Bleacher Report - Articles by Tobi Writes

Come on Al, It's Time to Just Win, Baby!

Tobi Writes — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 23:41:55 -0500

Dear Al,

I know you've heard the talk.

"Al's over the Hill."

"The game has passed Al by."

And that one the really has to light you up...

"His deep passing game doesn't work anymore."

Idiots.

Like they haven't seen Kurt Warner bomb his teams into the Super Bowl.

You can't put up with that garbage! You are the Raiders! You are the heart and soul of the greatness!

Al, it's time to get back to the top.

The facts are the Raiders aren't meant to be built around spoiled high draft picks. The Raiders are always at their best when they are built around the rejects of the rest of the league.

The UFL is made of NFL rejects. Go raid the UFL.

Man, you know that playoff teams need good leadership at the top. A strong owner, a good coach, and a good solid QB. You got one out of the three, but you haven't had the others since John Gruden left.

JaMarcus Russell can hold the bench down until his contract is up or until you decide to cut his fat, lazy ass. The guy is another Ryan Leaf. He is an Akili Smith-level bust. The guy doesn't even come to camp in shape? You don't need him.

Bruce Gradkowski is a 53 percent career passer with a career QB rating of 61. On top of that, he doesn't have the arm to go deep. He's a solid backup to a third QB, nothing more.

Charlie Frye was a nice prospect once. He's an OK third QB, but it is pretty clear the Raiders don't have a starter.

Your head coach, Tom Cable, isn't a winner and is out of his league as a head coach. He ran the University of Idaho into the ground. He's actually the guy that ended the run of great coaches at that school. He was the first coach fired at Idaho in 22 years. 22 years! You know you have a program on cruise control when they haven't fired a coach in 22 years. Cable blew it taking over a strong program.

He certainly hasn't shown anything as the Raiders' coach.

It is time to cut your losses and roll the dice on getting better now, Al.

Fire Cable and hire Californian Jim Fassel away from the UFL's Las Vegas Locomotives to be the next coach of the Raiders and sign Former Buffalo Bill first-round pick and current Locos QB J.P. Losman to be your starting QB.

The Locos were that league's second best team, but they kept improving as the year went on and they ended up beating the league's best team for the title.

That is the sign of a well coached team. Fassel also is a former NFL coach of the year who took the Giants to a Super Bowl before he was run out of the league by the fans in New York. He is a Raider who just hasn't happened yet.

The UFL season is over, so he could step in filling the role that an interim coach would normally fill and take over the staff for the last five games, allowing him to see if he wants to keep any of your assistants or bring in his own guys next season.

Fassel is an intense ball of fire. He is good guy, but he can be the SOB the Raiders have needed for years to be your avatar on the field and kick lazy and problem players around.

He likes to run the ball and to take shots deep fairly often. He demands his players play with toughness and fire, and people in the NFL don't give him the respect he has earned. He seems like the perfect Raider's coach.

Losman went to the UFL to play for Fassel. The two are a very odd couple, but it clearly works.

Losman is a weird California dude who looks like a dirty unshaven surfer roaming the sideline and muttering to himself during the games.

But he respects Fassel and Fassel can get Losman's attention.

Losman is still the same guy who got run out of Buffalo.

He appears to think he is better than he is and also sometimes appears to bristle under coaching. That said, he really seemed to want to learn from Fassel.

Losman has the big arm to make the deep passing game work. He has the arm and deep accuracy to make this offense work like it should.

He is a surprisingly tough player who will stand in to hit the deep pass, but has a bad feel for sensing the rush and will hold on to the ball too long—Fassel is working with him on that.

Losman's mechanics come and go, but you can see a slow improvement in his consistency from working with Fassel. When his mechanics are good, he can throw an accurate pass with zip 50-60-plus yards. He can throw accurate bombs.

He completed a sweet 62.6 percent of his passes for 9 TDs and 2 INTs in the UFL's seven game season with a pretty marginal pair of starting WRs, but that was against poor secondaries. Still, he has a career 75.6 passer rating in the NFL, which is better than the career QB ratings of your other QBs.

Losman appears flaky, inconsistent, self-absorbed, a bit argumentative, and frankly a little weird, but he's also talented, tough, and better than anyone you've got.

Think of it as trading JaMarcus Russell for J.P. Losman. At this point, who wouldn't make that trade?

It isn't like there is a huge talent difference. Russel can probably throw the ball 90 yards while Losman can only throw it 70 --- big deal. Both have big arms and the physical talent to have been NFL first round picks.

Then there is how they actually play on the field. Losman has a 75.6 NFL QB rating for his career. Russell's is 65.5.

With a full offseason with Fassel, Losman could really smooth out his game and become a pretty good player.

He's a Raider. He might be another Jim Plunkett.

Fassel has enough faith in Losman to start him over Gradkowski, regardless of the occasional bad game by Losman. Losman, Gradkowski, and Frye lay out nicely as your QBs.

The Raiders are one of the worst teams in the NFL today. It sucks, but it is what it is. There is no difference in talent between the guys starting in the UFL and the bottom half of the Raiders' roster. So why not go sign some of those guys to replace your weaker backups?

You have guys that you know aren't developing or lack the talent to contribute in the NFL sitting on your bench. Time to dump some of those guys.

UFL rosters were built specifically to have NFL prospects in every roster spot. That is part of the UFL's hope to become a feeder league of the NFL.

The UFL didn't go after big time collegiate playmakers who the NFL wouldn't touch. They went after guys who have made NFL rosters. These guys were in the UFL because they didn't make enough plays to stay in the NFL, not because they lacked NFL talent.

And as it turns out a very small sliver of those guys in the UFL can make plays.

Use the retreads from the UFL to restore the chip on their shoulders that Raiders players should have towards the rest of the league.

The Locomotives won the title because their defense ate up the league's best offense. Give Fassel the freedom to bring in clutch playmakers like DE Adrian Awasome, DT Ross Kolodziej, LB Teddy Lehman, S Tony Parrish, or other Locos like TE Adam Bergen, WR Tab Perry, QB Tim Rattay, and others to fill out his bench and ease the transition.

Guys like Florida's WRs Taye Biddle and Marcus Maxwell could also be targets to investigate to help that receiving corps. They may be the two best receivers in that league and do appear to be legit NFL talents that would fit the Raider's down field passing scheme, not just bubble guys like most of the UFL's players. You can probably nab a couple of good backup OL from the UFL too.

The UFL season just ended and you have to think most NFL teams aren't going to touch most of those guys to try to discourage players from going to the UFL in the future.

Be Al Freakin' Davis.

Treat the UFL as your bonus draft. Add the right 10 or so players from the UFL and another three or four in the next draft and this team can be back in the playoffs next season.

Come on, Al.

Just win, baby!

UFL Final Attendance Numbers For Premeire Season In

Tobi Writes — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 19:44:41 -0500

The UFL's Premiere season is over and the attendance numbers are in. I wrote an article on attendance after the Redwood's first home game, suggesting strong promotional efforts were needed.

With no promotion, things have gotten worse.

Here are the 12 games attendance numbers in order:

Stadium City attendance

Sam Boyd Las Vegas 14,209
Citrus Bowl Orlando 11,203
Sam Boyd Las Vegas 12,160
AT&T Park San Francisco 6341
Citrus Bowl Orlando 12,021
Giants Stadium New Jersey 10,318
Tropicana Field St. Petersburg 11,354
Shuart Stadium Hempstead, NY 4392
Rentschler Field E. Hartford, CT 5201
Spartan Stadium San Jose 4312
AT&T Park San Francisco 6837
Sam Boyd Las Vegas 13,306

Total fans attending UFL games: 111,654

Average attendance per game: 9305

While there is a lot to be said for controlling costs, one has to wonder if the marketing folks who came up with the idea of the "Premiere Season" with its secondary sites were under the impression there would be some promotion attached to sell tickets.

It would have certainly made some sense to lay the groundwork for expansion teams in these secondary sites.

It would seem like drawing 5201 to see a game in Connecticut would not be a strong positive in terms of securing a future owner for an expansion Connecticut team, but that is just one man's opinion.

What are your thoughts on the UFL's initial season?

They Played Well Enough To Win... Actually, Suffering Fan, They Didn't

Tobi Writes — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:39:58 -0500

As we approach the end of the football season, fans of struggling teams like my beloved UNT Mean Green turn to our team's schedule and look at close losses for hints that our teams will be better next year.

A phrase that often comes up is "They played well enough to win that game!" This phrase has been bothering me lately.

Usually the team that plays well enough to win the game, wins.

In fact, that is the case the vast majority of the time.

Only once in a blue moon do you have a game like Superbowl XXV where a team drives down into somewhat safe FG range, lines up for the kick, executes it successfully, but the ball sails wide—and even in that game, that was a 47 yard field goal!

A missed chipshot FG is about the only time I think that you can say a losing team "played well enough to win."

Look at Super Bowl XXXIV— another game frequently pointed to as a game the losing team played well enough to win.

The Titans drove down the field at the end of the game, but the Rams stuffed Wide reciever Kevin Dyson at the 1 yard line on the last play of the game.

"Played well enough to win?" No, they didn't.

The game came down to that last play and the Rams outplayed them on that last play.

If the Titans scored that TD would have made the score 23-22. They would still have to successfully hit the extra point and even at that point they would have only "played well enough to tie."

Why am I dwelling on this? Because we fans of losing teams look at our teams from the wrong perspective and we need to stop doing that.

We need to stop having these overly optimistic views of the likely success levels of our teams. We need to stop setting ourselves up for heartbreak.

It isn't sound to look at a game and say, "Hey, our team rolled up twice as many yards as our opponents. We will probably beat them next year."

That is wrong line of thought.

Our team didn't play well enough to win. What really happened is they found a way to lose.

Bad teams do that. Bad teams find a lot of ways to lose.

We need to look at these games and say "How did our team find a way to lose that game? In what area were they so wretchedly bad that it cost them the game?"

Could they not block for a field goal? Did the coaching staff mismanage the game, giving up numerous scoring opportunities?

Did the coaching staff mismanage their personnel? Did the team lose a key player to injuries?

Does a leading receiver have butter fingers? Did the coaching staff make good halftime adjustments?

Did the coaching staff have the players ready to play? Did the coaching staff come up with a good game plan? Does the team lack players in key positions?

Once we have the answer to the question: "Why did our team lose?" We need to follow up with, "Is there any indication that something is being done to prevent that situation from happening next year?"

If the answer is no, then we should not give ourselves the false hope that our team will be great.

I wrote this in part for other long suffering fans, to save them from heartache.

But mostly, I wrote this for myself... I want to re-read it before next season.

25 Suggestions to Make NCAA Athletic Programs More Profitable

Tobi Writes — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:48:42 -0500

With the lingering economic downturn, NCAA division I members are cutting athletic programs to keep their athletic programs afloat. This is happening in a time when the NCAA has imposed a moritorium on classification upgrades while they reviews their rules and criteria on the upgrade process. The NCAA, as the major governing body of university sports, could ease the financial burden on all schools by expanding their focus and re-writing those rules and others today. The NCAA is a bit of a bureaucracy --- the president of the NCAA, James Isch, cannot just impose rules --- rather there is an executive committee and a governence board that creates the rules and oversees each of the NCAA's three classifications. That said, saving money and helping build up their athleic programs is in the interest if every member university, so reform is possible. I have limited my list to 25 changes the NCAA might impliment to make it's member universities more profitable. Although I'd champion all of them, any one of these reforms could really help the NCAA's member schools' bottom lines. Some of the ideas are fairly simple and require little explanation; With many of the other ideas I have gone into a little more detail to illustrate how they might deliver greater financial success for NCAA members. (One final note before we begin. Please forgive the picture choices. Slide shows on Bleacherreport must use the Bleacher report picture archive. Bleacher report has plenty of pictures of Austrialian rules football, sand volleyball and the like, but DII football? I had to be a little creative there in drawing the links. But feel free to make a game out of it and try and guess why I chose the pictures I did.) With no further ado, "Come on, NCAA, let's make some money!"

Begin Slideshow

UNT- ULM: Mean Green CBs, OL, Offensive staff Fail to Deliver in 33-6 ULM Romp

Tobi Writes — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:45:50 -0500

As my wife and I approached the stadium today, a lady came up to us and said that her friends had decided not to show and she had two extra tickets that we could have for free.

It was all down hill from there.

Quiet Stadium, Flat Team

UNT's offense seemed flat all day. Really. The entire team seemed flat.

Looking around the stadium, it was pretty apparent why there was no energy in the building: There were probably about 10,000 people in the stands. It looked like there were about 3,000 students in the student section and another 1,500 or so University of Louisiana-Monroe fans with about another 6,000 UNT on the alumni side (although that may be a little generous).

A good veteran team would not be bothered by the turnout, especially after a much-needed win, but UNT clearly was flat on both sides of the ball for most of the day.

The defense played a solid workman-like game, but the offense was a total no-show.

UNT's first series ended with another dropped deep pass by Michael Outlaw. As I have said before, Outlaw is not a natural receiver. That doesn't mean he won't be dramatically better next year if he continues to work hard. It just means he was limited today. Nine games into the season, one would hope the receivers coach would have figured this out.

UNT's staff continues to try to make him into a deep threat when he is the least-suited for that job of any of their starting foursome. He isn't especially fast. In fact, he appears to be the slowest of the four on the field. He doesn't run great routes on those slow-developing plays. He doesn't adjust well to the ball in the air. And he has trouble catching the deep pass.

He is a somewhat reliable and productive inside receiver. He catches those passes pretty well and is willing to take a shot. Let him be that guy.

Why UNT's offensive staff consistently puts him in a position where he loses confidence is beyond me. Today UNT may as well have been playing with three receivers, because they continue to misuse and destroy this kid's confidence.

Forrest Rucker was in on the next series and had to wait for a late-thrown pass from Riley Dodge. The issue was compounded because Rucker didn't run a great route and had very little separation. He dropped the ball, killing that drive and forcing UNT to kick a field goal.

Rucker has a long way to go in my book. Force-feeding him plays is not going to make this guy a player next season. He is slow, he runs lazy routes, and he doesn't have good hands. Those are issues that require offseason work. Playing time in games won't fix any of those issues.

Why some UNT fans want to see more of him at this point in his career is beyond me. I have repeatedly read suggestions that this guy is our deep threat. This guy is not going to beat anyone deep.

ULM just stopped UNT's third drive with good defense. UNT's fourth drive ended when the offense couldn't dig itself out of the hole that Tyler Bailey's offside penalty created.

