My favorite LaTech poster, Dwayne_from_Minden made this post on the Mean Green board:

If I was ya'll or the Cajuns I wouldn't think twice about it (going to the WAC) now -

I figure we are out one way or the other in 24 months...

It was still the right choice for us in 1999, but I personally want no part of the WAC in 2012/13

GO TECH and GO DAWGS!

Pretty standard thoughts from most Tech fans.

so will Tech be calling WW in the near future?

YEAH we are hoping that by then ULM will be playing FCs again. And no not a pretty standard thought for Tech fans. Actually just a few. we would still rather be in a conference with Fresno, Hawaii ,Nevada football and Utah St and NMXst basketball. The wac will make a move to get some texas schools in eventually to bridge the gap because they simply have to to survive. I think Tech may very well end up in the sunbelt(it would happen tomorrow if ULM left) but it would take the WAC to lose a few more members for that to happen. I think what Dwayne is saying is that it is smart to wait a year or two before making a decision to leave the belt and I agree. The WAC is still to shaky. If the other two Texas schools are added, it should be a no brainer that you should move to the WAC. I still think you would be welcome.

Here is a simple question for UNT. If in the next year or two the WAC brings in TX ST and UTSA. Even without Tech in the mix, would you still rather be in the belt or the WAC.

(06-30-2010 07:27 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  Here is a simple question for UNT. If in the next year or two the WAC brings in TX ST and UTSA. Even without Tech in the mix, would you still rather be in the belt or the WAC.

I bet the WAC.

After all Texas State has had four winning seasons in football the last twenty years and UTSA will actually play a game in 2011. Both are solidly in the bottom half of the nation in basketball.

The way the WAC will be boosted would make that irresistible.

(06-30-2010 07:37 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-30-2010 07:27 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  Here is a simple question for UNT. If in the next year or two the WAC brings in TX ST and UTSA. Even without Tech in the mix, would you still rather be in the belt or the WAC.

I bet the WAC.

After all Texas State has had four winning seasons in football the last twenty years and UTSA will actually play a game in 2011. Both are solidly in the bottom half of the nation in basketball.

The way the WAC will be boosted would make that irresistible.

It is not about where they have been. It is where they will be associated. Besides you have three texas schools in one conference and NMxSt which isn't that far. Why would UNT not want to be included in something that actually has travel partners. You guys are forgetting that UTSA might be the next Boise. Who was boise ten short years ago. A nobody. It's not a slam on the Belt. I just think your fans would be more interested in playing local teams than FIU and fAU, which honestly UNT could care less about. with Fresno and Hawaii twice we have had those teams ranked playing in our home stadium. I might add that when we went to the WAC, we went because we had close travel partners. Tech would have never gone that route in the current situation. If they don't bring in those two schools, UNT should stay put. and the way UTSA has already lined up some pretty big 1and 1's , I would watch how you knock them. They might come out of the gate pretty fast.

Using your logic why wouldn't Tech want to be with ULM? Three Louisiana schools in one conference. A natural travel partner. Wouldn't you be more interested in playing a local school that is I-A instead of aligning with McNeese and NW State as I-A newcomers in the WAC?

Yeah they MIGHT come out of the gate fast, some have, but most haven't, but I know what Texas State has done as a I-AA. I know what both have done in basketball.

(06-30-2010 07:20 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  YEAH we are hoping that by then ULM will be playing FCs again. And no not a pretty standard thought for Tech fans. Actually just a few. we would still rather be in a conference with Fresno, Hawaii ,Nevada football and Utah St and NMXst basketball. The wac will make a move to get some texas schools in eventually to bridge the gap because they simply have to to survive. I think Tech may very well end up in the sunbelt(it would happen tomorrow if ULM left) but it would take the WAC to lose a few more members for that to happen. I think what Dwayne is saying is that it is smart to wait a year or two before making a decision to leave the belt and I agree. The WAC is still to shaky. If the other two Texas schools are added, it should be a no brainer that you should move to the WAC. I still think you would be welcome.

