(07-09-2011 05:56 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  It would be a long time before the WAC could be better off-even if UTA's first full FBS season is in 2016, they'll still be a startup, and at least 3 of their conference rivals (assuming Lamar gets in) will be either in their third or fourth year of competition as a full member of the Bowl Subdivision. Unless if Lamar, UTSA, Texas State, and UTA all turn into South Florida, the WAC will have the perception that the Sun Belt did in its infancy as a football conference. Throw in some former Big West (Cal Poly SLO, UC Davis) or Big Sky (Sacramento State, Portland State, Montana, etc.) schools in the mix as well, and it will only lengthen the time it takes the WAC to shake off that perception.

If UNT wanted to join the WAC, their probably really isn't anything from stopping them, as long as they do it before Lamar joins. If Louisiana Tech leaves, that might create another opening, but once a fourth school from Texas is added, that's probably it.

This may sound crazy, but not as crazy as a conference in dire need of football schools adding three non-football schools. I have a suggestion for the WAC since they have already been turned down by every FCS school west of the Mississippi. They should look to add a couple of football only teams from the eastern US. They have already added three non-football schools. So my suggestions are:
UNCC: Already in basketball conference, and looking for football only with FBS hopes in the future. Large market size.
Ga St: Big market, big stadium, and I think they want to move up. They may have a problem finding a conference for other sports. I doubt the CAA would let them keep their other sports parked there..
App St: Great FCS program that wants to move up with no where to go. They would also most likely need to find a confernece for their other sports.

(07-08-2011 11:32 PM)ManzanoWolf Wrote:  

(07-08-2011 08:36 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  The Commissioner of the WAC, Mr. Karl Benson, visited U. T. Arlington's campus on June 29, 2011, to meet with President Spaniolo and U. T. Arlington Athletic Director, Mr. Pete Carlon, to discuss the possible move. On July 5, 2011, Commissioner Benson notified President Spaniolo that the Presidents of the nine universities comprising the current WAC membership, including President Romo of U. T. San Antonio, had voted
unanimously to extend an invitation to U. T. Arlington to join the conference. The effective date of the move would be July 1, 2012. (The nine current members of the WAC are: University of Denver, University of Idaho, Louisiana Tech University, New Mexico State University, San Jose State University, Seattle University, U. T. San Antonio, Texas State University, and Utah State University.) Like U. T. Arlington, the
University of Denver and Seattle University are non-football playing members of the WAC. The WAC is a bowl subdivision conference where football is important, but U. T. Arlington's invitation is not conditioned on U. T. Arlington starting a football program"

http://www.utsystem.edu/bor/agendabook/j...7-11ab.pdf

A unanimous vote by the Presidents to include Tech's president . . wow . . is this a bad joke or what ???

Frequently, once a vote of a boards of directors will have a second vote after a divided vote so they can show "unanimity" to the public. Me thinks the first vote was NOT unanimous, but once it was going to happen in any case it looks much better for the entire board to be in favor.

(07-09-2011 10:24 AM)VideoGreenEagle Wrote:  

(07-08-2011 11:32 PM)ManzanoWolf Wrote:  

(07-08-2011 08:36 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  The Commissioner of the WAC, Mr. Karl Benson, visited U. T. Arlington's campus on June 29, 2011, to meet with President Spaniolo and U. T. Arlington Athletic Director, Mr. Pete Carlon, to discuss the possible move. On July 5, 2011, Commissioner Benson notified President Spaniolo that the Presidents of the nine universities comprising the current WAC membership, including President Romo of U. T. San Antonio, had voted
unanimously to extend an invitation to U. T. Arlington to join the conference. The effective date of the move would be July 1, 2012. (The nine current members of the WAC are: University of Denver, University of Idaho, Louisiana Tech University, New Mexico State University, San Jose State University, Seattle University, U. T. San Antonio, Texas State University, and Utah State University.) Like U. T. Arlington, the
University of Denver and Seattle University are non-football playing members of the WAC. The WAC is a bowl subdivision conference where football is important, but U. T. Arlington's invitation is not conditioned on U. T. Arlington starting a football program"

http://www.utsystem.edu/bor/agendabook/j...7-11ab.pdf

A unanimous vote by the Presidents to include Tech's president . . wow . . is this a bad joke or what ???

Frequently, once a vote of a boards of directors will have a second vote after a divided vote so they can show "unanimity" to the public. Me thinks the first vote was NOT unanimous, but once it was going to happen in any case it looks much better for the entire board to be in favor.

I'd buy that argument except for the fact that this all unraveled because of an agenda, which is required to be released, to a UT System BOR meeting. None of this has been announced by the WAC and any vote to show unity between the schools would have been for July 14th when everything was supposed to be made public.

To me, the unanimous vote means one of two things:

1) They have western schools (like the Montana's) who will be ready to jump and the western schools were ok with UTA rounding out the eastern division

or

2) This was in return for LaTech, TXST, UTSA, etc voting for non-football member Seattle. In this case with no clear western schools jumping, the dog fight will happen over whether or not to invite yet another Texas school in football playing Lamar.

