Hell of a storm you guys had there the other evening. I grew up in North Texas, and I have seen my share of hail storms, but never have I seen hail the size of softballs. Hope everyone there is ok and the campus survived ok. Can't imagine the number of insurance claims on cars for hail damage.

(04-05-2014 01:03 PM)ODU AGGIE Wrote:  Hell of a storm you guys had there the other evening. I grew up in North Texas, and I have seen my share of hail storms, but never have I seen hail the size of softballs. Hope everyone there is ok and the campus survived ok. Can't imagine the number of insurance claims on cars for hail damage.

The storms were pretty bad. Lots of people here got some property damage. Our football stadium even took some hits. At the scrimmage this morning, I noticed the Apogee sign over the players entrance was damaged. One of the dorms also has roof damage. Several cars lost their windows too. I feel very fortunate that my house was spared.

(04-04-2014 11:10 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 10:29 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 06:30 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 02:45 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 02:20 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  You're obviously better at recognizing royalty than football talent.

You're not the sharpest tool in the shop are ya I don't try to judge or grade football talent. Prince is spelled with a small p............ not exactly a recognition of royalty

Yeah, you don't try to judge football talent. I believe ya. Had to go all the way back to 29 March to find this one.

(03-29-2014 02:16 PM)MG61 Wrote:  This is the type of player ya like to be showing some type of interest in your program.

So, that would make you what?

Maybe when you called me a prince, you were thinking of this guy?

Get real. A comment that one makes about a top player attending a practice and that is the type you like to see showing interest in your program is self explanatory and not an indication that you try to evaluate and judge ability. Now continue with your trolling. Better yet, go back to your glorious Belt board where you belong. For someone who believes CUSA is inferior to the Belt, you sure spend a lot of time here.

Why do you have to misrepresent what I've said MG61? I've never said that C-USA was "inferior" to the Belt. In fact, I've said the opposite noting that it's obviously a better conference in basketball than the Belt. In the other major sports I've commented that there's hardly a hill of beans difference in the two conferences, certainly not enough to warrant the foaming at the mouth most Cajun fans exhibit wanting to get into C-USA. I just don't get it.

Over the last few years the Belt has outperformed C-USA on the football field in head to head matchups and last year clearly finished ahead as a G5 conference. I suspect that trend will continue and actually grow.

We're peer conferences, play many cross-conference games in multiple sports, and I respect what many C-USA teams have accomplished so I'll continue to post here just as I do on other forums. Thank you.

I wouldn't mind the Cajuns in CUSA at all, but I don't think the Belt and CUSA can be called peer conferences when every member of the Belt would jump at a chance to play in CUSA. Just as every member of CUSA would be happy to join the AAC. This is not a knock on the Belt, but the reality of were the two conferences currently are.

(04-06-2014 01:33 PM)Grandgreen Wrote:  I wouldn't mind the Cajuns in CUSA at all, but I don't think the Belt and CUSA can be called peer conferences when every member of the Belt would jump at a chance to play in CUSA. Just as every member of CUSA would be happy to join the AAC. This is not a knock on the Belt, but the reality of were the two conferences currently are.

GG, thanks for the kind comments but I'll have to respectfully disagree. While recent history has shown a willingness on the part of Belt programs to bolt for C-USA, I'm not convinced that that trend will continue indefinitely. I base my opinion on the recent on-the-field performance of each conference and their current university makeup. Slowly but surely the Belt is building its own brand.

There can be no doubt that C-USA once stood head & shoulders above the Belt, mostly via the makeup of conference schools such as Louisville, Memphis, Cincinnatti, TCU, Houston, SMU and Central Florida, just to name few. Those departed teams, and numerous othes, left behind a structure (perception, reputation, contracts, etc) that still benefits those who remain and those who have joined recently. That same 'perception', in part, is what has been appealing to Belt members who have joined your league.

But let's not kid ourselves. Anyone who believes that a few ailing former members left behind, mixed with former Sun Belt teams and FCS call-ups, will continue to garner the same respect nationally is not thinking objectively. As you said, not a knock against anyone, just my vew of reality. One need only look at the recent fiasco revolving around the NCAA tourney at-large bids for an example of changing perceptions. A conference that even I thought would get 2 at-large bids, got none.

Realignment smacked us all really hard and has reshaped the G-5's considerably. My personal view is that the gap between our conferences has narrowed significantly, starting with head-to-head performance. If that trend continues, the other differences will also continue to narrow, so much so that in the not too distant future the bleeding of Belt members to C-USA will cease.

