(12-04-2014 08:36 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Good God.

I hate to tell you but you are in for some hard times in FBS football. You will not get your way and everything will not be happy times. You will be left out of bowls at some point in the future in any conference unless you get to a P5 conference.

Try going 11-0 and getting no bowl. Ever done that?

You were on ESPN on a nice night against a top conference opponent with bowl eligibility on the line and you had almost nobody there....and you want to blame it on the conference? How about YOUR FANS? You haven't proved to any bowl yet that your fans can travel 10 feet much less 10 hours.

So join the "we want out of the Sun Belt crowd". Maybe we all should. Maybe we should all leave and form a new conference that has 11 bowl tie-ins. Then it would be utopia.

Kind of hard to prove how well your team travels to a bowl game if you've never been invited right?

Also I guess you didn't watch when we played at South Alabama and they had about 10 fans in their stadium and they were playing for their 6th win.......???

Your argument is very weak.

(12-04-2014 09:12 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:05 PM)slycat Wrote:  I'd like to see secondary ties with Independence, HOD, or AF. Those are all in the footprint.

To get those tie-ins, we have to have solid attendance (sitting in the 25k, with probably 10-12k of season ticket sales), and travel strong to away games.

2-3k traveling is not good numbers.

I call bull****. There are teams with worst attendance playing bowl games.

(12-04-2014 09:24 PM)slycat Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:17 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:14 PM)slycat Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:12 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:05 PM)slycat Wrote:  I'd like to see secondary ties with Independence, HOD, or AF. Those are all in the footprint.

To get those tie-ins, we have to have solid attendance (sitting in the 25k, with probably 10-12k of season ticket sales), and travel strong to away games.

2-3k traveling is not good numbers.

I agree. Need to keeping improving home attendance and travel to UH and UTSA in the coming years. Also don't put our games against stAte and UL on weeknights. Save that for other teams when they come to town. I think both those teams would have traveled well to SM.

They are going to put your top opponents on weeknights on television. You have to get your fan base to come to the game on a weeknight when they can watch it on tv. Not easy, but it can be done. ULL and stAte have both had good numbers on nights like those.

Had decent enough numbers for UL (little under 19,000). The stAte game was just awful. I think it had to do with getting blasted by UL on a weeknight, and losing two straight close ones to GS and USA before the game. I know i was bummed headed into the stAte game.

Hopefully, next year is better. But average attendance was up 2000 from last year so thats good.

Forecast called for rain and cold weather and start time was at 8:30pm. When weather is bad and cold people are going to stay home. Fans with kids less likely to travel.

(12-04-2014 10:28 PM)TXSTCAT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:24 PM)slycat Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:17 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:14 PM)slycat Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:12 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  To get those tie-ins, we have to have solid attendance (sitting in the 25k, with probably 10-12k of season ticket sales), and travel strong to away games.

2-3k traveling is not good numbers.

I agree. Need to keeping improving home attendance and travel to UH and UTSA in the coming years. Also don't put our games against stAte and UL on weeknights. Save that for other teams when they come to town. I think both those teams would have traveled well to SM.

They are going to put your top opponents on weeknights on television. You have to get your fan base to come to the game on a weeknight when they can watch it on tv. Not easy, but it can be done. ULL and stAte have both had good numbers on nights like those.

Had decent enough numbers for UL (little under 19,000). The stAte game was just awful. I think it had to do with getting blasted by UL on a weeknight, and losing two straight close ones to GS and USA before the game. I know i was bummed headed into the stAte game.

Hopefully, next year is better. But average attendance was up 2000 from last year so thats good.

Forecast called for rain and cold weather and start time was at 8:30pm. When weather is bad and cold people are going to stay home. Fans with kids less likely to travel.

Might not wanna use that excuse when trying to get a bowl game in late December or early January.

(12-04-2014 09:24 PM)slycat Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:17 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:14 PM)slycat Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:12 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:05 PM)slycat Wrote:  I'd like to see secondary ties with Independence, HOD, or AF. Those are all in the footprint.

To get those tie-ins, we have to have solid attendance (sitting in the 25k, with probably 10-12k of season ticket sales), and travel strong to away games.

2-3k traveling is not good numbers.

I agree. Need to keeping improving home attendance and travel to UH and UTSA in the coming years. Also don't put our games against stAte and UL on weeknights. Save that for other teams when they come to town. I think both those teams would have traveled well to SM.

They are going to put your top opponents on weeknights on television. You have to get your fan base to come to the game on a weeknight when they can watch it on tv. Not easy, but it can be done. ULL and stAte have both had good numbers on nights like those.

