Remove this ad
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 626 Member Since: 03/04/11

Maverick

Lead

Apr 25 11 11:10 AM

Tags : :

It seems like we are just on the verge of another huge wave of conference realignment, and I just wonder if it might be easier if the SLC moved back up to Division 1 "A", as it was until 1982. It would make more sense than for the current SLC to break up and for the larger SLC members to disperse to the WAC and other second/third tier FBS conferences.

Perhaps a more rational approach would be for the WAC, Sunbelt and other pretenders to drop down to FCS, but we know that will never happen....
Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Remove this ad
avatar

grumpdogg

Senior

Posts: 110 Member Since:03/02/11 Junior

#1 [url]

Apr 26 11 9:11 AM

Re: Conference Realignment

There have been rumors flying around every so often of us getting a WAC invite. While I find it a long shot, it would be nice. The WAC may be a lower rung conference in the FBS, but they still have some real TV contracts that trump anything we current receive from SLC.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 626 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#2 [url]

Apr 26 11 9:59 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

I agree, Grump. The WAC is not a BCS conference, but it's way way better than the Sunbelt, or MEAC or MoValley, and close to being on a par with the ConfUSA and maybe a step lower than the MtnWest. Still, we will have to make a huge investment and will lose some of the compactness we have enjoyed with the SLC. Again, it all comes down to revenue sports and that means we would have to do like UTSA and add football to be a viable candidate.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

grumpdogg

Senior

Posts: 110 Member Since:03/02/11 Junior

#3 [url]

Apr 26 11 11:00 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

I have a feeling that any upward conference move by us would be with the stipulation that we bring football back. The money would be too good for Spaniolo to pass up and he'd have to give us what students have already voted for.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 626 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#4 [url]

Apr 27 11 9:19 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

grumpdogg wrote:
I have a feeling that any upward conference move by us would be with the stipulation that we bring football back. The money would be too good for Spaniolo to pass up and he'd have to give us what students have already voted for.

I think you're on to something. Now that the arena problem has been solved, he has to be thinking about what it will take to move UTA to center stage with the public, so that Tier One status can be more than a pipe dream. With the students pitching in to the tune of $2 per semester hour (only 1/5 the amount UNT students paid for their new stadium) the overhead will be minimal and the potential upside is limitless.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

80sAlum

Alumni

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

#5 [url]

May 9 11 9:23 AM

Re: Conference Realignment

Duck - Why do you feel Tier 1 is a pipedream? The strides they have made in recent years both in development and quality and quantity of student are impressive to me. The opening of the new research building should add fuel to the fire, unless I am missing something here.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 626 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#6 [url]

May 9 11 10:49 AM

Re: Conference Realignment

80sAlum wrote:
Duck - Why do you feel Tier 1 is a pipedream? The strides they have made in recent years both in development and quality and quantity of student are impressive to me. The opening of the new research building should add fuel to the fire, unless I am missing something here.

I agree the strides have been impressive, except for external giving, endowments and public identification with the University a/k/a school spirit. We need to see internal and external "buy in" to the Maverick culture and institutional striving towards excellence that would make us somehow superior to our rivals in the Tier One competition - Texas Tech, U of Houston, UT Dallas, UNT and those other pretenders.

As I see it, we are making progress on all fronts, including this one, but last I checked, we were in last place in external giving and endowments. Having the gas wells on campus has been fortuitous, but we still lag behind even UTD and UNT. I would not be surprised if we were also behind Texas State and UTSA. As State funds dwindle, the ability of the Tier One candidate schools to self-fund will become more and more important. It just makes sense.

That little school in Fort Worth is beating our brains out when it comes to community and alumni giving. I have no doubt that local enthusiasm for TCU is fueled by their successful athletic programs, especially football.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

grumpdogg

Senior

Posts: 110 Member Since:03/02/11 Junior

#7 [url]

May 12 11 12:17 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

Read this article this morning: http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/05/11/wac-football-updating-the-expansion-options/

It looks like the WAC will be announcing expansion plans in June. They are planning on inviting non-football schools this summer and football playing schools the following summer. We were in the list of possibilities...

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 626 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#8 [url]

Jun 2 11 10:13 AM

Re: Conference Realignment

I cannot imagine why the WAC would ever be interested in us. We have a 2nd tier athletics program in a 3rd tier conference. If we moved up to the WAC without increasing UTA's athletic budget, we would be a 3rd tier program in a 2nd tier conference (at best). Sometimes I really identify with Charley Brown's allegiance to his favorite baseball player, Joe Scholobotnik.

The most we ever had on this site at one time was 6 people.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 626 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#9 [url]

Jun 17 11 9:25 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

grumpdogg wrote:
Read this article this morning: http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/05/11/wac-football-updating-the-expansion-options/

It looks like the WAC will be announcing expansion plans in June. They are planning on inviting non-football schools this summer and football playing schools the following summer. We were in the list of possibilities...

