(08-18-2018 12:44 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Big mistake. UTA is a commuter school surrounded by three FBS schools that struggle with fan support. I would say if UTA was in Amarillo, San Angelo, Wichita Falls, Texarkana or Midland it might have a chance of developing a fan base but not in DFW. the area is already saturated with TCU, SMU, UNT and Big XII/SEC schools.

You are correct. You could also add fighting the Dallas Cowboys, who play down the street. It will be tough to get started with a student base that is very apathetic towards sports.

(08-18-2018 04:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 03:51 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 03:42 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 11:23 AM)SENOREIDA Wrote:  I'm on the fence about this. Would rather see Wichita St join with UTA. But I also don't think the schools want to divide the CFB money anymore, and UTA and UALR does not have a equal seat at the table.

UTA or UALR would have an equal seat. Not a question of whether the others want to divide it up more or not.

OTOH, if UTA added, and a need for a 12th arose, you could invite NMSU as an affiliate with no access to CFB money.

Then NMSU might as well stick with cobbling together an independent schedule, if they wouldn't get a cut.

NMSU asked for exactly those terms in trying to stay. They wanted to join all-sports but were more than willing to take football only on those terms.

Right now, NMSU could go 12-0 in 2018 and not play in any bowl.
They are ineligible for the Access spot because they wouldn't be a conference champion.
Their deal with Tucson only gives them a spot if one of the Sun Belt or MWC doesn't have enough bowl eligible teams.
No other bowl if vacant has to take them unless the only other choice is a sub .500 team.

The CFP is going to pay the Sun Belt the same amount whether the league has 10 members, 11 members, or 12 members.
ESPN isn't going to kick in more cash if the Aggies come in.

The only mutual benefit available is making scheduling easier for both parties and giving NMSU a better path to a bowl. For that each Sun Belt member should forego about $76,000 in revenue?

I don't think NMSU will be a contender for the NY6 any time in the foreseeable future, but point taken about bowl access in general. I guess desperate times call for desperate measures.

(08-18-2018 03:51 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 03:42 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 11:23 AM)SENOREIDA Wrote:  I'm on the fence about this. Would rather see Wichita St join with UTA. But I also don't think the schools want to divide the CFB money anymore, and UTA and UALR does not have a equal seat at the table.

UTA or UALR would have an equal seat. Not a question of whether the others want to divide it up more or not.

OTOH, if UTA added, and a need for a 12th arose, you could invite NMSU as an affiliate with no access to CFB money.

Then NMSU might as well stick with cobbling together an independent schedule, if they wouldn't get a cut.

Guaranteed Home games would be worth it.

Linear TV deal in the SBC is what, $1m before expenses to the school. Better than nothing, but not going to pay for more than 5-10% the operational costs.

Title IX is the biggest obstacle (55% female), after fund raising maybe $50M or so to jump start the program - being a UT and in the DFW the money part is doable. To offset 85 scholarships would require 93 or 94 more women's scholarships, or a reduction in male scholarships in others sports. So they'd probably have to drop a sport. But they are at the bare minimum for D1 with 15 (counting track and Field twice for Indoor and Outdoor). Baseball and Golf are the only options to drop. Golf would barely help the scholarship count, Baseball would make a bigger dent in the scholarship count but bring howls -- it is also a core SBC sport. Otherwise maybe hold back a few scholarships in Football and adding several women's sports (Beach Volleyball, Tri-Athlon, Lacrosse) while cutting Golf and pruning other men's sports might just scrape in for T9.

This probably wont be put to a vote of the students. The population is > 55% female and only 37% White, 14% Black, making passage of an athletic fee increase problematic at best (23% are Asian, 12% international ... it's starting to look like a typical California campus, just up the Asians 12% and the international 4% more). So this will rely on legacy alumni and select leadership to carry the day.

This could be good news for NMSU football should UTA go forward with this, as the SBC would almost certainly be looking for a 12th. Associate membership in Football would allow the same divisional splits as the Basketball, except NMSU replacing UALR for football in the West. (Obviously if UALR ever started football NMSU would get booted again.)

This will be an interesting one to watch how it develops or probably not.