UNT's fifth drive ended on an INT where either Riley Dodge over threw Forrest Rucker or Rucker quit on the route. You make the call (Considering Dodge's arm I know where I'd vote).

In between the last two UNT drives of the half, we saw Royce Hill watch as LaGregory Sapp caught a TD right in front of him. He was there and probably could have challenged the play, but instead just watched the ball make it's way there.

And that is how, despite very reasonable defensive play, you end the first half down 16-3.

Throughout the first half, the offensive staff kept trying to run Lance Dunbar and there just were no holes. At the half UNT had ran Dunbar eight times and he had gained 12 yards. It was pretty clear this was not going to be the kind of game where Dunbar would tear it up.

As I said in the preview, Dunbar does not have the strength to carry tacklers additional yards. Against another sound front-seven, Dunbar had another first half like he did at Troy and, just like at Troy, the offense was totally ineffective with a running game that left the offense in long yardage situations consistently.

In the second half, the troubles continued. Jamaal Jackson mishandled a kickoff and the ball went out of the end zone.

The offense did show a little life for a moment, as the offensive staff briefly remembered that B.J. Lewis is a pretty good receiver. But in the next drive he and Riley Dodge missed each other and the staff forgot about Lewis again.

Darius Carey caught three passes in a row before ULM sacked Dodge to force a punt.

Defensively, things got rougher in the second half. UNT had been doing a pretty decent job of controlling ULM's running game, but then the ULM receivers just started dominating UNT's corners.

Sapp beat CB Adryan Adams deep for 52 yards on a play on which Adams did not look for the ball. A few plays later, Sapp beat Hill for another TD.

UNT responded with a decent drive fueled by a throw to Jamaal Jackson, which netted a 15-yard penalty and nice 13-yard scramble by Dodge; but it fizzled out, yielding only a FG.

The following kickoff was a fiasco with UNT's kicker having to make the stop after a 63-yard return. The defense played it tough and was able to force a FG after three plays, getting the game to 26-6.

The following drive appeared to feature an actual adjustment by the UNT offensive staff as they brought in the hard-running senior, Cam Montgomery (Dunbar had 14 carries for 35 yards at that point).

Montgomery carried the pile down the field with runs of four, three, and nine yards before the quarter ended. At the start of the fourth quarter, the elusive Dunbar was back in.

It was apparently just a rest for Dunbar and not an adjustment. Dunbar was immediately stopped after a three-yard gain. Facing long yardage, Riley Dodge was fed two low-percentage garbage plays and on the second, an ill-conceived deep shot, Dodge's pass was picked off on a play that was very reminiscent of the hustle interception vs. Ohio.

From the stands, Riley Dodge looked very disgusted with the play-calling, but perhaps I was projecting.

It should also be noted that just prior to Dunbar returning to the game, one of UNT's best lineman—if not the Mean Green's best lineman—Estaban Santiago, was thrown out of the game on a blown makeup-type call by the referees.

Santiago and the UNT OL were helping power the runs down the field by staying after their blocks until the whistle blew. Montgomery stayed on his feet and the piles kept moving so UNT would gain a few extra yards as a scrum of UNT blockers helped Montgomery move the ball.

A ULM defender took offense with the physical play and threw a punch. Apparently trying not to look like they were giving UNT home cooking, the refs also threw out Santiago, who did not appear to do anything wrong.

Pretty much as soon as Santiago was out, I figured there would not be a comeback to even make the game close.

The following series featured two big passes. Adams again did not even look back at the ball. Royce Hill was beaten deep again. He appeared to be just running with his man—keeping him company really, not actually trying to cover him.

Despite poor fundamentals from the CBs, the defense really appeared to step it up once more in the fourth quarter. Akpunku and Penson stuffed a fourth down play to get the ball back for UNT.

On the series after that, Penson made a play behind the line of scrimage. Eddick Gilmore blocked a pass. Ira Smith made an interception.

Good stuff. That is 1.5 games of solid play from the front seven. Penson, Phillips, Cantly, and Gillmore all delivered in their new roles.

Sadly nothing came of the Smith INT.

Two plays later, Dodge telegraphed a pass, it was intercepted, and that was pretty much it.

If UNT and ULM were cars, UNT would be a hot rod in the process of being restored by a first-time car enthusiast. ULM would be an old farmers' small, 1979 Nissan pickup truck.

At the starting line UNT's highly-touted hot rod would stall out and ULM's pickup truck would do a moderate 40 mph to the finish line.

Based on talent, UNT probably should have won this game. Instead, ULM dominated the Mean Green.

What This Game Taught Us

Quite a lot, really. The defense didn't shut down ULM by any means, giving up 454 yards to ULM, but they were decent.

Recall that ULM entered the game with the Sun Belt's No. 3 offense at 27 PPG, despite losing their QB and playing three BCS schools, Troy, and Arkansas State when the Red Wolves were playing very well.

To hold them to 33 points with their starting QB and no support from the Mean Green offense is actually quite respectable.

UNT's front seven and their safeties played well enough that UNT could have won this game. That in itself was quite a triumph for coach DeLoach and his staff.

UNT's CBs on the other hand were pretty bad. In fact they were so bad for the eighth week in a row that I think it might be time for Dodge to harshly evaluate the secondary coach and possibly it may be time to bench both starting CBs in favor of Antoine Bush and Robbie Gordon.

After watching Royce Hill get beat regularly for TDs for two years, part of me wonders if he is simply a reasonable kick-returner and nothing more. I think it may be time to shut him down (mostly) and rebuild his technique and aggressiveness in the off-season.

CBs are supposed to be cognizant of their opponent's eyes and turn to play the ball when the WRs do so. When is the last time you have seen a UNT CB actually do that?

Now to be fair, this team is all about "bend, don't break" and as such the CBs are likely instructed that their first responsibility is to get the WR down. Still, there is a point when you have to start making plays on the ball, otherwise you just aren't covering anyone.

I think it may be too late to have UNT's starting CBs unlearn that for this year. Bush has played in different defenses and as such is probably less given to playing that style. He is a solid CB. Gordon is simply more aggressive than the other UNT CBs and is a junior. He needs to be ready to take on a starting job next year, anyway.

This game really showed the warts on the Mean Green offense.

UNT's much-hyped OL is simply incapable of opening holes vs. a talented and sound front-seven. Without holes and shoddy tackling, Lance Dunbar is a fairly indescript physical specimen at this point in his development. Basically tough yards are not his bag.

The offensive staff is horrible at making midgame adjustments and even when they do stumble onto something that works, they quickly drift away from it. This has been hugely glossed over because the scheme is quite effective.

The offensive brain trust seem to trust the scheme and ride the hot hand far more than they game plan what actually should work.

This was a game where the staff should have had it in their head that if the OL couldn't open holes they might need to put in better run-blockers or give more carries to Mathis and Montgomery, who excel at moving the pile and finishing runs, or just gone to throwing the ball.

This staff seems to think that an elusive hole-picker is ideal for every opponent. Hopefully they figure it out before the next time UNT plays a team with a good run defense.

I don't know if the offensive coordinator, Todd Dodge, or the receivers coach is to blame, but someone is really screwing Riley Dodge over by not using this receiving staff properly.

This team has three very good receivers with big-play potential in Darius Carey, Jamaal Jackson, and B.J. Lewis; three solid, chain-moving, short-ball receivers in Alex Lott, Kevin Dickerson, and Michael Outlaw; and a guy who is reportedly "uncoverable in practice" but apparently doesn't time fast enough for the coaching staff to throw any balls his way, in Breece Johnson.

There is no way with that talent that you throw deep to Outlaw, use Rucker as the fifth receiver, and use Lewis as a fourth option.

It is just crazy.

Outlaw and Lott should be rotating in at one of the interior receiver slots. Put players with speed and the ability to adjust quickly to a late or floating pass out there. Basically Carey or Jackson.

And someone needs to work with Riley on getting those deep passes off quicker. Riley has a better arm than Ty Detmer ever did in college, so he can get those off successfully, but he is constantly late getting the ball off.

Obviously as long as this report was, this was a tough game to watch. Here's hoping the staff sees the same problems I saw and next week is better.

Will Athletic Budgets be Used to Classify Division I Schools After 2010?

Tobi Writes — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:03:55 -0500

The NCAA imposed a moratorium until 2010 on any schools starting the upgrade process to move up to Division I. The stated reason was to reconsider the rules a school will follow to become or remain a member of Division I.

In the past, the NCAA has tried to use other criteria to force financially underperforming universities down to a less expensive level of competition.

In the 1990s, the NCAA insisted any schools who wanted to play football at the IA (now called FBS) level had to have a stadium that seated 30,000. A number of schools proceeded to gather funds to do costly stadium upgrades to 30,000. In many cases, like Buffalo, EMU, and UNT, these stadium uprgades had the net result of discouraging fan attendance. Several schools were forced to drop football.

In the 2000s, the NCAA had a rule requiring schools to maintain a multi-year average of 15,000. A number of schools failed to meet these requirements, including a couple that generally draw season averages high above this threshhold.

Presumeably, the NCAA has not enforced these rules due to the number of schools they would be throwing out of the FBS level. Presumably, the seemingly unenforcable nature of this rule is what has lead to the moritorium on all moves.

It is very conceiveable, if not likely, the next threshold the NCAA may impose to keep teams that lack the financial support to play at the FBS level out of the FBS classification may be based on athletic budgets.

For fans of the business side of collegiate sports, that is an excuse to pour over the athletic budgets of division I schools and reach some conclusions!

Are you ready for some football...budgets?

(All numbers are from 2007. I didn't list them all out, as the numbers are far less important than the approximate ballpark. In general, most schools stay in the same approximate ballpark from year to year, but some schools do spike up in some years and some are unequivocally expanding their athletic budgets like UNT, UTSA, Texas State, and one or two other Sun Belt schools.)

BCS tier athletic budgets

1. Ohio State 109M
2. Tennessee 92M
3. Florida
4. Texas
5. Wisconsin
6. Southern California
7. Louisiana State
8. Penn State
9. Alabama
10. Iowa
11. Nebraska
12. Michigan State
13. Texas A&M
14. Oklahoma
15. Auburn
16. Michigan
17. Virginia
18. Stanford
19. Georgia
20. UCLA
21. Arkansas
22. Kentucky
23. North Carolina
24. Kansas
25. Notre Dame
26. South Carolina
27. Boston College
28. Virginia Tech
29. Minnesota
30. Purdue
31. Arizona State
32. Connecticut
33. California
34. Louisville
35. Texas Tech
36. Washington
37. Oregon
38. Miami (Fla.)
39. Georgia Tech
40. Missouri
41. Clemson
42. Duke
43. Maryland
44. Oregon State
45. Illinois
46. Rutgers
47. Syracuse
48. West Virginia
49. Oklahoma State
50. Indiana
51. North Carolina State
52. Arizona
53. Northwestern -41M
54. Baylor -40M
55. Florida State -40M
56. Colorado - 40M
57. Kansas State -40M
58. Texas Christian (non-BCS) - 39M
59. Vanderbilt - 39M
60. Pittsburgh - 37M
61. Iowa State - 37M
62. Wake Forest - 37M
63. Cincinnati - 34M
64. Mississippi - 34M

This is where non-BCS FBS schools start en masse.

I think looking at the above the idea that pops into my mind is how much is membership in a BCS conference worth? Specifically, in terms of increased TV revenue, bowl payouts, increased visitor attendance by being in a conference of haves...What dollar value does that equate to? $5 million? $10 million? More?

I look at the bottom 10-12 BCS schools and wonder if the rest of their leagues would love to kick most of them out if they had a clear path to it. (Obviously, not Northwestern, Colorado, WSU, or FSU, but the rest...?) What would the budget of those schools look like in lesser conferences? $30 million? Less?

FBS Tier athletic budgets

65. Brigham Young -31M
66. San Diego State -30M
67. Washington State (BCS) -30M
68. Central Florida -30M
69. Memphis
70. Houston
71. South Florida (BCS) -28M
72. Southern Methodist
73. Hawaii
74. New Mexico
75. Rice
76. Utah
77. Temple
78. Mississippi State (BCS) -26M
79. UNLV
80. East Carolina
81. Fresno State
82. Tulsa
83. Miami (Oxford)
84. Boise State
85. UAB
86. Wyoming
87. Texas-El Paso -21M
88. Central Michigan
89. Nevada
90. Buffalo
91. New Mexico State - 19M
92. Tulane
93. Marshall
94. Eastern Michigan
95. Western Michigan
96. Ohio
97. Colorado State
98. Florida International
99. Akron
100. Middle Tennessee State
101. Western Kentucky
102. Kent State
103. Toledo
104. San Jose State
105. Northern Illinois -16M
106. North Texas -16M
107. Bowling Green -16M
108. Ball State -16M
109. Southern Mississippi -15M
110. Florida Atlantic -14M
111. Troy -13M
112. Utah State - 13m
113. Idaho -12M
114. Louisiana Tech -12M
115. Arkansas State - 10M
116. Louisiana-Lafayette -10M
117. Louisiana-Monroe -7M

I was a little suprised by a few of these schools. I thought the top three non-BCS would be BYU, Utah, TCU. Not quite.

NMSU and SD State have much larger athletic budgets than I thought. (How the hell does SD State not kill the WAC in football With that budget and sole ownership of football hotbed San Diego? There is something seriously wrong with that athletic department/school.)

Miami (Oxford) and Buffalo were surprises to me as well. CSU's budget was suprisingly small to me. Southern Miss being No. 109 is not a huge shock. It is a very poor state. I wonder if Ol' Miss and Miss St. would be any higher if the SEC dismissed them and they had to play a C-USA schedule.