Had decent enough numbers for UL (little under 19,000). The stAte game was just awful. I think it had to do with getting blasted by UL on a weeknight, and losing two straight close ones to GS and USA before the game. I know i was bummed headed into the stAte game.

Hopefully, next year is better. But average attendance was up 2000 from last year so thats good.

I agree the stAte game was bad, multiple factors caused this. 1. UL performance 2. 8:30 weeknight KO 3. It wasn't a "nice night", it rained all day and drizzled throughout the game

The two week night games killed our attendance. If those two games were weekend games our attendance would've looked better (low 20's for the year).

I think that if we were to get in AF or HOD we would have good amount of fans.

I wouldn't blame you but I would be disappointed. I think there is tons of potential here. As I said on another forum, when the bowl tie-ins were established both the SBC and CUSA were drastically different. Who knows what happens in the future?

This time last year we were in the Southern Conference. Now I hate to disparage the SoCon because championships there used to mean something at that level and it has TONS of history, but this year has been unbelievable. I read about my school's team on USA Today this morning... that's bananas. Losing TXST won't stop us but would certainly be difficult to replace.

(12-04-2014 10:33 PM)TXSTGrad03 Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:24 PM)slycat Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:17 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:14 PM)slycat Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:12 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  To get those tie-ins, we have to have solid attendance (sitting in the 25k, with probably 10-12k of season ticket sales), and travel strong to away games.

2-3k traveling is not good numbers.

I agree. Need to keeping improving home attendance and travel to UH and UTSA in the coming years. Also don't put our games against stAte and UL on weeknights. Save that for other teams when they come to town. I think both those teams would have traveled well to SM.

They are going to put your top opponents on weeknights on television. You have to get your fan base to come to the game on a weeknight when they can watch it on tv. Not easy, but it can be done. ULL and stAte have both had good numbers on nights like those.

Had decent enough numbers for UL (little under 19,000). The stAte game was just awful. I think it had to do with getting blasted by UL on a weeknight, and losing two straight close ones to GS and USA before the game. I know i was bummed headed into the stAte game.

Hopefully, next year is better. But average attendance was up 2000 from last year so thats good.

I agree the stAte game was bad, multiple factors caused this. 1. UL performance 2. 8:30 weeknight KO 3. It wasn't a "nice night", it rained all day and drizzled throughout the game

The two week night games killed our attendance. If those two games were weekend games our attendance would've looked better (low 20's for the year).

I think that if we were to get in AF or HOD we would have good amount of fans.

Rain is an excuse that stAte fans can relate to. Just a threat of it will put a dent in our attendance.

It sucks enough at 7-5. Can't imagine the frustration WKU felt at 8-4.

(12-04-2014 08:49 PM)gostAte870 Wrote:  I'm concerned from here on out because when A-State doesn't win the conference, UL will get New Orleans, and Ga Southern, App, and/or USA will get the Alabama bowls. We're going to be as screwed as Texas State going forward.

Bingo!! Our Conference needs to implement a rule that puts teams in bowls according to Ws. Today it's us yesterday it was WKU and others. Tomorrow it could be your team! Having one bowl tie in is not the same. We have the Ws and the tie ins but we lost out due to location. How will we travel to a bowl game? Who knows. We have helped several Texas teams set attendance records. Our fans will travel for the right game. A cold wet late game is no reason re penalize our team. What do you tell recruits? I've been Pro Sun Belt since day one but this bites. Our players deserve better. We need a rule that puts the winning most programs first. If other conferences can do it why can't we. Everyone should contact their President and request this rule because next year it could be your team on the out side looking in. Fix that and I'll be happy.

(12-04-2014 10:33 PM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  I wouldn't blame you but I would be disappointed. I think there is tons of potential here. As I said on another forum, when the bowl tie-ins were established both the SBC and CUSA were drastically different. Who knows what happens in the future?

This time last year we were in the Southern Conference. Now I hate to disparage the SoCon because championships there used to mean something at that level and it has TONS of history, but this year has been unbelievable. I read about my school's team on USA Today this morning... that's bananas. Losing TXST won't stop us but would certainly be difficult to replace.

I was pretty excited when we added you and App. I knew you wouldn't be typically FCS move ups and y'all out did yourselves this year. I hope troy bounces back big next year too.

(12-04-2014 10:24 PM)CornMeal Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 08:36 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Good God.

