Topic: Conference Membership thread

[architechguy]

My timeline is in 10 years.

I see Texas St. making it in the same way that Texas Tech did.  I don't rmemeber Tech ever being a force in football until they joined the Big 12 and hired Leach.  Before that, I remember Tech being about the same level as New Mexico St.  They were really never a force and Usually lost everytime they played against a Big 8 team.

Texas St. is different than TCU and SMU because they are a much larger school, and are a public university.  I know they are leaps and bounds away from their beauty school beginnings as Southwest Texas University.   From where I am standing, I see them making a lot of necessary moves to make it at the next level.  They are even become more of an option for kids that would otherwise choose TCU, SMU, Baylor, and Houston. 

My big question is will they be able to raise their academic standards enough to be included into the Big 12.  I think they will have to build themselves in a mid major conference for about a decade taking kids that may not qualify for Texas and aTm until they can actually compete at the BCS level.

Again, I don't understand why Texas State is supposed to be able to accomplish what teams like Houston and North Texas haven't been able to do.  You're description of Texas State is accurate, but it also applies to 10 schools around the state, what makes them different?  Look at the list below of the top 10 colleges in Texas by size.  Three are in the Big 12, Texas State is one, so there's 6 other schools, if those teams can't build a powerful football program with a 100 year head start, why is Texas State gonna be able to?  There's simply no evidence to suggest they're going to be able to grow into a competitive program in a conference like the Big 12.  I removed the names of the teams on the list below to at least try to take away the bias, it shows that Texas State isn't the only school with a large student body and alumni base.

Top 10 as of Fall 2008[1]
1    50,006
2    48,126
3    36,104
4    34,795
5    29,125
6    28,585
7    28,422
8    25,070
9    20,458
10    17,577

You're severely over estimating New Mexico State, they're one of the all time losingest programs in college football history.  They're Kansas State pre-Bill Snyder, only without ever getting a coach like Bill Snyder.  Texas Tech isn't an elite program, never won a championship, but we do have a winning record all time.  Putting those two teams in the same category is just a poor, poor comparison.

[Bone Crusher]

You're severely over estimating New Mexico State, they're one of the all time losingest programs in college football history.  They're Kansas State pre-Bill Snyder, only without ever getting a coach like Bill Snyder.  Texas Tech isn't an elite program, never won a championship, but we do have a winning record all time.  Putting those two teams in the same category is just a poor, poor comparison.

I don't think 'Crow was referring to the success of the football programs.  TT and NMSU used to be part of the Border Intercollegiate Athletic Association until TT departed for the SWC.  He might have been asking you where TT would have been as a program if they didn't depart for the SWC and eventually the Big 12.  TT would have been a mid-major school without those two conferences.  Most likely part of the WAC or MWC.  The same could be said for CU as well.

History of the BIAA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Intercollegiate_Athletic_Association

[architechguy]

Arizona and Arizona State were part of that conference too, you could say the same thing about them. Every team had to start somewhere.  It doesn't answer my question though, what sets Texas State apart from the other half dozen public schools of their size who haven't been able to find long term football success?  So many other teams just like them have tried and failed ahead of them, why would they be different?

[Bone Crusher]

Arizona and Arizona State were part of that conference too, you could say the same thing about them. Every team had to start somewhere.  It doesn't answer my question though, what sets Texas State apart from the other half dozen public schools of their size who haven't been able to find long term football success?  So many other teams just like them have tried and failed ahead of them, why would they be different?

Just because they haven't had that much success in FCS football doesn't mean they won't be successful in FBS football.

Boise State won six FCS Big Sky conference championships (14 total conference championships) plus an I-AA National Championship.

BSU: http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/wac/boise_state/championships.php

Archi, I have to bust you for speaking without knowing the facts about Texas State's past success: http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_iaa/southland/texas_state/championships.php

Texas State has 12 total conference championships plus two Division II championships as well.

Given where BSU and Texas State are at, one would think Texas State has better potential to be successful than BSU.

Texas Tech has 12 total conference or division championships to their credit: http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/big12/texas_tech/championships.php

North Texas won 20 conference championships before going up to FBS ball.  Right now that program is in the dumps.

UNT: http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/sunbelt/north_texas/championships.php

The matter of fact is that past success does not indicate how successful a football program will be in the future at a higher classification.

