UTSA Decides to Go FBS, Could SLC Boot'em? [Archive]

TexasTerror

February 11th, 2010, 08:12 AM

One of the major announcements while AGS was down is that UTSA intends to go straight to FBS with no stop in the Southland Conference.

Here's a few write-ups on the situation...

Getting Things in Place at UTSA, Lamar and UCA (http://www.collegesportingnews.com/entry.php?37-Getting-Things-in-Place-at-UTSA-Lamar-and-UCA)

UTSA Throws Curveball - Announces FBS Plan (http://www.collegesportingnews.com/entry.php?31-UTSA-Throws-Curveball-Announces-FBS-Plan)

Let the Battle Begin - UTSA vs Texas State (http://www.collegesportingnews.com/entry.php?15-Let-the-Battle-Begin-UTSA-vs-Texas-State)

The biggest decision that has to be made could come as early as the June SLC meetings as the league 'powers' could decide to give UTSA the boot from the league.

msusig

February 11th, 2010, 09:09 AM

TexasTerror

February 11th, 2010, 09:11 AM

Let's keep them in. I wouldn't mind going to San Antonio to see the dome, river walk, and the Alamo again.

So, you would keep them in all of the other sports minus football?

Any concerns about the precedent you are setting with other schools like TXST, SHSU and maybe Lamar looking into FBS?

msusig

February 11th, 2010, 11:13 AM

So, you would keep them in all of the other sports minus football?

Any concerns about the precedent you are setting with other schools like TXST, SHSU and maybe Lamar looking into FBS?

Nah, I wouldn't go for anything, but football. And even then it would only be once. They are going to be playing FCS football first, right?

msusig

February 11th, 2010, 11:16 AM

So, you would keep them in all of the other sports minus football?

Any concerns about the precedent you are setting with other schools like TXST, SHSU and maybe Lamar looking into FBS?

Never mind....I didn't read your article till now. Kick them out in all sports, but I still would like to play them in football once. Plus if we kick them out now, we can replace them with another team earlier.

TexasTerror

February 11th, 2010, 11:33 AM

Never mind....I didn't read your article till now. Kick them out in all sports, but I still would like to play them in football once. Plus if we kick them out now, we can replace them with another team earlier.

Any idea on what team you would like to see replace UTSA if we did decide to remove them? Are we most likely looking at a Div II school or would we be willing to take in a non-football school (since that's practically what UTSA was for the SLC)?

the kidd

February 11th, 2010, 01:18 PM

What about UIW. Its a San Antonio school.

TexasTerror

February 11th, 2010, 01:27 PM

What about UIW. Its a San Antonio school.

Incarnate Word was mentioned as a possible SLC school "back when". Their issue was that if they were not going to get into a Div II conference (and they did), they would explore Div I.

I think they are fine right now in Div II, so do not see them being on the table. Throw in the fact, they are also a private school.

msusig

February 11th, 2010, 01:36 PM

Any idea on what team you would like to see replace UTSA if we did decide to remove them? Are we most likely looking at a Div II school or would we be willing to take in a non-football school (since that's practically what UTSA was for the SLC)?

I'm not familiar with with Div. II schools so I couldn't name any particular school. I would want us to stay away from any non-football school. If we lose Texas State in addition to UTSA, we would need to pick up 2 football schools because I think it would help the conference to be able to get to 12 football schools.

MaximumBobcat

February 11th, 2010, 01:43 PM

Delta State, Tarleton State and West Texas A&M are top replacement schools in my book.

TexasTerror

February 11th, 2010, 01:49 PM

Delta State, Tarleton State and West Texas A&M are top replacement schools in my book.

Tarleton State, definitely.

chrisattsu could probably shed some more light, but they want to be Div I as part of their 10, 15 year plan. chris, you back yet?

I think Delta State signed a pact with their conference members that they would not pursue Div I or something like that. Vaguely recall that someone posted that or something similar on another board - whether CS or elsewhere.

putter

February 11th, 2010, 02:09 PM

boot em out. Let them struggle as an FCS independent trying to build the program

TexasTerror

February 11th, 2010, 02:17 PM

boot em out. Let them struggle as an FCS independent trying to build the program

Depending on how quickly the dominoes fall, UTSA may be able to latch on to a conference before things become really dire.

I have a hard time believing the SLC will boot them out quicker than the two years allowed. They may invoke penalties - such as not being eligible for the automatic bids - but I think they'll keep them in for the next two years.

chrisattsu

February 11th, 2010, 02:39 PM

Tarleton State, definitely.

chrisattsu could probably shed some more light, but they want to be Div I as part of their 10, 15 year plan. chris, you back yet?

I think Delta State signed a pact with their conference members that they would not pursue Div I or something like that. Vaguely recall that someone posted that or something similar on another board - whether CS or elsewhere.

Slow to getting the memo, but I'm back.

Tarleton's campus master plan indicates that we hope to play Division 1 by 2017. That being said, this plan was developed by the former President. McCabe was a major supporter of sports. I cannot say if Dattavio (new pres) is as interested in this matter.

The UTSA move has lead to some discussions on the D2 board, specifically who is interested in moving up. It seems that the West Texas block (WT A&M, Abilene Christian, and Angelo State) are less interested in moving up unless they can do it as a block. They like the rivalries, and they are not interested in playing in Hammond, Lake Chuck, or even Huntsville. (and how many Louisiana schools want to go to Amarillo or the Big Country)

Plus West Texas A&M is close to being the big fish in a smaller pond. Right now, their basketball, volleyball, and football teams plunge deep into the national tournaments. The Southland has little luster for them, as the SLC winner ends up the sacrificial lamb to the 1-or-2 seeds.

