(11-05-2011 02:01 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 12:15 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  If C-USA and the MWC lose the named schools, then the gap between the Sun Belt and those conferences will shrink somewhat no matter who they add. I think minimizing the hit is one reason why they will expand. That and because they need to try and appease the T.V. money men. Expansion seems to always boil down to maximizing power and money.

As for the Sun Belt, if we don't lose any programs, the gap between our conference and C-USA will shrink dramatically. And, within a few years we could be at a point where the Sun Belt contends for the top non AQ spot.

Having said that, any Sun Belt team invited would accept an offer from C-USA.

As for expanding the Sun Belt, I think it's still too early to speculate. We are just now at a point where we can speculate about possible C-USA candidates. I'm no fan of UTSA, but I can see the value in the San Antonio market. Texas State should not even be in the discussion. I'm thinking when it's all over the Belt may only need 1 team to get to 8. 8 is not so bad. It would mean less teams to spit the money with. If the Belt sticks to its policy of not adding from the FCS, there would really be only two candidates for the spot, LA Tech and NMSU. LA Tech's administration has marginalized the Sun Belt in past statements, so I say NMSU would be the better of the two. If the new commissioner changes policy and considers FCS programs, UTSA would keep the Belt in Texas and provide a large market, but I think Appy State would be the best FCS candidate.

I can understand not being a fan of Texas State, but to say we don't even belong in the discussion is ignorant in my opinion. In fact, I think we have a similar profile to a lot of Belt schools.

34000+ enrollment
$20 million budget
Good baseball and softball
Good facilities (30K expansion to on-campus FB stadium, new BSB/SB stadiums, new T&F complex)
Endowment very similar to North Texas
Two major airports nearby
Hot co-eds
FB attendance averaging over 15k this year in a 16k stadium

Good softball and baseball ? Basketball is horrible and would affect the conference RPI. 15,000 attendance is well below startup member USA's nearly 19,500 and less than every current member. Texas State probably would not be one of the top candidates on the Sun belt wish list.

Texas State has no market. They are in San Marcos. The eastern Belt schools are not going to vote for a team that will increase their travel costs and add no value to our conference payouts. Right now the Sun Belt has a "No FCS" expansion policy, so only NMSU and LA Tech are possible targets. That is not ignorant it's the truth.

(11-05-2011 02:57 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Texas State has no market. They are in San Marcos. The eastern Belt schools are not going to vote for a team that will increase their travel costs and add no value to our conference payouts. Right now the Sun Belt has a "No FCS" expansion policy, so only NMSU and LA Tech are possible targets. That is not ignorant it's the truth.

right on, i like tx st but i think they need a few more years of grooming... im sure bobcat fans think they are ready to own the WAC but get that stadium finished and improve bball... that would greatly enhance your image... its all about football and basketball.... softball baseball and hot coeds arent going to get you anywhere

(11-05-2011 02:01 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 12:15 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  If C-USA and the MWC lose the named schools, then the gap between the Sun Belt and those conferences will shrink somewhat no matter who they add. I think minimizing the hit is one reason why they will expand. That and because they need to try and appease the T.V. money men. Expansion seems to always boil down to maximizing power and money.

As for the Sun Belt, if we don't lose any programs, the gap between our conference and C-USA will shrink dramatically. And, within a few years we could be at a point where the Sun Belt contends for the top non AQ spot.

Having said that, any Sun Belt team invited would accept an offer from C-USA.

As for expanding the Sun Belt, I think it's still too early to speculate. We are just now at a point where we can speculate about possible C-USA candidates. I'm no fan of UTSA, but I can see the value in the San Antonio market. Texas State should not even be in the discussion. I'm thinking when it's all over the Belt may only need 1 team to get to 8. 8 is not so bad. It would mean less teams to spit the money with. If the Belt sticks to its policy of not adding from the FCS, there would really be only two candidates for the spot, LA Tech and NMSU. LA Tech's administration has marginalized the Sun Belt in past statements, so I say NMSU would be the better of the two. If the new commissioner changes policy and considers FCS programs, UTSA would keep the Belt in Texas and provide a large market, but I think Appy State would be the best FCS candidate.

I can understand not being a fan of Texas State, but to say we don't even belong in the discussion is ignorant in my opinion. In fact, I think we have a similar profile to a lot of Belt schools.

