(06-07-2015 10:08 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 10:06 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 09:50 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  SMU is moving to a top 40 academic rating while Tech will never match us

Nice, I love academic smack. That will certainly help SMU in realignment conversations.

Pony, curious why the hate towards Tech? We have played you guys and help SMU sell out Ford. DFW Tech alums enjoy our occasional visit to your awesome campus.

I can make fun of Houston you can't

Sad part is that SMU may not get a P5 invite. Houston on the other hand are on the list.

(06-08-2015 07:18 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 03:10 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 03:04 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Carnegie listed Boise State as the same with Washington State, USC, California, Cal-Davis, UCLA, Oregon, Stanford, Oregon State, and Arizona. I just hit similar schools to Boise State, and that is how they compare Boise State with those schools.

Then you did it wrong.

If you remove all the low level and schools that are not in the USA? Boise State might register. If Boise State are now offering some research like the PAC 12? Then they are making strides. Sometimes the best schools are not AAU schools like Stanford, but schools like Boise State who can do more with students. You don't see many disabled kids getting into these big schools because they can't past the SATs to satisfy the schools. Schools like Boise could work and help challenged kids to get a degree. That is why schools like Boise State have grown in size, and the P5 schools losing ground. It is too hard to get into these P5 schools or schools like the Ivy's.

where do you get this nonsense from

I don't think it would be possible for someone to be so wrong and so clueless as you demonstrate on such a broad range of topics if they tried to be wrong

Boise is classified by Carnegie as a Masters/Large Program university

that is not in the same classification as WSU or Oregon or any of the others you listed

stop sticking your head in your butt to find your "facts"

http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/lo...limit=0,50

(06-07-2015 03:42 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 02:06 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  During TCU's G5 status, they averaged 10K more than UH

Really now.

Over the last 6 years, UH has averaged 28K fans per game. We have made no major bowl games. We've won 49 games vs 29 losses.

TCU went to the Fiesta Bowl in 2009, the Rose in 2010 and got a Big 12 invite in 2011, all combining to give them an attendance boost during their last 3 years in G5.

Since UH could sustain a similar boost by making a major bowl, a more apples comparison would be to TCU's attendance in the 6 years from 2003-2008. TCU averaged 31.5K fans per home game in those years in which it won 57 games vs 18 losses.

So TCU outdrew Houston by 3500 fans a game during comparable periods. But TCU also won more games. And they kept their head coach & staff whereas UH is on its 3rd head coach in the last 6 years.

you present the dumbest and most unreasoned argument there is

one would have to be an unmitigated buffoon to see any logic or reason in your silly argument

UH has done nothing on the field that is remotely comparable to what TCU has done for the last 15 seasons and trying to pretend that it is a reasoned argument that UH COULD do something like that when you are cheery picking numbers and still UH falls short of TCU is just asinine

TCU had a couple of not that great seasons as well and their attendance is still much better than anything UH has come close to putting together

TCU made an impressive run for a sustained period of time BEFORE expansion and realignment happened and they invested in facilities multiple times while in a G conference they did not sit on their hands and hold out there begging bowl and hope someone would do it for them they went out and took it and earned it

and trying to present the fact that they were able to invest in their coach and coaching staff and invest in facilities to convince him to stay while UH churned through coaches as not being a fair comparison is again laughable because again TCU DID WHAT IT TOOK TO BE RELEVANT....TCU did what it took on and off the field they did not sit around crying after it was too late about what they COULD HAVE DONE MAYBE PERHAPS POSSIBLY AND MAYBE MIGHT COULD PERHAPS POSSIBLE DO IF ONLY.....they just went out and did it

and here are the attendance numbers from 2003-2014 with 2004 milling directly from the NCAA and one would have to be a damn dunce t find anything comparable in these numbers no mater how stupid you want to get about picking and choosing

http://www.ncaa.org/championships/statis...attendance

2003 TCU UH

36,155 21,807

2004 NA

2005

31,254 15,054

2006

31,926 21,910

2007

30,018 20,955

2008

30,389 21,518

2009

38,187 25,242

2010

42,466 31,728

2011

33,686 31,731

2012

46,047 27,247

2013

43,598 24,256

2014

44,719 28,311

TCU had no seasons under 30,000 in that entire run and many well above 30K while UH even in their "bestest evAR" hand picked years still had several seasons well under 30K and none over 32K even opening up a brand new stajium

So you think Houston has maxed out its G5 attendance at 28K per game. That we could go to the Fiesta and Rose Bowl back to back like TCU and not improve our attendance by 8000 per game like TCU. Instead, we'd be stuck on 28K.