Texas A&M-Kingsville turned down the move once before, and said that they would do it again. Even though their location (30 minutes from Corpus) is a better geographic fit for the SLC.

Aside from that, the only teams that are improving facilities and showing an increased budget are Central Oklahoma, TAMU-Commerce, and Incarnate Word. UCO would give the SLC a new state/market, and Incarnate Word would maintain a market that you are losing.

I don't think that Commerce is still not at the level they need to be to consider this move.

This leaves UIW- Tom Benson has given them a blank check to start a program in an affluent part of San Antonio. Maybe he is willing to push it even further. They are just joining the LSC so they have not made the entrenched rivalries. They are the second largest private school in the state, but UTSA may steal their thunder if they become 'the team' of the Alamo City.

McNeese75

February 11th, 2010, 07:10 PM

Kick UTSA to the curb xcoffeex

lionsrking2

February 11th, 2010, 07:33 PM

Kick UTSA to the curb xcoffeex

I agree...they're either with us, or against us.

msusig

February 11th, 2010, 07:47 PM

Depending on how quickly the dominoes fall, UTSA may be able to latch on to a conference before things become really dire.

I have a hard time believing the SLC will boot them out quicker than the two years allowed. They may invoke penalties - such as not being eligible for the automatic bids - but I think they'll keep them in for the next two years.

What is the latest on UT-Arlington & UT-CC wanting to get football? It would be good if UTA gets football, then we would only need to replace Texas State if they ever make it to FBS.

TexasTerror

February 11th, 2010, 10:30 PM

What is the latest on UT-Arlington & UT-CC wanting to get football? It would be good if UTA gets football, then we would only need to replace Texas State if they ever make it to FBS.

Didn't UT-Arlington decide to replace "The Stage'" instead of adding football?

A&M-CC is still dealing with the ramifications of their NCAA violations. They need some more time, I figure...

chrisattsu

February 12th, 2010, 08:43 AM

Didn't UT-Arlington decide to replace "The Stage'" instead of adding football?

A&M-CC is still dealing with the ramifications of their NCAA violations. They need some more time, I figure...

I believe that you are right.

My brother was at UTA when President Spaniolo said that they would look at bring back the football team. Of course, Spano said that they needed a new Special Events Center to replace "the Stage", and that is where it is. At this point, they are still not interested in doing it, nor do I think that they will ever be. With the new Cowboys Stadium a few miles away (IE- The Kill Zone), I don't think it will happen.

Corpus? I think they used the football study as a carrot to get us to add them to the conference. They said that they were would review it when they reach the 10,000 student mark, but who knows.

Best bet is to bring in a D2 school that is already playing football

msusig

February 12th, 2010, 08:59 AM

I believe that you are right.

My brother was at UTA when President Spaniolo said that they would look at bring back the football team. Of course, Spano said that they needed a new Special Events Center to replace "the Stage", and that is where it is. At this point, they are still not interested in doing it, nor do I think that they will ever be. With the new Cowboys Stadium a few miles away (IE- The Kill Zone), I don't think it will happen.

Corpus? I think they used the football study as a carrot to get us to add them to the conference. They said that they were would review it when they reach the 10,000 student mark, but who knows.

Best bet is to bring in a D2 school that is already playing football

What is "The Stage"?

TexasTerror

February 12th, 2010, 09:04 AM

What is "The Stage"?

Texas Hall.

A basketball court on a theatre stage...

http://utanews.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/photo.jpg

chrisattsu

February 12th, 2010, 09:25 AM

Texas Hall.

A basketball court on a theatre stage...

http://photos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs223.snc3/21069_715416348037_29606938_41642235_7903042_n.jpg

Taken from my Cell Phone Camera.

Texas Hall is one of the strangest places to watch a basketball game. A missed pass and the ball goes flying into the crowd.

Dane96

February 12th, 2010, 09:48 AM

chrisattsu

February 12th, 2010, 10:24 AM

Wow...this is a huge curveball...that I think could only work in the State of Texas. To jump full on in to FBS is ballsy.

Very ballsy. The UTSA faithful believe that Lynn Hickey (their AD) has things lined up 'backstage' because of her numerous NCAA committee / AD connections.

As TT has mentioned in other threads,
UTSA is full speed ahead

Texas State has taken a wait and see approach. Improve the program, and put ourselves in the best possible situation to make t he move should an opportunity present itself (by increasing funding, building new facilities, and athletic/academic success).

Lamar has made it no secret that they would like to move to FBS if the opportunity presented itself.

If that occurred, you could see Sam Houston jumping so that they are not left behind. Stephen F Austin tags along with rival Sam so that they are not left behind. At which point, you have to wonder if UTA and A&M-CC trying to follow their Texas brethren as an all-sports tag along.

None of which makes UTSA too happy. FBS Southland is not what they (nor I suspect Texas State) want.

TexasTerror

February 12th, 2010, 06:40 PM

Here's a "cautionary tale for colleges with big sports dreams" that was a blog published by the Austin American-Statesmen web site. (http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/investigative/entries/2010/02/12/a_cautionary_university_sports.html?cxntfid=blogs_ focal_point)

Pretty poor article considering Binghamton is a relatively new Div I member and of course, do not have football. Still, here you have a major newspaper in the general vicinity of TXST and UTSA questioning their intentions...