Good luck going forward!

(04-06-2014 03:31 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(04-06-2014 01:33 PM)Grandgreen Wrote:  I wouldn't mind the Cajuns in CUSA at all, but I don't think the Belt and CUSA can be called peer conferences when every member of the Belt would jump at a chance to play in CUSA. Just as every member of CUSA would be happy to join the AAC. This is not a knock on the Belt, but the reality of were the two conferences currently are.

GG, thanks for the kind comments but I'll have to respectfully disagree. While recent history has shown a willingness on the part of Belt programs to bolt for C-USA, I'm not convinced that that trend will continue indefinitely. I base my opinion on the recent on-the-field performance of each conference and their current university makeup. Slowly but surely the Belt is building its own brand.

There can be no doubt that C-USA once stood head & shoulders above the Belt, mostly via the makeup of conference schools such as Louisville, Memphis, Cincinnatti, TCU, Houston, SMU and Central Florida, just to name few. Those departed teams, and numerous othes, left behind a structure (perception, reputation, contracts, etc) that still benefits those who remain and those who have joined recently. That same 'perception', in part, is what has been appealing to Belt members who have joined your league.

But let's not kid ourselves. Anyone who believes that a few ailing former members left behind, mixed with former Sun Belt teams and FCS call-ups, will continue to garner the same respect nationally is not thinking objectively. As you said, not a knock against anyone, just my vew of reality. One need only look at the recent fiasco revolving around the NCAA tourney at-large bids for an example of changing perceptions. A conference that even I thought would get 2 at-large bids, got none.

Realignment smacked us all really hard and has reshaped the G-5's considerably. My personal view is that the gap between our conferences has narrowed significantly, starting with head-to-head performance. If that trend continues, the other differences will also continue to narrow, so much so that in the not too distant future the bleeding of Belt members to C-USA will cease.

Good luck going forward!

tl;dr

(04-06-2014 10:39 PM)meangreener Wrote:  

(04-06-2014 03:31 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(04-06-2014 01:33 PM)Grandgreen Wrote:  I wouldn't mind the Cajuns in CUSA at all, but I don't think the Belt and CUSA can be called peer conferences when every member of the Belt would jump at a chance to play in CUSA. Just as every member of CUSA would be happy to join the AAC. This is not a knock on the Belt, but the reality of were the two conferences currently are.

GG, thanks for the kind comments but I'll have to respectfully disagree. While recent history has shown a willingness on the part of Belt programs to bolt for C-USA, I'm not convinced that that trend will continue indefinitely. I base my opinion on the recent on-the-field performance of each conference and their current university makeup. Slowly but surely the Belt is building its own brand.

There can be no doubt that C-USA once stood head & shoulders above the Belt, mostly via the makeup of conference schools such as Louisville, Memphis, Cincinnatti, TCU, Houston, SMU and Central Florida, just to name few. Those departed teams, and numerous othes, left behind a structure (perception, reputation, contracts, etc) that still benefits those who remain and those who have joined recently. That same 'perception', in part, is what has been appealing to Belt members who have joined your league.

But let's not kid ourselves. Anyone who believes that a few ailing former members left behind, mixed with former Sun Belt teams and FCS call-ups, will continue to garner the same respect nationally is not thinking objectively. As you said, not a knock against anyone, just my vew of reality. One need only look at the recent fiasco revolving around the NCAA tourney at-large bids for an example of changing perceptions. A conference that even I thought would get 2 at-large bids, got none.

Realignment smacked us all really hard and has reshaped the G-5's considerably. My personal view is that the gap between our conferences has narrowed significantly, starting with head-to-head performance. If that trend continues, the other differences will also continue to narrow, so much so that in the not too distant future the bleeding of Belt members to C-USA will cease.

Good luck going forward!

tl;dr

Yeah right. Everyone knows you read every word.

wow, nice designs. UNT is doing it right...AAC invite in the future?

Definitely you guys are doing the things to make yourself look pretty.

How're the basketball facilities from fan point of view?

(04-09-2014 03:56 PM)chrisiskingx Wrote:  wow, nice designs. UNT is doing it right...AAC invite in the future?

Definitely you guys are doing the things to make yourself look pretty.

How're the basketball facilities from fan point of view?

The Super Pit
http://www.meangreenmap.com/superpit.html

(04-06-2014 03:31 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(04-06-2014 01:33 PM)Grandgreen Wrote:  I wouldn't mind the Cajuns in CUSA at all, but I don't think the Belt and CUSA can be called peer conferences when every member of the Belt would jump at a chance to play in CUSA. Just as every member of CUSA would be happy to join the AAC. This is not a knock on the Belt, but the reality of were the two conferences currently are.