ULM is a charter football member of the Sun Belt. If Tech doesn't want to be in a conference with them, that's your problem not the Belts.

Frankly if you guys think the Belt is so far beneath you, I hope that the Belt agrees with you and doesn't accept your application or offer. I would beleive most of us have no interest in being in a conference with someone who has such a low opinion of other conference members and stands in their high chair saying me,me,me,,me. Stay in the WAC, pray for CUSA (pray long and loud), look to the MAC, go Indy or just go look in the mirror and tell yourselves about your greatness.

(06-30-2010 07:27 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  Here is a simple question for UNT. If in the next year or two the WAC brings in TX ST and UTSA. Even without Tech in the mix, would you still rather be in the belt or the WAC.

The Belt.

(06-30-2010 08:51 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(06-30-2010 07:20 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  YEAH we are hoping that by then ULM will be playing FCs again. And no not a pretty standard thought for Tech fans. Actually just a few. we would still rather be in a conference with Fresno, Hawaii ,Nevada football and Utah St and NMXst basketball. The wac will make a move to get some texas schools in eventually to bridge the gap because they simply have to to survive. I think Tech may very well end up in the sunbelt(it would happen tomorrow if ULM left) but it would take the WAC to lose a few more members for that to happen. I think what Dwayne is saying is that it is smart to wait a year or two before making a decision to leave the belt and I agree. The WAC is still to shaky. If the other two Texas schools are added, it should be a no brainer that you should move to the WAC. I still think you would be welcome.

ULM is a charter football member of the Sun Belt. If Tech doesn't want to be in a conference with them, that's your problem not the Belts.

Frankly if you guys think the Belt is so far beneath you, I hope that the Belt agrees with you and doesn't accept your application or offer. I would beleive most of us have no interest in being in a conference with someone who has such a low opinion of other conference members and stands in their high chair saying me,me,me,,me. Stay in the WAC, pray for CUSA (pray long and loud), look to the MAC, go Indy or just go look in the mirror and tell yourselves about your greatness.

dont think the belt is beneath us. I think ULM is beneath the belt. I just think as long as those schools I mentioned are still in the WAC, there is no reason to panic and go anywhere. The ultimate goal is cUSA so why not stay put and see if something opens up.

(06-30-2010 07:27 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  Here is a simple question for UNT. If in the next year or two the WAC brings in TX ST and UTSA. Even without Tech in the mix, would you still rather be in the belt or the WAC.

I have to say the Belt as well. We have been a conference that was laughed at for taking in FCS schools before and I would prefer to avoid that in the future. Since USA was already a member of the Belt, it is not the same as adding a FCS school.

As the UTSA being the next Boise, I will not be the least bit surprised if UTSA does NOT complete a move to FBS in 2013 as they hope. The Belt doesn't need them and their are better WAC candidates in the West. Remember Hawaii, Fresno and Nevada have all said they really don't want any more teams from Texas as it is just too far away.

(06-30-2010 07:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Using your logic why wouldn't Tech want to be with ULM? Three Louisiana schools in one conference. A natural travel partner. Wouldn't you be more interested in playing a local school that is I-A instead of aligning with McNeese and NW State as I-A newcomers in the WAC?

Yeah they MIGHT come out of the gate fast, some have, but most haven't, but I know what Texas State has done as a I-AA. I know what both have done in basketball.

because Texas St and Utsa have the backing to make something of themselves. We have no problem with being associated with ULL. They are a real university. ULM is a JUCO.

