(02-16-2012 10:27 AM)Burn the Horse Wrote:  I wish we would play more weeknight games. When you have the Tuesday or Wednesday night game each week your the only game that night. So, every sports bar and football watching home in America has YOUR game on that night. Its great publicity.

I like weeknight road games. With a two hour drive ahead of me to Jonesboro, weeknight home games blow.

Problem is there is no way to do it without someone playing at home.

The way I look at it we have 3 choices...

Do nothing...this is what we have been doing and it is working to make us stronger. But at some point we will need to make a move or become stagnat.

Add regional teams at the expense of exposure and marketability. Think MAC, but I belive they have moved on from this strategy as well, but their options are limited.

Add market teams at the expense of travel and stability. Think CUSA.

I like the idea of adding both LaTech and USTA. I think it is the best move for both market and regionality, a very good compromise. And the suggestion for adding either TXST for NT or TXST/GAST for F_U is a great idea as well, if we loose one or more. I believe these help both market and regionality.

People should stop comparing us to the MAC. I have a lot of respect for them but they are in a whole different situation in the South it's college football then everything else. In the North it's NFL, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St, then everyone else. Those NFL and college teams have a monopoly on the population based fans of the north.

In the south just about everyone watches college football. In the North not everyone follows it and if they do it's the Michigan or Ohio St type teams so their forever stuck in their situation. If the Sun Belt put's on a good show people will watch because they are looking for something to watch.

If Ohio won a BCS bowl they would probably have a small increase in attendance and views from students. If Troy won one then people in Alabama would watch just because they have a good team.

(02-16-2012 12:01 PM)YJason Wrote:  The way I look at it we have 3 choices...

Do nothing...this is what we have been doing and it is working to make us stronger. But at some point we will need to make a move or become stagnat.

Add regional teams at the expense of exposure and marketability. Think MAC, but I belive they have moved on from this strategy as well, but their options are limited.

Add market teams at the expense of travel and stability. Think CUSA.

I like the idea of adding both LaTech and USTA. I think it is the best move for both market and regionality, a very good compromise. And the suggestion for adding either TXST for NT or TXST/GAST for F_U is a great idea as well, if we loose one or more. I believe these help both market and regionality.

The SEC went nearly 60 years without adding a team. They added when it made sense. They would still be at 12 but for TAMU knocking on the door and begging and the league feared if they said no TAMU might land the Pac-12 on their doorstep.

I'm in no rush. Just add teams that make the overall collection of schools better and are schools that look like what we have now academically and in fan and athletic department culture.

The SEC had Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia all this time so of course they were not going to add anyone and no one used want want them because they were in small towns.

No one in the Sun Belt is winning national championships or has even been ranked. Were not in the same position the SEC was in and La Tech is as good as it get's for making "sense" There are no other teams who have even played D1 football for ten years available besides Tech.

I like ten teams but I also like Troy having a conference. If we stay at ten teams then people will always be actively looking for a way out the conference instead of trying to improve it. And ten just kills our perception big time. Part of the reason conference USA has been better is they have had more teams. When you have 12 teams a few teams will usually have a good season opposed 1 and 2 teams at the most like we have been doing.

I'm for adding La Tech and UTSA/Texas State.

(02-16-2012 01:22 PM)Burn the Horse Wrote:  I'm for adding La Tech and UTSA/Texas State.

If the choice is between UTSA and TXST...both being new to D1A...I think we have to choose UTSA. Just too much upside for UTSA, between the two. They can ride the wave they are on with just a little success. Alamodome will also give them a possibilty of hosting a Bowl in the future as well.

If you ask me the only way we will even need to look at TXST is if we loose NT. And then we should also look at GAST at that time.

The way I look at it is if we look at a D1A move-up we really should take a look at those that have expressed interest in moving ups as well. A few years behind, but much more potential in an undertapped market will not make a big deal in the grand scheme of things.

Not to mention opening up GA to more recruits for F_U, Troy, MTSU, WKU, and SOAL. And even though this is a selfish reason, it is a very good one.