(10-16-2014 05:26 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

CornMeal dateline about sbc3495557' Wrote:  I hope they don't ever get football. Or if they do its not FBS at least. Does anybody really want a third UT branch school playing football?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Conference By-laws/Guidelines say that if they start football and want to join FBS, we have to let them in.

Is that actually true? I swear when hillfloppers were moving up from FCS to FBS they were mulling about joining sbc or mac

(10-17-2014 10:51 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 10:44 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 09:03 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 03:37 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 03:24 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Funny.. alright man stop piling on.

Look, it just makes sense for UTA to start Football. They would be in the same position as South Alabama except they are twice as big and the conference has three more football teams. If Missouri State is added then that gives them another close conference rival.

435 miles?

I am trying to understand your point.

UT- Arlington to:


Texas State 216 miles
Louisiana Monroe 309 miles
Louisiana Lafayette 413 miles
Missouri State 437 miles
Arkansas State 466 miles
New Mexico State 660 miles
Idaho 1,923 miles

So Texas State is a "close rival" for NMSU(634 miles) because the rest of the conference is much further?

We were not talking about NMSU and Texas State. We were talking about UT Arlington and I mentioned Missiouri State.

Um... thanks for the recap FJ, I still don't get your argument. 437 miles is not close, then it seemed you were saying relative to the rest of the conference Missouri State is "close" to UTA, so I merely asked if you consider Texas State a close rival for NMSU.

(10-17-2014 10:09 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 09:15 AM)Cajuncat Wrote:  I would like to see the mileage difference between UTA and these FBS Programs:

*NORTH TEXAS
*TCU
*SMU

Ok,

UTA to:

North Texas 46 miles
TCU 19 miles
SMU 25 miles


ok. What is your point?

No point, but I can bullish!t something up if you want me to.

(10-17-2014 11:25 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 10:51 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 10:44 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 09:03 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 03:37 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  435 miles?

I am trying to understand your point.

UT- Arlington to:


Texas State 216 miles
Louisiana Monroe 309 miles
Louisiana Lafayette 413 miles
Missouri State 437 miles
Arkansas State 466 miles
New Mexico State 660 miles
Idaho 1,923 miles

So Texas State is a "close rival" for NMSU(634 miles) because the rest of the conference is much further?

We were not talking about NMSU and Texas State. We were talking about UT Arlington and I mentioned Missiouri State.

Um... thanks for the recap FJ, I still don't get your argument. 437 miles is not close, then it seemed you were saying relative to the rest of the conference Missouri State is "close" to UTA, so I merely asked if you consider Texas State a close rival for NMSU.

oh okay. I was just pointing out the possible addition of MSU would be pretty much the same travel distance to other Sun Belt campuses from UT Arlington.

(10-17-2014 11:40 AM)Cajuncat Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 10:09 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 09:15 AM)Cajuncat Wrote:  I would like to see the mileage difference between UTA and these FBS Programs:

*NORTH TEXAS
*TCU
*SMU

Ok,

UTA to:

North Texas 46 miles
TCU 19 miles
SMU 25 miles


ok. What is your point?

No point, but I can bullish!t something up if you want me to.

Okay. You being from Texas, I assumed you know the campuses are close to UT Arlington. So I thought you were inferring to something else.

(10-17-2014 11:07 AM)RamblinRedWolf44 Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 05:26 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

CornMeal dateline about sbc3495557' Wrote:  I hope they don't ever get football. Or if they do its not FBS at least. Does anybody really want a third UT branch school playing football?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Conference By-laws/Guidelines say that if they start football and want to join FBS, we have to let them in.

Is that actually true? I swear when hillfloppers were moving up from FCS to FBS they were mulling about joining sbc or mac

Yes it's true. That's why USA had a home the day it announced it was starting a football program and going FBS. We didn't have to apply. We were instantly a future member. The MAC courted WKU for a bit, which is what you are thinking about, but WKU had a guaranteed home in the SBC.

