(09-06-2013 06:45 PM)panama Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 06:43 PM)JoeJag Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 06:40 PM)panama Wrote:  Everyone is behind GSU. And our is an OCS

Buajajajajajaja


Carry On

You make heap big joke, but you guys will probably have an OCS before South does.

That would be sad because we have no land and an AD who is a Decepticon. So no way we beat you.

The irony is that we have an OCS, but that title is a little empty.

(09-06-2013 04:26 PM)MJG Wrote:  Charlotte's problem is three ACC and one SEC team are very close plus the Panthers.

Actually four ACC schools: North Carolina, NC State, Duke and Wake Forest.
Plus the one SEC school: South Carolina, of course.
Plus the Panthers.
However, they can do OK if the interest is there, and so far it seems it is.

I dont know about you, but when I was in college, I didn't have the means to go to downtown SA every weekend. Especially when I was a freshman/sophomore. Moreover, the riverwalk and so called "SA nightlife" is just a tourist trap to locals and not something that will be appealing to many. In 15 years of living in SA, I really only went downtown for fiesta. Thats why UTSA/Alamodome will always lack that traditional college gameday feel.

Not a knock on UTSA, but their attendance declined steadily last year as the novelty of having a new team is starting to wear off. They are going to start having a hard time making the dome look full without scheduling a full slate of teams that will mop the floor with them.

I know that there is a healthy dose of UTSA envy going around San Marcos, but I dont get it. All you have to do is look at UTSA's recruiting to get the real story without all the spit and polish. UTSA severely lacks a decent campus lifestyle. It lacks everything that matters to a college player.

(09-07-2013 11:03 AM)bokobobcat1919 Wrote:  I dont know about you, but when I was in college, I didn't have the means to go to downtown SA every weekend. Especially when I was a freshman/sophomore. Moreover, the riverwalk and so called "SA nightlife" is just a tourist trap to locals and not something that will be appealing to many. In 15 years of living in SA, I really only went downtown for fiesta. Thats why UTSA/Alamodome will always lack that traditional college gameday feel.

Not a knock on UTSA, but their attendance declined steadily last year as the novelty of having a new team is starting to wear off. They are going to start having a hard time making the dome look full without scheduling a full slate of teams that will mop the floor with them.

I know that there is a healthy dose of UTSA envy going around San Marcos, but I dont get it. All you have to do is look at UTSA's recruiting to get the real story without all the spit and polish. UTSA severely lacks a decent campus lifestyle. It lacks everything that matters to a college player.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. While you make some good points regarding the geographic split from campus to the dome ; I completely disagree with your assessment of support and game day experience. And I say that having just returning home from today's game. 40,000+ at the game and a very active tailgating scene even for an 11AM game. They have a long term sweetheart deal they simply couldn't replicate on campus. Win-win for city and school.

Agreed, UTSA just has something that is not replicable anywhere else. Building an on campus stadium would hurt their program. The only thing I see changing their situation is if San Antonio gets an NFL team. But my suspicions are that Jerry Jones wouldn't take too kindly to that.

40k+ if you're lucky. the upper decks were mostly empty.. and they showed up because it was Oklahoma State.

Mark my words. After a losing season, San Antonio, a city of nearly 2.5 million people is going to struggle to average 20k-24k in their last 3 home games. UAB and Tulane especially. LA Tech might travel well... last year, their numbers steadily declined. TXST was an outlier. Next year those numbers will drop even more.

Tell me you didn't notice that the turn out for the TXST/UTSA game was better than this.?.? I mean, they brought in OKLAHOMA STATE this year and didnt come anywhere close to selling out the dome. "Package deals" and all. What can we expect when UTSA fans start to realize that they arent as great as they thought? When they aren't playing OOC games they have no chance of winning?

(09-07-2013 04:58 PM)bokobobcat1919 Wrote:  40k+ if you're lucky. the upper decks were mostly empty.. and they showed up because it was Oklahoma State.

Mark my words. After a losing season, San Antonio, a city of nearly 2.5 million people is going to struggle to average 20k-24k in their last 3 home games. UAB and Tulane especially. LA Tech might travel well... last year, their numbers steadily declined. TXST was an outlier. Next year those numbers will drop even more.

Tell me you didn't notice that the turn out for the TXST/UTSA game was better than this.?.? I mean, they brought in OKLAHOMA STATE this year and didnt come anywhere close to selling out the dome. "Package deals" and all. What can we expect when UTSA fans start to realize that they arent as great as they thought? When they aren't playing OOC games they have no chance of winning?

How many minor league football teams played in San Antonio? I remember the Gunslingers of the old USFL and a team in WLAF. If my memory serves me, they weren't well attended.
Yep they didn't support football back in the 80's
http://www.remembertheusfl.8m.com/teams/sanantonio.html
Nor did they support football back in the 90's
http://www.funwhileitlasted.net/2011/06/...io-riders/

I like San Antonio. It's a nice city but maybe they are gear more towards basketball?

Reading those links showed huge bias and flaws. First, the USFL made comment they were one of the worst run franchises.

Second, the World League team played two seasons, one in a high school stadium, one in a college stadium, home to our current TXST team, not even in SA.