(06-30-2010 09:03 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  

(06-30-2010 08:51 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(06-30-2010 07:20 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  YEAH we are hoping that by then ULM will be playing FCs again. And no not a pretty standard thought for Tech fans. Actually just a few. we would still rather be in a conference with Fresno, Hawaii ,Nevada football and Utah St and NMXst basketball. The wac will make a move to get some texas schools in eventually to bridge the gap because they simply have to to survive. I think Tech may very well end up in the sunbelt(it would happen tomorrow if ULM left) but it would take the WAC to lose a few more members for that to happen. I think what Dwayne is saying is that it is smart to wait a year or two before making a decision to leave the belt and I agree. The WAC is still to shaky. If the other two Texas schools are added, it should be a no brainer that you should move to the WAC. I still think you would be welcome.

ULM is a charter football member of the Sun Belt. If Tech doesn't want to be in a conference with them, that's your problem not the Belts.

Frankly if you guys think the Belt is so far beneath you, I hope that the Belt agrees with you and doesn't accept your application or offer. I would beleive most of us have no interest in being in a conference with someone who has such a low opinion of other conference members and stands in their high chair saying me,me,me,,me. Stay in the WAC, pray for CUSA (pray long and loud), look to the MAC, go Indy or just go look in the mirror and tell yourselves about your greatness.

dont think the belt is beneath us. I think ULM is beneath the belt. I just think as long as those schools I mentioned are still in the WAC, there is no reason to panic and go anywhere. The ultimate goal is cUSA so why not stay put and see if something opens up.

That's a great idea. Just stay put.

(06-30-2010 09:03 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  dont think the belt is beneath us. I think ULM is beneath the belt.

LMFAO!!! Naughty, NAUGHTY!!! I think that's the first time I've actually smiled at one of your posts (not saying I agree, ULM bros and sisses!) -- it was just a fantastic comeback I'm gonna offset one of those negative 14's for ya right now... nice to see you DO have a sense of humor after all :-)

In all seriousness, I'd like to see La Tech back in the Belt and ULM stay. Any "mid-major" who beats Bama AT Bama gets my love forevermore -- that is, until such time they face my Mighty Jags :-)

(06-30-2010 09:04 PM)VideoGreenEagle Wrote:  

(06-30-2010 07:27 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  Here is a simple question for UNT. If in the next year or two the WAC brings in TX ST and UTSA. Even without Tech in the mix, would you still rather be in the belt or the WAC.

I have to say the Belt as well. We have been a conference that was laughed at for taking in FCS schools before and I would prefer to avoid that in the future. Since USA was already a member of the Belt, it is not the same as adding a FCS school.

As the UTSA being the next Boise, I will not be the least bit surprised if UTSA does NOT complete a move to FBS in 2013 as they hope. The Belt doesn't need them and their are better WAC candidates in the West. Remember Hawaii, Fresno and Nevada have all said they really don't want any more teams from Texas as it is just too far away.

they may not have a choice in the matter. UTSA already has contracts for 1 and 1;s. they better field a team. and soon.

(06-30-2010 09:12 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  

(06-30-2010 09:04 PM)VideoGreenEagle Wrote:  

(06-30-2010 07:27 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  Here is a simple question for UNT. If in the next year or two the WAC brings in TX ST and UTSA. Even without Tech in the mix, would you still rather be in the belt or the WAC.

I have to say the Belt as well. We have been a conference that was laughed at for taking in FCS schools before and I would prefer to avoid that in the future. Since USA was already a member of the Belt, it is not the same as adding a FCS school.

As the UTSA being the next Boise, I will not be the least bit surprised if UTSA does NOT complete a move to FBS in 2013 as they hope. The Belt doesn't need them and their are better WAC candidates in the West. Remember Hawaii, Fresno and Nevada have all said they really don't want any more teams from Texas as it is just too far away.

they may not have a choice in the matter. UTSA already has contracts for 1 and 1;s. they better field a team. and soon.

You can bet those contracts contain clauses regarding their football status. No one in their right mind would sign those 1-1's without loading the contracts with bailout clauses.

(06-30-2010 07:20 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  And no not a pretty standard thought for Tech fans. Actually just a few.

I think Tech may very well end up in the sunbelt.

I think what Dwayne is saying is that it is smart to wait a year or two before making a decision to leave the belt and I agree. The WAC is still to shaky.