UTA vs UNT and UTA vs Texas St would appear to be natural rivalries for a renewed Mavericks football team. The absence of football is somewhat odd for a large Texas school--UTA, A&M CC, and UTRGV are the only 3 big ones that come to mind. UNT seems to have a niche in the DFW market; I don't see why UTA can't too. With the rich recruiting ground and access to a major airport they should be able to easily sign Home and Homes.

Eh I wouldn't call it a niche

UNT is still an afterthought in DFW due to the actual school being in Denton which is about an hour north of TCU/Downtown FTW and their extremely apathetic fan base.

And though it has a better location, UTA is even more of an apathetic commuter school than UNT.

(08-18-2018 05:28 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  UTA vs UNT and UTA vs Texas St would appear to be natural rivalries for a renewed Mavericks football team. The absence of football is somewhat odd for a large Texas school--UTA, A&M CC, and UTRGV are the only 3 big ones that come to mind. UNT seems to have a niche in the DFW market; I don't see why UTA can't too. With the rich recruiting ground and access to a major airport they should be able to easily sign Home and Homes.

UT-Dallas is a large public too with a burgeoning endowment and growing research. Would be interesting to see now long UTD leaves DIII and adds football.

(08-18-2018 04:34 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 12:44 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Big mistake. UTA is a commuter school surrounded by three FBS schools that struggle with fan support. I would say if UTA was in Amarillo, San Angelo, Wichita Falls, Texarkana or Midland it might have a chance of developing a fan base but not in DFW. the area is already saturated with TCU, SMU, UNT and Big XII/SEC schools.

You are correct. You could also add fighting the Dallas Cowboys, who play down the street. It will be tough to get started with a student base that is very apathetic towards sports.

There's no reason UTA can't carve a niche, pro football fans are different than college football fans. They'd be drawing students and alums mostly. Draw 20k from that group and all they'd need is 5k more to have a decent sized fanbase.

Heck, they might draw some out of town Cowboys fans staying over the weekend looking for something to do besides Six Flags.

(08-18-2018 06:13 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 05:28 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  UTA vs UNT and UTA vs Texas St would appear to be natural rivalries for a renewed Mavericks football team. The absence of football is somewhat odd for a large Texas school--UTA, A&M CC, and UTRGV are the only 3 big ones that come to mind. UNT seems to have a niche in the DFW market; I don't see why UTA can't too. With the rich recruiting ground and access to a major airport they should be able to easily sign Home and Homes.

UT-Dallas is a large public too with a burgeoning endowment and growing research. Would be interesting to see now long UTD leaves DIII and adds football.

They won't add football. But they may try to move to Div I.

(08-18-2018 06:55 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Heck, they might draw some out of town Cowboys fans staying over the weekend looking for something to do besides Six Flags.

Doubt that.

(08-18-2018 11:23 AM)SENOREIDA Wrote:  I'm on the fence about this. Would rather see Wichita St join with UTA. But I also don't think the schools want to divide the CFB money anymore, and UTA and UALR does not have a equal seat at the table.

Wichita isn’t a possibility. AAC to Sun Belt is BB suicide. No reason to add FB now that they’re in.

(08-18-2018 11:23 AM)SENOREIDA Wrote:  I'm on the fence about this. Would rather see Wichita St join with UTA. But I also don't think the schools want to divide the CFB money anymore, and UTA and UALR does not have a equal seat at the table.

Why on earth would Wichita State downgrade from the AAC to the Sun Belt?

Missouri St
Arkansas St
Little Rock
Louisiana
Louisiana-Monroe
North Texas
Arlington
San Antonio
Texas St
New Mexico St

...would be a nice, regional 10-team Sun Belt (if ASU/CCU/GSUx2 formed a regional FBS home themselves).

Little Rock wouldn’t even be required to add FB. Just roll with 9/10.

(08-18-2018 10:04 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 06:55 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Heck, they might draw some out of town Cowboys fans staying over the weekend looking for something to do besides Six Flags.

Doubt that.

You never know, it's not like DFW is lined with tourist attractions and attractions like bars are everywhere.

If UTA was hosting a Big 12 school, I might go. I personally hate just staying in a hotel all day while traveling.

(08-18-2018 10:25 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 11:23 AM)SENOREIDA Wrote:  I'm on the fence about this. Would rather see Wichita St join with UTA. But I also don't think the schools want to divide the CFB money anymore, and UTA and UALR does not have a equal seat at the table.

