Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Green Menace Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,809
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 61
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #61
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

Exactly what the MWC should do.
07-coffee3
02-20-2018 05:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ghostofclt Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 549
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 39
I Root For: Charlotte
Location:
Post: #62
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.


clt says UNT is much too small for MW
02-20-2018 05:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
deb025 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 413
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation: 16
I Root For: Louisiana Tech
Location:
Post: #63
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 05:01 PM)Green Menace Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

Exactly what the MWC should do.
07-coffee3

With no baseball program UNT won't be going anywhere. In fact CUSA should make UNT start a baseball program asap or fine them for not having one. Whatever the average yearly cost of funding a baseball program in CUSA should be paid by UNT to the conference and split among the rest of the schools.
02-20-2018 06:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,656
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 167
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #64
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 06:12 PM)deb025 Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 05:01 PM)Green Menace Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

Exactly what the MWC should do.
07-coffee3

With no baseball program UNT won't be going anywhere. In fact CUSA should make UNT start a baseball program asap or fine them for not having one. Whatever the average yearly cost of funding a baseball program in CUSA should be paid by UNT to the conference and split among the rest of the schools.

Ha! That ain't going to happen. Look, I know some on here are angry because we have extra cash to spread around, due to not fielding a baseball team, but C-USA knew we didn't have one when they invited us, and never mandated that we add one.

So, we will add baseball, when we feel like it. 07-coffee3
02-20-2018 06:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,052
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #65
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

this won't make any difference at all for a change in conferences

UTSA had an offer from the MWC when they were a brand new program and the WAC was folding

https://blog.mysanantonio.com/utsa/2012/...oin-c-usa/

hell UTSA had an offer from the CUSA before north Texas state got theirs

and there is nothing that has changed other than UTSA has shown they can play decent football and draw a crowd

and if a student fee increase of a dollar or two mattered UTSA and the administration could get behind it and get it passed in a few weeks, but this fee does not matter

UTSA probably should have taken that MWC offer when they had it, but they fell for the failed "play with more Texas teams BS" that never pans out for any of those teams on a consistent basis
(This post was last modified: 02-20-2018 06:48 PM by TodgeRodge.)
02-20-2018 06:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JCMiner Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,138
Joined: Apr 2015
Reputation: 55
I Root For: UTEP
Location: Austin TX
Post: #66
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 06:47 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

this won't make any difference at all for a change in conferences

UTSA had an offer from the MWC when they were a brand new program and the WAC was folding

https://blog.mysanantonio.com/utsa/2012/...oin-c-usa/

hell UTSA had an offer from the CUSA before north Texas state got theirs

and there is nothing that has changed other than UTSA has shown they can play decent football and draw a crowd

and if a student fee increase of a dollar or two mattered UTSA and the administration could get behind it and get it passed in a few weeks, but this fee does not matter

UTSA probably should have taken that MWC offer when they had it, but they fell for the failed "play with more Texas teams BS" that never pans out for any of those teams on a consistent basis

Yeah we fell for that one too.
02-20-2018 07:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,052
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #67
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 07:15 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 06:47 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

this won't make any difference at all for a change in conferences

UTSA had an offer from the MWC when they were a brand new program and the WAC was folding

https://blog.mysanantonio.com/utsa/2012/...oin-c-usa/

hell UTSA had an offer from the CUSA before north Texas state got theirs

and there is nothing that has changed other than UTSA has shown they can play decent football and draw a crowd

and if a student fee increase of a dollar or two mattered UTSA and the administration could get behind it and get it passed in a few weeks, but this fee does not matter

UTSA probably should have taken that MWC offer when they had it, but they fell for the failed "play with more Texas teams BS" that never pans out for any of those teams on a consistent basis

Yeah we fell for that one too.

it was a big mistake for UTEP to leave the MWC they were doing much better in the MWC

if UTEP and UTSA were smart they would get together and do all they can to get into the MWC
02-20-2018 07:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mturn017 Online
ODU Homer
*

Posts: 6,776
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 427
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Roanoke, VA
Post: #68
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

We'll give you a deal if you take all four Texas teams
02-20-2018 07:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,656
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 167
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #69
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 07:27 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

We'll give you a deal if you take all four Texas teams

The Texas programs are not going anywhere. Any program that isn't happy with the current configuration can pack their crap and leave. 07-coffee3
02-20-2018 07:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JCMiner Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,138
Joined: Apr 2015
Reputation: 55
I Root For: UTEP
Location: Austin TX
Post: #70
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 07:45 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 07:27 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

We'll give you a deal if you take all four Texas teams

The Texas programs are not going anywhere. Any program that isn't happy with the current configuration can pack their crap and leave. 07-coffee3

I don’t know how any CUSA team can be happy with the current configuration. And if your are content you have some very low aspirations.
02-20-2018 09:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,656
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 167
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #71
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-20-2018 09:56 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 07:45 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 07:27 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(02-08-2018 07:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  One step to trying to get on par with the rest of the FBS in facilities just took a hit.