Well, the WAC announced.....Seattle, a non football school. So it appears there will have to be additional announcements in the future, since the WAC is still very short of Football schools with 7.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

80sAlum

Alumni

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

#12 [url]

Jul 9 11 9:57 AM

Re: Conference Realignment

Glad this is happening, will be fun to see some of these schools in the new arena. Should create some interest.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

GiantBenMav

Alumni

Posts: 334 Member Since:03/01/11 Alumni

#13 [url]

Jul 9 11 2:27 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

WOW, say what you will about the WAC, but it is an image improvement to the SLC ... with UTSA and Texas State moving as well it will lessen the financial burden ... very interesting, especially with the upcoming addition of football (no, I don't know anything; but to me football is a matter of when, not if)

Buddy Christ Says: Go Mavs !!!

Quote    Reply   
avatar

80sAlum

Alumni

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

#15 [url]

Jul 10 11 10:30 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

Thanks for the links GBen, all good reads, I'm getting pumped up about the athletics programs in the middle of summer, not happened before!

Quote    Reply   
avatar

TBonesLU

Posts: 2 Member Since:07/11/11

#16 [url]

Jul 11 11 3:25 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

Congratulations to UT-A. As hard as it is for me to say that, I feel I must.

With that said, this does not seem to be in the best interest for the WAC. Lamar has a football program newly revived, has raised more money in the last 5 years than since we were founded in '23, and we have consistently been competitive in every sport for years. With UT-A's DMA in the middle of Cowboys/Rangers/Mavericks/Stars/Mustangs/Frogs/RoughRiders/Mean Green country, how can anyone expect the athletic program to compete? The new athletics building is going to hold 6,500 people (?). Lamar's Montagne Center holds 10,080 with some of the best recruits in the country for basketball, football, and baseball surrounding it with no other competitors in 50 miles.

Please feel free to state your arguments. I am merely curious to see what some of you think. I do not mean this as a slight to your university. I live in Dallas myself and love the area.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Duck

Maverick

Posts: 626 Member Since:03/04/11 Maverick

#17 [url]

Jul 11 11 8:07 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

Lamar is good in sports, is usually competitive for the SLC all-sports trophy. I think they match up well with the Sunbelt schools and the new WAC entries, although LU is smaller than UTSA, UTA and TSSM, all three of which have more than 30K students enrolled. No doubt Montagne is a good facility, and we envy the way LU has resurrected football (props to Pres Simmons!). Maybe LU will get invited to the WAC anyway. I hope so, and I hope UTA gets to play Lamar in football again soon. We always did well against the Cardinals, I think 12 in a row, dating back to 1965 or so....

Quote    Reply   
avatar

80sAlum

Alumni

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

#18 [url]

Jul 12 11 9:13 AM

Re: Conference Realignment

Tbones - I don't think anyone expects UTA sports to "compete" with the Cowboys, Rangers, TCU football, etc. etc.. For the WAC I believe the small market share of a HUGE D/FW pie that UTA could garner with winning programs is possibly worth more than a large market share of schools in remote places with tiny pies.

I believe there are lots of UTA alumni and other folks that would watch on TV (may not come to games) a UTA/New Mexico State bball game, which would mean added TV revenue for the WAC.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

GiantBenMav

Alumni

Posts: 334 Member Since:03/01/11 Alumni

#19 [url]

Jul 12 11 5:05 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

a small slice of several million people still holds up well ... simple as that; nobody says UTA will take over this area, they wont ... but building a regular basketball winner is not out of the question, especially without football and a new arena ...

Buddy Christ Says: Go Mavs !!!

Quote    Reply   
avatar

FoUTASportscaster

Maverick

Posts: 988 Member Since:07/27/11 Maverick

#20 [url]

Jul 27 11 7:27 PM

Re: Conference Realignment

Duck wrote:
I agree, Grump. The WAC is not a BCS conference, but it's way way better than the Sunbelt, or MEAC or MoValley, and close to being on a par with the ConfUSA and maybe a step lower than the MtnWest. Still, we will have to make a huge investment and will lose some of the compactness we have enjoyed with the SLC. Again, it all comes down to revenue sports and that means we would have to do like UTSA and add football to be a viable candidate.


I'm not sure it is a step abovwe the Sun Belt anymore. They lost Boise State (2-0 in BCS, track and field, wrestling, basketball tourney 2009), Fresno State (4-4 in last 8 bowl games, 23 win per season in last five in women;s bball, 2008 national baseball champions, soft ball powerhouse), Hawaii (BCS appearance, national volleyball powerhouse) and Nevada (top 25 football, NCAA touney men's bball, NCAA touney appearing softball).

In return, they have three SLC schools (top level at least), Seattle and Denver.

The lineup is now San Jose State, Idaho, Utah State , Seattle, Denver, UTA, UTSA, TSU-SM, La Tech, New Mexico State.

That compares favorable to UNT, Troy, FAU, South Alabama and Mid Tenn.

As much as I bagged on them, I'd rather be in the Sun Belt.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help