If we still had WW. we would be sitting on our thumbs right now getting raided and losing 2 teams probably without any additions besides USA.

The SBC would probably be screwed if we still had WW.

(04-29-2012 01:32 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  If we still had WW. we would be sitting on our thumbs right now getting raided and losing 2 teams probably without any additions besides USA.

The SBC would probably be screwed if we still had WW.

And just how do you know this ?

Indeed. I hope we stop all this no FCS teams nonsense now conference USA is even doing it regardless of how they try to justify the addition of UTKFC.

If we lose two teams (UNT, FIU) I say go ahead and add Georgia Southern as #10, App State as #11, and #Texas State for #12. But I hope we set out a plan for 14 members by 2017. Invite UTA and West Florida as Olympic sports members then have them go through a transition similar to what we did with FIU and South.

(04-29-2012 01:32 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  If we still had WW. we would be sitting on our thumbs right now getting raided and losing 2 teams probably without any additions besides USA.

The SBC would probably be screwed if we still had WW.

Is this just your opinion or are we going to see some reasoning as to why you think this way?

(04-29-2012 01:44 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 01:32 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  If we still had WW. we would be sitting on our thumbs right now getting raided and losing 2 teams probably without any additions besides USA.

The SBC would probably be screwed if we still had WW.

And just how do you know this ?

Waters hated conference realignment/expansion and said so.

The Sun Belt at one point early on had the opportunity to grab Texas State/UTSA which would have left LaTech looking for a home before CUSA was ready.

Things might look very different now if the Sun Belt had been aggressive rather than passive.

Before anyone goes adding teams without a football team, shouldn't we ask UALR, who has been a very loyal member for over 20 years? WKU and USA got chances to upgrade that might not've been otherwise been provided because both have a track record of sticking around and being part of the team. Isn't there a stadium in Little Rock? In my opinion, its up to UALR, but I'd like to see them get the chance first. And then, I'd prefer programs with existing teams.

(04-29-2012 01:54 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 01:32 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  If we still had WW. we would be sitting on our thumbs right now getting raided and losing 2 teams probably without any additions besides USA.

The SBC would probably be screwed if we still had WW.

Is this just your opinion or are we going to see some reasoning as to why you think this way?

Its my opinion....WW never really did much in regards for expansion or really wanting the Conference to grow and grab attention

(04-29-2012 02:04 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  Before anyone goes adding teams without a football team, shouldn't we ask UALR, who has been a very loyal member for over 20 years? WKU and USA got chances to upgrade that might not've been otherwise been provided because both have a track record of sticking around and being part of the team. Isn't there a stadium in Little Rock? In my opinion, its up to UALR, but I'd like to see them get the chance first. And then, I'd prefer programs with existing teams.

There is no way the University of Arkansas would ever allow another FBS team in Arkansas. ASU became FBS despite their best efforts to keep us from it. Since they control UALR, that wont happen.

(04-29-2012 02:04 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  Before anyone goes adding teams without a football team, shouldn't we ask UALR, who has been a very loyal member for over 20 years? WKU and USA got chances to upgrade that might not've been otherwise been provided because both have a track record of sticking around and being part of the team. Isn't there a stadium in Little Rock? In my opinion, its up to UALR, but I'd like to see them get the chance first. And then, I'd prefer programs with existing teams.

UALR will never have football because they are part of the University of Arkansas system.

The University of Arkansas will not even PLAY any in-state teams. They have a policy against EVER playing an in-state team.

A few years ago UA and UALR both made the NIT. UA turned down the NIT bid because of "player exhaustion"....or maybe because they most likely would have been paired with UALR in the first round since the NIT paired based on potential ticket sales.

So it is unlikely that they will ever allow the creation of another in-state football program within their own system.

(04-29-2012 02:04 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  Before anyone goes adding teams without a football team, shouldn't we ask UALR, who has been a very loyal member for over 20 years? WKU and USA got chances to upgrade that might not've been otherwise been provided because both have a track record of sticking around and being part of the team. Isn't there a stadium in Little Rock? In my opinion, its up to UALR, but I'd like to see them get the chance first. And then, I'd prefer programs with existing teams.

UALR would be a great addition if they wanted a football team it's the second biggest school in the state in one of the biggest cities in the state. But unless your city and fans want a team all it does is create a Title IX nightmare and loss of $.

I can assure you the city of Little Rock is about as pro Arkansas as Birmingham is as pro Alabama and I don't even live there. I would rather see UALR put all their resources into basketball than to start football.

(04-29-2012 02:14 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 02:04 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  Before anyone goes adding teams without a football team, shouldn't we ask UALR, who has been a very loyal member for over 20 years? WKU and USA got chances to upgrade that might not've been otherwise been provided because both have a track record of sticking around and being part of the team. Isn't there a stadium in Little Rock? In my opinion, its up to UALR, but I'd like to see them get the chance first. And then, I'd prefer programs with existing teams.

UALR would be a great addition if they wanted a football team it's the second biggest school in the state in one of the biggest cities in the state. But unless your city and fans want a team all it does is create a Title IX nightmare and loss of $.

I can assure you the city of Little Rock is about as pro Arkansas as Birmingham is as pro Alabama and I don't even live there. I would rather see UALR put all their resources into basketball than to start football.

Doesn't matter what Little Rock or UALR fans want. UA board would never allow it.

(04-29-2012 02:14 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 02:04 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  Before anyone goes adding teams without a football team, shouldn't we ask UALR, who has been a very loyal member for over 20 years? .