I hate to tell you but you are in for some hard times in FBS football. You will not get your way and everything will not be happy times. You will be left out of bowls at some point in the future in any conference unless you get to a P5 conference.

Try going 11-0 and getting no bowl. Ever done that?

You were on ESPN on a nice night against a top conference opponent with bowl eligibility on the line and you had almost nobody there....and you want to blame it on the conference? How about YOUR FANS? You haven't proved to any bowl yet that your fans can travel 10 feet much less 10 hours.

So join the "we want out of the Sun Belt crowd". Maybe we all should. Maybe we should all leave and form a new conference that has 11 bowl tie-ins. Then it would be utopia.

Kind of hard to prove how well your team travels to a bowl game if you've never been invited right?

Also I guess you didn't watch when we played at South Alabama and they had about 10 fans in their stadium and they were playing for their 6th win.......???

Your argument is very weak.

You seem to think I have some interest in proving something to you. You are free to believe that it was a conspiracy....if that argument seems "strong" to you.

You are right about not proving how well you travel unless you get the opportunity to travel. We had to win a conference championship to get that opportunity.

(12-04-2014 10:25 PM)TXSTCAT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:12 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:05 PM)slycat Wrote:  I'd like to see secondary ties with Independence, HOD, or AF. Those are all in the footprint.

To get those tie-ins, we have to have solid attendance (sitting in the 25k, with probably 10-12k of season ticket sales), and travel strong to away games.

2-3k traveling is not good numbers.

I call bull****. There are teams with worst attendance playing bowl games.

Are they in the Sun Belt?

No? Didn't think so.

(12-04-2014 09:22 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Meanwhile the GoDaddy Bowl in our own backyard didn't even consider USA. I don't know why anyone thinks we are a lock... They haven't looked our way either bowl eligible season. The GoDaddy was between ASU and TXST. They took the known commodity in ASU. Be mad at them.

Who knows what went into the Camellia Bowl's selection process, but I bet for their inaugural bowl they wanted a huge crowd. They aren't going to get that from most MAC teams.

I have no beef with other programs that were selected or their fans. It's the rules we have in place. I wish everyone the best in their bowl games. Represent the Beast Belt!! I just feel bad for our team. Those guys were sold a bill of goods and may not get a pay off. To me that looks bad for the conference. It doesn't help to recruit players when you go 7-5 and stay home. This needs to be fixed.

We all have to built this conference. Last year 2 bowl tie-ins, this year 3, next year 4. Is that enough? I would still say no. The Belt needs 5 bowl tie-ins I believe and the 5th needs to be in the western side of the conference (Texas, Louisiana or in Arkansas).

But I would have no objection at all to a Belt rule that required 7 win teams to be sent to bowls over 6 win teams.

Any and I mean any Belt team who finishes 7-5 or better should be in a bowl period.

(12-04-2014 10:48 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  We all have to built this conference. Last year 2 bowl tie-ins, this year 3, next year 4. Is that enough? I would still say no. The Belt needs 5 bowl tie-ins I believe and the 5th needs to be in the western side of the conference (Texas, Louisiana or in Arkansas).

But I would have no objection at all to a Belt rule that required 7 win teams to be sent to bowls over 6 win teams.

Any and I mean any Belt team who finishes 7-5 or better should be in a bowl period.

If only Little Rock could get their shite together.....

(12-04-2014 10:40 PM)slycat Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 10:33 PM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  I wouldn't blame you but I would be disappointed. I think there is tons of potential here. As I said on another forum, when the bowl tie-ins were established both the SBC and CUSA were drastically different. Who knows what happens in the future?

This time last year we were in the Southern Conference. Now I hate to disparage the SoCon because championships there used to mean something at that level and it has TONS of history, but this year has been unbelievable. I read about my school's team on USA Today this morning... that's bananas. Losing TXST won't stop us but would certainly be difficult to replace.

I was pretty excited when we added you and App. I knew you wouldn't be typically FCS move ups and y'all out did yourselves this year. I hope troy bounces back big next year too.

I was really impressed with GS, outside of Navy (mostly area military), most visiting fans at Bobcat stadium this year.

(12-04-2014 10:39 PM)TXSTCAT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 08:49 PM)gostAte870 Wrote:  I'm concerned from here on out because when A-State doesn't win the conference, UL will get New Orleans, and Ga Southern, App, and/or USA will get the Alabama bowls. We're going to be as screwed as Texas State going forward.