Take Idaho for instance...at the time BSU made the jump to FCS ball, Idaho was the better program of the three Idaho schools (Idaho State is the other school still in FCS football.  I know this for a fact because I did keep close tabs on the Big Sky Conference in the 1990's as well.  What happened was that Idaho wasn't as well prepared as BSU to make the jump to FBS football.

Idaho: http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/wac/idaho/championships.php

[architechguy]

Archi, I have to bust you for speaking without knowing the facts about Texas State's past success

Where did I say Texas State isn't a successful program?

The matter of fact is that past success does not indicate how successful a football program will be in the future at a higher classification.

I'm confused, aren't you backing the point that Texas State will be successful because of their FCS success?  Why would you then say the past has no effect on the future?

Given where BSU and Texas State are at, one would think Texas State has better potential to be successful than BSU.

I think quite the opposite is true.  Boise State has very little competition for recruits, and very little competition within their conference.  They're the only major program for hundreds and hundreds of miles in any direction.  Aside from Idaho or Idaho State, who's the nearest FBS program?  Utah, Washington State, BYU?  Texas is a big state with a lot of players to go around, enough players come out of the state for 20 teams to sign a full recruiting class, but there already are 20 teams lined up to get those players and Texas State would go to the back of that line.  Boise State is in a shorter line, and they're at the front of that line.  Also, I know it's a tired argument but playing in the WAC makes their success rate artificially high.  If Boise State were in the Big 12, they could have just as good a team as they have now, and be a four loss team.  They would be equally capable of beating Oklahoma or pulling off a big win, but there would be more teams on their schedule each year that are capable of beating them.  So they wouldn't be 12-0 in the Big 12. 

[Scarecrow]

I believe a lot of it has to do with a National perception.  The name of the school also means something.  If the Big 12 needed to pick a school and keep a favorable impression from people from the East Coast that know nothing of Texas football, which name sounds the most credible?  Which team is more marketable?  Which school can draw more donations from alumni?  What is the better sell?

U of Houston
North Texas
TCU
SMU
UTSA
Texas State

They updated their mascot logo in 2003:

http://www.txstate.edu/about/history-traditions/bobcat-logo/contentParagraph/0/content_files/file/bobcatlogo2.jpg

Let's see, we already have Louisiana State, Mississippi State, Florida State, Oregon State, Kansas St., Michigan State, Penn State, Ohio State, Minnesota State and Nebaska State (for all those Coach fans).

That is one reason why I think they can make it.  I think they will be able to come up with the money.

In US News and World Report's Best Colleges 2010, Texas State ranked 12th Best Public University in the West.

Enrollment is 29,125 last year setting a record for the school.  It will only have larger incoming classes in the future.  You don't have to agree with me. I'm just making an observation from what I see.

[architechguy]

I don't think Texas State is the answer to any of those questions.  TCU, Houston and SMU are the biggest name teams out there.

I do agree with your last paragraph, I just don't think it makes a difference.  Every school in the state is setting records for enrollment.  Tech went down a little bit this past year, but for 8 years in a row before that we set a school record every August for enrollment, so Texas State isn't doing anything the rest of the schools in the state aren't doing as well.

[Bone Crusher]

The name of the school is only a small part of the equation.  First of all, you need the enrollment & alumni numbers and Texas State does have the numbers.  Then you need to look at where you are located and the population & support is there since San Marcos is near Austin and San Antonio and just hours away from Dallas and Houston.

I cannot see Texas State being a member of the Big 12 for a long time because how would you justify putting the money in a brand new 50 to 60 thousand seat stadium after putting up the money to get the Bobcats to FBS football in the first place?

Anyone visit the UTSA website?  There are plans for a 50,000 seat football stadium.

It's pretty funny we are discussing Texas State because I almost decided to work towards going to that school when it was still called Southwest Texas State.

[architechguy]

I don't mean this to sound like a cheap shot at Texas State, but I never really took it seriously as a major university.  I know a bunch of people who went there, but they all flunked out or transferred to a bigger school.  I always had the impression that the students were just trying to get their grades up to transfer to UT.  I never thought of it as a destination school that students would leave home to attend for four years and get their degree.  Frankly, it seemed like a commuter school to me.  Being a commuter school isn't a bad thing, it doesn't mean the students aren't dedicated and committed to their education, but I think they get a larger number of students that are there because it's close to home and convenient.

