(12-08-2018 05:39 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  UTA will be a great addition especially for TX State and Ark State.

They should be able to schedule OOC games with home and games against:

UNT
UTSA
UTEP
Houston

Plus games single away games with

Kansas State
Kansas

I don't rule out TCU, SMU and Baylor.

This will help UTA transition faster.

We used to play some SWC teams, and actually beat TCU a couple of times in the 70s. It would be fun to resume that series, this time with an equal number of scholarship players.

I know it’s incredibly scientific, but I found a Magic 8-ball online and asked if UTA was going to add football. My response was “DON'T COUNT ON IT.”

(12-09-2018 11:00 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  I know it’s incredibly scientific, but I found a Magic 8-ball online and asked if UTA was going to add football. My response was “DON'T COUNT ON IT.”

Haha! Funny. The eight ball is probably right!

Latest news flurry is probably more a case of a president letting an AD run wild. Not a groundswell of demand for it.

(12-06-2018 01:19 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote:  I really like having 10 teams currently because of the payout our schools get from the CFP. It's a huge boost to our football programs when we are making more than CUSA, MAC, and possibly MWC.

At the same time, I'd like for Texas State to have an in-state rival. In that scenario, I'd have to think the Sun Belt would want to expand to 12 to even things out... I would only be okay with that if we added a current, quality FBS program... no more adding FCS teams.

Like who? Liberty would be about the only option. Doubt we could convince any CUSA teams to come over.

(12-09-2018 11:26 AM)BirdofParadise Wrote:  1 Of course, if UTA adds football we may not have a choice.

This is the reason Jay. If they decide to play football, they are in. They would add a huge market to the belt, if that still matters.

(12-11-2018 10:38 AM)CW Fishman Wrote:  if that still matters.

I don't think it does....

(12-11-2018 02:10 PM)_x_ Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 10:38 AM)CW Fishman Wrote:  if that still matters.

I don't think it does....

Yeah, but pretend for moment that they came and brought a new bowl game, perhaps the GM *Chevy Suburban Bowl at the Globe Life Park? It could be a replacement for a minor bowl and on ESPN.. just thinking out loud.

(*they build those big suckers in Arlington)

Add UTA and McNeese football and rename the league the Southland 2.0

(12-11-2018 03:51 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  Add UTA and McNeese football and rename the league the Southland 2.0

How so? UTA is already a league member and no one (except you) ever said anything about adding Mcneese. If UTA plays FBS football, they would be obligated to play in the SBC and the conference would be obligated to accept them as a football playing member. In fact with 41K students in a city of almost 400K in the middle of the DFW metroplex which has a population of 7.4 million, it would be an attractive add.

(12-11-2018 03:41 PM)CW Fishman Wrote:  (*they build those big suckers in Arlington)

I've been inside the plant before during production. Pretty interesting to watch.

(12-11-2018 04:06 PM)CW Fishman Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 03:51 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  Add UTA and McNeese football and rename the league the Southland 2.0

How so? UTA is already a league member and no one (except you) ever said anything about adding Mcneese. If UTA plays FBS football, they would be obligated to play in the SBC and the conference would be obligated to accept them as a football playing member. In fact with 41K students in a city of almost 400K in the middle of the DFW metroplex which has a population of 7.4 million, it would be an attractive add.

7.4 million people that don’t care about UTA sports. You are right, if they did create a program. The Belt would have to take them.

(12-11-2018 07:20 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 04:06 PM)CW Fishman Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 03:51 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  Add UTA and McNeese football and rename the league the Southland 2.0

How so? UTA is already a league member and no one (except you) ever said anything about adding Mcneese. If UTA plays FBS football, they would be obligated to play in the SBC and the conference would be obligated to accept them as a football playing member. In fact with 41K students in a city of almost 400K in the middle of the DFW metroplex which has a population of 7.4 million, it would be an attractive add.

7.4 million people that don’t care about UTA sports. You are right, if they did create a program. The Belt would have to take them.

Actually, the enrollment has gone up since it hit 41K two years ago. It's probably around 45,000 now. I'm sure during the transition years it will feel like Southland Conference 2.0 (or more like 8.0), and it will be nice to play the likes of Lamar and Abilene Christian. We used to like going to the games against University of Slow Learners and Arkansas State as well. Not so much for LaTech and McNeese, but it's all good. Maybe we can do a "Rangers Old Stadium Bowl!"