34000+ enrollment
$20 million budget
Good baseball and softball
Good facilities (30K expansion to on-campus FB stadium, new BSB/SB stadiums, new T&F complex)
Endowment very similar to North Texas
Two major airports nearby
Hot co-eds
FB attendance averaging over 15k this year in a 16k stadium

I realize that there may be more money in inviting UTSA, but for whatever reason, I would take Texas State in a heartbeat over them. NT and Texas State (Southwest Texas) have history in football and basketball. Especially if NT moves to CUSA, I think Texas State fits in the SBC much better than NMSU.

(11-05-2011 03:32 PM)Mean Green Matt Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 02:01 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 12:15 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  If C-USA and the MWC lose the named schools, then the gap between the Sun Belt and those conferences will shrink somewhat no matter who they add. I think minimizing the hit is one reason why they will expand. That and because they need to try and appease the T.V. money men. Expansion seems to always boil down to maximizing power and money.

As for the Sun Belt, if we don't lose any programs, the gap between our conference and C-USA will shrink dramatically. And, within a few years we could be at a point where the Sun Belt contends for the top non AQ spot.

Having said that, any Sun Belt team invited would accept an offer from C-USA.

As for expanding the Sun Belt, I think it's still too early to speculate. We are just now at a point where we can speculate about possible C-USA candidates. I'm no fan of UTSA, but I can see the value in the San Antonio market. Texas State should not even be in the discussion. I'm thinking when it's all over the Belt may only need 1 team to get to 8. 8 is not so bad. It would mean less teams to spit the money with. If the Belt sticks to its policy of not adding from the FCS, there would really be only two candidates for the spot, LA Tech and NMSU. LA Tech's administration has marginalized the Sun Belt in past statements, so I say NMSU would be the better of the two. If the new commissioner changes policy and considers FCS programs, UTSA would keep the Belt in Texas and provide a large market, but I think Appy State would be the best FCS candidate.

I can understand not being a fan of Texas State, but to say we don't even belong in the discussion is ignorant in my opinion. In fact, I think we have a similar profile to a lot of Belt schools.

34000+ enrollment
$20 million budget
Good baseball and softball
Good facilities (30K expansion to on-campus FB stadium, new BSB/SB stadiums, new T&F complex)
Endowment very similar to North Texas
Two major airports nearby
Hot co-eds
FB attendance averaging over 15k this year in a 16k stadium

I realize that there may be more money in inviting UTSA, but for whatever reason, I would take Texas State in a heartbeat over them. NT and Texas State (Southwest Texas) have history in football and basketball. Especially if NT moves to CUSA, I think Texas State fits in the SBC much better than NMSU.

To say Texas State has no market is way off. By proximity UNT claims the DFW market, so compare their distance to FW and Dallas to Texas State's distance to Austin and San Antonio. Texas State is in the middle of two a very large and rapidly growing markets that will consolidate into one metroplex market in the future (politically already in the planning stage).

From Google Maps:
UNT to downtown FW - 37.4 miles
UNT to downtown Dallas - 42.4 miles

TxSt to downtown Austin - 30.4 miles
TxSt to downtown San Antonio - 50.9 miles

(11-05-2011 09:48 PM)tux Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 03:32 PM)Mean Green Matt Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 02:01 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 12:15 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  If C-USA and the MWC lose the named schools, then the gap between the Sun Belt and those conferences will shrink somewhat no matter who they add. I think minimizing the hit is one reason why they will expand. That and because they need to try and appease the T.V. money men. Expansion seems to always boil down to maximizing power and money.

As for the Sun Belt, if we don't lose any programs, the gap between our conference and C-USA will shrink dramatically. And, within a few years we could be at a point where the Sun Belt contends for the top non AQ spot.

Having said that, any Sun Belt team invited would accept an offer from C-USA.

As for expanding the Sun Belt, I think it's still too early to speculate. We are just now at a point where we can speculate about possible C-USA candidates. I'm no fan of UTSA, but I can see the value in the San Antonio market. Texas State should not even be in the discussion. I'm thinking when it's all over the Belt may only need 1 team to get to 8. 8 is not so bad. It would mean less teams to spit the money with. If the Belt sticks to its policy of not adding from the FCS, there would really be only two candidates for the spot, LA Tech and NMSU. LA Tech's administration has marginalized the Sun Belt in past statements, so I say NMSU would be the better of the two. If the new commissioner changes policy and considers FCS programs, UTSA would keep the Belt in Texas and provide a large market, but I think Appy State would be the best FCS candidate.