Part of the State University of New York system, Binghamton University for years enjoyed a sterling academic reputation. But that wasn’t enough for administrators, who craved a competitive and high-profile athletic program. On Thursday, a special investigator released this scathing report on what can happen when big-time sports overwhelm academics.

Upstate New York is a long way away. Yet a couple of Central Texas universities currently in the midst of aggressive drives to grow their sports programs might want to scan the document for lessons on what not to do as they reach for the stars.

The University of Texas-San Antonio is starting a football program from scratch. Last year the Roadrunners hired former University of Miami coach Larry Coker, who recently announced his first class of recruits. The school, which is raising money for a stadium, intends to start playing in 2011 and ascend to the Football Bowl Subdivision (formerly Division I) by 2013. Texas State University in San Marcos also hopes to elevate itself to the top division soon. To demonstrate its intentions, it recently upgraded its football stadium and built new baseball and softball facilities.

Redwyn

February 12th, 2010, 06:49 PM

DKHardee

February 12th, 2010, 10:51 PM

I think its a mistake jumping right into the FBS... though it did work well for USF.

TexasTerror

February 13th, 2010, 08:34 AM

I think its a mistake jumping right into the FBS... though it did work well for USF.

And that is the model that UTSA is using for their move to FBS. They want to follow USF's lead and based on several areas of contention - are right on that mark.

superman7515

February 14th, 2010, 10:39 AM

Angelo State, Abilene Christian, Tarleton State, Texas A&M Commerce, Midwestern State, or Central Oklahoma, or Texas A&M Kingsville could be Div 2 candidates.

Central Oklahoma has an enrollment of 15,700 which would already rank them 4th in the Southland Conference football schools (without UTSA) behind Texas State (who is planning to move up anyway), Southeastern Louisiana, and Sam Houston State.

And of course Texas A&M Kingsville - 7 National Championships, 34 Conference Championships. So they know how to win.

TexasTerror

February 15th, 2010, 04:09 PM

Would Oral Roberts be willing to move to the SLC if the league allows a non-football squad in? ORU is 272 miles to UT-Arlington, about 30 miles less to Central Arkansas.

ORU is 274 miles from UMKC, the closest distance to any foe in the league - especially since Centenary is jumping ship.

Figure the top of the SLC is comparable, if not better than the Summit League - particularly in baseball and men's basketball. It'd also give the SLC access to Oklahoma while cutting costs for ORU.

El Gato

February 15th, 2010, 06:26 PM

Short answer to original question: No.
I have answered this more in detail on bobcatfans.com and don't feel like elaborating now.

UCABEARS75

February 16th, 2010, 10:53 AM

I am not sure they would be interested but Arkansas Tech in Russellville, Arkansas (about 40 miles up I-40 from Conway) has really upgraded their athletic facilities in the past few years.

They made the playoffs last year in football winning 1 game and both their men's and women's BB teams are currently ranked in the top ten of D-II.

Their average BB attendance compares favorably with the Southland and I believe their FB could also in a few years.

Nice school, nice town, growing, etc.

TexasTerror

February 16th, 2010, 11:03 AM

chrisattsu

February 16th, 2010, 11:20 AM

I've heard about Arkansas Tech's basketball programs and since they would be a perfect travel partner with Central Arkansas, they are truly worth considering.

Could this be the Southland Conference in 2020? Non-football schools of Houston Baptist, UT-Arlington and Texas A&M-Corpus Christi? SHSU, Lamar, SFA, TXST and UTSA to FBS or out of the league?

Arkansas Tech
Central Arkansas
Houston Baptist
McNeese State
Nicholls State
Northwestern State
Southeastern Louisiana
Tarleton State
Texas A&M - Corpus Christi
Texas A&M - San Antonio (new school, we'll be hearing about them soon)
Texas A&M - Kingsville
UT-Arlington

Speaking only for the bolded schools, I am going to say -

TAMU-Kingsville: No. They are VERY happy in Division 2. They would rather be the successful at the D2 level.

TAMU-San Antonio: No. They only have one building, and they were ripped from A&M-Kingsville just under a year ago. You have to walk before you can crawl. They may have a D2 team in 10 years, but not FCS.

If you are going to include the Jaguars, why not include the Texas A&M-Central Texas Warriors (Formerly Tarleton-Central Texas)?

I think Incarnate Word has a better chance of being in the SLC before TAMUSA or TAMUCT

TexasTerror

February 16th, 2010, 11:31 AM

TAMU-San Antonio: No. They only have one building, and they were ripped from A&M-Kingsville just under a year ago. You have to walk before you can crawl. They may have a D2 team in 10 years, but not FCS.

Their drawing of a football stadium is VERY nice though! ;)

I think Incarnate Word has a better chance of being in the SLC before TAMUSA or TAMUCT

The school was willing to Div I if they could not find a Div II conference affiliation. Seems like willingness on my part to make the jump. They do need to enjoy the Div II status for a few more years before consideration of a jump.

El Gato

February 16th, 2010, 01:38 PM

What about UTPA? Have they not shown intrest in joining the SLC?

UCABEARS75

February 16th, 2010, 01:59 PM

I've heard about Arkansas Tech's basketball programs and since they would be a perfect travel partner with Central Arkansas, they are truly worth considering.

Could this be the Southland Conference in 2020? Non-football schools of Houston Baptist, UT-Arlington and Texas A&M-Corpus Christi? SHSU, Lamar, SFA, TXST and UTSA to FBS or out of the league?