(12-11-2018 09:40 PM)wewererebels Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 07:20 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 04:06 PM)CW Fishman Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 03:51 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  Add UTA and McNeese football and rename the league the Southland 2.0

How so? UTA is already a league member and no one (except you) ever said anything about adding Mcneese. If UTA plays FBS football, they would be obligated to play in the SBC and the conference would be obligated to accept them as a football playing member. In fact with 41K students in a city of almost 400K in the middle of the DFW metroplex which has a population of 7.4 million, it would be an attractive add.

7.4 million people that don’t care about UTA sports. You are right, if they did create a program. The Belt would have to take them.

Actually, the enrollment has gone up since it hit 41K two years ago. It's probably around 45,000 now. I'm sure during the transition years it will feel like Southland Conference 2.0 (or more like 8.0), and it will be nice to play the likes of Lamar and Abilene Christian. We used to like going to the games against University of Slow Learners and Arkansas State as well. Not so much for LaTech and McNeese, but it's all good. Maybe we can do a "Rangers Old Stadium Bowl!"

That is a huge student population and metro area. Why did UTA drop football? That doesn’t equal interest or support. Could it be lack of interest from the students and city?

stop teasing us and restart the football program already UTA!

(12-12-2018 12:06 AM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  stop teasing us and restart the football program already UTA!

NO

YES

(12-11-2018 11:59 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 09:40 PM)wewererebels Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 07:20 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 04:06 PM)CW Fishman Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 03:51 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  Add UTA and McNeese football and rename the league the Southland 2.0

How so? UTA is already a league member and no one (except you) ever said anything about adding Mcneese. If UTA plays FBS football, they would be obligated to play in the SBC and the conference would be obligated to accept them as a football playing member. In fact with 41K students in a city of almost 400K in the middle of the DFW metroplex which has a population of 7.4 million, it would be an attractive add.

7.4 million people that don’t care about UTA sports. You are right, if they did create a program. The Belt would have to take them.

Actually, the enrollment has gone up since it hit 41K two years ago. It's probably around 45,000 now. I'm sure during the transition years it will feel like Southland Conference 2.0 (or more like 8.0), and it will be nice to play the likes of Lamar and Abilene Christian. We used to like going to the games against University of Slow Learners and Arkansas State as well. Not so much for LaTech and McNeese, but it's all good. Maybe we can do a "Rangers Old Stadium Bowl!"

That is a huge student population and metro area. Why did UTA drop football? That doesn’t equal interest or support. Could it be lack of interest from the students and city?

One could make that argument for Arlington and UTA in 1985, although the program did not go down without a fight and considerable controversy. But things change over a 33 year period, and as FoUTAsportscaster has ably set forth, there is every reason to be optimistic about the level of support that a reborn program will receive.

(12-12-2018 09:55 PM)wewererebels Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 11:59 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 09:40 PM)wewererebels Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 07:20 PM)rcajun91 Wrote:  

(12-11-2018 04:06 PM)CW Fishman Wrote:  How so? UTA is already a league member and no one (except you) ever said anything about adding Mcneese. If UTA plays FBS football, they would be obligated to play in the SBC and the conference would be obligated to accept them as a football playing member. In fact with 41K students in a city of almost 400K in the middle of the DFW metroplex which has a population of 7.4 million, it would be an attractive add.

7.4 million people that don’t care about UTA sports. You are right, if they did create a program. The Belt would have to take them.

Actually, the enrollment has gone up since it hit 41K two years ago. It's probably around 45,000 now. I'm sure during the transition years it will feel like Southland Conference 2.0 (or more like 8.0), and it will be nice to play the likes of Lamar and Abilene Christian. We used to like going to the games against University of Slow Learners and Arkansas State as well. Not so much for LaTech and McNeese, but it's all good. Maybe we can do a "Rangers Old Stadium Bowl!"

That is a huge student population and metro area. Why did UTA drop football? That doesn’t equal interest or support. Could it be lack of interest from the students and city?

One could make that argument for Arlington and UTA in 1985, although the program did not go down without a fight and considerable controversy. But things change over a 33 year period, and as FoUTAsportscaster has ably set forth, there is every reason to be optimistic about the level of support that a reborn program will receive.

I guess then the ball really sits in UTA’s court. Make the leap or not. There’s a spot at the table. Make it happen. If it’s a good idea then it will if not then become a top 20 basketball team.