The Sun Belt's western division is starting to look like old Southland Conference.
Eastern Division
Appalachian State
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy
Western Division
Arkansas-Little Rock
Arkansas State
Louisiana-Lafayette
Louisiana-Monroe
Texas-Arlington
Texas State
(01-13-2014 01:14 AM)David Krysakowski Wrote: [ -> ]The Sun Belt's western division is starting to look like old Southland Conference.
Eastern Division
Appalachian State
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy
Western Division
Arkansas-Little Rock
Arkansas State
Louisiana-Lafayette
Louisiana-Monroe
Texas-Arlington
Texas State
Why didn't you just post this straight in the smack talk section>?
(01-13-2014 01:28 AM)Check Yosef Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2014 01:14 AM)David Krysakowski Wrote: [ -> ]The Sun Belt's western division is starting to look like old Southland Conference.
Eastern Division
Appalachian State
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy
Western Division
Arkansas-Little Rock
Arkansas State
Louisiana-Lafayette
Louisiana-Monroe
Texas-Arlington
Texas State
Why didn't you just post this straight in the smack talk section>?
That's alright, I moved it to smack for him.
(01-13-2014 01:50 AM)chiefsfan Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2014 01:28 AM)Check Yosef Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2014 01:14 AM)David Krysakowski Wrote: [ -> ]The Sun Belt's western division is starting to look like old Southland Conference.
Eastern Division
Appalachian State
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy
Western Division
Arkansas-Little Rock
Arkansas State
Louisiana-Lafayette
Louisiana-Monroe
Texas-Arlington
Texas State
Why didn't you just post this straight in the smack talk section>?
That's alright, I moved it to smack for him.
Heh, you see the post on the coosa board about them looking like the old SBC
Sent from my iPhone using
Tapatalk
(01-13-2014 01:51 AM)Check Yosef Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2014 01:50 AM)chiefsfan Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2014 01:28 AM)Check Yosef Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2014 01:14 AM)David Krysakowski Wrote: [ -> ]The Sun Belt's western division is starting to look like old Southland Conference.
Eastern Division
Appalachian State
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy
Western Division
Arkansas-Little Rock
Arkansas State
Louisiana-Lafayette
Louisiana-Monroe
Texas-Arlington
Texas State
Why didn't you just post this straight in the smack talk section>?
That's alright, I moved it to smack for him.
Heh, you see the post on the coosa board about them looking like the old SBC
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eventually someone is going to tell the AAC that they look like the old CUSA.
(01-13-2014 01:14 AM)David Krysakowski Wrote: [ -> ]The Sun Belt's western division is starting to look like old Southland Conference.
Eastern Division
Appalachian State
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy
Western Division
Arkansas-Little Rock
Arkansas State
Louisiana-Lafayette
Louisiana-Monroe
Texas-Arlington
Texas State
While all but Arkansas-Little Rock were SLC members at some point, they weren't all conference members at the same time.
Arkansas State 1963-1987
UTA 1963-2012 (men were independent in the 1986/87 year)
Louisiana-Lafayette 1971-1982 (were affiliate members in women's sports from 1982-87)
Louisiana-Monroe 1982-2006 (football was out in 1995)
Texas State 1987 - 2012
I'll even add Troy as a football affiliate 1996-2001.
So at most, among six former SLC members, only three were mates at any one time.
And I'd like to see another Southland member in the Belt, SHSU.
By the way, the new Southland is awful. Has anyone seen how their basketball is doing? I wondered why UTA bothered to join the Sun Belt. Now I know.
The SLC carries about one thing and one thing only and that is having 1-AA football. If they actually fueled resources into baseball for example, they'd be right behind the SBC. As it is, SHSU has gotten two at-large bids that last two years and picked up some wins in the NCAA's.
Schools like Southeastern Louisiana, McNeese, Northwestern Louisiana and Lamar are perennially in the top 100 RPI and usually a few more are. UTA and TXST were also there. But they didn't even make conference media guides for anything but basketball and football. It was frustrating to say the least.
UTA belonged in the current SLC with Texas Hall as its arena. Our budget was higher than most schools once football was factored out and once CPC was built, we didn't belong.
(01-21-2014 01:19 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: [ -> ]And I'd like to see another Southland member in the Belt, SHSU.
By the way, the new Southland is awful. Has anyone seen how their basketball is doing? I wondered why UTA bothered to join the Sun Belt. Now I know.
Why Sam? Just curious.
The best I can tell is that he heard they made the title game under Fritz awhile back before he bolted to this league. Otherwise the facilities & funding in Huntsville is nowhere near ready for FBS.
On the other hand, I have always loved the sniping between SWT & Sam fans. It seems a shame to have lost it. Now it feels like listening to a stadium full of Ags sing their war hymn about a school they don't even play anymore. Sad.
(01-21-2014 08:27 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2014 01:19 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: [ -> ]And I'd like to see another Southland member in the Belt, SHSU.
By the way, the new Southland is awful. Has anyone seen how their basketball is doing? I wondered why UTA bothered to join the Sun Belt. Now I know.
Why Sam? Just curious.
They sold 30k tickets to a game in Houston. HUGE presence here in Houston (bigger than Texas Tech). They'd be a winner, quickly in FBS. They matter.
(01-21-2014 11:41 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2014 08:27 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2014 01:19 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: [ -> ]And I'd like to see another Southland member in the Belt, SHSU.
By the way, the new Southland is awful. Has anyone seen how their basketball is doing? I wondered why UTA bothered to join the Sun Belt. Now I know.
Why Sam? Just curious.