Athletics Fee Voting Results

For – 1,439 or 23.3%
Against – 4,734 or 76.7%

Transportation Fee Voting Results

For – 1,857 or 30.1%
Against – 4,316 or 69.9%

"The fee increase was requested to enhance the students’ experience at UTSA sporting events, support recruiting student-athletes, maintain and upgrade athletic facilities, upgrade video equipment and expand staff to televise programs at Conference USA standards, and hire and retain athletic managers and trainers to support student well-being."

Some are holding our faculty partly to blame, as some faculty had "Vote No" signs in their departments. Convenient that students don't get to vote on tuition hikes, salaries, lab fees, etc.

http://www.utsa.edu/today/2018/02/story/FeeVote.html

Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

We'll give you a deal if you take all four Texas teams

The Texas programs are not going anywhere. Any program that isn't happy with the current configuration can pack their crap and leave. 07-coffee3

I don’t know how any CUSA team can be happy with the current configuration. And if your are content you have some very low aspirations.

North Texas spent a decade in the Sun Belt, so C-USA West is as about as good a collection of programs we could hope for in a G5 conference. But I agree, no program should be happy as long as they are relegated to the G5 level. Yes, being tied to some of the eastern programs isn't optimal, but there is no perfect situation in any G5 conference.

Our conference leadership is absolutely terrible, but even so C-USA is still a solid vehicle for all of our programs in the western division. I do not see a substantially better option in any of the other G5 conferences. If I am wrong, please explain.
(This post was last modified: 02-21-2018 09:45 AM by Side Show Joe.)
02-21-2018 09:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Saint3333 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,445
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 192
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #72
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
There is an obvious solution to a better conference for fans and student athletes, redraw the CUSA/SBC lines.
02-21-2018 01:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,656
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 167
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #73
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-21-2018 01:25 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  There is an obvious solution to a better conference for fans and student athletes, redraw the CUSA/SBC lines.

No thank you. That is not a better solution. C-USA West would not benefit from adding the western Sun Belt programs. As a collection they would not add any extra value, nor would they collectively add any prestige to our current line-up. Arkansas State is the only Sun Belt program I would even be interested in. So, I will amend my original opinion... There is no substantially better situation among the other G5 conferences, and realigning with the Sun Belt shouldn't even be considered.
02-21-2018 01:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JCMiner Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,138
Joined: Apr 2015
Reputation: 55
I Root For: UTEP
Location: Austin TX
Post: #74
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-21-2018 09:45 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 09:56 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 07:45 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 07:27 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 03:19 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Wait...UTSA has substandard broadcast equipment and staff? I'm sure CUSA standards aren't on par as the MW but that is surprising to me. In fact, in this momentum of digital broadcasting and schools producing their own games, it is a necessity now. UTSA is going to fall behind if they can't get that part up to snuff.

I guess the MW will be more inclined to look at UNT rather than UTSA for any expansion into Texas.

We'll give you a deal if you take all four Texas teams

The Texas programs are not going anywhere. Any program that isn't happy with the current configuration can pack their crap and leave. 07-coffee3

I don’t know how any CUSA team can be happy with the current configuration. And if your are content you have some very low aspirations.

North Texas spent a decade in the Sun Belt, so C-USA West is as about as good a collection of programs we could hope for in a G5 conference. But I agree, no program should be happy as long as they are relegated to the G5 level. Yes, being tied to some of the eastern programs isn't optimal, but there is no perfect situation in any G5 conference.

Our conference leadership is absolutely terrible, but even so C-USA is still a solid vehicle for all of our programs in the western division. I do not see a substantially better option in any of the other G5 conferences. If I am wrong, please explain.

I understand that for UNT this version of CUSA is a step above the Sun Belt you left behind. For us this version of CUSA is a step down from what we originally signed up. Aside from the millions we are no longer receiving in media fees it’s also almost impossible to find our teams on tv.

My question to you is are you really that happy here that you would turn down an invite from the AAC if they needed to backfill a spot?
02-21-2018 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,656
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 167
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #75
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-21-2018 03:25 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 09:45 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 09:56 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 07:45 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 07:27 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  We'll give you a deal if you take all four Texas teams

The Texas programs are not going anywhere. Any program that isn't happy with the current configuration can pack their crap and leave. 07-coffee3

I don’t know how any CUSA team can be happy with the current configuration. And if your are content you have some very low aspirations.

North Texas spent a decade in the Sun Belt, so C-USA West is as about as good a collection of programs we could hope for in a G5 conference. But I agree, no program should be happy as long as they are relegated to the G5 level. Yes, being tied to some of the eastern programs isn't optimal, but there is no perfect situation in any G5 conference.