In 1985, the city population was roughly 850,000. In 1992 it was 950,00.

The current pop is almost 1.4 million. Things are a bit different.

(09-07-2013 09:47 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Reading those links showed huge bias and flaws. First, the USFL made comment they were one of the worst run franchises.

Second, the World League team played two seasons, one in a high school stadium, one in a college stadium, home to our current TXST team, not even in SA.

In 1985, the city population was roughly 850,000. In 1992 it was 950,00.

The current pop is almost 1.4 million. Things are a bit different.

So you say the links have no merit but you use it to try to prove a point? Time will tell but I'm beating once the novelty wears off their attendance will suck. They do have a large enrollment and the average of a student is 22. Who knows. I don't have a dog in this fight.

(09-07-2013 10:23 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 04:26 PM)MJG Wrote:  Charlotte's problem is three ACC and one SEC team are very close plus the Panthers.

Actually four ACC schools: North Carolina, NC State, Duke and Wake Forest.
Plus the one SEC school: South Carolina, of course.
Plus the Panthers.
However, they can do OK if the interest is there, and so far it seems it is.

You could smash the Ah-She-She 4 together and you might get a singular program out of that mash that could be middle of the road in the SEC. Those four schools, even State, all ask "when's basketball season start?"

The Gamecocks and Clemson might as well be on Mars. They have fans in the city but there might as well be a 700 foot high wall of ice across the state boarder. There's not as much bleed over as one would assume by looking at a map.

And so far the relationship with our local NFL franchise has been nothing but awesome and to our benefit.

Western North Carolina hasn't really had a major college football team, and now they have two. Nothing but potential for both Charlotte and App.

(09-07-2013 11:18 PM)Louisianafanrcajun90 Wrote:  

(09-07-2013 09:47 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Reading those links showed huge bias and flaws. First, the USFL made comment they were one of the worst run franchises.

Second, the World League team played two seasons, one in a high school stadium, one in a college stadium, home to our current TXST team, not even in SA.

In 1985, the city population was roughly 850,000. In 1992 it was 950,00.

The current pop is almost 1.4 million. Things are a bit different.

So you say the links have no merit but you use it to try to prove a point? Time will tell but I'm beating once the novelty wears off their attendance will suck. They do have a large enrollment and the average of a student is 22. Who knows. I don't have a dog in this fight.

Dude, I don't know where you learned your reasoning skills, but even talking to you is a risk since you will read whatever you want into it. Your links themselves weren't biased, but using them to prove your point were biased and flawed.

You say SA can't support a team and provided those two links.

However, clicking on the links showed that one said they were the worst run franchise and played in a high school stadium where they couldn't sell beer or receive parking revenue.

The second showed they played in that same high school stadium with the same financial conditions in the first year and then in San Marcos the second.

None of that reflects on the Alamodome or what UTSA and SA are doing right now. It is a flawed to use the 1985 USFL and the 1992 WLAF to compare to 2013 C-USA.

(09-06-2013 01:26 PM)MJG Wrote:  Three schools have recently added football and were lucky enough to have stadiums available.
UTSA has a huge nice dome and is the only Tennant.

Georgia ST has the best and soon maybe the best stadium in the NFL.They also share it with an NFL team and have a ACC school in town.

USA has an open air stadium that is a more appropriate size.
So who has the best stadium situation ?

Not USA. Our stadium is an antique that's off campus. That being said, its free, seats 40,000 and its availability was a major factor in USA starting football. Parking, seating, concessions, bathrooms, sound, audio, press box, and locker rooms are not up to par.

We'll be playing at Ladd for probably at least another 5 years. There are worse situations... Idaho and UMass have a worse situation. I'd also include WKU due to the small size of their stadium.

(09-06-2013 06:43 PM)JoeJag Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 06:40 PM)panama Wrote:  Everyone is behind GSU. And our is an OCS

Buajajajajajaja


Carry On

You make heap big joke, but you guys will probably have an OCS before South does.

Actually, USA will get a real OCS before Ga State does. The proximity of the Ga Done to GState is a crutch long term. It condemns GState into a stadium WAY too big for their crowds. Give us 5 years to build up to 15k real season ticket holders then USA can feel more comfortable building it on campus. We have the land and we have the money.

I agree with cajun. I grew up in San Antonio, so I know how fickle the fans can be. UTSA football is a novelty right now.. and their fans are convinced they are better than they really are. Of their 8 wins last year, TXST was far and away the best team they beat, or have ever beaten. Not only was it a close win, one could argue that they were quite lucky to get it.

As UTSA continues to lose this season... and they will, the novelty of it all will continue to wear off and attendance will plummet. I'd wager my house on it. Their attendance steadily dropped last year even with the inflated record. How people think something has changed and attendance will somehow improve when UTSA starts losing is beyond me.

UTSA is not San Antonio. SA is a longhorn/aggie/tcu/tech town... UTSA has always been a party joke there. That is not going to be an easy sell/change.. especially if they cant compete with those favored programs.