Brilliant.

On the other hand, if you concede that Houston has not maxed its G5 attendance and that a couple of Top 10 seasons and major bowls would improve attendance, then you can't compare UH to TCU attendance year by year. Instead, you have to find comparable periods like I suggested above.

no I think some Houston fans are proving to be extremely unintelligent and making silly arguments trying to compare themselves to TCU when their on the field, in the stands and financial support in no way shape or form compares to TCU

they seem to think that telling everyone what they could do if they just only happened to actually do it (instead of talking about how they might do it) is somehow an impressive credential and worthy of consideration for inclusion in a conference

they somehow think that Houston is special because they claim they could see a jump in attendance if they did what TCU did......as if every G5 program in the country would not make the same claim.....if Cincy, either of the GSUs, UCF, USF, the F_Us, San Jose State, San Diego State, UNLV, north Texas state (maybe), SMU, Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, or dozens of other programs did what TCU did I am sure their fans believe they would have a major boost in attendance as well......some might even be dumb enough to claim they would also hold on to their coach through that run, improve their stajium two times (one time coming up with over $100 million in less than a year to do so) and then they would have an even bigger jump in attendance and have a top 10 season after they made the transition

the difference is TCU actually went out and proved they could do all of that instead of just talking endlessly about it and TCU did it while moving conferences and improving their lot even if it was not to a P5 conference until the very end....and then TCU performed and improved in that P5 conference as well

UH on the other hand still tells everyone what they would do even though as of now realignment seems to be over for a long number of years......but somehow UH fans seem to think their talk of what they would do is special talk and perhaps "real talk doh" even though UH has not come close to doing anything like what TCU did and there are plenty of other G5 programs that have more impressive attendance than UH

Boise, Cincy, UCF, BYU have all done more than UH has.....hell Memphis has been ranked 1 time since 2000 just like UH

telling everyone how great you would be if you were actually great is not meaningful it is just talk and probably not even "real talk"

(06-08-2015 02:03 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  they somehow think that Houston is special because they claim they could see a jump in attendance if they did what TCU did......as if every G5 program in the country would not make the same claim....

Your reading comprehension is really poor.

I was responding to a statement that TCU drew 10K more per game in the G5 than Houston.

When you look at what Houston has done the last 6 years and compared it to a similar period in TCU's history (2003-08) where both schools were winning games in G5 and going to minor bowls, the difference is 3500 fans per game.

Not 10K.

But by all means, continue to misconstrue what I write.

(06-08-2015 07:51 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(06-08-2015 02:03 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  they somehow think that Houston is special because they claim they could see a jump in attendance if they did what TCU did......as if every G5 program in the country would not make the same claim....

Your reading comprehension is really poor.

I was responding to a statement that TCU drew 10K more per game in the G5 than Houston.

When you look at what Houston has done the last 6 years and compared it to a similar period in TCU's history (2003-08) where both schools were winning games in G5 and going to minor bowls, the difference is 3500 fans per game.

Not 10K.

But by all means, continue to misconstrue what I write.

Coog, with all due respect, you are cherry picking.

96-08
TCU 29,497
UH 18,990

96-02
TCU 27,813
UH 17,780

03-08
TCU 31,526
UH 20,402

09-11
TCU 38,113 which includes the 2011 season when ACS only sat 32K
UH 29,567

(06-08-2015 02:03 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  no I think some Houston fans are proving to be extremely unintelligent and making silly arguments trying to compare themselves to TCU when their on the field, in the stands and financial support in no way shape or form compares to TCU

they seem to think that telling everyone what they could do if they just only happened to actually do it (instead of talking about how they might do it) is somehow an impressive credential and worthy of consideration for inclusion in a conference

they somehow think that Houston is special because they claim they could see a jump in attendance if they did what TCU did......as if every G5 program in the country would not make the same claim.....if Cincy, either of the GSUs, UCF, USF, the F_Us, San Jose State, San Diego State, UNLV, north Texas state (maybe), SMU, Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, or dozens of other programs did what TCU did I am sure their fans believe they would have a major boost in attendance as well......some might even be dumb enough to claim they would also hold on to their coach through that run, improve their stajium two times (one time coming up with over $100 million in less than a year to do so) and then they would have an even bigger jump in attendance and have a top 10 season after they made the transition

the difference is TCU actually went out and proved they could do all of that instead of just talking endlessly about it and TCU did it while moving conferences and improving their lot even if it was not to a P5 conference until the very end....and then TCU performed and improved in that P5 conference as well