[Bone Crusher]

I don't mean this to sound like a cheap shot at Texas State, but I never really took it seriously as a major university.  I know a bunch of people who went there, but they all flunked out or transferred to a bigger school.  I always had the impression that the students were just trying to get their grades up to transfer to UT.  I never thought of it as a destination school that students would leave home to attend for four years and get their degree.  Frankly, it seemed like a commuter school to me.  Being a commuter school isn't a bad thing, it doesn't mean the students aren't dedicated and committed to their education, but I think they get a larger number of students that are there because it's close to home and convenient.

The only interest I had in Texas State at the time was due to the number of Deaf people attending that school compared to the others.

It's true that some schools are simply stepping stones to other schools but that's the way things are sometimes.  That is what you get with those (insert state) State Universities and the same thing could be said about Colorado State versus CU-Boulder.  Some of those State Universities have to admit you regardless of your grades.

[Scarecrow]

archi, i understand your perspective on Texas St when you lived in Texas and had friends go to Southwest Texas St.

However, since the name change, Texas St. seems to be focused on changing that image to a destination school.  It's like the former beauty school is going through an "extreme makeover".  My timeline for them is 10 years.

UTSA is also following suit.  UTSA may have an advantage because they are THE University in the Metro of San Antonio.  They aren't competing with Austin for the best students.  In fact, a lot of the students that didn't finish in the top 10 percent of their class who can't enroll at UT are going to UTSA.  UT has already hit it's limit in accepting freshmen so the carryover is going to Texas St. and UTSA. 

If Texas St. and UTSA are successful in marketing themselves to incoming freshmen as destination schools in the Austin/San Antonio region, I can see them in a respectable mid major conference soon.  Their success from that point will determine on who they can hire as a coach and who they are able to recruit.

Another school looking to make the move in Big 12 country which I admit I know little about is South Dakota St University.  What's the scoop on them?

[Bone Crusher]

archi, i understand your perspective on Texas St when you lived in Texas and had friends go to Southwest Texas St.

However, since the name change, Texas St. seems to be focused on changing that image to a destination school.  It's like the former beauty school is going through an "extreme makeover".  My timeline for them is 10 years.

UTSA is also following suit.  UTSA may have an advantage because they are THE University in the Metro of San Antonio.  They aren't competing with Austin for the best students.  In fact, a lot of the students that didn't finish in the top 10 percent of their class who can't enroll at UT are going to UTSA.  UT has already hit it's limit in accepting freshmen so the carryover is going to Texas St. and UTSA. 

If Texas St. and UTSA are successful in marketing themselves to incoming freshmen as destination schools in the Austin/San Antonio region, I can see them in a respectable mid major conference soon.  Their success from that point will determine on who they can hire as a coach and who they are able to recruit.

Another school looking to make the move in Big 12 country which I admit I know little about is South Dakota St University.  What's the scoop on them?

South Dakota State has already moved to Division 1 FCS and are part of the Missouri Valley Football Conference along with North Dakota State.  Both schools look like they will be in FCS for awhile.  South Dakota and North Dakota Universities also just moved up to Division 1 FCS football as well. 

I believe UTSA and Texas State are ticketed for the C-USA down the road and I can see the C-USA splitting up where the Texas schools (perhaps along with some Louisana schools and possibly Arkansas State) forming the new "SWC".

UTSA already hired former Miami, FL head coach Larry Coker.  That should send a message that the Roadrunners are dead serious about going FBS football.

[architechguy]

UT San Antonio is starting their football program from scratch aren't they?  That's exactly what Georgia State is doing here in Atlanta.  These are two very similar schools because they're big public schools in a metro area, they both have solid athletic departments already with other successful programs.  Georgia State hired Bill Curry as their first coach, very successful coach like Larry Coker.  They have a long way to go though since they're just starting.

[Scarecrow]

UTSA already hired former Miami, FL head coach Larry Coker.  That should send a message that the Roadrunners are dead serious about going FBS football.

This sounds exactly like Florida Atlantic.  Schnellenberger (a former Miami NC coach) built the program from scratch.  After 7 years, they had a winning record and made it to a bowl game.  