FCS Schools' Athletic Budgets

1. Pennsylvania -27M
2. Delaware - 25M
3. James Madison - 25M
4. New Hampshire - 22M
5. Villanova - 22M
6. Massachusetts -21M
7. Stony Brook -21M
8. Lehigh -20M
9. Hofstra -19M
10. Colgate -18M
11. Liberty
12. Yale
13. Rhode Island -17M
14. Southern Illinois
15. Cornell
16. Northeastern
17. Princeton
18. Delaware State
19. Harvard
20. California-Davis
21. Holy Cross
22. Columbia -16M
23. Richmond -15M
24. Coastal Carolina
25. Old Dominion
26. Bucknell
27. William & Mary
28. Dartmouth
29. Sacred Heart
30. Maine -14M
31. Towson
32. Furman
33. Montana
34. Northern Iowa
35. Missouri State -13M
36. Montana State
37. Texas State -13M
38. Illinois State -12M
39. Brown
40. Cal Poly
41. Sacramento State
42. Elon
43. Albany
44. North Dakota
45. Lafayette
46. Eastern Kentucky
47. Northern Arizona
48. Wofford
49. Gardner-Webb
50. North Dakota State
51. Eastern Illinois
52. The Citadel -10M
53. Youngstown State
54. American
55. Appalachian State
56. Monmouth
57. Chattanooga
58. Jacksonville State
59. Samford
60. Robert Morris -9M
61. College of Charleston
62. Howard
63. Georgia State
64. Virginia Military Institute
65. Stephen F. Austin
66. Tennessee State
67. Indiana State
68. Davidson
69. Portland State
70. Bethune-Cookman
71. Central Connecticut State
72. Murray State
73. Campbell
74. Idaho State
75. South Dakota State
76. South Dakota
77. Iona
78. Eastern Washington -8M
79. Wagner
80. Western Illinois
81. Southern
82. Marist
83. North Carolina-Greensboro
84. Jacksonville
85. Southeast Missouri
86. Western Carolina
87. North Carolina A&T
88. Tennessee Tech
89. Saint Francis (PA)
90. South Carolina State -7M
91. Northern Colorado
92. Sam Houston State
93. Morgan State
94. Hampton
95. Tennessee-Martin
96. Central Arkansas
97. Southeastern Louisiana
98. Charleston Southern -7M
99. Georgia Southern - 6M
100. Presbyterian
101. Norfolk State
102. Northwestern State
103. Jackson State
104. Weber State
105. Grambling State
106. Texas Southern
107. Southern Utah
108. Alabama State - 6M
109. McNeese State - 5M
110. Austin Peay
111. Alabama A&M
112. Florida A&M
113. Arkansas-Pine Bluff
114. Morehead State
115. Nicholls State -5M
116. North Carolina Central - 4M
117. Prairie View A&M - 4M
118. Mississippi Valley State - 4M
119. Winston-Salem State - 4M
120. Alcorn State - 3M
121. Savannah State - 2M

It is interesting to see there are 93 FCS teams with larger budgets than ULM. Some would take that to mean all of those schools could potentially play FBS football if a conference was despirate enough. I disagree strongly with that view.

In my opinion, it should be looked at from exactly the opposite perspective. It is more something that should raise red flags about the situations facing schools on the bottom end of the FBS budget list. If your target school projects as a similar FBS program to one of those FBS schools, you may want to seriously rethink moving up.

I think that to look at things more clearly, you have to see if the target school has the kind of good support (attendance) needed for FBS and the enrollment (or for privates, endowment) to make up the annual budget shortfall from upgrading.

That said, somewhere around 70 FCS schools are ALREADY running at $9M budgets or more. I think you have to get those budgets up to about $15-20 million to be stable at the FBS level, but if those schools have most of the essentials (acceptable stadiums, strong attendance, and can leverage students via student fees or fans and alumni via endowments) they could successfully make the jump to FBS.

There are some obvious schools (Savannah, Alcorn) that look a bit in over their head at the FCS level, but honestly, not as many as I thought. Still, I would prefer to see FCS have a minimum attendance threshold for schools and conferences—say, 6,000 or so—and a separation of football from D1 status.

If that were combined with a 96-team NCAA bracket with 32 slots earmarked for DII teams, you could strengthen the sports and make the schools' programs more profitable. A lot of these schools would be a lot more profitable playing DII football, but don't want to give up the NCAA tourney revenue.

The glaring point to me is how many of the top bugets are on the East Coast...even discounting the small Patriot League universities. Delaware, James Madison, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Stony Brook, Hofstra, Liberty, Rhode Island, Northeastern, Old Dominion, William & Mary, Maine.

Discounting the stadium situations of some and just looking at the schools, that could quickly become a very nice FBS conference. Temple, Army, and Navy might want in. Buffalo might as well.

It is also quite impressive when you look at the Ivy League schools. They provide athletic opportunities for an astounding number of student athletes. Quite admirable.

Finally the athletic budgets of non-football playing IAAA schools

1. Georgetown -27M
2. Saint John's -27M
3. Boston University -22M
4. Marquette -22M
5. Denver -21M
6. George Washington -17M
7. Fordham -17M
8. Dayton -16M
9 Seton Hall
10. Wichita State
11. Providence
12. San Diego
13. Loyola Marymount -15M
14. DePaul -14M
15. Vermont -13M
16. Santa Clara
17. Pacific
18. Fairfield
19. George Mason
20. California-Santa Barbara
21. Pepperdine
22. Virginia Commonwealth
23. Drexel
24. Creighton
25. Long Beach State
26. Saint Joseph's
27. Xavier -11M
28. California-Irvine
29. Drake
30. Saint Louis
31. Binghamton
32. Quinnipiac
33. Bradley -10M
34. San Francisco -10M
35. La Salle -10M
36. Long Island
37. Butler
38. Saint Mary's -10M
39. Wisconsin-Milwaukee
40. Gonzaga
41. Rider
42. Loyola (MD) -9M
43. Charlotte
44. Illinois-Chicago
45. Wright State
46. Portland
47. Cal State Fullerton
48. Duquesne
49. Maryland-Baltimore County
50. Hartford
51. Valparaiso-9M
52. Oral Roberts
53. Winthrop
54. Texas-San Antonio -9M
55. Cal State Northridge
56. Cleveland State
57. Siena
58. South Alabama
59. Niagara
60. Oakland
61. Stetson
62. California-Riverside
63. Evansville
64. Canisius
65. Belmont
66. Arkansas-Little Rock
67. Loyola (Il)
68. Manhattan
69. Missouri-Kansas City
70. Mount Saint Mary's
71. Cal State Bakersfield
72. Detroit
73. North Carolina-Wilmington
74. Saint Bonaventure
75. New Jersey Tech
76. Radford
77. Texas-Arlington - 6M
78. North Florida
79. Texas A&M-Corpus Christi
80. Kennesaw State
81. Lipscomb
82. Wisconsin-Green Bay
83. High Point
84. Saint Peter's
85. Centenary
86. Utah Valley University -5M
87. Fairleigh thingyinson
88. Longwood
89. Mercer
90. East Tennessee State
91. Texas-Pan American
92. Lamar
93. IUPU-Fort Wayne
94. IUPUI
95. Chicago State -4M
96. Maryland-Eastern Shore
97. Florida Gulf Coast
98. Coppin State -3M
99. New Orleans -3M
100. North Carolina-Asheville -3M
101. South Carolina-Upstate -3M
102. Saint Francis (NY) -3M

While stadium availabilty is obviously the final arbitrar, with 60 IAAA schools with budgets over $8 million and 21 with budgets over $12 million, it is easy to envision a lot of these schools adding football one day soon.

One of the most glaring is Wichita State. They have an enrollment of 15,000 and have a 30,000-seat Cessna Football Stadium being wasted on track. They could likely support football, could pay the budget shortfall for football and the matching women's scholarships, and don't really have a lot of local competition for the public's entertainment dollars.

Additionally, they have the MVFC—one of the elite FCS conferences—waiting for them and are near a host of OOC team at the FBS level as well as at the top of the DII level who could travel fans.

The VCU situation practically makes my brain bleed so I am going to leave that alone.

Lamar is glaring. With a 2007 budget of $4.4 million, a stadium seating 17,500 , a small DMA, no inviting FBS conference, and an enrollment of 13,000, on the surface the idea of jumping to FBS seems daunting.

But Lamar has some things in its favor. The region is football crazy. Since talks of football have gone around Lamar's enrollment has gone (back) up by about 3,000. There was talk of this being the kind of situation where FBS football might push university enrollment growth, and that does seem to be what has occurred. Students voted en masse to pay athletic fees to get football back at Lamar.

The 79 percent to 21 percent results speaks volumes about student body support. At the time of the vote, it was estimated the fee would raise $2 million for the reinstatement of football. I think the number may end up being closer to $3.5 million when 2011 rolls around, bringing the budget to about $8 million.

That may not be enough to get them over any new NCAA upgrade thresholds based off budget, but it will get them into the upper half of southland budgets. With a totally rebuilt stadium ($20 million renovation). If Lamar enrollment hits say 15,000 by 2015, that could add another $500,000 to their budget under that athletic fee.

If their students decide to bump up the athletic fee to the Texas maximum of $20 at that point, with an enrollment of 15,000 that would yield another $5 million for an FBS budget of about $14 million. That is a ton more viable at the FBS level than ULM.

One other item to note. Lamar is a member of the Texas State system, which means student fee increases go to the board governing the Texas State system. Unlike schools in the UT system like UTPA or UTA, they won't have UT politics leading to delays or an outright rejection of any student approved athletic fee increase. UT may not want any large Texas publics taking up FBS football. On the other hand, Texas State, as the largest member university in the Texas State system, can use more FBS members as they need a conference home. SHSU is also a member of the TS system.

With the exception of UNO, the last seven schools hit me as DII schools in disguise. Perhaps it says something very pointed about IAAA status. Maybe part of the requirements of IAAA/FCS should require a minimum of a $5 million budget? For FBS schools $15 million minus bodybag game payouts? Could that be where the NCAA might be heading?

Could Certain Schools Legitimately Succeed as FCS or Even FBS Members?

Tobi Writes — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 14:08:15 -0500

A few years ago, I culled through the schools that participate in athletics in a level below the three DI NCAA classifications that might legitimately consider playing football at a higher level.

FBS (Universities that compete at the top level of NCAA football), FCS (mostly small colleges and small private universities that still want to play football, but not at the most expensive level), I-AAA (Schools that have enough sports to be classified as a Division I school, but do not play football).

My criteria

Simply put, enrollment was my main criteria.

I think in order to play enough sports (with either FBS or FCS football as one of those sports) and not lose your shirt, you should have at minimum somewhere around 10,000 students enrolled.

Athletics are largely funded by student fees. Having less than 10,000 enrolled students would likely make the expense too much for the student body to bear.

Of course their are exceptions to this. Private schools have students who expect much larger costs. A private school can do it with less students, but for ease I stuck with my 10,000 rule.

In some instances, there was minor leeways given to schools that had slightly less than 10,000 because I knew additional factors that made that school more likely to succeed, but those were few and far between.

I think to play FBS football, public universities really should have about 15,000 students enrolled at a minimum. Anything else is pretty risky and potentially a black eye for your university.

I think you can be quite successful at the FCS level with a 10,000-student enrollment. There are several schools at the FCS level that have enrollments of less, but they don't generally do very well.

Aren't there other factors?

Absolutely there are, but in general this article deals with what I consider by far the most important factor.

Other factors that definitely need to be considered include looking at how many students may be close enough to attend games, the size of the surrounding community/communities from which you can draw football fans, the general attitude of the area towards football, the presence of 20-30,000 seat stadium for FBS or a 5,000-20,000 seat stadium for FCS on or near campus, and maybe most importantly the abscense of higher level competition in the area.

For example, The University of Texas-Arlington, a I-AAA school is located only a mile or so from Jerry Jones' new 80,000 seat Dallas Cowboys stadium. UTA has an enormous enrollment (over 25,000 students). That would lead someone who didn't know about the Cowboys to think maybe UTA would be a good candidate to try FBS football.

With the Cowboys there, the general public is likely not to spend money to buy tickets to see UTA's theoretical football program, saving their money to buy Cowboy tickets.

The best UTA could likely do is to have a subsistence-level football program at the FCS level.

That might still be a net positive for UTA and would be very inexpensive to implement, but as you can see other criteria do figure in to the equation.

Why make this list?

Honestly, because I see a cloudy future for FCS sports unless more schools move up into that tier. There are simply too many FCS schools that have no business playing at the FCS expense level.

Conversely, playing at the D-II, D-III, or NAIA level is often the equivilant of playing football in your backyard. If you are going to spend the money, you might as well get the promotional advantage that sports can bring to a university.

Schools like Montana and Delaware are great examples of how an FCS program can generate revenue. You don't have to lose money playing football.

Old Dominion started play this year and is averaging 19,000 in attendance at the FCS level.

A good stadium, good promotion, and good planning can make football into the engine that feeds your athletic program. Why not at your university?

I hope to turn on a light for alumni who finds his or her school on this list. I hope they read it and realize, "Hey my school CAN afford to play at this level" and start working to build alumni and adminstration support to get your school to a level where it can get the maxiumum benefit out of athletics for your university.

Without further ado, the lists:

Good NCAA Division II candidates for upgrading for FBS or FCS

Will one of these schools be the next Florida Atlantic?

(Note: A number of theses schools have part-time students and computer learning remote students bumping up their numbers.)