(10-17-2014 02:05 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 11:07 AM)RamblinRedWolf44 Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 05:26 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

CornMeal dateline about sbc3495557' Wrote:  I hope they don't ever get football. Or if they do its not FBS at least. Does anybody really want a third UT branch school playing football?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Conference By-laws/Guidelines say that if they start football and want to join FBS, we have to let them in.

Is that actually true? I swear when hillfloppers were moving up from FCS to FBS they were mulling about joining sbc or mac

Yes it's true. That's why USA had a home the day it announced it was starting a football program and going FBS. We didn't have to apply. We were instantly a future member. The MAC courted WKU for a bit, which is what you are thinking about, but WKU had a guaranteed home in the SBC.

The MAC had conversations with MT/WKU as a package deal a few times, pretty sure it never progressed to serious interest from the MAC or either school.

I do think some of the more myopic WKU fans, at the time of transition, bought into the negative perception of the Sun Belt and were suggesting the MAC would be better.

(10-16-2014 04:39 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  I hope they don't ever get football. Or if they do its not FBS at least. Does anybody really want a third UT branch school playing football?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I kinda want to tell ya to go F yourself.

North Texas 46 miles
TCU 19 miles
SMU 25 miles

With those football schools so close some would ask if UTA could support football,
but with your student population would imagine UTA could. How was attendance
the few years before dropping football? Was that the reason UTA dropped it?
Exactly what years did UTA play football.

(10-17-2014 06:23 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 04:39 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  I hope they don't ever get football. Or if they do its not FBS at least. Does anybody really want a third UT branch school playing football?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I kinda want to tell ya to go F yourself.

Do it then. I would still hate to have UTA in FBS or the Sun Belt. I would always be completely flaccid for that game.

Why don't we contact UT-Dallas and UT-Pan American to see if they want to start football and join too?

UTEP
nUTSAck
UTPA
UTD
UTA

UT branch schools are fun and exciting.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-17-2014 08:13 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 06:23 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 04:39 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  I hope they don't ever get football. Or if they do its not FBS at least. Does anybody really want a third UT branch school playing football?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I kinda want to tell ya to go F yourself.

Do it then. I would still hate to have UTA in FBS or the Sun Belt. I would always be completely flaccid for that game.

Why don't we contact UT-Dallas and UT-Pan American to see if they want to start football and join too?

UTEP
nUTSAck
UTPA
UTD
UTA

UT branch schools are fun and exciting.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

This is strange. UTA was the 2nd A-State football game I attended. I grew up watching us play them in football. We have a 13-8-1 record against them. Odd to hear TXST fans viewing them as newbies.

(10-17-2014 08:13 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  nUTSAck

Creative, but questionable at best...

(10-17-2014 08:21 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 08:13 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  nUTSAck

Creative, but questionable at best...

C+ for effort.

Lets keep all creative names for UTSA away from male body parts from here on out.

(10-17-2014 07:06 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  North Texas 46 miles
TCU 19 miles
SMU 25 miles

With those football schools so close some would ask if UTA could support football,
but with your student population would imagine UTA could. How was attendance
the few years before dropping football? Was that the reason UTA dropped it?
Exactly what years did UTA play football.

Distance between each other is really irrelevant. There are very few UTA students who root for any of the other metroplex schools. It is usually a UT-Austin or A&M deal.

UTA had fielded a team at some level since 1919. They became an NCAA school in 1959 when they moved to the four-year ranks. They were one of the dominant teams in the SLC in the '60's, but a series of poor decisions and they became perennial 5-6 or worse in the '70's. If there was ever a blueprint on how not to move up to the highest level, UTA is it.

After an on campus stadium was built in 1980, UTA averaged either in the 7,000's or 5,000'ss until the programs demise after the 1985 season.

I really wonder what would have happened if the 1986 team were fielded what would have happened. The 1985 team was seven points over three games away from conference champs. 11 offensive starters, many of whom are UTA single season record holders, were set to return. Eight defensive starters were set to return on a unit that had given up the least amount of points in seven years. Both kickers were also set to return, including Scott Roper, who went on the set conference and school records for Arkansas State. Six players ended up transferring to Southwest Conference schools. Would have been a heck of a team. That kind of success would have brought in more people than the previous year, especially since UNT was playing at Maverick Stadium that year.

