim that UNT and UNT fans getting caught up in something that went on decades in the past has no relevance to today....I will also make the claim that getting caught up in that laughable and easily refuted argument has prevented many from having a clear and realistic opinion and evaluation of the UNT program......because it makes them feel better to blame it all on a small private university 30 miles away that has had plenty of it's own athletics issues to concern themselves with

I made the claim that UNT had a multitude of time and opportunity to take advantage of all the things they claimed they offered to the SWC and they never saw fit to do so...and in fact they tossed in the towel and dropped to D1-AA

I made the claim that it would be easy to see why the SWC passed over UNT when they were looking for a new member....I offered supporting arguments as to why I felt that happened....others blamed SMU......Haden Fry has refuted that claim......he as well as anyone would have been in the position to know

not sure where I ever presented the argument that UNT will always suck

Edited December 5, 2010 by TodgeRodge

[Primo]

talking too much and nobody listening.... keep it short and simple and maybe get heard.

almost forgot... hated rivals?

Still dislike SMU, and.... Southlake Carroll...

Edited December 5, 2010 by Primo

[TodgeRodge]

talking too much and nobody listening.... keep it short and simple and maybe get heard

I did keep it simple

I highlighted two words in the quote from another as to why UNT has never been where those on this forum desire it to be......and my opinion on that was called into question.....so I supported it

if by keep it simple you mean blame SMU or fault other conferences for not listening to you when you say just let us in and we will deliver all the things we are not now delivering....well I will go back to the simple Dr. Phil quote above

how is that working out for you...

PS if keeping it simple and blaming others was actually something that worked (while repeating past mistakes) the USA would be better off than ever today

Edited December 5, 2010 by TodgeRodge

[Primo]

check your meds...

Folks who say too much tend to read things that aren't there...

still dislike SMU... and LeTourneau... throw in Texas Wesleyan...

[Yellow Snow]

I would imagine this was the exact same thing you said during the DD years of 4 straight in the Belt correct

to quote famed UNT alumni Dr Phil.

How is that working out for you...

The Pac 10 hasn't had as many two team BCS years because that conference has sucked. The Big 10 would be a better comparison. They routinely get two teams in the BCS and their conference bowl record has not been good.

Just because UNT has been shown little support from alums in the past doesn't mean they will continue to be indifferent. Is that the argument you are making? That there is no hope and UNT should just give up? Seems to be what you are saying.

Dan McCarney changed the culture at Iowa State, and my money is saying he will do the same at UNT. Mark my words. Dan McCarney is the perfect hire. All he needs to do is get an additional 1 in 10 UNT alums to buy in and UNT will be at that proverbial next level. With even a small increase in pulse - UNT will win, and win alot.

[Primo]

still dislike SMU... but go ahead and add UTA...

[Quoner]

I did keep it simple

I highlighted two words in the quote from another as to why UNT has never been where those on this forum desire it to be......and my opinion on that was called into question.....so I supported it

if by keep it simple you mean blame SMU or fault other conferences for not listening to you when you say just let us in and we will deliver all the things we are not now delivering....well I will go back to the simple Dr. Phil quote above

how is that working out for you...

PS if keeping it simple and blaming others was actually something that worked (while repeating past mistakes) the USA would be better off than ever today

I've unmasked your secret identity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY_oKve-bH0

[Primo]

still dislike SMU... oh and add Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico...

[SilverEagle]

please point out in any of my past post where I have made the claim that UNT will always suck

I made the claim that UNT and UNT fans getting caught up in something that went on decades in the past has no relevance to today....I will also make the claim that getting caught up in that laughable and easily refuted argument has prevented many from having a clear and realistic opinion and evaluation of the UNT program......because it makes them feel better to blame it all on a small private university 30 miles away that has had plenty of it's own athletics issues to concern themselves with

I made the claim that UNT had a multitude of time and opportunity to take advantage of all the things they claimed they offered to the SWC and they never saw fit to do so...and in fact they tossed in the towel and dropped to D1-AA

I made the claim that it would be easy to see why the SWC passed over UNT when they were looking for a new member....I offered supporting arguments as to why I felt that happened....others blamed SMU......Haden Fry has refuted that claim......he as well as anyone would have been in the position to know

not sure where I ever presented the argument that UNT will always suck

My dislike for SMU goes back to before I graduated from UNT. I would like to be able to blame SMU for all our "deficiencies", but historically we mainly have our previous administrators, and ourselves to blame for our situation.