GG, thanks for the kind comments but I'll have to respectfully disagree. While recent history has shown a willingness on the part of Belt programs to bolt for C-USA, I'm not convinced that that trend will continue indefinitely. I base my opinion on the recent on-the-field performance of each conference and their current university makeup. Slowly but surely the Belt is building its own brand.

How is the Belt building a brand when you lost half your damn members to CUSA in the last 2 years? ULL and Ark State have done great things for the SBC lately, but everyone else is new.

(04-09-2014 04:12 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 03:56 PM)chrisiskingx Wrote:  wow, nice designs. UNT is doing it right...AAC invite in the future?

Definitely you guys are doing the things to make yourself look pretty.

How're the basketball facilities from fan point of view?

The Super Pit
http://www.meangreenmap.com/superpit.html

I think the Super Pit looks pretty awesome, but man, some of those pictures of the amenities look really bad. They look very out of date. Cinder block walls, an old projection tv?

Looks like a dorm room. The playing area itself looks awesome though, especially the new scoreboard. UNT has great facilities, I'm jealous.

(04-09-2014 04:35 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(04-06-2014 03:31 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(04-06-2014 01:33 PM)Grandgreen Wrote:  I wouldn't mind the Cajuns in CUSA at all, but I don't think the Belt and CUSA can be called peer conferences when every member of the Belt would jump at a chance to play in CUSA. Just as every member of CUSA would be happy to join the AAC. This is not a knock on the Belt, but the reality of were the two conferences currently are.

GG, thanks for the kind comments but I'll have to respectfully disagree. While recent history has shown a willingness on the part of Belt programs to bolt for C-USA, I'm not convinced that that trend will continue indefinitely. I base my opinion on the recent on-the-field performance of each conference and their current university makeup. Slowly but surely the Belt is building its own brand.

How is the Belt building a brand when you lost half your damn members to CUSA in the last 2 years? ULL and Ark State have done great things for the SBC lately, but everyone else is new.

Yeah, and C-USA has been really stable.

(04-10-2014 02:50 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 04:35 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(04-06-2014 03:31 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(04-06-2014 01:33 PM)Grandgreen Wrote:  I wouldn't mind the Cajuns in CUSA at all, but I don't think the Belt and CUSA can be called peer conferences when every member of the Belt would jump at a chance to play in CUSA. Just as every member of CUSA would be happy to join the AAC. This is not a knock on the Belt, but the reality of were the two conferences currently are.

GG, thanks for the kind comments but I'll have to respectfully disagree. While recent history has shown a willingness on the part of Belt programs to bolt for C-USA, I'm not convinced that that trend will continue indefinitely. I base my opinion on the recent on-the-field performance of each conference and their current university makeup. Slowly but surely the Belt is building its own brand.

How is the Belt building a brand when you lost half your damn members to CUSA in the last 2 years? ULL and Ark State have done great things for the SBC lately, but everyone else is new.

Yeah, and C-USA has been really stable.

I never claimed CUSA was building a brand because it's not and neither is the SBC.

(04-04-2014 09:35 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  Dayum. I just figured out that the UNTs don't have a men's baseball team.

They don't have a women's baseball team either. (Hehe)

(04-10-2014 05:59 PM)Eagleholic Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 09:35 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  Dayum. I just figured out that the UNTs don't have a men's baseball team.

They don't have a women's baseball team either. (Hehe)

Sorry, old school.

what will be the cost to build this?

http://www.gomeangreen.com/forums/UNT%20...atalog.pdf

http://www.gomeangreen.com/forums/UNT%20...20form.pdf

Not liking the synthetic playing field, but maybe those that have turf at their home parks can talk me off the ledge

(04-14-2014 06:50 PM)laxtonto Wrote:  http://www.gomeangreen.com/forums/UNT%20...atalog.pdf

http://www.gomeangreen.com/forums/UNT%20...20form.pdf

Not liking the synthetic playing field, but maybe those that have turf at their home parks can talk me off the ledge

Not going to lie, synthetic turf works much better for football than baseball. With football, you only really have to worry about how well/safely people can run on it, while with baseball you have to also try to get the ball to bounce off the turf like it would on natural grass.

That said, UT uses artificial turf at Disch-Faulk, and that hasn't appeared to hinder their program.

I like it. Congrats.