Our conference leadership is absolutely terrible, but even so C-USA is still a solid vehicle for all of our programs in the western division. I do not see a substantially better option in any of the other G5 conferences. If I am wrong, please explain.

I understand that for UNT this version of CUSA is a step above the Sun Belt you left behind. For us this version of CUSA is a step down from what we originally signed up. Aside from the millions we are no longer receiving in media fees it’s also almost impossible to find our teams on tv.

My question to you is are you really that happy here that you would turn down an invite from the AAC if they needed to backfill a spot?

I tend to think long term. As things sit right now, yes an invitation to the AAC would be nice. But that probably would not be the case, if they were looking to back fill. Who would they be replacing? At this point, probably one of their Florida programs and Houston. Well, in my opinion the AAC's western division without Houston (SMU, Tulsa, Memphis, Tulane, and Navy: 3 small private schools and an academy that sits on the eastern seaboard) doesn't look too much better then staying in C-USA West. Remember, 5 of the 7 teams in C-USA West finished with winning records. Memphis would be nice, but I really think C-USA West is a rapidly improving division. Plus, the AAC is due to take their pay cut soon. Add in the fact that any back filling would mean the AAC's more valuable programs are gone, and that pay cut only gets deeper.

I understand UTEP isn't in the same C-USA they joined, but I really don't see a situation within the G5 that will change that. If you do, I'd love to hear it.
02-21-2018 04:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JCMiner Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,138
Joined: Apr 2015
Reputation: 55
I Root For: UTEP
Location: Austin TX
Post: #76
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-21-2018 04:18 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 03:25 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 09:45 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 09:56 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 07:45 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  The Texas programs are not going anywhere. Any program that isn't happy with the current configuration can pack their crap and leave. 07-coffee3

I don’t know how any CUSA team can be happy with the current configuration. And if your are content you have some very low aspirations.

North Texas spent a decade in the Sun Belt, so C-USA West is as about as good a collection of programs we could hope for in a G5 conference. But I agree, no program should be happy as long as they are relegated to the G5 level. Yes, being tied to some of the eastern programs isn't optimal, but there is no perfect situation in any G5 conference.

Our conference leadership is absolutely terrible, but even so C-USA is still a solid vehicle for all of our programs in the western division. I do not see a substantially better option in any of the other G5 conferences. If I am wrong, please explain.

I understand that for UNT this version of CUSA is a step above the Sun Belt you left behind. For us this version of CUSA is a step down from what we originally signed up. Aside from the millions we are no longer receiving in media fees it’s also almost impossible to find our teams on tv.

My question to you is are you really that happy here that you would turn down an invite from the AAC if they needed to backfill a spot?

I tend to think long term. As things sit right now, yes an invitation to the AAC would be nice. But that probably would not be the case, if they were looking to back fill. Who would they be replacing? At this point, probably one of their Florida programs and Houston. Well, in my opinion the AAC's western division without Houston (SMU, Tulsa, Memphis, Tulane, and Navy: 3 small private schools and an academy that sits on the eastern seaboard) doesn't look too much better then staying in C-USA West. Remember, 5 of the 7 teams in C-USA West finished with winning records. Memphis would be nice, but I really think C-USA West is a rapidly improving division. Plus, the AAC is due to take their pay cut soon. Add in the fact that any back filling would mean the AAC's more valuable programs are gone, and that pay cut only gets deeper.

I understand UTEP isn't in the same C-USA they joined, but I really don't see a situation within the G5 that will change that. If you do, I'd love to hear it.
All fair points. We have to wait and see what the new AAC media deal will be. I know they are expecting to get into the 3-5 million per team range but I like you also see them taking a paycut.

As far as UTEP goes our dream scenario would be to partner up with UTSA, RICE or UNT and get into the MW. Even without another Texas team just getting UTEP into the MW will strengthen CUSA and provide a more compact regional look to the conference.
02-21-2018 04:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,656
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 167
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #77
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-21-2018 04:57 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 04:18 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 03:25 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 09:45 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-20-2018 09:56 PM)JCMiner Wrote:  I don’t know how any CUSA team can be happy with the current configuration. And if your are content you have some very low aspirations.

North Texas spent a decade in the Sun Belt, so C-USA West is as about as good a collection of programs we could hope for in a G5 conference. But I agree, no program should be happy as long as they are relegated to the G5 level. Yes, being tied to some of the eastern programs isn't optimal, but there is no perfect situation in any G5 conference.

Our conference leadership is absolutely terrible, but even so C-USA is still a solid vehicle for all of our programs in the western division. I do not see a substantially better option in any of the other G5 conferences. If I am wrong, please explain.