Team - Location - Affiliation - Enrollment - Conference - Football?
Wilmington University Wildcats - New Castle, Delaware - PRI - 11,500 - CACC - NO FB
Cal Poly Pomona Broncos - Pomona, California - PUB - 20,510 - CCAA - NO FB
Cal State Dominguez Hills Toros - Carson, California - PUB - 12,082 - CCAA - NO FB
Cal State East Bay - Hayward, California - PUB - 13,124 - CCAA - NO FB
Cal State LA Golden Eagles - Los Angeles, California - PUB - 21,051 - CCAA - NO FB
Cal State San Bernardino Coyotes - San Bernardino, California - PUB - 17,066 - CCAA - NO FB
Chico State Wildcats - Chico, California - PUB - 17,034 - CCAA - NO FB
SF State Gators - San Francisco, California - PUB - 30,125 - CCAA - NO FB
UC San Diego Tritons - La Jolla, California - PUB - 20,339 - CCAA - NO FB
Mercy College Mavericks - Dobbs Ferry, New York - PRI - 10,000 - ECC - NO FB
New York Institute of Technology Bears - New York City and Old Westbury, New York - PRI - 12,755 - ECC - NO FB
Queens College Knights - Flushing, Queens - PUB - 17,639 - ECC - NO FB
Ferris State University Bulldogs - Big Rapids, Michigan - PUB - 12,547 - GLIAC - FB
Grand Valley State University Lakers - Allendale, Michigan - PUB - 23,295 - GLIAC - FB
Northern Michigan University Wildcats - Marquette, Michigan - PUB - 9,400 - GLIAC - FB
Saginaw Valley State University Cardinals - University Center, Michigan - PUB - 9,565 - GLIAC - FB
Wayne State University Warriors - Detroit, Michigan - PUB - 33,000 - GLIAC - FB
Northern Kentucky University Norse - Highland Heights, Kentucky - PUB - 13,910 - GLVC - NO FB
University of Southern Indiana Screaming Eagles - Evansville, Indiana - PUB - 10,040 - GLVC - NO FB
University of Missouri–St. Louis Tritons - St. Louis, Missouri - PUB - 15,548 - GLVC - NO FB
University of Alaska Anchorage Seawolves - Anchorage, Alaska - PUB - 16,242 - GNAC - NO FB
University of Alaska Fairbanks Nanooks - Fairbanks, Alaska - PUB - 9,380 - GNAC - NO FB
Central Washington University Wildcats - Ellensburg, Washington - PUB - 10,145 - GNAC - FB
Western Washington University Vikings - Bellingham, Washington - PUB - 13,069 - GNAC - NO FB
Valdosta State University Blazers - Valdosta, Georgia - PUB - 11,200 - GSC - FB
University of West Florida Argonauts - Pensacola, Florida - PUB - 10,516 - GSC - NO FB
University of West Georgia Wolves - Carrollton, Georgia - PUB - 10,611 - GSC - FB
University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos - Edmond, Oklahoma - PUB - 15,000 - LSC - FB
University of Central Missouri Mules and Jennies - Warrensburg, Missouri - PUB - 10,604 - MIAA - FB
University of Nebraska at Omaha Mavericks - Omaha, Nebraska - PUB - 14,903 - MIAA - FB
Southern Connecticut State University Fighting Owls - New Haven, CT - PUB - 12,326 - NE-10 - FB
University of Massachusetts Lowell River Hawks - Lowell, MA - PUB - 13,479 - NE-10 - NO FB
University of Minnesota-Duluth Bulldogs - Duluth, Minnesota - PUB - 10,500 - NSIC - FB
Minnesota State University, Mankato Mavericks - Mankato, Minnesota - PUB - 14,036 - NSIC - FB
Saint Cloud State University Huskies - Saint Cloud, Minnesota - PUB - 16,000 - NSIC - FB
Grand Canyon University Antelopes - Phoenix, Arizona - PRI/BAP - 13,000 - PAC-W - NO FB
Academy of Art University Urban Knights - San Francisco, California - PRI - 14,000 - PAC-W - NO FB
Indiana University of Pennsylvania Crimson Hawks - Indiana, Pennsylvania - PUB - 14,200 - PSAC - FB
Kutztown University of Pennsylvania Golden Bears - Kutztown, Pennsylvania - PUB - 10,200 - PSAC - FB
West Chester University of Pennsylvania Golden Rams - West Chester, Pennsylvania - PUB - 13,219 - PSAC - FB
Metropolitan State College of Denver* Roadrunners - Denver, Colorado - PUB - 21,109 - RMAC - NO FB
Barry University Buccaneers - Miami Shores, Florida - PRI/CATH - 12,809 - SSC - NO FB
Saint Leo University Lions - Saint Leo, Florida - PRI/CATH - 15,120 - SSC - NO FB
Nova Southeastern University Sharks - Davie, Florida - PRI - 33,135 - SSC - NO FB
The University of Tampa Spartans - Tampa, Florida - PRI - 10,515 - SSC - NO FB
Recinto Universitario de Mayagüez Tarzans y Janes - Mayaguez, Puerto Rico - PUB - 13,148 - IND - NO FB
Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Río Piedras Roosters y Bantams - San Juan, Puerto Rico - PUB - 21,909 - IND - NO FB

D-III schools that could play football as DI members

Team - Location - City - Affiliation - Enrollment - Conference - Football?
University of Texas at Dallas Comets - Richardson, TX - Public - 14,556 - ASC - NO FB
Baruch College Bearcats - Manhattan, New York - Public - 15,500 - CUNYAC - NO FB
Brooklyn College Bridges - Brooklyn, New York - Public - 15,385 - CUNYAC - NO FB
City College of New York Beavers - Manhattan, New York - Public - 13,244 - CUNYAC - NO FB
College of Staten Island Dolphins - Staten Island, New York - Public - 11,263 - CUNYAC - NO FB
Hunter College Hawks - Manhattan, New York - Public - 21,309 - CUNYAC - NO FB
John Jay College of Criminal Justice Bloodhounds - Manhattan, New York - Public - 14,000 - CUNYAC - NO FB
Lehman College Lightning - Bronx, New York - Public - 10,615 - CUNYAC - NO FB
New York City College of Technology Yellow Jackets - Brooklyn, New York - Public - 11,795 - CUNYAC - NO FB
Rochester Institute of Technology Tigers - Henrietta, New York - Private - 13,046 - Empire 8 - NO FB
Johnson & Wales University Wildcats - Providence, Rhode Island - Private - 16,000 - GNAC - NO FB
Rhode Island College Anchormen - Providence, Rhode Island - Public - 9000 - LEC - NO FB
University of Massachusetts Boston Beacons - Dorchester, Massachusetts - Public - 13,433 - LEC - NO FB
University of Southern Maine Huskies - Gorham, Lewiston & Portland, Maine - Public - 10,974 - LEC - NO FB
Bridgewater State College Bears - Bridgewater, Massachusetts - Public - 8800 - MASCAC - FB
Salem State College Vikings - Salem, Massachusetts - Public - 9254 - MASCAC - NO FB
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers - Cambridge, MA - Private - 10,235 - NEWMAC - FB
Kean University Cougar - Union Township, Union County, New Jersey - Public - 13,200 - NJAC - FB
Montclair State University Red Hawks - Montclair, New Jersey - Public - 16,660 - NJAC - FB
Rowan University Profs - Glassboro, New Jersey - Public - 9300 - NJAC - FB
Rutgers-Newark Scarlet Raiders - Newark, New Jersey - Public - 10,500 - NJAC - NO FB
William Paterson University Pioneers - Wayne, New Jersey - Public - 10,970 - NJAC - FB
Buffalo State College Bengals - Buffalo, New York - Public - 11,234 - NJAC - FB
State University of New York at Brockport Golden Eagles - Brockport, New York - Public - 8742 - NJAC - FB
Carnegie Mellon University Tartans - Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania - Private - 11,006 - UAA - FB
Case Western Reserve University Spartans - Cleveland, Ohio - Private - 9952 - UAA - FB
Emory University Eagles - Atlanta, Georgia - Private - Methodist - 12,338 - UAA - NO FB
New York University Violets - New York, New York - Private - 40,870 - UAA - NO FB
University of Chicago Maroons - Chicago, Illinois - Private - 13,400 - UAA - FB
University of Rochester Yellowjackets - Rochester, New York - Private - 9027 - UAA - FB
Washington University in St. Louis Bears - St. Louis, Missouri - Private - 13,527 - UAA - FB
UW-Eau Claire Blugolds - Eau Claire, Wisconsin - Public - 11,140 - WIAC - FB
UW-La Crosse Eagles - La Crosse, Wisconsin - Public - 9880 - WIAC - FB
UW-Oshkosh Titans - Oshkosh, Wisconsin - Public - 12,753 - WIAC - FB
UW-Stevens Point Pointers - Stevens Point, Wisconsin - Public - 9163 - WIAC - FB
UW-Stout Blue Devils - Menomonie, Wisconsin - Public - 8839 - WIAC - FB
UW-Whitewater Warhawks - Whitewater, Wisconsin - Public - 10,962 - WIAC - FB

NAIA schools that legitimately could move up

Team - Location - City - Affiliation - Enrollment - Conference - Football?
Lindenwood University Lions - St. Charles, MO - Private - 14500 - HAAC - FB
CS San Marcos Cougars - San Marcos, CA - Public - 9159 - IND - NO FB
Davenport University Panthers - Grand Rapids, Michigan - Private - 12471 - WHAC - No FB
Savannah College of Art and Design Bees - Savannah, GA - Private - 11897 - Sun - No FB
UTB/TSC Scorpions - Brownsville, TX - Public - 17247 - RRAC - NO FB
Indiana Wesleyan University Wildcats - Marion, IN - Private- Wesleyan - 15442 - MCC - NO FB

North Texas Faces a Tough UL-Monroe Warhawks Team in Denton

Tobi Writes — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:05:26 -0500

ULM is a mentally tough team. They sit at 4-4 overall, but their four losses are to Sunbelt powerhouse Troy and 3 BCS schools.

They have beaten both FIU and FAU in competitive games that really didn't show me much beyond mental toughness, but they broke the hearts of the Arkansas State Red wolves on a wet field in Louisiana last month.

ASU was playing some very tough football and ULM just flat punched them in the mouth, grinding out a smash mouth win on the ground—without the Warhawks' starting QB who was lost in the game.

For anyone who thinks UNT will sneak up on these guys and run away from them in a 55-45 shootout, I would strongly suggest a less optimistic view.

UNT can beat these guys, but it would have to be in a slug out. UNT will have to commit to stopping the run and their starting CBS will have to play out of their minds. The Mean Green OL will have to have a great game opening holes for Dunbar. If any of these things don't happen, the Warhawks should win this game.

ULM gives up 99 yards rushing per game

UNT will face a very tough front seven. UNT fans love Lance Dunbar and praise him like he is the second coming, but they need to cool that off a bit in preparation for this game and look at the Troy game. The last time UNT faced a good run defense, their offensive line was exposed as the undersized pass blocking line that it is.

Dunbar is a reasonable talent as a runner. He isn't exceptionally big or strong yet. He isn't a physical runner who can regularly and repeatedly break tackles yet. He is a very smart runner who sets up defenders and eludes blockers. He has good speed, but really he has good burst. He is really an ideal fit for the Dodge offense, which spreads a defense wide and allows Dunbar to find gaps and burst to open space.

In the time Troy had their starters in, Dunbar had no gaps to run through. Troy's starting defense owned the UNT OL. While the Trojan starters were in, Dunbar had nowhere to go.

UNT had a hard time scoring at all. UNT is a dramatically lesser offense when they cannot run the ball. Riley Dodge may have played very well last week, but I am not ready to predict he can play an interception free half without a strong running game in support. As much as he and the passing game improved from a maturity point last week, I think his development will be a process, not an overnight thing.

If the run is taken away again this week this could be a hard game for UNT. UNT's line has to have a great run blocking day.

UNT gives up 194.8 yards per game

UNT cannot spot these guys 200 yards on the ground. ULM has a very good but not exceptional running game. They aren't the most explosive running game UNT will see, but they will go back to the run time and time again.

Statistically ULM's rushing totals are great, running for 174.2 yards per game. Frank Goodin is a very sound back who has been ULM's workhorse this year accounting for about half of their rushing yards. He has 707 yards on 147 carries for a strong 4.8 yards per carry.

This team will pound on UNT all day long.

On the flipside, UNT might be the same weak run defense we have seen for the last month plus or they may play to their talent and really give ULM trouble.

UNT may commit to stuffing the run with some safety help like they did in the fourth quarter vs. WKU. UNT held the Hilltoppers to 16 total yards in the fourth quarter when they committed to stuffing the run.

On the positive side, UNT won't struggle nearly as badly as they did in the first half vs. WKU. Every problem UNT had in the first half vs. WKU was correctable and most of it was corrected in the second half of that game.

The swapping of Eddrick Gilmore to DE and Tevinn Cantly to DT solidified both positions a great deal. Gilmore is a big defensive end who has a great sense of when to switch to a power rush. He forced WKU's QB out of the pocket on a play that forced a fumble that he then recovered that lead to a game tying TD. He also beat his man for a safety last week that iced the game.

He may very well be guy who disrupts things and regularly forces the QB out of the pocket, generating the easy plays that this DL has desperately needed all season long.

Cantly for his part had a solid second half at DT vs. WKU. Cantly has the size and athleticism to be a good player at any spot on the DL but seemed to be a little bit of a disappointment at end. Lost in the shffle. At DT he is much closer to the action and it seemed to really suit him last game. He is still adjusting to the move, but I would not be suprised to see a breakout game from Cantly in the last few games.

215 lb Freshman DE KC Obi may still be abused a little at the other spot vs. the run due to a lack of size and strength, but Obi is technically sound and the rest of the DL looks stronger than it has been all season.

Soph pass rush specialist Brandon Akpunku has lost some of his playing time due to stupid penalties, but is a bigger, better, more explosive and fiery player than Obi and may take that time back.

Redshirt freshman OLB Jeremy Phillips is likely to get most of the snaps in place of converted safety Kylie Hill. Hill is better in coverage, but Phillips is a good 4 inches taller and 10 lbs heavier. Phillps seems to see the field better and has natural ball instincts at the spot.

Still do not expect miracles from Phillips—he is still a skinny developing player. He missed a special teams tackle last week that just made me cringe. It was the softest huggy bear arm tackle one could imagine a linebacker every trying to make.

Still, he should be a net positive as in spite of Hill's skills, Hill really wasn't making any plays to stop drives or change momentum, areas at which Phillips excels.

UNT's CBs need to come up big

ULM backup QB Cody Wells has played fairly well, so whether Trey Revell plays doesn't seem as big of an issue to me as it is to some.

I think the surrounding talent on the ULM offense is impressive. Senior WR LaGregory Sapp is a big powerful hoss of a WR who is averaging an eye-popping 18.2 yards per catch. At least UNT can take some solace that he really has never displayed the nose for the end zone that top WRs have—he has scored one TD this year and his career high for a season is three TDs.

The opposite WR spot is manned by the slightly smaller but still large Darrell McNeal. He has scored six TDs already this year.

These are two very good big receivers who will give UNT's smaller, shorter CBs a very hard time.

If UNT's CBs can stay with these guys well enough to allow the safeties to over commit to the run at least some of the time, UNT could really control the ULM offense. If they cannot, look for ULM to be able to grind out a victory.

Predictions

First off, I think 20,000 UNT fans make the game tomorrow. Probably most will want to see Lance Dunbar run for 200 again—probably not likely vs. this defense—but hey, as long as they come.

Ultimately, I think UNT will win this game. I think ULM will control the UNT running game and slow the offense, but I expect the Mean Green Defense to have their best game since the Ball State game.

Additionally, I have been raving about UNT KR Jamaal Jackson for two weeks now. I expect him to beat a suspect ULM coverage team at least once in this game for a 80 yard return. ULM has one of the worst kick coverage teams in the sunbelt, but I would strongly doubt they have faced a better returner than Jackson. I think these team are actually fairly well matched. I think his returns may be the difference in this game.

Finally, I am really going to go out on a limb and predict UNT to win the fourth quarter against this very tough minded ULM team and that would be a big upset. Over the last few weeks there seems to have been a dramatic change of focus with the UNT players regarding finishing out games.

