(04-07-2014 10:24 PM)SHWISH Wrote:  

(04-07-2014 01:25 PM)Warsaw landing Wrote:  

(04-07-2014 09:37 AM)SHWISH Wrote:  

(04-07-2014 08:49 AM)Warsaw landing Wrote:  

(04-06-2014 09:33 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  If NMSU adds its oly sports then there could be two football only schools and two that don't play football. No need to add more. Idaho and UMASS & UALR and UTA.

I actually believe adding Umass as football only and then NMST as a full member may be our best move.

Let me give you a geographic lesson. Beaumont Texas is closer to the Atlantic Ocean than it is to El Paso Texas. Why is giving a travel worried SBC a greater travel in 0lympics and football the best move?

New Mexico State would be a great addition to Olympic sports and the realistic candidates are all a plane ride for ULM. Plus I personally don't want any more FBS teams in Texas, for recruiting purposes.

You have it backwards. Lets use Lamar as an example, hehe, SBC adds Lamar will result in more, not less, ULM and SBC recruitment in Texas, more specifically southeast Texas and gulf coast. SBC won't attract many recruits in Oklahoma because no sbc school is in Oklahoma. SBC add an Oklahoma school, SBC can better recruit there. SBC is losing out on talent in Houston, therefore SBC needs to add Lamar or Sam or HBU or TSU. Adding Lamar gets you both Houston and Golden Triangle.
PS Lamar or Sam need not to be in Houston, just nearby.