Bingo!! Our Conference needs to implement a rule that puts teams in bowls according to Ws. Today it's us yesterday it was WKU and others. Tomorrow it could be your team! Having one bowl tie in is not the same. We have the Ws and the tie ins but we lost out due to location. How will we travel to a bowl game? Who knows. We have helped several Texas teams set attendance records. Our fans will travel for the right game. A cold wet late game is no reason re penalize our team. What do you tell recruits? I've been Pro Sun Belt since day one but this bites. Our players deserve better. We need a rule that puts the winning most programs first. If other conferences can do it why can't we. Everyone should contact their President and request this rule because next year it could be your team on the out side looking in. Fix that and I'll be happy.

We have a rule that the conference champions are accomodated first. WKU last year wanted that rule ignored. If your rule were in place you might find that you won the conference and STILL not go to a bowl game because of your attendance or distance. Will you remain silent then? That is why that rule is in place. That is why WKU did not get a bowl (plus the fact they were bailing on the conference anyway).

Now as far as number of wins. USA didn't play an FCS. If you go strictly by number of wins then you encourage the scheduling of weak OOC opponents rather than strong OOC opponents. You incentivize a permanently bottom ranked conference. USA would have just scheduled UAPB and been 7-5 instead and would STILL be 8 hours closer to Montgomery than you.

Do you think our bowl tie-ins will tolerate further restrictions on who they can and cannot choose? They certainly do not want Idaho under any circumstance. Force them to take a 7-5 Idaho over a 6-6 USA and you WILL NOT HAVE THAT BOWL TIE-IN FOR LONG.

(12-04-2014 10:44 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 10:25 PM)TXSTCAT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:12 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 09:05 PM)slycat Wrote:  I'd like to see secondary ties with Independence, HOD, or AF. Those are all in the footprint.

To get those tie-ins, we have to have solid attendance (sitting in the 25k, with probably 10-12k of season ticket sales), and travel strong to away games.

2-3k traveling is not good numbers.

I call bull****. There are teams with worst attendance playing bowl games.

Are they in the Sun Belt?

No? Didn't think so.

Exactly. The leadership of the belt need to step up and advocate for their teams. Other conferences do. So we should expect the same. If we have the bypass in place and the contracts they cannot deny us our team the game they deserve.

Do you believe some of CUSA's teams are that desirable as bowl participants? But CUSA still insists that 7 win teams go over 6 win teams.

Any absolutely the conference champion should be guaranteed a bowl placement.

(12-04-2014 10:57 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 10:39 PM)TXSTCAT Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 08:49 PM)gostAte870 Wrote:  I'm concerned from here on out because when A-State doesn't win the conference, UL will get New Orleans, and Ga Southern, App, and/or USA will get the Alabama bowls. We're going to be as screwed as Texas State going forward.

Bingo!! Our Conference needs to implement a rule that puts teams in bowls according to Ws. Today it's us yesterday it was WKU and others. Tomorrow it could be your team! Having one bowl tie in is not the same. We have the Ws and the tie ins but we lost out due to location. How will we travel to a bowl game? Who knows. We have helped several Texas teams set attendance records. Our fans will travel for the right game. A cold wet late game is no reason re penalize our team. What do you tell recruits? I've been Pro Sun Belt since day one but this bites. Our players deserve better. We need a rule that puts the winning most programs first. If other conferences can do it why can't we. Everyone should contact their President and request this rule because next year it could be your team on the out side looking in. Fix that and I'll be happy.

We have a rule that the conference champions are accomodated first. WKU last year wanted that rule ignored. If your rule were in place you might find that you won the conference and STILL not go to a bowl game because of your attendance or distance. Will you remain silent then? That is why that rule is in place. That is why WKU did not get a bowl (plus the fact they were bailing on the conference anyway).

Now as far as number of wins. USA didn't play an FCS. If you go strictly by number of wins then you encourage the scheduling of weak OOC opponents rather than strong OOC opponents. You incentivize a permanently bottom ranked conference. USA would have just scheduled UAPB and been 7-5 instead and would STILL be 8 hours closer to Montgomery than you.

Do you think our bowl tie-ins will tolerate further restrictions on who they can and cannot choose? They certainly do not want Idaho under any circumstance. Force them to take a 7-5 Idaho over a 6-6 USA and you WILL NOT HAVE THAT BOWL TIE-IN FOR LONG.

And yet Confrence USA has more bowl tie ins and TV dollars. Your argument doesn't hold up. Bottom line our Admins are afraid to dictate who gets to play and so they are dictated too. That is weak sauce. Keep that mentality and winning programs will continue to leave for greener pastures.