UH on the other hand still tells everyone what they would do even though as of now realignment seems to be over for a long number of years......but somehow UH fans seem to think their talk of what they would do is special talk and perhaps "real talk doh" even though UH has not come close to doing anything like what TCU did and there are plenty of other G5 programs that have more impressive attendance than UH

Boise, Cincy, UCF, BYU have all done more than UH has.....hell Memphis has been ranked 1 time since 2000 just like UH

telling everyone how great you would be if you were actually great is not meaningful it is just talk and probably not even "real talk"

Houston's best years was when Kevin Sumlin as head coach and Case Keenum was the QB. Losing Sumlin stopped Houston's momentum.
Southern Miss. was winning big every year until Jeff Bower and Larry Fedora were hired away.

(06-07-2015 03:04 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-07-2015 08:53 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(06-04-2015 10:36 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Yeah, the Pac-12 is pretty close to the Big Ten in emphasizing academics. T The Pac-12 isn't going to budge on that front (or else they'd be going after a school like UNLV, which truly provides a brand new lucrative market without any pro sports competition).

The Pac 12 is reported to rely on ARWU US rankings, which are based on six objective indicators, including the number of alumni and staff winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals, number of highly cited researchers selected by Thomson Reuters, number of articles published in journals of Nature and Science, number of articles indexed in Science Citation Index - Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index, and per capita performance of a university.

The Pac 12 ranks very highly in ARWU:

2 Stanford
4 Cal
10 UCLA
13 Washington
26 Colorado
33 USC
46 Arizona
47 Utah
48 Arizona St
65-77 Oregon St
78-104 Oregon
78-104 Wash St

In addition, all are rated Carnegie Very High Research. All except Oregon St, Wash St and Utah are AAU.

Assuming they don't go below ARWU 78-104 unless they have the chance to get a football power like OU, here are the potentially available schools in the Central time zone and west that are at least 78-104 in ARWU:

GOR-restricted
28 Texas
65-77 Iowa St
78-104 Kansas

Not GOR-restricted
45 Rice
65-77 Hawaii
78-104 Colo St
78-104 New Mexico
78-104 Houston

Note: all of these schools are also Carnegie Very High Research. Texas, Iowa St, Kansas and Rice are AAU.

Here are other potential candidates as ranked by ARWU. Carngegie Very High Research and AAU noted:

105-125
BYU
San Diego St
Tulane - Carnegie VHR AAU

126-146
Kansas St
Oklahoma St
Oklahoma - Carnegie VHR
Wyoming
Utah St

Not Rated
Texas Tech
Baylor
TCU
Boise St
UNLV
Nevada
San Jose St
Fresno St
Air Force
SMU
Tulsa
North Texas
UTSA
UTEP
Ark St
Louisana Tech
ULaLa
ULa Monroe
etc

Clearly, in order to get UT, the OU brand and the UT-OU rivalry, the Pac 12 was willing to hold their nose and take Oklahoma St and Texas Tech, which don't fit their profile.

If the Pac 12 can't get UT or OU, I don't see them raiding the Big 12 except to take Kansas or Iowa St if the league splinters.

Otherwise, Pac 12 expansion IF ANY will come from:

Rice
Hawaii
New Mexico
Colo St
Houston
Tulane

These are the only G5 schools that arguably fit the Pac 12's academic profile. SMU and BYU are fine schools, and BYU has a nice ARWU rating. But both are church-owned. And SMU doesn't do research. San Diego St is a fine school and has a nice ARWU rating, but it doesn't add a TV market.

In that regard, Colo St faces an uphill battle. The Pac 12 already gets subscriber fees in Colorado. And the Buffs would scream bloody murder if Colo St were proposed for membership.

As such, under the Rutgers/Big 10 Network expansion principle, perhaps the Pac 12 eventually expands with:

Hawaii
New Mexico
Houston
Tulane (or maybe Rice)

Four new cable TV markets. Two "University ofs" and two great recruiting states. Rice is a great school, but very small at 3900 undergrads. Tulane is more than twice that size. Tulane is about the size of Stanford.

Carnegie listed Boise State as the same with Washington State, USC, California, Cal-Davis, UCLA, Oregon, Stanford, Oregon State, and Arizona. I just hit similar schools to Boise State, and that is how they compare Boise State with those schools.

Sorry David, Boise St has the worst academic profile of any of the FBS schools. It's really a football team with some classrooms added to make it a college team rather than an NFL-which Boise and Albertsons can't support, even with the help of Taco Bell.