I can understand not being a fan of Texas State, but to say we don't even belong in the discussion is ignorant in my opinion. In fact, I think we have a similar profile to a lot of Belt schools.

34000+ enrollment
$20 million budget
Good baseball and softball
Good facilities (30K expansion to on-campus FB stadium, new BSB/SB stadiums, new T&F complex)
Endowment very similar to North Texas
Two major airports nearby
Hot co-eds
FB attendance averaging over 15k this year in a 16k stadium

I realize that there may be more money in inviting UTSA, but for whatever reason, I would take Texas State in a heartbeat over them. NT and Texas State (Southwest Texas) have history in football and basketball. Especially if NT moves to CUSA, I think Texas State fits in the SBC much better than NMSU.

To say Texas State has no market is way off. By proximity UNT claims the DFW market, so compare their distance to FW and Dallas to Texas State's distance to Austin and San Antonio. Texas State is in the middle of two a very large and rapidly growing markets that will consolidate into one metroplex market in the future (politically already in the planning stage).

From Google Maps:
UNT to downtown FW - 37.4 miles
UNT to downtown Dallas - 42.4 miles

TxSt to downtown Austin - 30.4 miles
TxSt to downtown San Antonio - 50.9 miles

At the Sun Belt level, market is far from the driving factor.

Just think, not long ago Texas State folks were slamming the Belt and praising the WAC. Time for some serious groveling guys.

(11-05-2011 10:50 PM)MG61 Wrote:  Just think, not long ago Texas State folks were slamming the Belt and praising the WAC. Time for some serious groveling guys.

And I was saying all along that had we decided to invite UTSA and Texas State they'd all be here bashing the WAC, rather than over there bashing us.

Neither conference is all that good, the difference is, we're realistic enough to not claim we're something we're not. Which conference is marginally better is of no real consequence at this point.

Both Austin and San Antonio have large public universities. There is no basis for Texas State to claim those markets. Texas State's market is San Marcos. North Texas is the major public university of the DFW metroplex. In Fort Worth, we have the University of North Texas Health Science Center, and in Dallas we have the University of North Texas-Dallas, which is now independent from our main campus. SMU and TCU are both small exclusive private universities. About 100,000 North Texas alums work in the metroplex. Including myself. Most of the newscasters in DFW are UNT alums. Please don't compare our ability to claim market support in DFW, with your situation in San Marcos.

(11-05-2011 10:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Both Austin and San Antonio have large public universities. There is no basis for Texas State to claim those markets. Texas State's market is San Marcos. North Texas is the major public university of the DFW metroplex. In Fort Worth, we have the University of North Texas Health Science Center, and in Dallas we have the University of North Texas-Dallas, which is now independent from our main campus. SMU and TCU are both small exclusive private universities. About 100,000 North Texas alums work in the metroplex. Including myself. Most of the newscasters in DFW are UNT alums. Please don't compare our ability to claim market support in DFW, with your situation in San Marcos.

They must sell some premo stuff in San Marcos. Folks can't naturally be that delusional.

TX st will never be able to claim much of the Austin or San Antonio market.

UNT has the potential to deliver the entire DFW market if we could duplicate what TCU or SMU have done..... the DFW Metroplex is often refered to as "North Texas" in case some yall didnt know...

Market may not be the driving factor for the Sunbelt, but it is for CUSA, MWC, Big East, etc

(11-05-2011 10:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Both Austin and San Antonio have large public universities. There is no basis for Texas State to claim those markets. Texas State's market is San Marcos. North Texas is the major public university of the DFW metroplex. In Fort Worth, we have the University of North Texas Health Science Center, and in Dallas we have the University of North Texas-Dallas, which is now independent from our main campus. SMU and TCU are both small exclusive private universities. About 100,000 North Texas alums work in the metroplex. Including myself. Most of the newscasters in DFW are UNT alums. Please don't compare our ability to claim market support in DFW, with your situation in San Marcos.