(07-09-2011 04:48 AM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  Wow, glad we will be leaving that hybrid mess.

PS, you SBC guys that are on the WAC board, can you slap some sense into the WAC guys saying that when UTA starts fb in 2016...


post from kellytheguy
"IMO, UNT unknowingly comes out of this the real loser. Public perception will always have the Sunbelt behind the WAC. Hell, many people still call the MWC the WAC. The WAC has been to BCS bowls. UNT has no Texas conference rivals. They now have to compete for the same caliber recruits in DFW with UTSA and TSU in football. Throw UTA in the mix if they add football (especially w/ Jerry World) and UNT will wither on the vine.

If UNT had joined, they woulda blocked this move and made it better for themselves."

Not possible to slap any sense into them they are too busy picking out just the right shade of lipstick to put on the pig that is the SLAC

the WAC is a joke now, and it is freakin' hilarious. I look forward to hearing Tech fans' excuses in the coming years.

(07-09-2011 11:35 AM)Burn the Horse Wrote:  the WAC is a joke now, and it is freakin' hilarious. I look forward to hearing Tech fans' excuses in the coming years.

Some of the most hilarious reading is on the WAC board...

I've seen some Loser Tech comments that say the WAC will still be better than the Belt. Amazing.

(07-09-2011 10:52 AM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(07-09-2011 10:24 AM)VideoGreenEagle Wrote:  Frequently, once a vote of a boards of directors will have a second vote after a divided vote so they can show "unanimity" to the public. Me thinks the first vote was NOT unanimous, but once it was going to happen in any case it looks much better for the entire board to be in favor.

I'd buy that argument except for the fact that this all unraveled because of an agenda, which is required to be released, to a UT System BOR meeting. None of this has been announced by the WAC and any vote to show unity between the schools would have been for July 14th when everything was supposed to be made public.

I"m not sure how many corporate or public entity boards you have been a part of. The agenda sets when the discussion and votes are taken and very doesn't affect split discussion in executive session leading to a unanimous vote in the public session that follows. Even board of regents meetings within the state of Texas follow this pattern. I don't know for certain that this one did, but based on Texas law and standard practices it is both possible and in fact probable. You right that it might have been unanimous from the beginning but I find that extremely unlikely.

All I know is. If I was LaTech. I'd crawl on my hands and knees,if I had to. To get away from the New WAC. The Sun Belt is a 100 times better than what the WAC has become.

(07-09-2011 06:25 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  All I know is. If I was LaTech. I'd crawl on my hands and knees,if I had to. To get away from the New WAC. The Sun Belt is a 100 times better than what the WAC has become.

I don't understand why someone would rather be in the SLC of the SBC. They need to get over the ULM hate. Won't La Tech be just as mad when the WAC ends up having to take Northwestern St. down the road

(07-09-2011 07:09 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  

(07-09-2011 06:25 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  All I know is. If I was LaTech. I'd crawl on my hands and knees,if I had to. To get away from the New WAC. The Sun Belt is a 100 times better than what the WAC has become.

I don't understand why someone would rather be in the SLC of the SBC. They need to get over the ULM hate. Won't La Tech be just as mad when the WAC ends up having to take Northwestern St. down the road

I am really enjoying watching the wac crumble around latech and their reactions...

Trying to think of something comparable...maybe the Sun Belt inviting ut-martin...a really bizarre move by the wac.

(07-09-2011 07:09 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  

(07-09-2011 06:25 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  All I know is. If I was LaTech. I'd crawl on my hands and knees,if I had to. To get away from the New WAC. The Sun Belt is a 100 times better than what the WAC has become.

I don't understand why someone would rather be in the SLC of the SBC. They need to get over the ULM hate. Won't La Tech be just as mad when the WAC ends up having to take Northwestern St. down the road

because you are just not getting that Northwestern State would be an improvement over ULM. Tech or anybody else Aheeem ULL wants to be associated with them. At least the schools that are being selected in the Texas WAC are schools with large enrollments and lots of financial resources. Any of the three schools have the potential to be sleeping giants in an economy rich Texas. This really is not good news for UNT. Even some of there fans know it. Benson moved really fast on this one and I think it is to get into the Dallas market and stick it to UNT. It's a huge gamble but it just might pay off. I also think there must be some hidden information with the Montana schools or school coming on. If he can get divisional play for non football sports, he can lure some western football playing schools. This really doesn't look good for Lamar though as the eastern Wac is getting pretty full now. with the resourses of Texas, the WAC will look no worse than the belt in five years. The belt has been around for almost 20 years now and the three teams that went to bowls this year had to wait to the final week to reach 6 wins. It wont be a hard thing to catch up the belt.

Surely you can't be serious about this being a good idea.