I understand that for UNT this version of CUSA is a step above the Sun Belt you left behind. For us this version of CUSA is a step down from what we originally signed up. Aside from the millions we are no longer receiving in media fees it’s also almost impossible to find our teams on tv.

My question to you is are you really that happy here that you would turn down an invite from the AAC if they needed to backfill a spot?

I tend to think long term. As things sit right now, yes an invitation to the AAC would be nice. But that probably would not be the case, if they were looking to back fill. Who would they be replacing? At this point, probably one of their Florida programs and Houston. Well, in my opinion the AAC's western division without Houston (SMU, Tulsa, Memphis, Tulane, and Navy: 3 small private schools and an academy that sits on the eastern seaboard) doesn't look too much better then staying in C-USA West. Remember, 5 of the 7 teams in C-USA West finished with winning records. Memphis would be nice, but I really think C-USA West is a rapidly improving division. Plus, the AAC is due to take their pay cut soon. Add in the fact that any back filling would mean the AAC's more valuable programs are gone, and that pay cut only gets deeper.

I understand UTEP isn't in the same C-USA they joined, but I really don't see a situation within the G5 that will change that. If you do, I'd love to hear it.
All fair points. We have to wait and see what the new AAC media deal will be. I know they are expecting to get into the 3-5 million per team range but I like you also see them taking a paycut.

As far as UTEP goes our dream scenario would be to partner up with UTSA, RICE or UNT and get into the MW. Even without another Texas team just getting UTEP into the MW will strengthen CUSA and provide a more compact regional look to the conference.

I'm not a fan of conferences being too regional. I think it hurts a conference's visibility and relevance. I want UTEP to remain with the rest of the Texas programs. In my opinion, whatever we do, we need to have a conscious and do it together. I think the Texas teams are stronger together, and will only become stronger the longer we stay united.

I guess under your plan the Texas programs would be in the same division with New Mexico and Colorado State, Air Force, and Wyoming. All of which appear to be a similar distance from Texas as UAB.

I certainly think the MWC has better leadership then C-USA, and because of that I do not believe the MWC is interested in expanding to 16 teams. Plus, none of us know the future of the MWC's media contracts. Over the next few years these issues will be addressed and at that point movement might make sense for everyone involved.
02-21-2018 05:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Saint3333 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,445
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 192
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #78
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-21-2018 01:52 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 01:25 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  There is an obvious solution to a better conference for fans and student athletes, redraw the CUSA/SBC lines.

No thank you. That is not a better solution. C-USA West would not benefit from adding the western Sun Belt programs. As a collection they would not add any extra value, nor would they collectively add any prestige to our current line-up. Arkansas State is the only Sun Belt program I would even be interested in. So, I will amend my original opinion... There is no substantially better situation among the other G5 conferences, and realigning with the Sun Belt shouldn't even be considered.

Many western SBC schools would say the same thing about North Texas. Both conference have bottom halves naturally.
02-22-2018 09:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BKTopper Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 769
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 21
I Root For: WKU
Location: Off the L
Post: #79
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-22-2018 09:16 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 01:52 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 01:25 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  There is an obvious solution to a better conference for fans and student athletes, redraw the CUSA/SBC lines.

No thank you. That is not a better solution. C-USA West would not benefit from adding the western Sun Belt programs. As a collection they would not add any extra value, nor would they collectively add any prestige to our current line-up. Arkansas State is the only Sun Belt program I would even be interested in. So, I will amend my original opinion... There is no substantially better situation among the other G5 conferences, and realigning with the Sun Belt shouldn't even be considered.

Many western SBC schools would say the same thing about North Texas. Both conference have bottom halves naturally.

Most of the grumbling has come from C-USA East of late, right?
02-22-2018 09:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,656
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 167
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #80
RE: UTSA Students Vote Against Athletic Fee Hike
(02-22-2018 09:16 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 01:52 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  
(02-21-2018 01:25 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  There is an obvious solution to a better conference for fans and student athletes, redraw the CUSA/SBC lines.

No thank you. That is not a better solution. C-USA West would not benefit from adding the western Sun Belt programs. As a collection they would not add any extra value, nor would they collectively add any prestige to our current line-up. Arkansas State is the only Sun Belt program I would even be interested in. So, I will amend my original opinion... There is no substantially better situation among the other G5 conferences, and realigning with the Sun Belt shouldn't even be considered.

Many western SBC schools would say the same thing about North Texas. Both conference have bottom halves naturally.

They could, but that would be stupid. North Texas is the current C-USA Western Division Champ and has been to 3 bowl games since joining C-USA 5 years ago. C-USA West does not have a bottom half. 5 of our 7 teams finished the season bowl eligible. Only Rice and UTEP failed to reach 6 wins last season.

Every Sun Belt program west of the Mississippi, except Arkansas State, finished last season with a losing record. The teams in C-USA West will not consider any kind of realignment.
02-22-2018 10:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.