(08-07-2014 09:31 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Just curious. The LA Times ran an article the other day saying after two years that the PAC12 Network only had 11 million subscribers?

Can it last with that tiny number? The Mountain West Network only had like 7-10 million subscribers and actually was on DirecTV and had to fold. How many subscribers does the Longhorn Network have?, and LHN is in dubious shape.

In light of the Big Ten and SEC Network, this looks terrible for the PAC 12. The ACC's OTA deal blows it away too.

In the end with the LHN and PAC12 Network both struggling, I think Texas and the PAC have to merge just to keep the Networks together. LHN folds into the PAC Net and doubles exposure and keeps both from sinking??

The only way that works is if the rest of the Pac-12 (the -14 or -16 that results) agree to allow ESPN to hold some sort of stake in the expanded Pac-12 Networks. In exchange they will do the same sort of bundling they're doing with the SEC Network. But such an arrangement would be win-win financially for ESPN and the Pac-12 Network.

(06-09-2015 04:36 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Houston's best years was when Kevin Sumlin as head coach and Case Keenum was the QB. Losing Sumlin stopped Houston's momentum.
Southern Miss. was winning big every year until Jeff Bower and Larry Fedora were hired away.

Jeff Bower resigned he was not hired away

(06-08-2015 07:51 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(06-08-2015 02:03 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  they somehow think that Houston is special because they claim they could see a jump in attendance if they did what TCU did......as if every G5 program in the country would not make the same claim....

Your reading comprehension is really poor.

I was responding to a statement that TCU drew 10K more per game in the G5 than Houston.

When you look at what Houston has done the last 6 years and compared it to a similar period in TCU's history (2003-08) where both schools were winning games in G5 and going to minor bowls, the difference is 3500 fans per game.

Not 10K.

But by all means, continue to misconstrue what I write.

my reading comprehension is just fine.....it is your ability to make a meaningful point that suffers

(06-09-2015 04:36 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-08-2015 02:03 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  no I think some Houston fans are proving to be extremely unintelligent and making silly arguments trying to compare themselves to TCU when their on the field, in the stands and financial support in no way shape or form compares to TCU

they seem to think that telling everyone what they could do if they just only happened to actually do it (instead of talking about how they might do it) is somehow an impressive credential and worthy of consideration for inclusion in a conference

they somehow think that Houston is special because they claim they could see a jump in attendance if they did what TCU did......as if every G5 program in the country would not make the same claim.....if Cincy, either of the GSUs, UCF, USF, the F_Us, San Jose State, San Diego State, UNLV, north Texas state (maybe), SMU, Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, or dozens of other programs did what TCU did I am sure their fans believe they would have a major boost in attendance as well......some might even be dumb enough to claim they would also hold on to their coach through that run, improve their stajium two times (one time coming up with over $100 million in less than a year to do so) and then they would have an even bigger jump in attendance and have a top 10 season after they made the transition

the difference is TCU actually went out and proved they could do all of that instead of just talking endlessly about it and TCU did it while moving conferences and improving their lot even if it was not to a P5 conference until the very end....and then TCU performed and improved in that P5 conference as well

UH on the other hand still tells everyone what they would do even though as of now realignment seems to be over for a long number of years......but somehow UH fans seem to think their talk of what they would do is special talk and perhaps "real talk doh" even though UH has not come close to doing anything like what TCU did and there are plenty of other G5 programs that have more impressive attendance than UH

Boise, Cincy, UCF, BYU have all done more than UH has.....hell Memphis has been ranked 1 time since 2000 just like UH

telling everyone how great you would be if you were actually great is not meaningful it is just talk and probably not even "real talk"

Houston's best years was when Kevin Sumlin as head coach and Case Keenum was the QB. Losing Sumlin stopped Houston's momentum.
Southern Miss. was winning big every year until Jeff Bower and Larry Fedora were hired away.

UH had some good years in the late 70's when they joined the SWC. (Google Bill Yoeman) They won/tied the SWC 3 out their first 4 years in the league.

A little research on your part might help.

So maybe UT, OU, UND, and WVU into the PAC16? Also, it looks like legalizing marijuana and bringing into the open economy is working.

(06-10-2015 01:17 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  So maybe UT, OU, UND, and WVU into the PAC16? Also, it looks like legalizing marijuana and bringing into the open economy is working.

(06-10-2015 01:17 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  So maybe UT, OU, UND, and WVU into the PAC16? Also, it looks like legalizing marijuana and bringing into the open economy is working.

YEAH!!!!! North Dakota State in the PAC 16.