Not a standard thought for Tech fans, but you turn right around and contradict yourself by stating that we may very well end up in the Sunbelt.

(06-30-2010 09:03 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  

(06-30-2010 08:51 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(06-30-2010 07:20 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  YEAH we are hoping that by then ULM will be playing FCs again. And no not a pretty standard thought for Tech fans. Actually just a few. we would still rather be in a conference with Fresno, Hawaii ,Nevada football and Utah St and NMXst basketball. The wac will make a move to get some texas schools in eventually to bridge the gap because they simply have to to survive. I think Tech may very well end up in the sunbelt(it would happen tomorrow if ULM left) but it would take the WAC to lose a few more members for that to happen. I think what Dwayne is saying is that it is smart to wait a year or two before making a decision to leave the belt and I agree. The WAC is still to shaky. If the other two Texas schools are added, it should be a no brainer that you should move to the WAC. I still think you would be welcome.

ULM is a charter football member of the Sun Belt. If Tech doesn't want to be in a conference with them, that's your problem not the Belts.

Frankly if you guys think the Belt is so far beneath you, I hope that the Belt agrees with you and doesn't accept your application or offer. I would beleive most of us have no interest in being in a conference with someone who has such a low opinion of other conference members and stands in their high chair saying me,me,me,,me. Stay in the WAC, pray for CUSA (pray long and loud), look to the MAC, go Indy or just go look in the mirror and tell yourselves about your greatness.

dont think the belt is beneath us. I think ULM is beneath the belt. I just think as long as those schools I mentioned are still in the WAC, there is no reason to panic and go anywhere. The ultimate goal is cUSA so why not stay put and see if something opens up.

As an educated person you sound very stupid right now. You feel ULM is beneath the SBC? Please explain that freakin' statement. I understand you Tech guys do not like ULM, and most of us ULM fans are very fine with that. However, statements like the one above are the reasons why ULM fans, and fans of other schools, do not like Tech and its fans. ULM, over the past three years, has achieved 2 6-6 seasons in the SBC in football. How in the heck are we beneath the SBC with those results. ULM is a contender for the SBC title, and will be for a while. What are you using as a measuring stick? Money? Instead of bashing ULM for not doing like Tech and dumping millions of dollars into its football program and achieving mediocre results, applaud our efforts for achieve solid results while spending the least amount of money than anyone else in FBS football. Had we achieved results such as 1-11 or 2-10, then I would say the criticism is more than fair. However, we have been solid and very competitive while playing at minimum 3 solid BCS conference opponents every year. We have event kicked Tech's butt for some recruits, and you have the nerve to say that we are beneath the SBC...you just ticked me off for the night...freakin' conceited Tech fans always spouting off at the mouth with their bovine socialite...

(06-30-2010 09:20 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  As an educated person you sound very stupid right now. You feel ULM is beneath the SBC? Please explain that freakin' statement. I understand you Tech guys do not like ULM, and most of us ULM fans are very fine with that. However, statements like the one above are the reasons why ULM fans, and fans of other schools, do not like Tech and its fans. ULM, over the past three years, has achieved 2 6-6 seasons in the SBC in football. How in the heck are we beneath the SBC with those results. ULM is a contender for the SBC title, and will be for a while. What are you using as a measuring stick? Money? Instead of bashing ULM for not doing like Tech and dumping millions of dollars into its football program and achieving mediocre results, applaud our efforts for achieve solid results while spending the least amount of money than anyone else in FBS football. Had we achieved results such as 1-11 or 2-10, then I would say the criticism is more than fair. However, we have been solid and very competitive while playing at minimum 3 solid BCS conference opponents every year. We have event kicked Tech's butt for some recruits, and you have the nerve to say that we are beneath the SBC...you just ticked me off for the night...freakin' conceited Tech fans always spouting off at the mouth with their bovine socialite...

Don't hold back so much. Tell us what you really think!