According to what, MSA? DMA? Denton is in the Dallas-Fort Worth MSA and the DFW DMA just as San Marcos is part of the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos MSA and Austin DMA.

Austin has UT, yes... but DFW has a pro football, baseball, and basketball team; two soon-to-be BCS schools; UTA; and UNT.

(11-05-2011 09:48 PM)tux Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 03:32 PM)Mean Green Matt Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 02:01 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 12:15 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  If C-USA and the MWC lose the named schools, then the gap between the Sun Belt and those conferences will shrink somewhat no matter who they add. I think minimizing the hit is one reason why they will expand. That and because they need to try and appease the T.V. money men. Expansion seems to always boil down to maximizing power and money.

As for the Sun Belt, if we don't lose any programs, the gap between our conference and C-USA will shrink dramatically. And, within a few years we could be at a point where the Sun Belt contends for the top non AQ spot.

Having said that, any Sun Belt team invited would accept an offer from C-USA.

As for expanding the Sun Belt, I think it's still too early to speculate. We are just now at a point where we can speculate about possible C-USA candidates. I'm no fan of UTSA, but I can see the value in the San Antonio market. Texas State should not even be in the discussion. I'm thinking when it's all over the Belt may only need 1 team to get to 8. 8 is not so bad. It would mean less teams to spit the money with. If the Belt sticks to its policy of not adding from the FCS, there would really be only two candidates for the spot, LA Tech and NMSU. LA Tech's administration has marginalized the Sun Belt in past statements, so I say NMSU would be the better of the two. If the new commissioner changes policy and considers FCS programs, UTSA would keep the Belt in Texas and provide a large market, but I think Appy State would be the best FCS candidate.

I can understand not being a fan of Texas State, but to say we don't even belong in the discussion is ignorant in my opinion. In fact, I think we have a similar profile to a lot of Belt schools.

34000+ enrollment
$20 million budget
Good baseball and softball
Good facilities (30K expansion to on-campus FB stadium, new BSB/SB stadiums, new T&F complex)
Endowment very similar to North Texas
Two major airports nearby
Hot co-eds
FB attendance averaging over 15k this year in a 16k stadium

I realize that there may be more money in inviting UTSA, but for whatever reason, I would take Texas State in a heartbeat over them. NT and Texas State (Southwest Texas) have history in football and basketball. Especially if NT moves to CUSA, I think Texas State fits in the SBC much better than NMSU.

To say Texas State has no market is way off. By proximity UNT claims the DFW market, so compare their distance to FW and Dallas to Texas State's distance to Austin and San Antonio. Texas State is in the middle of two a very large and rapidly growing markets that will consolidate into one metroplex market in the future (politically already in the planning stage).

From Google Maps:
UNT to downtown FW - 37.4 miles
UNT to downtown Dallas - 42.4 miles

TxSt to downtown Austin - 30.4 miles
TxSt to downtown San Antonio - 50.9 miles

.....I didn't say Texas State has no market...inviting them over UTSA is just personal preference. I think many would disagree, and would rather have UTSA...this is a message board though...opinions are good.

(11-05-2011 10:55 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 10:50 PM)MG61 Wrote:  Just think, not long ago Texas State folks were slamming the Belt and praising the WAC. Time for some serious groveling guys.

And I was saying all along that had we decided to invite UTSA and Texas State they'd all be here bashing the WAC, rather than over there bashing us.

Neither conference is all that good, the difference is, we're realistic enough to not claim we're something we're not. Which conference is marginally better is of no real consequence at this point.

I've only ever been here defending the WAC - not bashing the Sun Belt. If our league were to remain what it is now, then I'd still continue to defend the WAC. But if La Tech, NMSU, SJSU, and USU find new homes; then there's not much of a conference left.

(11-05-2011 11:46 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 10:55 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 10:50 PM)MG61 Wrote:  Just think, not long ago Texas State folks were slamming the Belt and praising the WAC. Time for some serious groveling guys.

And I was saying all along that had we decided to invite UTSA and Texas State they'd all be here bashing the WAC, rather than over there bashing us.

Neither conference is all that good, the difference is, we're realistic enough to not claim we're something we're not. Which conference is marginally better is of no real consequence at this point.

I've only ever been here defending the WAC - not bashing the Sun Belt. If our league were to remain what it is now, then I'd still continue to defend the WAC. But if La Tech, NMSU, SJSU, and USU find new homes; then there's not much of a conference left.

