(06-24-2010 12:35 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  

(06-24-2010 12:17 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  I would love to be out of the Sun Belt, but only because I think the Sun Belt has a ceiling that we're approaching, we still have a ways to go, but we're getting there and if we could string together a few more football seasons like our last one and if we could actually do more than stagnate around the top(without ever reaching the top) of MBB, we'll reach that ceiling.

In regards to different fanbase's outlook on the Belt, nearly every fanbase wants to better themselves and MT is most certainly one of the ones that talks about getting into another conference more frequently, but you'll hardly ever here "suck belt" come out of an MT fans mouth or um...keyboard. I definitely consider the Sun Belt to have been a great place for us to grow as a program and still consider it a good place to be, but I think that MT is on a faster upward trajectory than the conference as a whole, so why shouldn't we want more for ourselves?

But as the confrence grows and improves that ceiling CAN be pushed higher. Lets say MTSU goes 12-1 this year inculding a bowl win. You'd be ranked especially considering that your probably starint in the mid -40's right now.

Lets say that some of your SunBelt games are close affairs that you win by a TD or less. The whole confrence is elevated which leads to better recuruiting across the board for the confrence.

Im really sold on the idea that if the 'Belt could get a team ranked for a few years it would explode upwardly in perception.

Of course we all want it to be OUR team but from a confrence standpoing ANY team will do.

A nice theory in principal, but even then with the current make-up of the Belt, I still see the ceiling as only so high. We aren't all going to grow together, it just won't work like that and eventually the teams at the top are going to be taken and the league will get weaker. We may be able to improve the Sun Belt and possibly even supplant the WAC and MAC, but the way I see it, it's still a race to the exit.

(06-24-2010 10:22 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  I'm not going to waste my time on the net trying to convince some guys who probably don't even donate above the $250 level to their school that they should be glad to accept us as members.

Ding. Ding. Ding.

I have a strong suspicion that most of the Belt fans that are doing most of the complaining, don't do much for their U in helping them achieve their U's goals.

It's easy to get on the net to ***** and moan. But what are YOU doing for your university ?

If you don't have much $$$ to give, give of your time.

The 'Belt/MAC/WAC/CUSA are NEVER going to "Make it" to the big kids table. MWC is close but who knows now with the changes if its still on pace.

And probably once every 10 years or so 1 or 2 members of those confrences will get the call up to the big time.

So in a sense your right, EVERY team in those confreces is looking for the exit.

The only Exit I want is to be at the big boy table, and untill that comes I think were all just looking at musical chairs around the same table as far as non-AQ confrences are concerned.

(06-24-2010 01:01 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  The 'Belt/MAC/WAC/CUSA are NEVER going to "Make it" to the big kids table. MWC is close but who knows now with the changes if its still on pace.

And probably once every 10 years or so 1 or 2 members of those confrences will get the call up to the big time.

So in a sense your right, EVERY team in those confreces is looking for the exit.

The only Exit I want is to be at the big boy table, and untill that comes I think were all just looking at musical chairs around the same table as far as non-AQ confrences are concerned.

I agree in a sense, but there is a possibility for an eastern based non-AQ conference that would rival the MWC.

We are a significant way from our ceiling.

Sun Belt basketball should be able to hit the 11-13 range in RPI without any membership changes, just changes in how the membership approaches basketball. We should be asking hard questions about what is going to change to warrant retention any time a team finishes worse than 150 in the RPI.

Sun Belt football should be able to fight for the #2 non-AQ slot without membership changes but that requires not waiting 9 years to pull the plug on a sub .500 coach who has never concluded a year with more wins than losses. Right now we have a 6-6 is good enough attitude so when a coach can deliver a few 6-6 years, that's good enough.

The problem though is that our biggest problem is what the school administration will accept as "good enough" that's not a problem a conference will fix. If hanging around .500 is the goal in the Sun Belt what's the goal in CUSA? .400 since you are getting out-spent and the names of the opponents are better perceived?

No one has a conference problem, most everyone has an expectation problem.

http://meangreenblog.dentonrc.com/Neinas%20report.pdf

got the facilities, need to raise some money to advertise them, need to raise more money in general, get more money for the university, sell more tickets to locals, and pay more for coaches

LOOK OUT UNT ABOUT TO DOMINATE THE BELT!

oh yea and the total free cash for additional athletics spending is right about what I said it would be in the thread below.....it will take 4 million per year to cover the stadium

the THECB FTE for UNT was 26,914 in 2009......even giving them credit for all their new students being at or near a 15 hour FTE we get

28,000 X 7 dollars net on the net fee X 2.25 (two long semesters and summer) X 15 hours = $6,615,000 - 4 million = 2,615,000 per year left over for new operations

or right about what the guy that would not know a decent consultant if it bit him in the ass and the guy that rambles like a drunk in the thread below when he said 2-3 million for new operations over and above Stadium cost :ncaabbs:

http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=437574

PS I work for cheaper than Chuck and I will be here all night thank you very much

crap I left out the most important part

if an opening in CUSA comes up try and get in! :muttering::domokun:

DRC Blog - Thoughts on Neinas Report.
http://meangreenblog.dentonrc.com/archiv...eport.html

Thoughts on the Neinas report
9:55 PM Thu, Sep 23, 2010
Brett Vito

I got a ton of comments today on the full text of the Chuck Neinas report and a few good questions.

First off, UNT paid Neinas $2,000 a day, plus expenses. There is no way that whole deal cost UNT more than $20,000.

I don't know where people got the idea is ran in the neighborhood of $250,000.

And if you ask me, this was very likely the version for public consumption. Neinas presented his findings to the board of regents separately.

Now, I am not saying that Neinas didn't mean everything he said in that report or that there was a separate report. He had a lot of good points and presented a lot for people to think about.

But Neinas is a smart guy working for smart people.

Do I think that Neinas had some pointed suggestions for what UNT needs to do to get to where it wants to be? You bet. That's why I asked him point blank in the press conference. Twice. Neinas wasn't biting. And he shouldn't have.

Do I think he agrees with every decision UNT has ever made. No.

Do I think the pink elephant in the room that wasn't addressed in specifics today -- UNT being 10-52 in football the last five-plus seasons -- came up? Oh, heck yes.

I just don't think UNT is going to air its dirty laundry in public that way or put it in print.

It would make for great copy, but it wouldn't help UNT any to have a guy they just paid somewhere north of 10 grand sit up there and say, "Well, I think UNT has made a lot of great moves since I was here last, but I don't what the bleep the people in charge were thinking when they did X."

There was hardly a mention of coaching, from the great "Trust in the Johns" duo of Johnny Jones and John Hedlund to the hires that haven't worked out so well.

Neinas is a highly respected consultant when it comes to finding coaches. So you know he has an opinion on what has gone on with who has been hired.

Any evaluation of a program wouldn't be complete without it, whether it is in the final report or not.

There is little doubt that UNT benefitted from the report.

It's just my guess that some of what was discussed wasn't in black and white.

..."UNT being 10-52 in football the last five-plus seasons..."

That is so pathetic, totally embarassing.