Arkansas Tech
Central Arkansas
Houston Baptist
McNeese State
Nicholls State
Northwestern State
Southeastern Louisiana
Tarleton State
Texas A&M - Corpus Christi
Texas A&M - San Antonio (new school, we'll be hearing about them soon)
Texas A&M - Kingsville
UT-Arlington

I just do not see all those schools making the move to FBS.

UTSA, probably.

Tx State, maybe-probably.

The rest I doubt very seriously unless they come up with split D-IA (bowl division 85 scholarships and playoff division 75-85 scholarships).

If that were to happen I would envision UCA making that move.

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 16th, 2010, 02:33 PM

What about UTPA? Have they not shown intrest in joining the SLC?

I think if UTSA, Lamar, & Texas St. leave the SLC will go after these schools...
All 3 applied for membership the last time we expanded.
UTPA
C.Oklahoma
Tarleton St.

I also think that the SLC would take UTPA over a private school like HBU who is still in the provisional stage and has a 7 year wait instead of 5 because they were in the NAIA.

TexasTerror

February 16th, 2010, 05:02 PM

What about UTPA? Have they not shown intrest in joining the SLC?

UT-Pan American has applied several times. They are an affiliate member in men's tennis and during their tenure, may have been an affiliate elsewhere. Can not recall.

I just do not see all those schools making the move to FBS.

There is a lot going on behind the scenes.

I was relatively surprised to hear SHSU in the conversations when I talked to people closely tied to the situation as it pertains to FBS departures from the SLC. They were included with UTSA and TXST.

There's some more that could be said, but we'll just leave it at that. Just know that SHSU is doing that study, that not only looks at how they can improve at the FCS level, but the ramifications, possibilities and support of an FBS move.

UTPA
C.Oklahoma
Tarleton St.

I also think that the SLC would take UTPA over a private school like HBU who is still in the provisional stage and has a 7 year wait instead of 5 because they were in the NAIA.

UTPA is a non-football school and can apply til they turn blue in the fact. Too many NCAA issues there or waiting to happen. If they can solidify their program while in the Great West, perhaps they are an option.

Central Oklahoma and Tarleton State are probably the two best Div II bets, along with Delta State if they were interested. Arkansas Tech needs to be kept in mind.

As far as HBU is concerned, didn't they sue the NCAA over the length of time? I am pretty sure they got it reduced to five successfully. Can not recall, though I am sure I can ask around.

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 16th, 2010, 09:15 PM

UT-Pan American has applied several times. They are an affiliate member in men's tennis and during their tenure, may have been an affiliate elsewhere. Can not recall.

There is a lot going on behind the scenes.

I was relatively surprised to hear SHSU in the conversations when I talked to people closely tied to the situation as it pertains to FBS departures from the SLC. They were included with UTSA and TXST.

There's some more that could be said, but we'll just leave it at that. Just know that SHSU is doing that study, that not only looks at how they can improve at the FCS level, but the ramifications, possibilities and support of an FBS move.

UTPA is a non-football school and can apply til they turn blue in the fact. Too many NCAA issues there or waiting to happen. If they can solidify their program while in the Great West, perhaps they are an option.

Central Oklahoma and Tarleton State are probably the two best Div II bets, along with Delta State if they were interested. Arkansas Tech needs to be kept in mind.

As far as HBU is concerned, didn't they sue the NCAA over the length of time? I am pretty sure they got it reduced to five successfully. Can not recall, though I am sure I can ask around.

I don't know if HBU sued. I think that 12 members 9 football would be ideal. If the 3 schools leave you'd have 7 for football and adding the 2 D-II schools will put them at 9, if no other school can afford to move up with all of these new rules even if they can adding a non-football member would make it 9/12. What is the SLCs stance on a private school over a state school like UTPA? UTPA had problems in the late 90s. I haven't heard anything since.

TexasTerror

February 16th, 2010, 09:20 PM

I don't know if HBU sued.

HBU did sue and won.

From the Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/sports/6245469.html), "HBU and the NCAA on Tuesday reached a settlement that paves the way for the Huskies to become an official Division I program by the 2011-12 academic year and closes the door on lawsuits the school filed against the NCAA last spring."

I think that 12 members 9 football would be ideal. If the 3 schools leave you'd have 7 for football and adding the 2 D-II schools will put them at 9, if no other school can afford to move up with all of these new rules even if they can adding a non-football member would make it 9/12. What is the SLCs stance on a private school over a state school like UTPA? UTPA had problems in the late 90s. I haven't heard anything since.

When was the last time the SLC had a private school? Guess it was the early 1970s when Abilene Christian and Trinity were part of the equation.

UTPA has had problems as of late. Actually, there was an article just last month in the Monitor (http://www.themonitor.com/sports/edinburg-34947--.html) regarding problems they have had.

The issue was with baseball, per that newspaper, "Since October 2008 when UTPA made the internal investigation public, the university has maintained silence even though it could release the findings of its probe once the information was forwarded to the NCAA.

The internal investigation wrapped in May, when the findings of the school’s probe were sent to the NCAA for college athletics’ governing body’s own investigation into the allegations."

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 16th, 2010, 09:23 PM

thanks for the info. Poor UTPA will never find a real home. I bet they miss the Sun Belt now. I still hope they can find a way in, they seem like a natural fit for the SLC.

TexasTerror

February 16th, 2010, 09:26 PM

thanks for the info. Poor UTPA will never find a real home. I bet they miss the Sun Belt now. I still hope they can find a way in, they seem like a natural fit for the SLC.