I think that mindset becomes contagious and makes poor to average team into good ones. I think we will see a strong fourth quarter again tomorrow.

UNT 30, ULM 27

What Would Happen If the CFL Failed?

Tobi Writes — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 04:49:54 -0500

I was studying the correlation between poorly attended Canadian Interuniversity Sports sponsored football games and Canadian Football League teams and getting annoyed, as I often do.

Last year, only 11 of the 27 CIS non-scholarship football programs playing the highest level of amateur football in Canada drew reported attendance numbers over 3000 a game.

(Some perspective is needed for American readers accustomed to the US top level of play for scholarship football at highly promoted programs like Texas, Tennessee, and Michigan that draw over 100K per game. Non-scholarship football in any country, including the US, tends not to be taken seriously by fans and to be an attendance dud. For non-scholarship, largely unpromoted and unmarketed football played in mostly badly thought out or aging stadiums or fields with bleachers in a cold country given to heavy snowfall, an average of 3000 is actually pretty reasonable --- all things considered.)

Anyway, of these 11 "healthy" football programs, eight of them were located in cities with no CFL competition.

Of the 16 "unhealthy" programs, 11 were located in CFL "Killzones" --- areas where the CFL dominated the entertainment dollar of football fans. (Of the remaining five, four universities had enrollments of less than 4000. Again, something that seemed quite excusable.)

CFL fans frequently tell me that the Plains is a football hotbed. And yet one would reach a totally opposite conclusion looking at CIS attendance. The only CIS football program that draws over 3000 per game is The University of Saskatchewan located in Saskatoon. Not coincidentially it is the only CIS team in a city in the Plains that doesn't have a CFL team.

CFL fans tell me how great it would be if the CFL would just expand into Halifax, London, Kitchener-Waterloo, and most of all Quebec City, because those cities have successful CIS programs.

It really doesn't sit well with me. The universities in those cities have built some decent programs in a very disfunctional CIS with little guidance, structure, or support. And now locals are supposed to jump aboard with the idea of ponying up the revenue to build a rich owner a $100 million stadium so that owner can steal the ticket buying fanbase from those local universities?

It just doesn't sit well with me.

I don't like the NFL, but at least they have the decency to find a market, get a stadium built, and then spend their money to train fans to go to that stadium. They don't just find a popular college football team and take over their stadium like an avian brood parasite.

On days like today, inspite of my affinity to the players and the Canadian game in general and my sympathy to the long suffering fans of the CFL, I hope that league never grows.

Today, in particular, my thoughts went further down that path and I considered what would happen if the CFL's BOG once more ran the league off the road and into the ditch and AAA didn't come to bail them out.

No NFL or Canadian Government bailouts?

First, I'd like to admit that this is very unlikely.

Someone always bails out the CFL. The CFL is like an armoured cockroach cruising through Vegas with a lucky rabbit's foot and weighted dice. It's annoying, filthy, and disgusting at times, but it seems to have an unlimited amount of last minute pardons.

The CFL appears to effectively be the NFL's junior partner. The NFL bailed them out and I have suspicions they would probably do so again. In return the CFL stays out of the U.S. and let's the NFL do whatever they want in Canada.

This allows the NFL to retain plausible deniability while thwarting U.S. anti-trust laws that could cripple the NFL. "See, the CFL has been competing with us for years!"

When you consider the NFL lost their 1980's lawsuit to the USFL and if not for the business tactics the USFL adopted under the mavericky leadership of Donald Trump, the USFL might have been awarded over a billion dollars of the NFL's money (in 1980's dollars!!), it seems pretty likely that keeping a "competitor" around who doesn't really compete with the NFL is worth a handful of NFL millions every once in a while.

Even if the CFL caught the NFL at a bad time, Canadians love the fact that the CFL is homegrown and historic. If it ever came down to it, I believe the local governments in CFL cities would champion a movement by the various levels of governement to save the league.

But what if it failed?

The idea really intrigued me. What would happen?

The Years: 0-3 ACFL

A New League Fails to Rise

An assumption might be that a new league would immediately arise to take its place, but would that happen in reality?

I don't think so.

Consider the fact that the CFL has always had difficulty finding owners to go into cities without established teams and CFL teams generally do not sell quickly without much discussion in the papers over failed attempts to sell.

CFL teams are not hot commodities. They aren't cash cows and do not seem to remain stable from year to year. Rich Canadians seem to agree with the average Canadian sports fan that there are slower ways to burn 10-20 million than buying a Canadian pro-football team.

Most Canadians seem to buy into the idea that Canadians don't like football much.

And there are reasons the rich Canadians should not like the CFL.

How many bridges have the CFL owners and the BOG burned to the ground over the last 20 years? I remember Windsor Mayor Eddie Francis being quoted in the paper a few years back about how he was going to build the CFL a stadium in Windsor. The CFL gave him the Heisman and left him to field criticism about being green and unrealistic in pursuing the CFL.

Not exactly a step-by-step guide on how to get government officials to champion spending tax payer money to build your league new stadiums.

Or what about the Argos ownership bailing out on the University of Toronto and the University of York at the last minute?

The names change over the years, but the fact that the CFL owners as a whole seem to be jerks appears to be a constant. When you really get down to it, the CFL BOG appear to be users. The politicians and businessmen who have the money that could make the CFL better see that reality.

CFL fans constantly pine for a rich foreign investor to start a new CFL team and endure the tough years to establish the team ... And then sell to a rich Canadian who isn't so foolish. Neither leg of that seems to happen.

If owners do not want to buy in to an established league with 100+ years of history, why would they want to buy into a start-up league that would attempt to emulate a defunct CFL?

Recall the problems the CFL has had in Ottawa. Failing CFL owners stiffed a lot of vendors and merchants out there. That played a role in the business community falling out of love with the CFL, which probably played a big role in killing the Ottawa Renegades.

Imagine that in every CFL city.

What owner in his right mind would want to spend money biding time until the businesses got over their hatred of all things pro football? It could be very similar to the fallout you see in the wake of American Basketball Association (ABA) teams who burn up semi-pro basketball credibility in market after market.

You know professional soccer teams would be all over those markets asking the cities to rework those stadiums into smaller capacity MLS stadiums. I am not a fan of North American soccer, but anyone who looks at the lay of the land can clearly see the unproven MLS has a lot more credibility with the Canadian tax paying public than the CFL does. The business community would probably forge relationships with those teams rather than with any new startup pro-football league.

Canadians seem unoptimistic about the CFL and Canadian football in general, if not fatalistic. If the CFL were to actually die, what percentage of CFL fans would actually buy into a new pro-football league team in season one? What percentage would want to wait a few years to see if the new league would make it before "foolishly" falling in love with pro-football again.

Sure the NFL would probably have exhibition games in Toronto, Montreal, Edmonton, and Vancouver, but the Bills game in Toronto was not a raging success last time. Additionally, when you figure in travel costs and smaller stadiums with less revenue generating potential, it seems unlikely the NFL would set up shop in Canada.

There are a number of reasons to question whether a new league would arise.

Football takes off

The Years: 4+ ACFL

With no pro football, what would football fans in Canada do?

I think over three to four years they would rediscover their love of University football.

Broadcasters would immediately look for something to fill the old CFL timeslots. CIS Football would be a cheap and easy option. As it was given more exposure, fans who tend to attend games would gravitate to attend those CIS games.

With no BC Lions, SFU and UBC would have tremendous gains in game attendance. UBC might take up playing at BC place or the new soccer stadium. UVIC and UFV might be inclined to start playing after seeing those school's numbers.

With no Stampeders, would the Dinos draw huge crowds to McMahon? With no Roughriders, would the Rams half fill Mosaic?

With no league for Aspers's Blue Bombers, the Bisons would be the major tenent in his new stadium. With no CFL threat to eventually force their way in, would Western expand TD Waterhouse?

With no Argonauts might we see a resurgence of The Toronto Blues? Like Laval today, they used to draw quite healthy crowds back in the day. The program just lost the public to the CFL. Would the Blues possibly play at Lamport or could attendence explode again to where they would play in the Rogers Centre? For that matter would York with their enormous enrollment?

With no Alouettes, would McGill fill Molson? Would UQAM play there or at Saputo? Would CEPSUM and Concordia Stadium be expanded?

It seems like big gains would be likely in every CFL market and likely small to large gains in every other CIS market. The failure of the CFL could tip off another golden age of Canadian University football.

While the CFL is not likely to be allowed to fatally shoot itself anytime soon, I think this was an article that needed to be written.

Sometimes it is good to reflect on what a league costs you. The CFL has quietly robbed Canada of strong Canadian Interuniversity football programs. The process has become an ingrained part of how the league operates and what Canadians expect. CFL fans have come to believe the CFL cuckolding college markets is a positive process.

Maybe it is time to take a step back and look at things from a different perspective.

All fans of Canadian football should look at what is good for Canada and Canadian football first sometimes and critically evaluate the CFL's actions from that regard, not just assume what is good for the CFL is good for Canadian Football.

Why Colt McCoy Is Boise State's Best Friend

Tobi Writes — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:45:38 -0500

I have read a lot of articles about what it will take to get Boise into the BCS. Frankly, I disagree with most of them.

To me, the answer to Boise's BCS dilemma is fairly simple.

Boise needs Colt McCoy and the University of Texas to win out.

I think it is as simple as that. They need their new BFF Colt to come through for them.

Exhibit 1: The BCS Bowl slot rules (from Wikipedia)

Consider the setup for BCS invites.

BCS Games	Conference	Conference
Rose Bowl Game presented by Citi	Pac-10	Big Ten
Tostitos Fiesta Bowl	Big 12	At-Large
FedEx Orange Bowl	ACC	At-Large
Allstate Sugar Bowl	SEC	At-Large
BCS Championship Game	BCS No. 1	BCS No. 2

"Even in the five BCS bowls, consideration is given to historic associations between the conferences and the bowl games themselves. Tie-ins still apply, unless a team obligated to a certain bowl game is selected for the BCS Championship Game. In that case, their slot is filled by an at-large school. Any bowl which loses a contracted team to the Championship Game gets first pick of the eligible at-large schools ."

Exhibit 2: The current BCS standings

RK TEAM RECORD

1. Florida 8-0
2. Texas 8-0
3. Alabama 8-0
4. Iowa 9-0
5. Cincinnati 8-0
6. TCU 8-0
7. Boise State 8-0
8. Oregon 7-1
9. LSU 7-1
10. Georgia Tech 8-1
11. Penn State 8-1
12. USC 6-2
13. Pittsburgh 7-1
14. Utah 7-1
15. Houston 7-1

How that might project out

Let's say that all of the undefeated schools win their remaining regular season games (because that is the assumption that most fans are working from).

It seems pretty likely in that scenario that Oregon's future wins over Stanford and Arizona would push them by Boise. There is a shot Penn State could pass Boise as well with a strong win over Ohio State.

Alabama would be the SEC West Champion and would play the SEC East Champion Florida. The loser would likely fall below Texas, so the national championship game would be the No. 1 SEC championship game winner vs. No. 2 Texas.

The Rose Bowl would be No. 7 Oregon vs. No. 3 Iowa.

The Orange Bowl would be No. 9 Georgia Tech vs. No. 6 Cincinnati.

The Sugar Bowl would take the No. 4 SEC Championship loser and would likely want No. 5 TCU due to proximity.

That would leave your advocate in among the BCS crowd, the Fiesta Bowl.

The Fiesta Bowl really likes Boise

The Fiesta Bowl is the only bowl likely to WANT No. 8 Boise.

They have seen Boise shock the nation, and Boise is comparatively close. With the size of the Boise fanbase, a trip to any other BCS bowl is a risky proposition for any other BCS bowl. Not so much for the Fiesta Bowl.

They won't take Boise over a higher ranked TCU team, but they would likely prefer Boise.

If Texas wins out, TCU would be the choice of the Sugar Bowl and the Fiesta would have two slots to fill.

The Fiesta Bowl would be losing its champion to the championship game. They could match Boise against another at-large team...No. 11 USC anyone?

USC also still has Arizona and Stanford on the schedule...

USC would have the fanbase somewhat close by to ensure a top turnout, while Boise would bring the star power of an undefeated snubbed team. It could be billed as a team that didn't deserve to be there (USC) vs. a team that had a legit title claim.

Fans of the BCS schools would want to see a USC team that didn't really do anything to earn a trip to the BCS this year, but is still super talented and well coached, destroy uppity Boise. Fans who despise the BCS would want to see Boise destroy a longtime BCS darling.

A great scenario, right?

But look what could happen if Texas gets upset in the Big 12 championship game.

BCS Games	Conference	Conference
Rose Bowl Game presented by Citi	No. 7 Oregon	No. 10 Penn St.
Tostitos Fiesta Bowl	Big 12 Champ	No. 5 TCU
FedEx Orange Bowl	No. 9 G. Tech	No. 6 Cincy
Allstate Sugar Bowl	No. 3 SEC Loser	No. 4 Texas
BCS Championship Game	No. 1 SEC Champ	No. 2 Iowa

I am sure the howling is starting already.

"The Rose Bowl would never pass over an Oregon-Boise rematch!"

Are you sure of that? Neither Boise nor Oregon is likely to excite fans in LA and fill the stadium.

Plus, Boise destroyed Oregon. That was not great TV.

It is entirely possible that Boise is just a team that matches up well against Oregon and that BSU is in the Ducks' heads.

What if the Rose Bowl invites Boise and the game is non-competitive? What if the fans turn the channel after the first quarter? Does the Rose Bowl want to broadcast a game that only interests fans in tiny Idaho?

Boise is also not likely to sell the kinds of tickets in LA that Penn State could, despite proximity. It is also not likely to have the viewership so important to generate the revenue these bowls need.

Citizens of Boise, you have your assignment...

Pray for Colt McCoy.

Fix Your Danged Stadium Already! (No. 3: Rice University)

Tobi Writes — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 15:04:18 -0500

In honor of Halloween, here is the third in my series on problem stadiums that haunt programs at the FBS level.

These recommendations were originally conceived in a thread I wrote a few years back at Collegesportsinfo.com.

For every FBS program, football should be the university's No. 1 or 1A revenue generating sport. Potentially, football revenue and football-inspired alumni donations could pay for all of the other sports. If you blow football, you will lose massive amounts of money on sports.

At the bottom end of the FBS, stadium troubles often cause a lot of issues.

With Eastern Michigan and Kent State discussed, I am going to turn the harsh spotlight from the MAC.

In attendance terms, FIU and FAU would be among the next schools to address, but frankly, they are in the process of doing what is needed at their schools. They get a flyer.

