Remove this ad
avatar

FoUTASportscaster

Maverick

Posts: 986 Member Since: 07/27/11

Maverick

Lead

May 1 13 9:19 AM

Tags : :

I was browsing for UTA and Sun Belt info when I ran across a Star Telegram article about UTA accepting the invitation.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/05/23 ... rfect.html

It was the standard will join on X date, UTA offers this for the conference, league got better, UTA does not have football.

[quote]"There is no expectation regarding the possibility of adding football," Benson said of UTA. "We know that it is something that is on their list to consider and if and when they go down that path, I'm sure the Sun Belt would welcome that.

This was before Spaniolo announced he was retiring, so it seems like the timeline I have loosely said exists fits. Upgrade all facilities and then take a look at football. With the indoor batting cages for softball and baseball done, it looks like softball is next up.

http://m.theshorthorn.com/sports/athlet ... l?mode=jqm

After CPC, the U announced athletics facilities would receive another $17 million. The batting cages were roughly $2 mill. The Shorthorn article pegs the softball/baseball upgrades at $8-$10 mill, so another roughly $5 mil for...? Tennis wouldn't need that much. Golf doesn't need it. Both basketball's and volleyball certainly don't need it. That leaves the track teams, which play at Maverick Stadium.

All of it makes me believe there is more going on behind the scenes than has been revealed.
Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Remove this ad
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 623 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#1 [url]

May 2 13 7:42 PM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

[quote]All of it makes me believe there is more going on behind the scenes than has been revealed. I like how your mind works. Apart from locker rooms and showers for Tennis, Baseball and Softball, we could certainly use a Women's Soccer field or perhaps indoor tennis courts. But I'm like you, I would like to see the money go towards making UTA an all-sports member of the Sunbelt. The synergistic effects of football at UTA would be staggering.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

FoUTASportscaster

Maverick

Posts: 986 Member Since:07/27/11 Maverick

#2 [url]

May 3 13 6:01 AM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

I may be unpopular, but I don't think any changes to Maverick Stadium need to be made, aside from updating the seating and expanding capacity.

I really have disliked the trend of moving football stadiums from all-purpose facilities to football-only. As it stands now, it could open tomorrow as a football, soccer and stay as a track-and-field venue.

There would be a lot of money needed to either build a new soccer stadium or new football stadium.

Unless I am missing something, all removing the track does is get more seats closer to the action, right?

Quote    Reply   
avatar

UTAMavalum83

Senior

Posts: 142 Member Since:07/13/11 Senior

#3 [url]

May 3 13 6:10 AM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

FoUTASportscaster wrote:
I was browsing for UTA and Sun Belt info when I ran across a Star Telegram article about UTA accepting the invitation.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/05/23 ... rfect.html

It was the standard will join on X date, UTA offers this for the conference, league got better, UTA does not have football.

[quote]"There is no expectation regarding the possibility of adding football," Benson said of UTA. "We know that it is something that is on their list to consider and if and when they go down that path, I'm sure the Sun Belt would welcome that.


This was before Spaniolo announced he was retiring, so it seems like the timeline I have loosely said exists fits. Upgrade all facilities and then take a look at football. With the indoor batting cages for softball and baseball done, it looks like softball is next up.

http://m.theshorthorn.com/sports/athlet ... l?mode=jqm

After CPC, the U announced athletics facilities would receive another $17 million. The batting cages were roughly $2 mill. The Shorthorn article pegs the softball/baseball upgrades at $8-$10 mill, so another roughly $5 mil for...? Tennis wouldn't need that much. Golf doesn't need it. Both basketball's and volleyball certainly don't need it. That leaves the track teams, which play at Maverick Stadium.

All of it makes me believe there is more going on behind the scenes than has been revealed.

Well, yeah - I'd sure hope so.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

UTAMavalum83

Senior

Posts: 142 Member Since:07/13/11 Senior

#4 [url]

May 3 13 6:13 AM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

Duck wrote:
[quote]All of it makes me believe there is more going on behind the scenes than has been revealed.
I like how your mind works. Apart from locker rooms and showers for Tennis, Baseball and Softball, we could certainly use a Women's Soccer field or perhaps indoor tennis courts. But I'm like you, I would like to see the money go towards making UTA an all-sports member of the Sunbelt. The synergistic effects of football at UTA would be staggering.