They sold 30k tickets to a game in Houston. HUGE presence here in Houston (bigger than Texas Tech). They'd be a winner, quickly in FBS. They matter.
That's the first I've heard of them having much of a presence in Houston (and I'm from there, with family still there).
The attendance is really surprising.
Houston Baptist - 9,246
Texas Southern - 6,403
Incarnate Word - 5,789
Eastern Washington - 8,621
Lamar - 9,156
Northwestern State - 5,527
SFA - 26,213
Nicholls State - 7,507
Southern Utah - 4,609
Now first let me say that something ain't right, cause that says they had 9 home games, but I'm working with ESPN here and they don't pay much attention to FCS.
However, given that, their average attendance is 9,231. That's including the bump of the SFA game in Houston (a rivalry game). Without that game? They are averaging 7,108.
Those attendance numbers, combined with their facilities issues and their donor base being weak (I hope it does improve), I just don't see them as ready.
I think they could be a solid football member, a good baseball member, and well... they can't be worse than us in basketball. But I don't think they can fund it.
Yeah, UTA without football had a larger budget for years.
Bowers Stadium would need a lot of work to hit the 1-A requirements. Current capacity is 12,976, though the record crowd is 16,000+. Though it doesn't bother me at all, it does to some, their is a track surrounding the field.
Johnson Coliseum is average, on par with Strahan at Texas State and a step behind ULM's Fant-Ewing, but far behind UTA's College Park Center, USA's Mitchell Center and Troy's Trojan Arena. They also have this weird "hole" where press row is. Very awkward.
Sanders Stadium for baseball is about on par with UTA's Clay Gould Ballpark, but with the new improvements coming after this year, they will be behind that. Right now, they are well behind Texas State in what I have personally visited, and from the web seem to be way behind UL-L, Troy and USA.
The Bearkat softball complex is similar. I'd rank it ahead of UTA's Allan Saxe Field, but we've got renovations coming, so I hope we get pas them.
Most other facilities are basic, but the larger issue of small budget and small attendance is an issue.
(01-22-2014 11:24 AM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, UTA without football had a larger budget for years.
Bowers Stadium would need a lot of work to hit the 1-A requirements. Current capacity is 12,976, though the record crowd is 16,000+. Though it doesn't bother me at all, it does to some, their is a track surrounding the field.
Johnson Coliseum is average, on par with Strahan at Texas State and a step behind ULM's Fant-Ewing, but far behind UTA's College Park Center, USA's Mitchell Center and Troy's Trojan Arena. They also have this weird "hole" where press row is. Very awkward.
Sanders Stadium for baseball is about on par with UTA's Clay Gould Ballpark, but with the new improvements coming after this year, they will be behind that. Right now, they are well behind Texas State in what I have personally visited, and from the web seem to be way behind UL-L, Troy and USA.
The Bearkat softball complex is similar. I'd rank it ahead of UTA's Allan Saxe Field, but we've got renovations coming, so I hope we get pas them.
Most other facilities are basic, but the larger issue of small budget and small attendance is an issue.
You cannot play football with a track around the field. At least that's pretty much what we have been told for years. Guess you will have to rip it out and have the stands right up behind the teams on the sidelines.
(01-22-2014 01:33 PM)GoApps70 Wrote: [ -> ]You cannot play football with a track around the field. At least that's pretty much what we have been told for years. Guess you will have to rip it out and have the stands right up behind the teams on the sidelines.
I get it as an aesthetics deal (and I know you are being sarcastic), but man... folks make WAY too big a deal out of the track thing.
It never detracted from my game day experience at Bobcat Stadium when we had the track. It didn't enhance my gameday experience at Bobcat Stadium now that it's gone.
(01-22-2014 03:20 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote: [ -> ] (01-22-2014 01:33 PM)GoApps70 Wrote: [ -> ]You cannot play football with a track around the field. At least that's pretty much what we have been told for years. Guess you will have to rip it out and have the stands right up behind the teams on the sidelines.
I get it as an aesthetics deal (and I know you are being sarcastic), but man... folks make WAY too big a deal out of the track thing.
It never detracted from my game day experience at Bobcat Stadium when we had the track. It didn't enhance my gameday experience at Bobcat Stadium now that it's gone.
There's been talk on our board of what to do with Maverick Stadium and the track when football comes back. I personally like the idea of multipurpose facilities. Football stadiums are the biggest sports venue on campus and if they are only for football, usually have the least amount of activity. Having a track and soccer dimensions (I know soccer players hate turf) increases the use, as well as decrease the costs of facility maintenance and land-use needs for other facilities.
Of course the big con is, especially at the bigger schools, is that the closer seats are high-dollar seats and that is a revenue generator in some cases.
(01-22-2014 03:20 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote: [ -> ] (01-22-2014 01:33 PM)GoApps70 Wrote: [ -> ]You cannot play football with a track around the field. At least that's pretty much what we have been told for years. Guess you will have to rip it out and have the stands right up behind the teams on the sidelines.
I get it as an aesthetics deal (and I know you are being sarcastic), but man... folks make WAY too big a deal out of the track thing.
It never detracted from my game day experience at Bobcat Stadium when we had the track. It didn't enhance my gameday experience at Bobcat Stadium now that it's gone.
Yeah was being sarcastic. It has never bothered me. Actually gives visiting team farther distance from the stands, and believe they actually appreciate that. Seen and heard too many things thrown at some other stadiums + insults.
We still are in the process of moving our track ASAP. Little land available that large and flat, or could be made flat in such a mountainous area though. Talking major track investment money.