I still dispise SMU.....the arrogant bastards.

[TodgeRodge]

The Pac 10 hasn't had as many two team BCS years because that conference has sucked. The Big 10 would be a better comparison. They routinely get two teams in the BCS and their conference bowl record has not been good.

Just because UNT has been shown little support from alums in the past doesn't mean they will continue to be indifferent. Is that the argument you are making? That there is no hope and UNT should just give up? Seems to be what you are saying.

Dan McCarney changed the culture at Iowa State, and my money is saying he will do the same at UNT. Mark my words. Dan McCarney is the perfect hire. All he needs to do is get an additional 1 in 10 UNT alums to buy in and UNT will be at that proverbial next level. With even a small increase in pulse - UNT will win, and win alot.

the Big 10 plays 8 conference games.....not 9......which means 11 teams X 12 games = 132 games 44 OOC and 88 IC (or more importantly 44 guaranteed conference losses)

if they did a RR-1 it would be 132 games and 99 IN and 33 OOC (49.5 auto losses) and that would obviously be a disaster with uneven schedules

if they all played that would be 132 with 110 IN and 22 OOC and most importantly 55 guaranteed losses for the conference

so they would have a guarantee of 11 more losses in the conference every year which would average to an additional loss per team (though obviously it would not end up like that)

if you were to add the ability to win 5 more games per year to the last few seasons of the PAC 10 and their teams were able to take advantage and win all of those games their conference would probably not look near as crappy those years and they would probably have had more bowl cash to split up and possibly be that much more attractive to the networks for future conferences

****

the argument I was making is that saying "we are indifferent all these years because we were not where we wanted to be".....when there were a multitude of opportunities to make meaningful improvements.....and multiple examples of other programs that did make and benefit from those improvements.....including some that were not even around in the past when you did not get where you wanted to be......is not really a persuasive argument to say we did belong there, we should have been there, we were cheated from being there, and we are still paying for it today

and it is not really a persuasive argument that suddenly you are going to start to deliver what you have had decades to deliver

as for giving up....I would say there should be a "give up" for the idea that just a couple of things here and there is all that needs to be tweaked and and suddenly me, the old SWC, SMU, and the rest will suddenly be eating our words or wishing all those years ago UNT had been let into the SWC...or that the new Big 12 will call....or the MWC.....or even CUSA

or that the fans will suddenly start pouring in in droves.....or that improvements in the conference situation will be eminent

as much as UNT fans love to mock SMU.....the fact is if all it took to win again consistently for the long term was a new stadium SMU would have been winning since 2000......if having a winning season or two and a bowl game was all it took for huge fan support SMU would be selling out.....TCU would be selling seats in their basketball arena for football games on the big screen

several on here call TCUs stadium a dump (even though most say it has excellent sight lines and is a great place to watch a game)......but TCU playing in that "dump" is #3 in the USA.....will be in their second straight BCS game, and will have their third top 10 finish

it takes a clear, long term, top down, focused, well written, and ever evolving plan to take a program where TCU, USF, Boise and others have......you have to be in the position to immediately take advantage of every single opportunity that is availed to you to improve your situation

none of that starts with "just wait until we win and the fans show up".......none of that starts with just building a stadium and saying "now we win and the fans come" (see SMU).......none of that comes with just a single coach (see Boise and TCU)......none of that comes with still refusing to have a clear evaluation of your past and how you arrived where you are currently at.....none of that comes with missing out on past and present opportunities and saying "wait until we are winning next time"......and none of that just comes from the AD and the athletics department

[Primo]

still talking too much and saying nothing...

still dislike SMU... and almost forget... Tamu

[VideoEagle]

Then why were there some schools at our attendance level and stadium size that did not have to drop to 1-AA?

Who?

Here are the details of the 1A and 1AA requirements as they were reset after the 1981 season. I think this came from Arkstfan.

After the 1981 season ended, at the NCAA Convention the rules for I-A were changed effective for the 1982 season (so no one would have time to adjust).

The new rules became:

1. Average 17,000 a year over the past four years.

2. OR average 17,000 one of the prior four years if you had 30,000 seats.

3. AND in both cases, play 60% of your games against I-A schools.

Three exceptions were created.

1. Average 20,000 home and away attendance over the past four years.

2. Average 20,000 home and away attendance in one of the past four years if you had 30,000 seats.

3. Be a member of a conference where more than half of the members met I-A criteria.

The exceptions could only be used to retain I-A status, not to attain it.

Edited December 5, 2010 by VideoEagle