See also UTSA, Old Dominion, South Alabama, UNC Charlotte - and for that matter, UA Birmingham several years ago (not to mention South Florida and all the Florida U's that have added FB in recent decades).

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 623 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#5 [url]

May 3 13 9:21 PM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

[quote]I may be unpopular, but...You crack me up. But anyway, I think you make a very good point. Why build separate buildings if those three sports aren't all competing at the same time? Five or six home FB games, a like number of soccer matches and one or two home track meets can all easily fit into one stadium. If we merely add seats to reach the FBS minimum, we will still have a very nice stadium, tons better than Fouts was, for example, and on a par with many others.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

80sAlum

Alumni

Posts: 293 Member Since:03/17/11 Alumni

#6 [url]

May 6 13 8:59 PM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

The University is looking for donors to help pay for the batting cages at the baseball field now. Any and all donations would show support, which could lead to bigger and better things....no matter how big or small. Time to write a check if you are in position to do so.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

80sAlum

Alumni

Posts: 293 Member Since:03/17/11 Alumni

#10 [url]

May 13 13 4:19 PM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

Well, I am having trouble pasting a pdf, so if you would like info. on the "Swing for the Fence" Capital campaign, call or email Craig Shaver (817)272-9608, Shaver@uta.edu.

Again, they are trying to raise $1M to pay off the remaining half the cost of the new baseball and softball buildings.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

FoUTASportscaster

Maverick

Posts: 986 Member Since:07/27/11 Maverick

#11 [url]

Jun 2 13 9:20 PM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

I was trying to find information about Maverick Stadium to clean up the Wikipedia page when I cam across a Shorthorn article from a couple of years ago that made mention of a small renovation of Maverick Stadium. Anyone else know about this?

http://www.theshorthorn.com/sports/mave ... 61791.html

One quote in particular made me go huh.

[quote]“If you want to have football here someday, the first thing you have to do is take care of what you have,” [Kevin] Fralicks [associate athletic director for external affairs] said. “We’re going to be improving these locker rooms. It will truly look Division I when it’s all said and done.”

I thought this was very telling. Why would he say something out of the blue like that? If football wasn't on the radar, the quote would have been something like what it was when I was a student, we have to give our student-athletes the best we can and right now they have locker rooms in the stadium. No one for the AD would have mentioned football.

Also, it struck me as odd that they are trying to improve the baseball and softball venues by giving them their own clubhouse, but they decided to go ahead and spend money on the current locker rooms?

I'm telling you, there is a shift here.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

FoUTASportscaster

Maverick

Posts: 986 Member Since:07/27/11 Maverick

#13 [url]

Sep 12 13 8:27 AM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

Wish I could change the name of the thread, but I was browsing looking for something else when I ran across this article:

http://espn.go.com/dallas/ncf/story/_/i ... ource-says

[quote]UT Arlington does not play football, although the school intends to explore building a football program after completing an upgrade of the baseball and softball facilities.

The school opened a $78 million basketball arena this year. New Sun Belt commissioner Karl Benson attended the opening of the 7,000-seat College Park Center.

I tried to find Tim MacMahon's contact info to find his source, but couldn't.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

FoUTASportscaster

Maverick

Posts: 986 Member Since:07/27/11 Maverick

#14 [url]

Oct 14 13 7:48 AM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

http://www.theshorthorn.com/sports/inte ... f6878.html

Not sure the specifics, but on the surface, there is absolutely no way we are not compliant. We offer the same number of sports and the comparable sports always have more scholarships for women. For example men's basketball has 13 scholies compared to the women's 15. Baseball, with a 25-player roster, has 11.7 scholarships while softball has 12 to give for 18 players.

Venues shows equality as well. The volleyball and basketball teams play at CPC, so two of the womens teams have top notch versus the mens bball. The tennis and track and field teams share the same venues, so that is compliant. At this point, the softball field is behind the baseball stadium, but that could be less about Title IX and more about the sport. Men's golf is the outlier, but if volleyball is in CPC, men's golf isn't, so that makes up for any shortcoming there.