(09-08-2013 02:50 PM)bokobobcat1919 Wrote:  I agree with cajun. I grew up in San Antonio, so I know how fickle the fans can be. UTSA football is a novelty right now.. and their fans are convinced they are better than they really are. Of their 8 wins last year, TXST was far and away the best team they beat, or have ever beaten. Not only was it a close win, one could argue that they were quite lucky to get it.

As UTSA continues to lose this season... and they will, the novelty of it all will continue to wear off and attendance will plummet. I'd wager my house on it. Their attendance steadily dropped last year even with the inflated record. How people think something has changed and attendance will somehow improve when UTSA starts losing is beyond me.

UTSA is not San Antonio. SA is a longhorn/aggie/tcu/tech town... UTSA has always been a party joke there. That is not going to be an easy sell/change.. especially if they cant compete with those favored programs.

You sound salty that they're a new program that's already outdrawing you.

you say potential future bcs buster... i lean more towards tulane in the superdome part 2. How much has playing in a famous dome helped them?

out drawing us? We're just as new to FBS as they are. Have you compared our recruiting? it isnt even close... Not REMOTELY close and TXST is going head to head with them for talent. That's not an exaggeration either. Now why do you think that is smarty?

my apologies, I figured most of you could see the forest through the trees.

you arent from this area.. if so, you'd know how much of a joke utsa really is. That's why they cant recruit to save their lives. UTSA is a glorified junior college in the ugliest part of town. Ignore the facts and drink the koolaid if you like. I'll be here next year to tell you I told you so.

(09-08-2013 02:24 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:26 PM)MJG Wrote:  Three schools have recently added football and were lucky enough to have stadiums available.
UTSA has a huge nice dome and is the only Tennant.

Georgia ST has the best and soon maybe the best stadium in the NFL.They also share it with an NFL team and have a ACC school in town.

USA has an open air stadium that is a more appropriate size.
So who has the best stadium situation ?

Not USA. Our stadium is an antique that's off campus. That being said, its free, seats 40,000 and its availability was a major factor in USA starting football. Parking, seating, concessions, bathrooms, sound, audio, press box, and locker rooms are not up to par.

We'll be playing at Ladd for probably at least another 5 years. There are worse situations... Idaho and UMass have a worse situation. I'd also include WKU due to the small size of their stadium.

have you been to western's stadium?

i don't care if yours seats 80k it has all the other crap working against it.

western's is very nice smack in the middle of campus. it's the right size for now. when you start averaging 22,500 for every single game then it would be too small.

it's the right size for western. i definitely wouldn't trade places with south al simply based on 8 miles from campus vs smack in the middle of.

most of the folks that have visited western came away impressed with our too small for you stadium.

an article from last year on UTSA's degrading attendance numbers. The TXST/UTSA game last season drew close to the same crowd as Okie State this year, so the numbers are still dropping.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/colle...994969.php

(09-08-2013 03:22 PM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(09-08-2013 02:24 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:26 PM)MJG Wrote:  Three schools have recently added football and were lucky enough to have stadiums available.
UTSA has a huge nice dome and is the only Tennant.

Georgia ST has the best and soon maybe the best stadium in the NFL.They also share it with an NFL team and have a ACC school in town.

USA has an open air stadium that is a more appropriate size.
So who has the best stadium situation ?

Not USA. Our stadium is an antique that's off campus. That being said, its free, seats 40,000 and its availability was a major factor in USA starting football. Parking, seating, concessions, bathrooms, sound, audio, press box, and locker rooms are not up to par.

We'll be playing at Ladd for probably at least another 5 years. There are worse situations... Idaho and UMass have a worse situation. I'd also include WKU due to the small size of their stadium.

have you been to western's stadium?

i don't care if yours seats 80k it has all the other crap working against it.

western's is very nice smack in the middle of campus. it's the right size for now. when you start averaging 22,500 for every single game then it would be too small.

it's the right size for western. i definitely wouldn't trade places with south al simply based on 8 miles from campus vs smack in the middle of.

most of the folks that have visited western came away impressed with our too small for you stadium.

I would trade stadiums with several teams in the conference. I would NOT trade with WKU. You have to play "home" games 70 miles away from your campus in order to schedule bigger teams. I'm sure your stadium is quaint and I'll bet that it has far better seating, parking, etc. than Ladd. But it really isn't a FBS stadium. There really is a minimum size issue. You really need to have 30k.

And yes, our stadium is a dump. But it is big enough to host Mississippi State, NC State, etc.

I'm sure your stadium is really nice. But it isn't FBS, its FCS (your stadium, not your program). I'm pretty sure that there are Topper fans that understand and agree with my criticism of WKU's on campus stadium and understand that WKU will need to expand at some point.

If you feel that your stadium is the 'right size' for WKU at this point, you're really setting the bar really low for your own program.

I recently attended a baseball game at ONEOK field in Tulsa. Wow, what an awesome facility. All the bells and whistles. But it isn't appropriate for a major league team. Its appropriate for a minor league team. I feel the same way about WKU's or ODU's facilities. I would hope that you don't really feel that a 23k stadium really is FBS caliber. Set your goals higher than that.

And you guys will probably stomp us in Mobile next week.