Why on earth would Wichita State downgrade from the AAC to the Sun Belt?

I’m assuming it would be football only in the Sun Belt. There’s actually not an NCAA rule that requires a school to have their football team in the same conference as their basketball team. Most conferences would not allow it and would likely boot a member that tried to do so. In this case though, the AAC doesn’t want a startup football program, and would gladly let Wichita State play football in any other G5 conference.

(08-18-2018 11:38 PM)Phlipper33 Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 10:25 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 11:23 AM)SENOREIDA Wrote:  I'm on the fence about this. Would rather see Wichita St join with UTA. But I also don't think the schools want to divide the CFB money anymore, and UTA and UALR does not have a equal seat at the table.

Why on earth would Wichita State downgrade from the AAC to the Sun Belt?

I’m assuming it would be football only in the Sun Belt. There’s actually not an NCAA rule that requires a school to have their football team in the same conference as their basketball team. Most conferences would not allow it and would likely boot a member that tried to do so. In this case though, the AAC doesn’t want a startup football program, and would gladly let Wichita State play football in any other G5 conference.

That's all true. It also assumes that Wichita wants FBS footbal,. I think for WSU FBS was something they were willing to do to get upgraded from the Valley.

(08-18-2018 04:45 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Linear TV deal in the SBC is what, $1m before expenses to the school. Better than nothing, but not going to pay for more than 5-10% the operational costs.

Title IX is the biggest obstacle (55% female), after fund raising maybe $50M or so to jump start the program - being a UT and in the DFW that part is doable. To offset 85 scholarships would require 93 or 94 more women's scholarships, or a reduction in male scholarships in others sports. So they'd probably have to drop a sport. But they are at the bare minimum for D1 with 15 (counting track and Field twice for Indoor and Outdoor). Baseball and Golf are the only options to drop. Golf would barely help the scholarship count, Baseball would make a bigger dent in the scholarship count but bring howls -- it is also a core SBC sport. Otherwise maybe hold back a few scholarships in Football and adding several women's sports (Beach Volleyball, Tri-Athlon, Lacrosse) while cutting Golf and pruning other men's sports might just scrape in for T9.

This probably wont be put to a vote of the students. The population is > 55% female and only 37% White, 14% Black, making passage of an athletic fee increase problematic at best (23% are Asian, 12% international ... it's starting to look like a typical California campus, just up the Asians 12% and the international 4% more). So this will rely on legacy alumni and select leadership to carry the day.

This could be good news for NMSU football should UTA go forward with this, as the SBC would almost certainly be looking for a 12th. Associate membership in Football would allow the same divisional splits as the Basketball, except NMSU replacing UALR for football in the West. (Obviously if UALR ever started football NMSU would get booted again.)

This will be an interesting one to watch how it develops or probably not.

UTA just added women’s golf and I’ve seen speculation previously that women’s soccer would be added if/when football is brought back.

(08-18-2018 04:34 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 12:44 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Big mistake. UTA is a commuter school surrounded by three FBS schools that struggle with fan support. I would say if UTA was in Amarillo, San Angelo, Wichita Falls, Texarkana or Midland it might have a chance of developing a fan base but not in DFW. the area is already saturated with TCU, SMU, UNT and Big XII/SEC schools.

You are correct. You could also add fighting the Dallas Cowboys, who play down the street. It will be tough to get started with a student base that is very apathetic towards sports.

Not just that, Texas Live! just officially opened next to the current Globe Life Park (fka The Ballpark) and the under construction Globe Life Field to open in 2020.
Texas Live!

There's little gain in restarting football in Arlington.

(08-18-2018 09:36 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  There is something different about UTA's situation than say Charlotte.

UTA was able to secure membership in a G5 conference without starting football. Charlotte had to restart football to get into CUSA.

From what I've seen if you can't get into a P5 conference the next best way to secure your athletic future is getting into a G5 one. G5 will guarantee a linear TV deal and likely be part of any future D1 split.

Interesting comparison. When you look at it, Charlotte took several steps backward in conference, so I guess we started football to go backward..... since we were in the A-10. I support any school that wants to start football and wish UTA well. But I don't think we re-started football with hopes of getting into CUSA but it is where we are now. So I guess we took a few steps backward to hope to take a giant leap forward. Despite our sucktitude in football, I don't regret the decision.