I could see UTSA and Texas St. make an entrance similar to Florida Atlantic/Florida International.  Or best case scenario... South Florida.

South Florida football started in 1997.  In 8 years, they join a BCS conference.  They hired the right coach and in 10 years from their birth, they get a top 10 ranking.  I don't think this is impossible for either Texas St. or UTSA.

[Bone Crusher]

With FAU and FIU, you already had the Miami Hurricanes whereas there was no such team in Tampa Bay for awhile.  The same thing could happen for UTSA and Texas State is between San Antonio and Austin so the potential is there for success with both programs.

[thedrUNKenLoper]

kids are still going to choose Texa$ over the up and coming schools especially since what 1 in 5 people in the state attended or have a degree from Au$tin?

[Scarecrow]

kids are still going to choose Texa$ over the up and coming schools especially since what 1 in 5 people in the state attended or have a degree from Au$tin?

Only 25 kids a year on average can choose Texas.  There is way more talent to go around.  The question is can they convince the kids to go to their school over TCU, Houston, or OK State, or Tech?

[thedrUNKenLoper]

I meant overall and not just for football, but even other sports.

[Bone Crusher]

Only 25 kids a year on average can choose Texas.  There is way more talent to go around.  The question is can they convince the kids to go to their school over TCU, Houston, or OK State, or Tech?

I think OK State shouldn't be in this discussion because OSU has the facilities that oil money bought.

San Antonio would be a nice draw and I don't know about San Marcos since I haven't been there before.  I think Houston would have a reason to be concerned if those two do indeed join C-USA and I think the same could be said for UTEP and SMU...programs in Texas that hasn't had that kind of success of late.

[Bone Crusher]

Texas State is working on their stadium to get it up to about 30k seats in four phases.  The first phase is about done.

[Scarecrow]

Texas St. will have the same draws that the City of Austin has due to its proximity.  Furthermore, the city of San Marcos, Buda, and Kyle (all cities between Austin and San Antonio) are growing extremely fast.  I heard a stat the other day Kyle's population increased by 500x in the last 10 years.  Spouses who have jobs in San Antonio and Austin will move to these cities.

Besides, San Marcos is to Austin as Norman is to OK City. 

I'm not predicting Texas St. to ever surpass UT or aTm, but I do think they are set up as good as any from the FCS to make the leap like South Florida did.

Houston did have their moment in the sun with Andre Ware.  Archi, why didn't Ware pick UT or aTm?  He was the best QB in the state when he played.  Didn't David Klingler also come out of Houston?

[Bone Crusher]

Houston did have their moment in the sun with Andre Ware.  Archi, why didn't Ware pick UT or aTm?  He was the best QB in the state when he played.  Didn't David Klingler also come out of Houston?

The SWC was alive back then.  I don't think those two would have gone to Houston if they were to choose today.

Texas St. will have the same draws that the City of Austin has due to its proximity.  Furthermore, the city of San Marcos, Buda, and Kyle (all cities between Austin and San Antonio) are growing extremely fast.  I heard a stat the other day Kyle's population increased by 500x in the last 10 years.  Spouses who have jobs in San Antonio and Austin will move to these cities.

Besides, San Marcos is to Austin as Norman is to OK City. 

I'm not predicting Texas St. to ever surpass UT or aTm, but I do think they are set up as good as any from the FCS to make the leap like South Florida did.

That is basically what I'm trying to say about Texas State and their chances in FBS ball. 

[usarmymike]

If Colorado and Missouri left the big 12,  I dont think the confeence would wait for either Texas St or UTSA to join.  They would act fast.  I think Houston and either SMU or TCU would be added.   The only suprises wuld be if the conerence went after Memphis, New Mexico or LA Tech.  That would be just to add new markets to make up for the lost Denver and St Louis markets.

[thedrUNKenLoper]

I cant find the rivals article but on local sports talk there saying how the Pac10 commish was on a Arizona radio station saying the conference may expand in the next 12 months with Utah and Colorado the targets.

[Bone Crusher]

I cant find the rivals article but on local sports talk there saying how the Pac10 commish was on a Arizona radio station saying the conference may expand in the next 12 months with Utah and Colorado the targets.

If you find anything, please post it...it's of interest to many CU fans including myself.