(07-09-2011 09:53 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  because you are just not getting that Northwestern State would be an improvement over ULM. Tech or anybody else Aheeem ULL wants to be associated with them. At least the schools that are being selected in the Texas WAC are schools with large enrollments and lots of financial resources. Any of the three schools have the potential to be sleeping giants in an economy rich Texas. This really is not good news for UNT. Even some of there fans know it. Benson moved really fast on this one and I think it is to get into the Dallas market and stick it to UNT. It's a huge gamble but it just might pay off. I also think there must be some hidden information with the Montana schools or school coming on. If he can get divisional play for non football sports, he can lure some western football playing schools. This really doesn't look good for Lamar though as the eastern Wac is getting pretty full now. with the resourses of Texas, the WAC will look no worse than the belt in five years. The belt has been around for almost 20 years now and the three teams that went to bowls this year had to wait to the final week to reach 6 wins. It wont be a hard thing to catch up the belt.

friend, your head is in La La Land if you think this new WAC is in any way as good as the Sun Belt. the new WAC may not even be an FBS Conference for long.


UNT made the right decision.

I agree with him....Loser Tech made the best decision.

really you guys are just adding one team that never played a down of football and upgraded on from FCS. hmmmmm. sounds pretty familiar to me. And the reason I say that UNT is going to suffer from this is now this is turning into the new southwest conference. How do you see the media coverage playing out. Let's see. Big 12, CUSA and Big East, WAC(four state schools), oh yeah and UNT playing in the belt. UTA is a gamble but it sits in the middle of Jerry World with alot of resources. Might be a risk worth taking, especially if football starts up again. If this conference does take off and these Texas schools start building rivalries, Unt fans are going to be having all this happening right in there back yard and wondering "now why are we playing ULM again?

You are in Louisiana playing in a conference with teams from Idaho, Colorado, Utah, California, and Washington.

(07-09-2011 10:31 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  really you guys are just adding one team that never played a down of football and upgraded on from FCS. hmmmmm. sounds pretty familiar to me. And the reason I say that UNT is going to suffer from this is now this is turning into the new southwest conference. How do you see the media coverage playing out. Let's see. Big 12, CUSA and Big East, WAC(four state schools), oh yeah and UNT playing in the belt. UTA is a gamble but it sits in the middle of Jerry World with alot of resources. Might be a risk worth taking, especially if football starts up again. If this conference does take off and these Texas schools start building rivalries, Unt fans are going to be having all this happening right in there back yard and wondering "now why are we playing ULM again?

Yawn. Another UNT better watch out, etc,etc,etc. interesting that so many WAC and Tech folks are concerned about the Mean Green. UTA is a 1AAA school that I doubt will restart football. Attendance-wise in basketball they are at the bottom of the DFW pecking order. Their new area will cause an attendance uptick, but it's doubtful that moving to the WAC will have any type of dynamic affect.

Basketball attendance averages. Pitched in Tech's for a WAC comparison.
TCU 4,285
UNT 3,552
Tech 2,168
SMU 1,970
UTA 811

(07-09-2011 10:09 PM)Burn the Horse Wrote:  

(07-09-2011 09:53 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  because you are just not getting that Northwestern State would be an improvement over ULM. Tech or anybody else Aheeem ULL wants to be associated with them. At least the schools that are being selected in the Texas WAC are schools with large enrollments and lots of financial resources. Any of the three schools have the potential to be sleeping giants in an economy rich Texas. This really is not good news for UNT. Even some of there fans know it. Benson moved really fast on this one and I think it is to get into the Dallas market and stick it to UNT. It's a huge gamble but it just might pay off. I also think there must be some hidden information with the Montana schools or school coming on. If he can get divisional play for non football sports, he can lure some western football playing schools. This really doesn't look good for Lamar though as the eastern Wac is getting pretty full now. with the resourses of Texas, the WAC will look no worse than the belt in five years. The belt has been around for almost 20 years now and the three teams that went to bowls this year had to wait to the final week to reach 6 wins. It wont be a hard thing to catch up the belt.

friend, your head is in La La Land if you think this new WAC is in any way as good as the Sun Belt. the new WAC may not even be an FBS Conference for long.


UNT made the right decision.

I think that UL would be crazy to let Tech in the conference and create 3 Louisiana teams in the Belt----If we could get Monroe out --OK--if not NO WAY!!!! In 3 years UL will be set with facilities, coaches, and backing (money and fans)------We will lead the Belt in Attendance in all 5 sports except maybe WBB---It has been a long time since things have looked So good for the Cajuns---With enrollment projected to be over the 20K mark with substantial on Campus students this place is gonna ROCK!!!

theATLdawg comes in here trying to sound like the freakin' boogy man with his, "UNT made a mistake, they are going to be sorry, watch out UNT, boooooooo..." bs.

ATL, everyone here thinks you're crazy. can you step back from your propaganda for just a moment and see truely how hopeless Tech's future looks in the WAC? it's getting pretty sad.