UTPA has just 14 sports.

I'd hope if they decided to join the SLC, that the league gets them to add women's soccer at the very least.

Problem with UTPA is that it is just shy of 900 mi from Conway, Ark. and 650 mi. from Hammond, La. I guess that's only 100-125 mi. further than Corpus Christi, Texas - but we could potentially see in-conference flights when certain schools play UT-Pan American, if that were the case? Maybe...??

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 16th, 2010, 09:29 PM

No doubt Houston is a more ideal spot for a SLC member.

El Gato

February 17th, 2010, 11:48 AM

Speaking about flights, Someone mentioned on another thread about a "southwest airlines conference". Hey, SW Airlines flies to Harlingen, and Edinburg (home of UTPA) is only about a 30-35 min drive from Harlingen.

JSU02

February 17th, 2010, 01:07 PM

Hmmmm, so i guess this editorial change is was led the moratorium in the 1st place?

the kidd

February 17th, 2010, 10:04 PM

MaximumBobcat

February 18th, 2010, 12:33 AM

Here is part of UTSA 2011 football Schedule. Also they will not play Texas State in year one and two.

To clarify any misunderstaning or miscommunication about the Runners opening 2011 schedule, UTSAtailgaters has confirmed that nine contracts have already been signed for the 2011 season and up to eleven are in the mix.

There had been grumblings that a season of 4-6 or 5-7 games would be played. That is actually the total of home games that are being targeted for the 2011 season. 5-7 home games is what UTSA is looking at for 2011. With opponents already confirmed such as Lamar, Georgia State, South Alabama, Cal-Poly there will be a full schedule. During our first two years of play we will not be playing a single FBS opponent and we will not be playing TSU-San Marcos.

It really is a shame that UTSA is so scared of the ramifications of losing to us that they won't schedule Texas State the first couple of years. Probably would have been the highest attended games those seasons for both schools.

Can't really blame them though, as it probably would be a TxSt victory both in the Alamodome or at Bobcat Stadium.

xcoffeex

TXST_CAT

February 18th, 2010, 05:33 AM

There is a lot going on behind the scenes.

I was relatively surprised to hear SHSU in the conversations when I talked to people closely tied to the situation as it pertains to FBS departures from the SLC. They were included with UTSA and TXST.

There's some more that could be said, but we'll just leave it at that. Just know that SHSU is doing that study, that not only looks at how they can improve at the FCS level, but the ramifications, possibilities and support of an FBS move.

OK what gives, you don't make a statement like that and not provide some details. Are these teams working together or separate? Are they trying to find conference slots to fill or in talks to create a new conference i.e a new SWC? Is Sunbelt or C-USA in the conversation or WAC? Common TT spill it or write about it in your next CS article.

TXST_CAT

February 18th, 2010, 05:36 AM

It really is a shame that UTSA is so scared of the ramifications of losing to us that they won't schedule Texas State the first couple of years. Probably would have been the highest attended games those seasons for both schools.

Can't really blame them though, as it probably would be a TxSt victory both in the Alamodome or at Bobcat Stadium.

xcoffeex

We should get the SA Express and AAS to write a piece about this very subject. xnodx

TexasTerror

February 18th, 2010, 08:30 AM

OK what gives, you don't make a statement like that and not provide some details. Are these teams working together or separate? Are they trying to find conference slots to fill or in talks to create a new conference i.e a new SWC? Is Sunbelt or C-USA in the conversation or WAC? Common TT spill it or write about it in your next CS article.

There's a lot going on behind the scenes, whether people realize it or not. At this time, there is really not anything to share at this point. When there is, it will be shared.

I'm still compiling information and trying to make sense of things. There may not be anything concrete to put out there in the open.

It really is a shame that UTSA is so scared of the ramifications of losing to us that they won't schedule Texas State the first couple of years. Probably would have been the highest attended games those seasons for both schools.

Can't really blame them though, as it probably would be a TxSt victory both in the Alamodome or at Bobcat Stadium.

I am not certain that TXST would sweep UTSA and I do not think it impacts UTSA one way or another should they win/lose.

UTSA is trying to put separation between them and TXST as programs. What we are seeing in UTSA's bold decisions is that they want to be the TCU to TXST's SMU.

UTSA wants to be one step ahead of TXST in everything. From making the move to FBS to finding a new conference.

At first, I thought the schools would be a package deal. They are no longer a package deal and this may come from feedback that Lynn Hickey was getting when talking to other conferences...not sure.

chrisattsu

February 18th, 2010, 09:12 AM

UTSA is trying to put separation between them and TXST as programs. What we are seeing in UTSA's bold decisions is that they want to be the TCU to TXST's SMU.

UTSA wants to be one step ahead of TXST in everything. From making the move to FBS to finding a new conference.

At first, I thought the schools would be a package deal. They are no longer a package deal and this may come from feedback that Lynn Hickey was getting when talking to other conferences...not sure.

I think you may be right on this.

MaximumBobcat

February 18th, 2010, 01:04 PM

I am not certain that TXST would sweep UTSA and I do not think it impacts UTSA one way or another should they win/lose.

UTSA is trying to put separation between them and TXST as programs. What we are seeing in UTSA's bold decisions is that they want to be the TCU to TXST's SMU.

Well of course you're not certain, we're talking about a game here. Any given Saturday. I'd be willing to bet on the Bobcats though.