Today I am going to skip a bit ahead and talk about Rice University.

DISCLAIMER

OK, in the interest of full disclosure, as a senior in high school I applied to Rice and didn't cut the mustard in the interview process.

I hope Owl fans will still judge the suggestions on their own merits rather than suggesting they originate in any kind of sour grapes. I still have quite a lot of fondness for Texas's premier university.

Rice Stadium, and why it doesn't work for Rice University

Rice University is a tiny private school with a little over 3,000 undergraduates. They only have 44,000 alumni, 12,000 of which live in Houston.

Rice Stadium (originally called Houston Stadium) was built to seat 70,000, and now seats 47,000.

The Owls attendance has generally stayed between 10,000 and 15,000 since the NFL Texans moved in next door, but they averaged 20,000 last year with the team's excellent play on the field.

A Little backstory on Rice/Houston Stadium

Back in the 1940s when the Texas publics in the Southwest Conference were much smaller, Rice fielded a competitive team.

They were so competitive, in fact, the city of Houston decided to build a 70,000-seat shrine to the SWC Champion Rice Owls to replace their 37,000 seat existing stadium, Rice Field.

This new stadium, initially called Houston Stadium, was to host both Rice games and the "startup" University of Houston Cougar games.

(UH, located 4 miles from Rice, launched football in 1946 as a member of the Lone Star Conference. They would eventually form the Gulf Coast Conference and play in the Missouri Valley Conference before the prestigious SWC finally let them in, in 1971.)

It is important to understand Rice football was the top level of football in Houston up to 1945.

The launch of football at UH was only the first blow in a series of hits to Rice University's program.

Bud Adams and The AFL destroy college football in Houston

In 1960, a rich Texas oilman by the name of Bud Adams decided to buy into the AFL and put a pro team in Houston at Jeppesen Stadium (now UH's Robertson Stadium), 3.5 miles away from Houston Stadium.

This move would destroy college football in Houston for the next 50-plus years.

As the Oilers grew in prosperity, they became the team the unaffiliated Houston football fan would spend their money to see, not Rice.

The Oilers fans felt comfortable sitting the appropriately sized 36,000-seat Jeppson Stadium, while the Owl fans felt more and more uncomfortable sitting in an increasingly vacant Houston Stadium.

The Oilers established what I call a pro football "killzone," an area of consumer dominance that consumes the finances of area fans a college program might otherwise be able to tap.

Things only got worse when the Oilers and Cougars moved into the much larger Astrodome a mere three miles from Rice in 1965.

It was the end of Rice football dominance, and it permanently stunted the development of UH Cougar football.

Flight of the Oilers

The Owls and the Cougars had an opportunity to change the direction of their programs in 1995 when the Oilers, a mere eight years after successfully extorting $67 million in upgrades to the Astrodome from the city, tried to demand a new stadium. Houston mayor Bob Lanier told Adams to take a long walk off a short plank, and the team moved to Tennessee.

Both Rice and UH drew higher attendance numbers in the years the NFL was absent from Houston.

If Rice and UH had made their grievances known publicly and really worked city government, perhaps they could have established a political firewall to prevent the NFL from getting a new stadium in their backyard again.

A prepared unified front possibly could have pushed Reliant stadium to a site somewhere far away from the universities.

Alas, that opportunity was lost and the NFL returned to Houston in 2002 a mere 2 miles away from Rice Stadium.

The shrinking of Rice Stadium

In 2006, the leadership at Rice made an unprecedented move for a major university— but the kind of choice one might expect from a university known for that level of academic excellence — they reduced the capacity of their stadium. They cleverly removed the endzone bleacher benches in the lower level of Rice Stadium, so the only seating in the lower bowl would be along the sidelines.

That cut the capacity of the stadium to a much more manageable 47,000.

It cut upkeep costs and made the stadium a much more enjoyable place to watch games by substantially reducing the number of empty seating.

Rice Stadium had always been a cutting edge stadium as from the initial planning stages it was planned with the idea of having excellent visability from every seat. The reduction of seating only improved that, putting all permanent seats parallel to the sidelines.

(Photo by Amble. Taken from Wikipedia per fair usage guidelines)

The lesson of the UT games

The University of Texas Longhorns play the Rice Owls in football in an effort to maintain UT's exposure in Houston for recruiting purposes. UT has 70,000 alumni living in Houston and wants the game played at Reliant every other year instead of Rice Stadium.

With a larger fan base, this game effectively becomes a home game for UT. Reliant with it's added revenue streams can offer Rice more money than Rice could make having the game at their stadium.

From UT's perspective, playing the game at Reliant adds to the perception that UT is on a different level than Rice. When the Longhorns come to play, only a pro stadium is up to par for the game.

A&M hasn't played Rice recently. A&M is close enough to Houston that they don't need to play a Houston university. There are no other programs who would draw more than 35,000 at a high end to play Rice in Houston.

The 47,000 number is clearly seen as the high end of what Rice officials assume they can draw. I think in effect the only opponent who could hit that number is UT, and recent history clearly show that Rice Stadium is not a venue in which UT is willing to play.

(If the NFL was not in the area and also sapping UH's attendance, UH could potentially fill the stadium for games against Rice as well. That situation does not exist.)

So what is the point of seating for 47,000?

The current and potential future usage of Rice Stadium

Today Rice Stadium hosts Rice Owl games, which, as noted previously, have not exceeded 21,000 since the NFL moved back into the neighborhood. (Those numbers are not going to move much over the next 30 years with the Texans nearby.) It also seats high school football games which have similar high end attendance numbers.

Having such a large capacity stadium that will regularly have so many empty seats supresses attendance. Fans do not want to sit in a stadium that is 2/3 empty. Having such a stadium reduces a fan's impulse to return fro the next game.

The games aren't as fun in an empty stadium and there is no sense of scarcity to fuel early ticket sales.

There is a reason that Major League Soccer has gone to smaller 15,000-30,000 seat capacity stadiums. They had to in order to build regular attendance.

Pro Soccer is seeking to build a new Houston stadium. Rice Stadium could fill that need with some minor tweaks if their capacity was smaller.

At some point in the future, non-NFL pro football may return to Houston. If or when it does, there is no guarantee that team won't want to play at Reliant.

If that team should chose a smaller venue, Rice stadium has some advantages over Robertson Stadium. As long as Rice Stadium's capacity is similar or slightly larger than Robertson's 32,000 set capacity, Rice will be in the driver's seat.

My recommendations

As with all posts in this series I am going to give a cheap recommendation and an ideal recommendation.

In either scenario, further seating cuts are needed. The stadium really should not seat more than 30,000 -35,000 and even that might be pushing it. More seats equate to unneccessary maintainance costs.

The lower deck seats currently only seat about 17,000, so demolishing the upper decks would likely not be a good idea. The pressbox and some luxury suites would need to be rebuilt costing more money and in general no FBS conference wants to see their member drop their stadium down to an FCS-level capacity.

Rice Stadium is an excellent skeleton of a fantastic stadium. The facilities there need to be upgraded to reflect the money the university possesses, not the small size of it's student body. Restroom facilities need to be sufficient for 30,000 and need to appear clean, somewhat new, and well maintained.

That is really just a given for stadiums that want to grow a fan base.

The concession stands should be somewhat cutting edge too, towards that goal. Rice should reach out to prestigious local resturants and try to work deals. Perhaps resturants and the city can pay part of the costs to upgrade the concession areas.

You should be able to get concessions at Rice games that no other university in Texas offers.

Watching a game at Rice Stadium should be an event.

The cheap recommendation

As far as seating goes, Rice could tarp the western upper deck. That would reduce capacity to 32,000 --- a much more appropriate number considering capacity needs.

Just like the last reduction it could likely be done in a cost effective manner and still look fairly good. There are no luxury boxes at the top of the west grandstand, so tarping it would not be distracting.

Especially in the case of Rice, I do not recommend the cheap option. I think for Rice to survive and prosper long term they need to spend some money and treat their stadium like the historic landmark it is.

The more costly recommendation

I'd recommend tearing out the edges of each of the upper decks. Specifically, sections 150-152, 159-161, 250-352, and 359-361. That would reduce capacity to a little over 34,000.

If it would make it easier to film games, I would but in cement platforms for TV cameras in their place. I don't know if doing that would help TV crews in filming the games, but if it would that is what my first thought would be to do with the areas.

If not, I might suggest just putting up a statue on a pillar of an owl looking down on the stadium in each spot --- basically bringing some art to the stadium. A different species of Owl could be immortalized in each end zone --- fiercely overlooking the Owl games. This would be an enjoyable facet of the games for young Owl fans --- a key in developing lifelong fans --- as well as a marketing point for fans of the high school games played in the stadium.

I'd also recommend considering converting the upper third of the remaining western upper deck into luxury boxes, a move that would further reduce capacity by another 3,000 or so, to a permanent seated capacity of maybe as little as 31,000.

Rice has more wealthy fans per fan than any other University in Texas, so it follows they should have more luxury boxes per seats than most stadiums. Even if they go unsold, these boxes could be used in nonstandard ways -- perhaps even as lures to land top professors who love football. Even in that usage, those suites would bring more value than empty bleachers do.

If nothing else consider it as a better usage of space. Rather than having an unprotected bleacher that will wear down, that area would be converted into seating protected from the elements.

Finally, I'd work to have alumnium bleacher backs installed behind all of the alumnimum bleacher seats. It is still acceptable to have bleacher benches for seating, but is a lot less acceptable among older fans today (who are used to molded backed seats in luxurious pro stadiums) not to have any back support for those bleacher bench seats.

Giving fans the ability to lean back comfortably while watching the game will help tremendously in fan acquistion and retention.

A final word

Rice University needs to play football for the added exposure it provides the small academic powerhouse, but it doesn't need to bleed money and esteem doing so.

I hope Owl leadership might consider these recommendations to further shrink their stadium to an appropriate size so they can build more of a self sufficient program.

Articles in this series:

1) Fix your danged stadium already, Eastern Michigan University!

2) Fix your danged stadium already, Kent State University!

3) Fix your danged stadium already, Rice University!

Hawaii Warriors: Time for Greg McMackin to Step Out of June Jones's Shadow

Tobi Writes — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 01:31:20 -0400

I'll admit it. I am a bigger fan of Greg McMackin than I am of June Jones.

I'd like to see McMackin make it in Hawaii. I'd like to see him outpace Jones, but so far the results aren't there.

McMackin has made some admirable changes. He seems to hold his players more accountable that Jones generally did. When they travel to the mainland, McMackin dosen't just accept the jet lag. He demands they suck it up and play hard, something that Jones rarely did.

He has also made some big mistakes. I personally think taking a salary that was almost 50% more than June Jones's last salary was a bad idea in that it put a target on him from day one.

I know the university and the state felt pressure to prove they weren't cheap after Jones's scorched earth exit, but McMackin would have done far better to publically insist on a salary that was not a cent more than the 800K or so Jones earned in his last season until McMackin earned more with his performance.

New Coaches need time more than up front money and a move like that might have given him a few more years cushion. An additional 400K in the school recruiting budget wouldn't hurt a new coach either.

The slur against gays he used in reference to Notre Dame also earned him some enemies he didn't need. I am sure he would love a redo on that moment as well.

Still, I am convinced he is a good hearted guy and a good coach. I'd like to see him step from June Jones' shadow at UH.

I think for him to do it, he has to break from Jones' blueprint. He can't be a better June Jones than the former coach was at UH, so why try?

The slide

Since former record setting JUCO QB Greg Alexander went down, Hawaii has lost four straight vs. the best teams in the conference.

This may be disappointing, but it wasn't unexpected.

Fresno, Idaho, and Boise are the best teams in the conference and Hawaii always struggles in Nevada.

Now the Warriors are entering a much more manageable part of the schedule.

They host WAC cellar dwellers Utah State and New Mexico, make their shortest plane trip to play a San Jose State team that appears to have collapsed, host Navy and end with Wisconsin, two teams that will be suffering major jet lag.

As amazing as it is to say, 7-6 may still not be out of the question, but the coaching staff has to get the offense to develop an offensive identity.

They need to move even further away from June Jones' philosophy and run the ball.

The Warriors can run the ball and should

Consider the offensive numbers from the last 4 games.

10/10 Fresno State 2-3 (0-2) L 42-17 24/52 283 2/2 18 rushes 85 yards 4.7 per carry
10/17 @ Idaho 2-4 (0-3) L 35-23 31/45 367 1/1 24 rushes 77 yards 3.2 per carry
10/24 No. 4 Boise State 2-5 (0-4) L 54-9 27/47 174 1/3 18 rushes 93 yards 5.2 per carry
10/31 @ Nevada 2-6 (0-5) L 31-21 29/49 374 3/2 20 rushes 118 yards 5.9 per carry

UH is getting marginal QB play and is still calling the games like Greg Alexander is throwing the ball.

The Warriors are throwing 50 passes a game and running 20 times a game.

That needs to change. These QBs need much more support from the running game.

Jones never ran the ball. To his credit McMackin does have his teams run a little.

He needs to do more of it. A 40 pass to 30 run mix would serve Hawaii a lot better.

There is no reason why this Hawaii team shouldn't end this season with, say, 1,200 rushing yards. They are currently on pace for 851 yards.

In spite of having a pipeline of big quality linemen, Jones never committed to running the ball with any regularity. As a result, the Warrior's top end under Jones was always capped.

Jones is great at winning games vs. sub-BCS opposition. McMackin's teams could have a higher upside than Jones's if they can run the ball as well as pass it. If an opponent taking away the pass no longer causes a Warrior implosion, UH will be a tough play for schools at any level.

Hawaii has a decent pair of backs with reasonable size this year. Leon Wright-Jackson and Alex Green are capable backs.

Use them.

Worth it for the recruiting dividend alone

Hawaii has always had trouble recruiting top runners.

No top RB is going to want to play for a school that doesn't even break 1000 yards rushing as a team. No Texas All-American RB is going to play for a school that rushes for 800 yards as a team in a season. That needs to change.

The run and shoot should be just as good of a running set as any spread. It has been a great platform for top running backs at the highest level.

UH will never land a Barry Sanders if they only run for 800 yards as a team in a season.

Jones simply ignored the running game. His intransigence with regards to running the ball cast a shadow over UH's running back recruiting efforts.

Hawaii should be an easy sell to top RBs. Play in paradise. Earn the starting job and you can run for 1000-1500 yards vs. 7 in th box on every down. Go into the NFL with less wear on your body (from playing against smaller defensive players) than other backs.