UALR would be a great addition if they wanted a football team it's the second biggest school in the state in one of the biggest cities in the state. But unless your city and fans want a team all it does is create a Title IX nightmare and loss of $.

I can assure you the city of Little Rock is about as pro Arkansas as Birmingham is as pro Alabama and I don't even live there. I would rather see UALR put all their resources into basketball than to start football.

My only point is that any discussion about bringing up a team without a current program should start with those in or league and who've stuck by us. I dont know if Arkansas would be amenable or even if UALR wants to do so, my only thought was that if anyone gets a free pass to FBS, I'd start with UALR.

(04-29-2012 02:21 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 02:14 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 02:04 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  Before anyone goes adding teams without a football team, shouldn't we ask UALR, who has been a very loyal member for over 20 years? .

UALR would be a great addition if they wanted a football team it's the second biggest school in the state in one of the biggest cities in the state. But unless your city and fans want a team all it does is create a Title IX nightmare and loss of $.

I can assure you the city of Little Rock is about as pro Arkansas as Birmingham is as pro Alabama and I don't even live there. I would rather see UALR put all their resources into basketball than to start football.

My only point is that any discussion about bringing up a team without a current program should start with those in or league and who've stuck by us. I dont know if Arkansas would be amenable or even if UALR wants to do so, my only thought was that if anyone gets a free pass to FBS, I'd start with UALR.

The problem is you are not convincing UALR. You are convincing a Board composed of all Razorback donors and ticket holders that football at UALR is a good thing.

(04-29-2012 02:29 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 02:21 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 02:14 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 02:04 PM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  Before anyone goes adding teams without a football team, shouldn't we ask UALR, who has been a very loyal member for over 20 years? .

UALR would be a great addition if they wanted a football team it's the second biggest school in the state in one of the biggest cities in the state. But unless your city and fans want a team all it does is create a Title IX nightmare and loss of $.

I can assure you the city of Little Rock is about as pro Arkansas as Birmingham is as pro Alabama and I don't even live there. I would rather see UALR put all their resources into basketball than to start football.

My only point is that any discussion about bringing up a team without a current program should start with those in or league and who've stuck by us. I dont know if Arkansas would be amenable or even if UALR wants to do so, my only thought was that if anyone gets a free pass to FBS, I'd start with UALR.

The problem is you are not convincing UALR. You are convincing a Board composed of all Razorback donors and ticket holders that football at UALR is a good thing.

The only non football program I'd really think would be worth considering would be the one in our conference. And if they won't, don't want to, or can't, I see no reason to consider those without a FCS team currently. I certainly wouldn't think about a D2 program under any circumstances because that would be the same or similar to admitting a school with no teams in ANY sport as the difference between D2 and D1 is so great. The difference, in my opinion, between FCS and FBS, while great is much less than that between D2 and D1 and with FCS upgrades the non football programs are already D1 and could be already equal or even above many already in the conference. Are there any shortage of quality FCS programs out there? Its not like the economics of FBS aren't better than FCSand we've got one of the few paths to get to FBS. Just my two cents.

People, I know D2 doesn't sound pretty on paper but there's D2 schools who could be FCS, FCS teams who should be D2, and FBS schools who should be FCS. Affiliation is just being in the right place at the right time for most schools. Troy was a D2 school once upon a time and we have had the most success of any school in the SBC when you start talking Titles, NFL drafts, and probably bowl games made.

(04-29-2012 01:32 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  If we still had WW. we would be sitting on our thumbs right now getting raided and losing 2 teams probably without any additions besides USA.

The SBC would probably be screwed if we still had WW.

The SBC is lucky to have him right now. The schools in the SBC know that, and the posters here simply don't count.

(04-29-2012 01:32 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  If we still had WW. we would be sitting on our thumbs right now getting raided and losing 2 teams probably without any additions besides USA.

The SBC would probably be screwed if we still had WW.

Really?

I have yet to see Benson do anything of merit. I'm not impressed.

(04-29-2012 08:59 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(04-29-2012 01:32 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  If we still had WW. we would be sitting on our thumbs right now getting raided and losing 2 teams probably without any additions besides USA.

The SBC would probably be screwed if we still had WW.

Really?

I have yet to see Benson do anything of merit. I'm not impressed.

And what did WW ever do?

Since Benson in the short time we have added GA state and will probably add atleast 2 more in no time....WW wouldnt have been this active

(04-29-2012 09:39 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  And what did WW ever do?

Since Benson in the short time we have added GA state and will probably add atleast 2 more in no time....WW wouldnt have been this active

We're adding schools with no fans, no tradition, no facilities, no support, no name recognition, and this is good because?

Apparently the only thing needed to be in Karl Benson's new Sunbelt is a couple of kids playing Madden in a dorm somewhere.

(04-29-2012 01:47 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  Indeed. I hope we stop all this no FCS teams nonsense now conference USA is even doing it regardless of how they try to justify the addition of UTKFC.

If we lose two teams (UNT, FIU) I say go ahead and add Georgia Southern as #10, App State as #11, and #Texas State for #12. But I hope we set out a plan for 14 members by 2017. Invite UTA and West Florida as Olympic sports members then have them go through a transition similar to what we did with FIU and South.

Lets go through this AGAIN. West Florida isn't serious about doing anything. Big ideas don't happen in Pensacola. UWF isn't going to do anything.