I think one of the reasons they don't want to play us is precisely because it could impact their recruiting, in student-athletes, as well as fan base.

Obviously the student-athletes want to go to a place that wins against their competition, and I can see the average San Antonio fan saying "They got beat by Texas State? I knew UTSA would suck..." And then never go to another game again.

And we can try to be Boise State to UTSA's TCU.... xrolleyesx

It's so easy to talk up UTSA because they have done nothing.

I still think that the roadrunners and bobcats will both be just fine and probably in the same conference.

TexasTerror

February 18th, 2010, 01:52 PM

It's so easy to talk up UTSA because they have done nothing.

I still think that the roadrunners and bobcats will both be just fine and probably in the same conference.

UTSA has done a few things though.

While they have yet to win a game on the field or even compete, they have made some bold statements regarding their plans to go FBS. That is a lot more than TXST has done and could provide crucial to the school's attempt to reach that level. I think UTSA's goal is to do everything that TXST has not, in order to get a jump start on them in as many regards as possible.

MaximumBobcat

February 18th, 2010, 02:05 PM

UTSA has done a few things though.

While they have yet to win a game on the field or even compete, they have made some bold statements regarding their plans to go FBS. That is a lot more than TXST has done and could provide crucial to the school's attempt to reach that level. I think UTSA's goal is to do everything that TXST has not, in order to get a jump start on them in as many regards as possible.

Gotta love those BOLD statements! xlolx xlolx xrolleyesx

Just as the SLC schools have played copy-cat with eachother for the past years (Baseball stadiums, videoboards, etc) expect UTSA and TxSt to copy cat eachother down to the t as well in these next few years. Especially once the moratorium is up.

TXST_CAT

February 18th, 2010, 02:10 PM

Well of course you're not certain, we're talking about a game here. Any given Saturday. I'd be willing to bet on the Bobcats though.

I think one of the reasons they don't want to play us is precisely because it could impact their recruiting, in student-athletes, as well as fan base.

Obviously the student-athletes want to go to a place that wins against their competition, and I can see the average San Antonio fan saying "They got beat by Texas State? I knew UTSA would suck..." And then never go to another game again.

And we can try to be Boise State to UTSA's TCU.... xrolleyesx

It's so easy to talk up UTSA because they have done nothing.

I still think that the roadrunners and bobcats will both be just fine and probably in the same conference.

I see us more as TCU

Since they refuse to play us I'd say they are more like UTEP- not important.

TCU vs UTEP I'd put my money on TCU. xnodx

msusig

February 18th, 2010, 04:26 PM

I see us more as TCU

Since they refuse to play us I'd say they are more like UTEP- not important.

TCU vs UTEP I'd put my money on TCU. xnodx

UTSA is more like UL-Lafayette and Texas State is more like UL-Monroe. :p

TexasTerror

February 18th, 2010, 06:18 PM

Gotta love those BOLD statements! xlolx xlolx xrolleyesx

Just as the SLC schools have played copy-cat with eachother for the past years (Baseball stadiums, videoboards, etc) expect UTSA and TxSt to copy cat eachother down to the t as well in these next few years. Especially once the moratorium is up.

UTSA is following up on those bold statements...

Until TXST clearly announces that they are moving up to FBS and not turning back, when can they be held in the same regard? I'm turning over the hour glass now and watching if TXST acts before the SLC meetings in June.

We all know UTSA will be on the table. Will TXST join their I-35 rivals in letting their intentions known and effectively starting the clock til their departure from the SLC?

UTSA is more like UL-Lafayette and Texas State is more like UL-Monroe. :p

Good comparison! xlolx

Only difference is that everyone calls La-Monroe - "ULM". People can't even determine the acronym for Texas State (-San Marcos), whether it be TSU, TXST, TSU-SM or any of the others ones I've seen in the press, TV, etc.

Syntax Error

February 18th, 2010, 06:34 PM

UTSA is not FCS or anything right now. They can rescind any time. All this talk from SLC fans about teams that don't exist in FCS is really "other sports" no?

TexasTerror

February 18th, 2010, 06:43 PM

UTSA is not FCS or anything right now. They can rescind any time. All this talk from SLC fans about teams that don't exist in FCS is really "other sports" no?

UTSA could be FCS. They will be FCS for a few years and their actions impact numerous current FCS members - namely each of the Texas schools in the SLC and a few 'could be' FCS members like UT-Arlington.

Until proven otherwise, it is what it is...

txstatebobcat

February 18th, 2010, 07:22 PM

There's a lot going on behind the scenes, whether people realize it or not. At this time, there is really not anything to share at this point. When there is, it will be shared.

I'm still compiling information and trying to make sense of things. There may not be anything concrete to put out there in the open.

I am not certain that TXST would sweep UTSA and I do not think it impacts UTSA one way or another should they win/lose.

UTSA is trying to put separation between them and TXST as programs. What we are seeing in UTSA's bold decisions is that they want to be the TCU to TXST's SMU.

UTSA wants to be one step ahead of TXST in everything. From making the move to FBS to finding a new conference.

At first, I thought the schools would be a package deal. They are no longer a package deal and this may come from feedback that Lynn Hickey was getting when talking to other conferences...not sure.