So we are clearly compliant in proportionality, student ratio, we actually have more men on campus than women last I heard, and history.

I could however, think of another potentially very big reason why we'd look at Title IX issues.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

runamuck

Posts: 72 Member Since:01/04/12 Junior

#15 [url]

Oct 29 13 6:53 AM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

I too think we can use the stadium we have with some upgrades. Then there is also the possibility down the road to schedule a big name game at jerry world. for games against sun belt teams, maverick stadium could be made to be plenty sufficient. as I recall when it was built the lighting and press box were built to D-1 standards..just add some seats..put in a large jumbotron..and upgrade the locker rooms..at some point maybe there would be enough funds to build a sports facility building at the south end.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

FoUTASportscaster

Maverick

Posts: 986 Member Since:07/27/11 Maverick

#16 [url]

Oct 29 13 2:10 PM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

The locker rooms were just upgraded in 2010 or so for the baseball, softball and track teams. Then a couple of years later they announce baseball and softball will have locker rooms at their facilities...

Quote    Reply   
avatar

runamuck

Posts: 72 Member Since:01/04/12 Junior

#17 [url]

Nov 28 13 8:18 AM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

Duck wrote:
[quote]I may be unpopular, but...
You crack me up. But anyway, I think you make a very good point. Why build separate buildings if those three sports aren't all competing at the same time? Five or six home FB games, a like number of soccer matches and one or two home track meets can all easily fit into one stadium. If we merely add seats to reach the FBS minimum, we will still have a very nice stadium, tons better than Fouts was, for example, and on a par with many others.

soccer games used to be held there all the time. I went to many when my son played for lamar..basically could hire coach and get going..

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 623 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#18 [url]

Nov 29 13 11:58 AM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

Yes, this is football, but since we're talking about women's sports....

I like soccer, women's golf, swimming and gymnastics as possible additional sports that may be needed for title IX balance in the event of football. Although all but golf could sell tickets, the surprise potential revenue sport would be gymnastics.

The college gymnastics team my daughter competed for drew an average of 3,000 ticket sales per meet and has pretty much paid its own way since day one. There is no reason to think we could not do the same if we had a team at CPC.

Contrary to the other sports mentioned, there would not be a lot of competition for good recruits. We would have nearly exclusive access to one of the most talent-rich areas of the US, with only one other scholarship program in the state, and that one (TWU) is only a D-II program. And except for Texas Women's, all of our competitors in meets at the CPC would be big name teams, like OU, LSU and Alabama.

At this point, the big name schools in Texas only have club teams, but I can see it coming before too long that UT, A&M and Rice will go for D-I gymnastics. It would be so cool if UTA beat them to the punch!

Quote    Reply   
avatar

FoUTASportscaster

Maverick

Posts: 986 Member Since:07/27/11 Maverick

#19 [url]

Dec 2 13 9:09 AM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

^There might be validity to that Duck. When you first suggested it, I kinda laughed it off, but if there is a lot of talent in Texas, it would make sense. How many other reasonably close schools have gymnastics?

runamuck wrote:
Duck wrote:
[quote]I may be unpopular, but...
You crack me up. But anyway, I think you make a very good point. Why build separate buildings if those three sports aren't all competing at the same time? Five or six home FB games, a like number of soccer matches and one or two home track meets can all easily fit into one stadium. If we merely add seats to reach the FBS minimum, we will still have a very nice stadium, tons better than Fouts was, for example, and on a par with many others.


soccer games used to be held there all the time. I went to many when my son played for lamar..basically could hire coach and get going..

UTA had a club men's team play in Maverick Stadium when it opened. There were virtually no other varsity men's programs in the state and UTA was part of a conference, or even more accurately league, that consistently played against every other Texas school, and they were winners, even against the SWC schools.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 623 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#20 [url]

Dec 2 13 8:24 PM

Re: Curious Karl Benson quote

OU, Arkansas, LSU, Centenary & TWU are in the immediate neighborhood, and it is not unusual for schools to host two or three teams per meet, kind of like Track & Field. There are other Big 12, SEC and PAC 12 teams that would likely send teams to some meets.

So my bottom line is that scheduling would pose little or no problem, and for an investment of less than three of our other women's sports, we could very quickly have a new revenue sport in the CPC.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help