It should be an easy sell, but because of Jones' passing myopia it is not. Time to walk away from that.

For this year's success and for future recruiting, Hawaii has to run the ball.

Brent Rausch or Bryant Moniz?

And then there is the question of who should play QB.

Sophomore Moniz is a short mobile winner from the island. Moniz is not a train wreck as a starting QB. He is serviceable and seems to get a little better each game, but is not currently what one would want from a starting QB in a pass heavy offense.

Junior Rausch was a three-star JUCO QB who had some playing time before Alexander claimed the starting job last year. Rausch earned the backup job over the off-season before breaking his pinkie. He is healthy now.

I suspect Rausch won't be worse than Moniz, so why not give him the Utah State game to make a claim on the job?

(I am not really advocating Rausch, more stating that there is little potential downside and possibly quite a large upside in giving him a half or even the full Utah State game.)

If Rausch has a dominant performance, the job is his and Moniz becomes his Tyler Graunke.

If Rausch is just average, then his shot is gone and the team goes with Moniz with his additional year of eligibility.

If Rausch struggles and the game is close at the half, Moniz get the second half and the rest of the season.

Just don't stretch it out.

Next year

How great would it be to see an experienced senior dominated WR unit led by Kealoha Pilares, Rodney Bradley, Greg Salas, and Malcolm Lane team with an experienced, established QB AND a returning say 800-yard rusher in Sr. Alex Green?

Come on Coach McMackin. Step out of that shadow.

UNT Slams the Door on WKU In Fourth Quarter In Wild 68-49 Win

Tobi Writes — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:40:27 -0400

Chalk one up to the players.

With a season full of heartbreaking near losses that had the fans on the verge of running the coaching staff out of town, the North Texas Mean Green sat on the edge of watching their season collapse into another one win season.

Not wanting to watch another 4th-and-one shotgun QB rollout play, a number of UNT fans opted to prepare for Halloween rather than attend the game. A little over 11,000 were in attendance, robbing the team of much of whatever home field advantage Fouts Field offers. Without the fan's energy, UNT players were flat in the first three quarters.

The mental toughness, and an emerging maturity of the Mean Green players allowed UNT to shut down the Hilltoppers.

Overcoming a flat opening

The Mean Green offense opened the game strongly as offense based teams often do with a nine play, 67 yard drive for a TD, but then allowed an 81 yard kickoff return to the UNT six yard line. WKU took it in on the next play to tie up the game at 7-7.

Riley Dodge drove the team 66 yards in six plays, capped by a 14 yard TD pass to Darius Carey to take a 14-7 lead. A few plays later, WKU's RB Marrell Booker broke away for a 61 yard TD run.

It was pretty clear at that point that defense would be a rare commodity in this game, a distressing thought that quieted those Mean Green fans in the stands.

WKU ran out to 35-21 lead further risking thinning the crowd, but Riley Dodge and the offense responded, coolly taking the team 46 yards in 41 seconds to cut the lead to seven going into the half, and keeping many Mean Green fans in their seats through halftime.

The second half opened with a surprising big play by the UNT defense. Senior DE Eddrick Gillmore and Freshman DE KC Obi got a good outside angles on a pass rush, but there was insufficient push from the center of the line. Gillmore switched to a power rush and drove towards QB Jakes, forcing him out of the pocket and into the path of full speed Obi. Obi steamrolled Jakes and forced a fumble that Gillmore recovered stopping a Hilltoppers drive at the UNT 30 yard line.

Four plays later the UNT running game punched it in to tie the game 35-35.

WKU scored two more TDs in the third, but each time the UNT offense responded. The third quarter ended with the teams tied 49-49.

UNT owns the fourth quarter

The fourth quarter opened with Hilltopper freshman QB Kawaun Jakes getting sacked by UNT's leading sacker DE Brandon Akpunku. It would get no better for the Hilltoppers in a brutal fourth quarter.

On the next play, UNT freshman OLB Jeremy Phillips read Jakes's eyes and stepped in front of a pass taking the ball to the WKU 13 yard line, setting up the game winning score.

WKU had numerous opportunities in the fourth quarter, but UNT's defense was as good in the fourth as it was bad in the first three quarters, and UNT's offense continued to add points.

In the fourth quarter UNT held Jakes to three completions on six attempts, for one yard with no TDs and one interception. They also sacked him twice, including one for a safety by senior DL Eddrick Gilmore. The Mean Green defense yielded 14 total rushing yards in the quarter on five runs.

After surrendering 44 points to FAU, 50 points to Troy, and 412 yards and 49 points in the first three periods to WKU, the much maligned Mean Green D finally stiffened and pitched a shutout quarter, yielding a mere 15 yards.

What this game reveals about the Mean Green

The cynic would say this game reveals nothing more than that UNT is a lousy defensive team, and not much better than WKU.

I say that guy is not looking at this game in perspective.

More signs of an emerging ability to close out games

In front of a small, deflated home crowd, a team on the verge of collapse dug deep and pulled together to dominate the fourth quarter, sealing up the victory.

UNT has not had any problems competing with teams like ULL, Ohio, or FAU, so the issue of whether UNT can compete with the rank and file of the sun belt has already been confirmed.

Closing has been a major problem—they have few senior starters, and a number of new players, and as such have had problems maintaining their confidence and closing out games.

Today, with little help from the home crowd, the Mean Green found that confidence within themselves and they dominated the fourth, outscoring WKU 19-0 to close out the game.

UNT Head Coach Todd Dodge Utilizes short yardage scheme, personnel

What?! That has to be a typo!

No, it is actually true. On one goal line play he ran the wildcat and snapped the ball directly to RB Jeremi Mathis who went right in.

On another play Bryant Seidle was in at tight end and sealed the edge allowing Riley Dodge into the end zone.

Todd Dodge takes a lot of heat --- and frankly much of it is deserved for continueing to run the short yardage shotgun set --- but the guy has proven he is not intractable. For that at least he deserves some credit.

UNT finally played a game where they didn't give away points

A team that has not been able to control costly turnovers managed to play a mistake free offensive game.

While Western does have the worst defense in the conference, UNT has given points away versus turnovers, versus defenses of varying caliber—even the bad ones. There were no fumbles in this game. No giveaway points.

This is an area the coaching staff has been working on for the last few weeks, and their work paid dividends today.

Jamaal Jackson is a beast

Well...as a kick returner anyway. It seemed like every time he touched the ball on a kick return, UNT started at their own 40 at worst.

The qualitative difference between most SUn Belt schools' kick return game is not that great. Jackson did it vs. Troy and did it again vs. WKU. He is the real deal.

If UNT starts most drives at their 40, this team is going to remain as good of an offensive team as it has seemed lately.

The defense made some stops with the game on the line for the first time in weeks

It is easy to say, "Well, The UNT defense gave up 49 to the Hilltoppers. They had not scored more than 24 all year long."

That is very true. The problem is that statement simply doesn't cover all of it.

UNT does have some big questions that need to be answered on the defensive side of the ball that the coaching staff thought would be masked by playing a low octane Hilltopper's offense. This gameplan seemed to be somewhat experimental. The staff seemed to think this game would give the staff a little breathing room.

That didn't happen. And the game got ugly. The defensive staff made a lot of changes prior to the game, but they may need to consider making some more changes, whether they are positional moves, philosophical shifts, or more actual personnel changes in the starting lineup.

The Hilltoppers don't have a bad offense, their offense just lacks the talent at the receiver spots and on the OL to score more than their defense allows.

The thought of UNT's defense just sucking also ignores the fact that the Hilltoppers had this game marked on their schedule for months. They came to play, and played their best game of the year against UNT chasing a win.

Additionally, as I stressed in the preview, UNT had not generated much in the turnover, or sack department in several games. Really the UNT defense hadn't stopped any opponent with any consistency in quite a while, and had just been run off the field by an average Troy offense.

For a team like WKU with a good QB and some good runners, but a thin OL and few receiving threats, this was exactly the kind of opponent against which the Hilltoppers were likely to have a big offensive game.

The Hilltoppers caught UNT's defense at it's mental and emotional worst, in a transition, with little support from the home fans.

For a half to arguably three quarters, UNT endured a worst case scenario. UNT's down linemen looked like they were on rollerskates in the first half. They stood up their blockers and slid with them down the line of scrimmage on a series of slow developing run plays, but WKU's backs are very well coached and quite explosive. They would wait for the entire line to be flowing one way and then cut back hard the other direction getting by the defensive linemen before they could react.

The UNT DL seemed almost hurt by the fact that WKU didn't have that great of a line. They would essentially beat their men working for the play and then be out of position on the cutback.

To compile the problem, the back 7 were not making many big play saving tackles in the first half.

After halftime, UNT's defensive linemen maintained their position better and WKU's offense had a much harder time of it.

The coaching staff marched the safeties up and overcommitted to the run in the fourth and WKU was smothered. I think it would also be accurate to say that The UNT defense took charge in the fourth. The defense put aside the loser mindset that they have not been able to shed all year and made their own destiny with a dominant finish.

UNT does have to take a hard look at the defense and address the issues of the last three games, but there are positives there too, even after giving up 99 points in two games to average to poor offenses.

Perhaps due to Sam Owusu-Hemeng's absence (and perhaps not) Eddrick Gilmore played the game at DE to great affect giving the team the pass rusher who can power rush it has needed at an end spot all season. Gilmore was as guilty as any of the rest of the DL in not overpursueing vs the run in the first half, but he looked great in the second half and had his best game of the season overall. He recorded a sack for a safety and had the pressure which helped force the game tying turnover at the start of the third.

The staff switched Tevinn Cantly and Gilmore, so Cantly was in the 4 man defensive tackle rotation. Like Gilmore and everyone else on the DL, Cantly didn't play well in the first half, but he was very solid in the second half. Cantly seems a little better of a run defender at DT than he was at end. That positional change looks like another good move by Defensive Coordinator Gary DeLoach.

The question is will the moves stick when Owusu-Hemeng returns?

I was not enthralled with KC Obi's play. He plays hard and understands what is needed, but really is not much of a playmaker at this point. He is more of just a perimeter runner today. If Gilmore doesn't force Jakes out of the pocket, Jakes would not be in Obi's path. He is undoubtably a great prospect, but I think he needs an off-season in the weight room upgrading his strength more than UNT needs his speed right now.

DE Brandon Akpunku had a bad game overall. He jumped off sides numerous times and had some other penalty resulting in a first down and missed at least one tackle on a cut back run that went for big yards. He did have a nice fourth quarter though with a tough guy sack and a couple good tackles. Even when Akpunku has an off game, you have to like the fire with which he plays. If all of the defense played with that passion we'd have a dominant unit. Even though he really needs to sit for about half of the plays, it is hard to advocate benching that fire.

I think the coaching staff really needs to consider working Draylen Ross in at DE too. With Cantly, Jackson, and Atkinson, UNT has a nice 3 tackle rotation. Ross, Gilmore, Akpunku, and (when he returns) Owusu-Hemeng would be a salty mix of speed and size at the ends.

Jeremy Phillips probably earned some PT with his big interception. That is probably a good thing as our starting trio of linebackers do not make plays, but Phillips did blow a pretty easy tackle on a kickoff return earlier in the game that does raise some concerns about his ability to tackle. Still, more PT for Phillips makes sense. Hill could pick up some safety time if that were to occur as well.

The defensive dominance of the fourth quarter coincided with much more aggressive play calling vs. the run. That is a marked departure from earlier in the year. If UNT's defensive staff feels comfortable putting their solid CBs on islands more, this could trigger a remarkable turnaround on defense.

Really my point is that the defense seems to be finding itself. To me, that is not as big of an issue. In a way, it might be accurate to view the defensive part of this game like one might a scrimmage as so many players had shifted positions. The team got better as the game progressed and they got mor comfortable in their roles. That is what you want to see.

I think the most important element to take from the last few games is that the team looks like it is learning not to give games away and how to close, and I think those have been far bigger issues for this team.

All of that bodes very well for the remaining schedule.

Dregs of the FBS Dregs Bowl 2009 could add 4 years to UNT rebuilding plan

Tobi Writes — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:04:54 -0400

UNT has their best chance for turning this season around this week when they host the WKU Hilltoppers. Both schools have developing football programs. UNT is about a year of FBS level talent acquisition ahead of Western Kentucky.

Both teams are at the bottom of the conference standings in the Sun Belt — the worst FBS conference in America.

UNT is 1-6 overall and 0-4 in the Sun Belt. WKU is 0-3 in the Sun Belt and 0-7 overall.

I am going to call the North Texas Mean Green a bit of a weak favorite in this one as the Western Kentucky Hilltoppers catch UNT at a season low emotionally, having been crushed by a Troy team, being in total disarray on defense, and having the heart of the team ripped out with the loss of senior MLB Tobe Nwigwe for the season with a foot injury.

No doubt UNT's offense should score about 50 points on WKU's thin, undermanned defense, and WKU should not be able to keep up offensively based on their games this year (the best of which was a 24-point yield last week vs. MTSU), but let's not forget how bad UNT's defense has been of late.

Additionally, WKU has talent at the important spots. Freshman QB Kawaun Jakes has been a plus player in most of their games this year. RB Bobby Rainey has already rushed for 446 yards this year at a very salty 5.9 yards per rush. He's a damned good player.

The Hilltoppers' problem offensively has been a lack of playmakers at the receiver spot.

This WKU team is a lot like UNT's last season—minus a Casey Fitzgerald.

If UNT cannot stop the run or generate turnovers, WKU may be able to nickel and dime UNT up and down the field—just like Troy did, controlling the clock and UNT's scoring potential.

WKU's big problem this year is that teams jump out to big leads on them, forcing the Hilltoppers away from the run early.

Despite good scoring numbers, UNT hasn't jumped out on anyone this year. When UNT with Riley Dodge at the helm has scored early—like in the ULL and FAU games—the offense has also served up turnovers that have been converted into points, neutralizing that lead.

If Dodge and the Mean Green give away 10-14 points via turnovers in the first half, they will extend how long WKU can run the ball, control the clock, and stay in the game.

In that scenario, there is no reason why Rainey could not roll for 200-plus yards against this run defense with the competent Jakes throwing the occasional pass to keep things honest.

If UNT isn't going to go after interceptions at all, favoring just making the tackle on a safe play, WKU could operate with impunity and have a breakout offensive game. WKU could eat up time of possession and potentially steal, say, a 34-27 win.

Now that said, WKU is at the same point UNT was last season with paper-thin depth. WKU's OL, for example, could have a catastrophic collapse at a position in any game.