I personally think UTSA made the announcement because of two reasons. One: the SLC is not big time enough for fans and donors. Two: because as far as conference realignment is concerned, UTSA is way behind. I mean rumors are flying like crazy right now, with actual shuffling (if any) starting either in late 2010 or actually sometime around 2011 with new conference mates playing each other as early as 2012.
I have to admit that UTSA has huge potential, however without a football team they are handicapped as they try to court a potential conference. IMO Their only hope is to announce that they are going FBS ASAP, and pray that a conference is willing to hold their spot until 2013. Which truth be told is certainly a possibility since the road runners are lucky enough to be in San Antonio.
With all that said, I'm still not convinced that UTSA has secured a spot in a conference. I doubt even the conference commissioners even know what the future holds to have serious talks with an FCS school, which is a last resort addition for any conference.

MaximumBobcat

February 18th, 2010, 07:32 PM

UTSA is following up on those bold statements...

We all know UTSA will be on the table. Will TXST join their I-35 rivals in letting their intentions known and effectively starting the clock til their departure from the SLC?

Care to extrapolate on those follow up's?

Larry Teis is definitely playing it a bit safer for now, which is probably wise because nobody knows what the new FCS-to-FBS requirements will be.

Only difference is that everyone calls La-Monroe - "ULM". People can't even determine the acronym for Texas State (-San Marcos), whether it be TSU, TXST, TSU-SM or any of the others ones I've seen in the press, TV, etc.

Any half-way intelligent person who has followed Texas State for more than a week is well-versed in the commonly accepted acronym of TXST.

TexasTerror

February 18th, 2010, 09:20 PM

I personally think UTSA made the announcement because of two reasons. One: the SLC is not big time enough for fans and donors. Two: because as far as conference realignment is concerned, UTSA is way behind. I mean rumors are flying like crazy right now, with actual shuffling (if any) starting either in late 2010 or actually sometime around 2011 with new conference mates playing each other as early as 2012.

To say "shuffling (if any)" is a gross understatement. Any AD that you speak with walked away from the NCAA meetings last month thinking that the dominoes are going to fall and fall very hard.

There was a CBS Sportsline article that painted a pretty good picture of the main reasons - television revenue. If realignment does not happen, it will be because several major conferences got GREAT television deals!

I have to admit that UTSA has huge potential, however without a football team they are handicapped as they try to court a potential conference. IMO Their only hope is to announce that they are going FBS ASAP, and pray that a conference is willing to hold their spot until 2013. Which truth be told is certainly a possibility since the road runners are lucky enough to be in San Antonio.

I do not think a conference will mind holding up for UTSA. Most schools without penalty (especially if they announce after July 1), are stuck until 2013. UTSA can get out of the SLC in all sports as soon as July 1, 2012. Football can compete in '13 against their new conference schools as out of conference games for two years before moving in. Nothing wrong with that.

It's more about long-term than short-term. It is what can you do today, to help tomorrow? Ask ADs, I am sure they will tell you that too as it relates to realignment.

With all that said, I'm still not convinced that UTSA has secured a spot in a conference. I doubt even the conference commissioners even know what the future holds to have serious talks with an FCS school, which is a last resort addition for any conference.

Conference commissioners are being very proactive in everything, as are ADs. Again, the impression I get is that ADs walked away from Indianapolis with a different taste in their mouth than they went in with.

Care to extrapolate on those follow up's?

Larry Teis is definitely playing it a bit safer for now, which is probably wise because nobody knows what the new FCS-to-FBS requirements will be.

I think the ADs have a pretty good idea of what is coming...

There is a reason that schools, including some that are not mentioned as often, as doing things to better prepare themselves for the next 5-10 years. They would be stupid not to...

Any half-way intelligent person who has followed Texas State for more than a week is well-versed in the commonly accepted acronym of TXST.

Funny how some FCS people still call you guys TSU and we've seen it wrong on scoreboards and TV broadcasts. Someone is not so well-versed.

MaximumBobcat

February 18th, 2010, 09:50 PM

Funny how some FCS people still call you guys TSU and we've seen it wrong on scoreboards and TV broadcasts. Someone is not so well-versed.

I can't really find much to rebut with as most of what you last said is opinion, but I will agree with you on the quoted point.

I agree, it is funny. Only the half-wits and people who refuse to do much research continue to call us TSU.

:D

txstatebobcat

February 18th, 2010, 11:05 PM

To say "shuffling (if any)" is a gross understatement. Any AD that you speak with walked away from the NCAA meetings last month thinking that the dominoes are going to fall and fall very hard.

There was a CBS Sportsline article that painted a pretty good picture of the main reasons - television revenue. If realignment does not happen, it will be because several major conferences got GREAT television deals!

I do not think a conference will mind holding up for UTSA. Most schools without penalty (especially if they announce after July 1), are stuck until 2013. UTSA can get out of the SLC in all sports as soon as July 1, 2012. Football can compete in '13 against their new conference schools as out of conference games for two years before moving in. Nothing wrong with that.

It's more about long-term than short-term. It is what can you do today, to help tomorrow? Ask ADs, I am sure they will tell you that too as it relates to realignment.

Conference commissioners are being very proactive in everything, as are ADs. Again, the impression I get is that ADs walked away from Indianapolis with a different taste in their mouth than they went in with.

I think the ADs have a pretty good idea of what is coming...

There is a reason that schools, including some that are not mentioned as often, as doing things to better prepare themselves for the next 5-10 years. They would be stupid not to...

Funny how some FCS people still call you guys TSU and we've seen it wrong on scoreboards and TV broadcasts. Someone is not so well-versed.