I think even if the WAC stays intact, it would be hard to argue that the SBC does not have the better lineup. The WAC that UTSA and Texas State join will be a hodgepodge of all the schools out west that can't find a home anywhere else.....and Louisiana Tech.

I like Texas State, and would like to be in a conference with them...IF (big if) we go to CUSA though, I think Texas States receives and takes an SBC invite.

(11-05-2011 11:49 PM)Mean Green Matt Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 11:46 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 10:55 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 10:50 PM)MG61 Wrote:  Just think, not long ago Texas State folks were slamming the Belt and praising the WAC. Time for some serious groveling guys.

And I was saying all along that had we decided to invite UTSA and Texas State they'd all be here bashing the WAC, rather than over there bashing us.

Neither conference is all that good, the difference is, we're realistic enough to not claim we're something we're not. Which conference is marginally better is of no real consequence at this point.

I've only ever been here defending the WAC - not bashing the Sun Belt. If our league were to remain what it is now, then I'd still continue to defend the WAC. But if La Tech, NMSU, SJSU, and USU find new homes; then there's not much of a conference left.

I think even if the WAC stays intact, it would be hard to argue that the SBC does not have the better lineup. The WAC that UTSA and Texas State join will be a hodgepodge of all the schools out west that can't find a home anywhere else.....and Louisiana Tech.

I like Texas State, and would like to be in a conference with them...IF (big if) we go to CUSA though, I think Texas States receives and takes an SBC invite.

Oh, I am in no way arguing the WAC line up is better; I just think the WAC in its current form would be better for Texas State because it's a weaker football conference.

It's also interesting to note that Texas State would prefer the MWC to CUSA. Maybe our administration likes the idea of west coast conferences?

(11-05-2011 11:40 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 10:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Both Austin and San Antonio have large public universities. There is no basis for Texas State to claim those markets. Texas State's market is San Marcos. North Texas is the major public university of the DFW metroplex. In Fort Worth, we have the University of North Texas Health Science Center, and in Dallas we have the University of North Texas-Dallas, which is now independent from our main campus. SMU and TCU are both small exclusive private universities. About 100,000 North Texas alums work in the metroplex. Including myself. Most of the newscasters in DFW are UNT alums. Please don't compare our ability to claim market support in DFW, with your situation in San Marcos.

According to what, MSA? DMA? Denton is in the Dallas-Fort Worth MSA and the DFW DMA just as San Marcos is part of the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos MSA and Austin DMA.

Austin has UT, yes... but DFW has a pro football, baseball, and basketball team; two soon-to-be BCS schools; UTA; and UNT.

How much of a factor is UTA really? Until they add football or have top notch basketball, I cannot see them as serious competition.

Wow..the hate for the new kids.. UTSA / Texas St.. runs pretty deep with most UNT fans...

I think Texas St. / UTSA will due well, and would hope that the Sunbelt would throw them a life line if the WAC don't survive..

Texas St really isn't THAT much different than UNT guys...the two schools are more similar than UNT is to say Tech. I've got no real problem with being in a conference with them - I'd love a place I could drive to.

(11-06-2011 12:36 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 11:40 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 10:58 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Both Austin and San Antonio have large public universities. There is no basis for Texas State to claim those markets. Texas State's market is San Marcos. North Texas is the major public university of the DFW metroplex. In Fort Worth, we have the University of North Texas Health Science Center, and in Dallas we have the University of North Texas-Dallas, which is now independent from our main campus. SMU and TCU are both small exclusive private universities. About 100,000 North Texas alums work in the metroplex. Including myself. Most of the newscasters in DFW are UNT alums. Please don't compare our ability to claim market support in DFW, with your situation in San Marcos.

According to what, MSA? DMA? Denton is in the Dallas-Fort Worth MSA and the DFW DMA just as San Marcos is part of the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos MSA and Austin DMA.

Austin has UT, yes... but DFW has a pro football, baseball, and basketball team; two soon-to-be BCS schools; UTA; and UNT.

How much of a factor is UTA really? Until they add football or have top notch basketball, I cannot see them as serious competition.

They're expected to add football in 2016 and will soon open their new basketball facility; regardless, I listed them because they are one of four division 1 schools in the metroplex.