EDIT: Here's a website with a bit of UTA football history.

http://michigan-football.com/ncaa/f/arlingtn.htm

(10-17-2014 08:13 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 06:23 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 04:39 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  I hope they don't ever get football. Or if they do its not FBS at least. Does anybody really want a third UT branch school playing football?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I kinda want to tell ya to go F yourself.

Do it then. I would still hate to have UTA in FBS or the Sun Belt. I would always be completely flaccid for that game.

Why don't we contact UT-Dallas and UT-Pan American to see if they want to start football and join too?

UTEP
nUTSAck
UTPA
UTD
UTA

UT branch schools are fun and exciting.

Rather be in the UT system with its resources and money than ... whatever your "system" is.

Be as flaccid as you want. Consistently, for both schools, aside from baseball, we are one of your biggest draws and vice versa.

I'd welcome UTA in football, but I wonder how much trouble they would have drawing given a CUSA team up the road, a Big XII team just on the horizon, and an AAC team around the corner. Plus, the Dallas Cowboys, the Dallas Mavericks, the Texas Rangers, and I figure they probably have a WNBA and hockey team too.

I don't think you have a problem getting a percentage of your alumni (like most universities do), but I wonder about the "t-shirt fan" to keep the attendance numbers up.

(10-17-2014 08:13 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 06:23 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 04:39 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  I hope they don't ever get football. Or if they do its not FBS at least. Does anybody really want a third UT branch school playing football?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I kinda want to tell ya to go F yourself.

Do it then. I would still hate to have UTA in FBS or the Sun Belt. I would always be completely flaccid for that game.

Why don't we contact UT-Dallas and UT-Pan American to see if they want to start football and join too?

UTEP
nUTSAck
UTPA
UTD
UTA

UT branch schools are fun and exciting.

Rather be in the UT system with its resources and money than ... whatever your "system" is.

Be as flaccid as you want. Consistently, for both schools, aside from baseball, we are one of your biggest draws and vice versa.
[/quote]


The only reason I'm not crazy about the idea of UTA getting football again is because it would be more competition for Texas State. Another in state FBS school that would be recruiting for some of the same players etc. I don't actually have any hatred toward UTA. But I can't do anything about it so whatever happens happens.



Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-17-2014 08:46 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  The only reason I'm not crazy about the idea of UTA getting football again is because it would be more competition for Texas State. Another in state FBS school that would be recruiting for some of the same players etc. I don't actually have any hatred toward UTA. But I can't do anything about it so whatever happens happens.

Our old friends at UNT railed about UTSA and TXST and not wanting to share a conference with them. But then...one of the reasons they left was to be with other Texas schools, to have games their alumni could attend, and be seen in other Texas markets.

(10-17-2014 08:31 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 08:21 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 08:13 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  nUTSAck

Creative, but questionable at best...

C+ for effort.

Lets keep all creative names for UTSA away from male body parts from here on out.

I can't take credit for it. I saw someone post it on bobcatfans a few years back and liked it. I'll stop using it on here though.



Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-17-2014 08:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-17-2014 08:46 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  The only reason I'm not crazy about the idea of UTA getting football again is because it would be more competition for Texas State. Another in state FBS school that would be recruiting for some of the same players etc. I don't actually have any hatred toward UTA. But I can't do anything about it so whatever happens happens.

Our old friends at UNT railed about UTSA and TXST and not wanting to share a conference with them. But then...one of the reasons they left was to be with other Texas schools, to have games their alumni could attend, and be seen in other Texas markets.

Yeah...it probably wouldn't be as bad as I was imagining earlier


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-17-2014 08:51 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Our old friends at UNT railed about UTSA and TXST and not wanting to share a conference with them. But then...one of the reasons they left was to be with other Texas schools, to have games their alumni could attend, and be seen in other Texas markets.

For some, it's not concern about sharing a conference, it's adding yet another FBS mouth into this state.

We have quite a few already (12, I believe).

I'm actually surprised the G5 conferences haven't tried to "divvy up" the Texas Schools to be as close to 2 in each conference as possible.