The ADs probably know change is coming and not a whole lot more. The FBS level is much more of a "every man for himself" attitude. In this environment one has to do a whole lot of hand shaking and not to be surprised if you find a knife in your back. Just look at the whole big east/ACC fiasco of a several years ago.

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 19th, 2010, 03:29 AM

I found this on the cs.com board talking about all of this. http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12564

There will be no new rules for moving FCS to FBS because they are both D-I. The new rules affect schools wanting to move D-II to D-I. Which sucks because schools can bolt for FBS but it will be harder to bring in schools from D-II to replace them.

For the SLC schools leaving, it seems that the WAC & Sun Belt are their only options after the big dogs raid the little dogs leaving holes.

I just hope Tarleton St. and C.Oklahoma are ready for the SLC to call them or any other D-II school in the area.

chazg

February 19th, 2010, 08:49 PM

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 21st, 2010, 02:25 AM

Very few of the LSC D2 schools will be financially ready to make the move up.

Also the NCAA has not finished with their rule changes for reclassification for football. They may make it much more difficult for a team to go from FCS to FBS.
I would not be surprised if they do away with new teams moving up without a conference.
They did make new rules.

1. you need a conference to move up
2. you must have been D-II for 5 years
3. you wait 8 years for post season in D-I
4. app fee will be between 1-1.4 million(this has not been settled yet)xsmhx

MaximumBobcat

February 21st, 2010, 02:40 AM

They did make new rules.

1. you need a conference to move up
2. you must have been D-II for 5 years
3. you wait 8 years for post season in D-I
4. app fee will be between 1-1.4 million(this has not been settled yet)xsmhx

You're going to have to source this before anyone takes you seriously.

TexasTerror

February 21st, 2010, 08:14 AM

You're going to have to source this before anyone takes you seriously.

Max,

I believe our friend got it partially right.

Here's a thread on the subject - http://anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?t=67953

MaximumBobcat

February 21st, 2010, 12:26 PM

Oh, I thought he was talking about FCS to FBS.

The NCAA still hasn't come out with if they're going to make any changes to those requirements have they?

chrisattsu

February 21st, 2010, 08:42 PM

The 8 year Post Season ban is pretty lame.

You will be hard pressed to find a team in the Lone Star Conference (especially one that is nationally competitive) that is willing to move up with that rule in place.

What Happens to the SLC if D2 teams decide that this rule is not worth it, and they don't move up?

Syntax Error

February 21st, 2010, 09:21 PM

Max,
I believe our friend got it partially right.
Here's a thread on the subject - http://anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?t=67953

xoutofrepx
not a copycat thread either

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 21st, 2010, 09:49 PM

You're going to have to source this before anyone takes you seriously.

There we tons of links to the new rule posted on ags & cs.com. I don't care if you don't believe me.

There is still no rule for moving from FCS to FBS and it doesn't look like there is going to be one.

MaximumBobcat

February 21st, 2010, 09:55 PM

There we tons of links to the new rule posted on ags & cs.com. I don't care if you don't believe me.

lol, relax buddy. the way you quoted the other guy and failed to address specifically what you were talking about made me think you were talking fcs to fbs.

The 8 year Post Season ban is pretty lame.

You will be hard pressed to find a team in the Lone Star Conference (especially one that is nationally competitive) that is willing to move up with that rule in place.

What Happens to the SLC if D2 teams decide that this rule is not worth it, and they don't move up?

1st choice would probably be force the basketball schools to add football. Then 2nd choice would be maybe take a Great West school?

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 21st, 2010, 09:55 PM

Max,

I believe our friend got it partially right.

Here's a thread on the subject - http://anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?t=67953
What part did I get wrong? Everything I posted is legit. I also put that the 1 million thing was still up in the air. Did they finalize that part? The rest is true. If you read #6, it tacks on 3 more years as a full member to the 5 provisional before being allowed in post season

MaximumBobcat

February 21st, 2010, 09:58 PM

What part did I get wrong? Everything I posted is legit. I also put that the 1 million thing was still up in the air. Did they finalize that part? The rest is true.

The playoff ban? idk what he meant.

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 21st, 2010, 10:06 PM

I didn't get it wrong. Its 8 years 5 reclassifying plus the 3 years they are a full D-I where they can't get any benefits of the post season.

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 21st, 2010, 10:08 PM

lol, relax buddy. the way you quoted the other guy and failed to address specifically what you were talking about made me think you were talking fcs to fbs.

1st choice would probably be force the basketball schools to add football. Then 2nd choice would be maybe take a Great West school?

I thought everyone saw that new rule by now. Its like you asking me to show proof that UTSA wants to be FBS:D

Lamar Cardinals 2010

February 21st, 2010, 10:14 PM

xoutofrepx
not a copycat thread either

You mean who posted it first? There's a guy on the collegesportsinfo board that posts stuff like that as soon as it goes public. I bet he posted it first, but why does it matter. Every newspaper will write how the USA beat Canada in hockey are the rest copying the first paper that releases it?xeyebrowx

chrisattsu

February 21st, 2010, 11:35 PM

The playoff ban? idk what he meant.

I probably should use another term other than "playoff ban", but essentially that is what happens to these schools.

"Hey Tarleton / West Texas A&M, have we got a deal for you. Our conference just lost 2 - 4 teams, and we are looking to expand because that really leaves us 4 or 5 football playing schools. We hope that you are still interested. We upped the buy-in to just over $1M and you can't win a conference title or participate in the post season for close to a decade in any of your sports. However, you will get your name on the ESPN every week, and get trips to Louisiana instead of Oklahoma."