Barring potential factors that may or may not happen (like the UNT fans, UNT coaching staff, or upperclassmen really pumping up the team or WKU injuries), I think UNT's best chance to win is based on attacking WKU's lack of depth. That really fits UNT's coaching staff's alleged standard MO anyway.

Dodge's offensive philosophy is designed to go after the weak spots repeatedly. (In practice this doesn't always happen, but B.J. Lewis' run of catches vs. MTSU is a prime example of this actually occuring to good affect in a game.) WKU doesn't have 4-6 good coverage guys.

You could see an explosive UNT receiver who isn't a coaching staff favorite (Lewis or Darius Carey) get more passes thrown his way than the staff normally does, and one of those big play guys could have a breakout game vs. a weaker coverage guy than they normally face.

This game could be disgustingly close; it could even be a WKU upset—or if UNT's players and coaches get their act together, correct their weaknesses, and play with fire, it could be a blowout win and the start of a UNT winning streak.

This is not only the biggest game of the year for WKU, it is also the biggest game of the year for UNT, with a loss potentially opening the door to catastrophe.

If UNT loses this game, the team could very well collapse to a one-win season.

The Mean Green's biggest issue all season has been a flat-out lack of confidence. The talent is clearly there to win. Whether they are being used properly is almost irrelevant in some ways, as UNT has been in enough games to be 4-3 at this point (even if in the eyes of many, many of UNT's best talents may be being misused).

Confidence is the issue. Players don't KNOW they can make plays as individuals or as a team in these schemes. A loss to WKU would be devastating in that regard and could trigger a collapse.

A one-win season would probably classify the season as "non-competitive" and probably would get Todd Dodge fired, in spite of UNT not being able to land a better coach.

A new coach in would run off a number of players to free up their scholarships and to prove points. A new coach would likely destroy any hopes of a winning season next year. It would restart the four-year rebuilding clock.

In brass tacks terms for the players, it could cost a lot of guys their scholarships at UNT and a lot of others their only shot at winning at the collegiate level. That is just the reality of coaching changes.

For the coaching staff and the players at UNT, this is a must win game that affects their future.

For the fans and the university, it could determine whether this or next season will be the breakthrough year or whether it will be four seasons from now. A loss would be devastating.

The game is scheduled for Halloween. One wonders if the largely dissatisfied UNT fanbase will show up and be a positive force cheering the Mean Green players (as opposed to a negative force booing Dodge) as the Mean Green players attempt to get over the hump, or if the fans will stay home—neutralizing the UNT home field advantage.

The fan turnout and attitude could be not only the difference in this game—it could be the determining factor to whether UNT restarts the four-year rebuilding clock.

With North Texas' Tobe Nwigwe Gone for Season, Team in Need of Heart Transplant

Tobi Writes — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:10:50 -0400

It you don't closely follow the UNT Mean Green, or at least the Sun Belt Conference you may not know the name Tobe Nwigwe.

NFL scouts see him as one of the few players on the UNT roster that has flashed NFL talent.

Hardcore Sun Belt Conference fans recognize him as a second team all-conference linebacker, and UNT's best defensive player.

UNT Fans know him best of all. We see him as our best player on either side of the ball. The senior linebacker is the only player on the defensive side who consistently steps up and makes plays.

We see him as the heart of our defense, if not the heart of our team.

A foot injury that will require surgery has tragically ended his collegiate career.

Tragic seems a word not strong enough to describe this unjust situation.

Nwigwe almost fell off the team earlier in his career and worked hard to get his career back on track. In return, he got to serve as the road spike on the nation's worst defense last year, and did not get a chance to see his teammates rally around him for the big turnaround with the defense that we all hoped for this year before the injury ended his career.

It is a very sad end to the career of someone who deserved a lot better.

What lies ahead for UNT's Defense

In a worst case scenario, last week's performance shows what the rest of the season COULD be like.

UNT's defense was pushed up and down the field by a good, but not great offense, yielding a season high 50 points. Series after series the UNT defense proved incapable of making the big play to stop a drive.

Troy scored on eight of their first 10 drives and took a ninth drive 78 yards to the UNT one yard line. The UNT defense was only able to generate a single three and out in Troy's first 10 drives.

All season long the defense has seemingly held its breath waiting for Nwigwe to make plays. Against Troy, without Nwigwe, none of the starters made any plays.

If that level of production continues, this team is certain to finish the year with two, or possibly only one win.

Who will take Nwigwe's place?

Junior AJ Penson is slated to start again this week. He was thrown into the fire last week versus Troy.

Penson started at OLB last season, but was a bad fit. That I have seen, his strength as a linebacker is his ability to diagnose run plays. In space as an OLB he was a bit lost.

The coaching staff proclaimed a lot of love for Penson at the start of the season saying that he was pushing Nwigwe for the starting MLB job.

I think most UNT fans wrote that off as a lot of hot air designed to spur Nwigwe to more fully tap his talent.

Nwigwe was a physical stud at 240 pounds, with the speed and instincts to cover. Penson is a smaller player than Nwigwe at 225 pounds, and not nearly the athlete, but he does have some positives.

He's works hard on the field. He reads running plays well, and while his is not as adept at overpowering blockers to make the play, he is generally in the right place to make a play. He may in fact be there more often than Nwigwe due to the fact that he doesn't have superior athleticism. What I saw of him prior to the season, I think he may end up being a more disciplined run stuffer.

With Nwigwe, UNT might give up 10 yards on a running plays followed by stops for no gain. With Penson you might not see as many stops for no gain, but you might see fewer 10 yard gains. You might see a whole lot of three-to-five yard gains on running plays, as we saw versus Troy.

If UNT is going to go with Penson, the upperclassmen around him need to step up and make plays. (Much like they should have been doing all year starting next to Nwigwe, but it would be much, much more necessary now.)

Guys like JR. LB Craig Robertson, SR. LB Kylie Hill, Soph. CB Royce Hill, SR. CB Antoine Bush, SR. CB Adryan Adams, and JR. S Ira Smith need to take up the mantle of leadership and kick up their level of play. These guys, specifically, need to start generating some turnovers.

I called these guys out in the past, and I will probably call them out in the future if they don't start producing. These guys have the talent to make plays. Being a good player means that you apply that talent.

That a former all-conference player like Robertson has produced so few big plays is especially disappointing.

The Wildcards

Do not be at all surprised to see some young guys on the field this week before garbage time.

I almost expect to see Daniel Prior on the feild at MLB on passing downs. He was very highly coveted prospect who had shown some talent versus the pass, and at last report Defensive coordinator DeLoach had made him his whipping boy to try and tap his talent.

Frankly, I would love to see more playing time for DE Tevinn Cantly and OLB Jeremy Phillips. I think Cantly could emerge with extended PT. Phillips probably needs less time to make his presence felt. I am very high on this kid.

John Shorter may have earned some more PT this week. I hope so. It is always good to have some fire in the secondary.

I would love to see a lot more of JR CB Robbie Gordon if our CBs continue to not make plays. He's raw, but a real gamer. I like this kid a lot.

Despite all the potential out there, it is a sad day for Mean Green fans.

Fix Your Danged Stadium Already! (No. 2: Kent State University)

Tobi Writes — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:06:31 -0400

Halloween is a day nearer, so here is the second in my series on problem stadiums that haunt programs at the FBS level.

These recommendations were originally conceived in a thread I wrote a few years back at Collegesportsinfo.com.

For every FBS program, football should be the university's No. 1 or 1A revenue generating sport.

Potentially, football revenue and football-inspired alumni donations could pay for all of the other sports. If you blow football, you will lose massive amounts of money on sports.

At the bottom end of the FBS, stadium troubles often cause a lot of issues.

With Eastern Michigan discussed, I turn my attention south to another MAC school and it's stadium problems.

No. 2 Kent State University

For years, Kent State has barely outpaced Eastern Michigan for the title of the worst-attended program at the FBS Level.

Kent faces a variety of factors that will prevent them from ever aspiring to become a school with BCS-level attendance. 20-22,000 is probably about as grandiose of an attendance goal that is reasonably attainable. That is about double what they drew last season.

Kent is only 10 miles from the University of Akron, which probably hurts both schools a bit. Additionally, Kent is only 35 miles from FCS power Youngstown State.

Kent doesn't only face college competition. They are a mere 45 minute drive away from the Cleveland Browns. They are in the Brown's NFL Killzone, if arguably on the edge of it.

In spite of this, Dix Stadium has as much or more to do with their attendance problems.

Didn't they just try to fix Dix Stadium? Again?

They certainly tried.

I can't fault the leadership there for their effort. The last two renovations have been inspired and conceptually dead-on. They just fell a little short.

A little History on Dix Stadium

Dix Stadium was built in 1969 as a replacement for Kent's old home, Memorial Stadium.

Dix Stadium has a very large western grandstand that probably seats just under 15,000. They used to have three other grandstands that sat about 5,000 each: one on the east sideline and one in each end zone.

The 2003 renovation tore down the east grandstand and replaced it with a narrow student grandstand that stretches between the 15 yard lines. On either side of that grandstand are "party tents."

(Photo by Jon Ridinger used per wikipedia usage guidelines)

It was really a pretty neat idea, except that grandstand simply does not seat enough. It seats about 4000, and one-sixth of that is the band.

Last year's renovation tore down the south bleachers to reduce the number of empty seats in the stadium by 5000 while replacing the scoreboard. Again, great moves, but moves that did not go far enough.

How does this stadium hurt them?

Despite all of the improvements, Kent State still faces the same problems that existed when this picture was taken.

(Picture hosted at the Kent State band page. The large western bleacher is at the top.)

The remaining north end zone seats too many people and the student section on the east seats too few. There are simply not enough good seats for the students.

Things aren't much better for the alumni. It is awkward to sit in such a large western grandstand opposite such a small eastern one.

The end zone seating is far too large, easy outpacing demand for end zone seating and adds to the discomfort of fans in the western grandstands.

My Suggestions

As with my EMU suggestions, I will try to be as cost effective as I can with my suggestions.

Again, I have an ideal recommendation and a more cost effective recommendation.

Option One: Demolish the remaining end zone section and expand student seating

This is really the best plan. While it would certainly be upsetting to demolish the last remnants of historic Memorial Stadium, perhaps the benches could be removed and worked into an expansion of the student section.

Demolishing the northern end zone bleachers would remove 5,000 seats.

The student bleachers could be expanded upwards, doubling capacity along that sideline to say 8000, creating a stadium with a capacity of 24,000.

At that point you could keep the band there and still get about 7500 other students on that side of the field. With great seats and the proximity of the party tents, it seems that Kent might do pretty well pulling in students.

The elimination of empty end-zone seats, the greater balance between the height of the stands, and the increased energy brought to the game by a larger student turnout will energize the locals and alumni and keep them coming back.

I think this could bump up attendance 3000 or so in a year or two based off student gains while driving up slow growth of a local and alumni fan base. By 2025 or so, you might be hitting your attendance goal.

Option Two: Tarp most of the end zone seating and move the band.

Another option would be to have tarps with the school name and logo made to cover some or all of the end zone seats.

It you covered some of the end zone seats, you could designate the end zone seating for the band. I don't know how much that would impair the acoustics and the game feel, but it is an option.

If you covered all of the end zone seats with tarps, the band could sit in the big western grandstand. Again, acoustic questions come into play, but it could be workable.

Kent State probably has the band sit on the student side make the sound level right for older alums.

Maybe a band section could be partially walled off to bring the volume down to an acceptable level? I claim no expertise in the art of band placement. I leave that to much smarter people.

Regardless of where you relocate the band, moving them opens up about 600-800 seats for other students near the party tents.

Ultimately this plan gets the stadium capacity down to an effective capacity of about 20,000. It focuses more on using scarcity to drive sales.

While that does usually drive up attendance—it doesn't provide as much of an opportunity to leverage your student body to excite the alumni and the local fanbase.

Articles in this series:

1) Fix your danged stadium already, Eastern Michigan University!

2) Fix your danged stadium already, Kent State University!

3) Fix your danged stadium already, Rice University!

Fix Your Danged Stadium Already! (No. 1: Eastern Michigan University)

Tobi Writes — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:15:12 -0400

In honor of fast-approaching Halloween, I am doing a series on problem stadiums that haunt programs at the FBS level.

These recommendations were originally conceived in a thread I wrote a few years back at Collegesportsinfo.com, based on muti-year attendance averages vs. stadium capacities. My opinions have been refined over the years using feedback from other sports fans.

At the bottom end of the FBS, stadium troubles often cause a lot of issues.

I am going to start at the very bottom of the FBS attendance roll.

No. 1 Eastern Michigan University

Eastern Michigan has long been the worst-attended program at the FBS Level, drawing less than 10,000 per game over multiple years.

Some have argued that as a strong reason for EMU to move to the FCS level.

My personal feelings on the matter are that changing affiliations should never be your first step. Address the factors that haunt your program today and then evaluate the level at which you should play.

Some of the issues that figure into EMU's attendance issues cannot be changed.

EMU is only seven miles away from the University of Michigan, which draws 110K per game. Even though the Wolverines are not a pro team, they might as well be. EMU is playing in what I have named a "Killzone." They are competing against a football business that dominates the public's football entertainment dollars in their area, just like NFL teams do in NFL Killzones.

EMU is also a bit of a commuter school. That hurts attendance as well.

These factors strongly suggest EMU will not draw a consistent 25,000 to Rynearson at any point in the next 20 years, no matter how competitive they are on the field.

But there is one glaring factor that can be fixed to help attendance. Rynearson itself.

What is wrong with Rynearson?

One might look at Rynearson Stadium and say it is a pretty nice stadium that lacks the cobbled together feel of a lot of other MAC schools. The seats are all along the sides of the field, which should really be ideal for drawing good attendance to a small FBS stadium.

So why does this stadium hurt them?

The placement of the field. It absolutely kills them.

With the track there, there is nothing that can be done to fix the field placement.

The stadium was expanded twice and apparently done badly both times. In 1974, the WFL's Detroit Wheels played at Rynearson, leading to an expansion of the stadium capacity to 22,227. They drew horrifically at Rynearson . In 1992, the stadium was expanded to satisfy the NCAA's then minimum capacity rules to its current capacity of 30,200.

Sadly, the leadership of EMU made the same error that a lot of small FBS programs make and built around the running track instead of taking out the running track.

Track draws a few hundred fans. FBS football draws tens of thousands of fans.

The two sports have entirely different fan requirements and should ideally never be addressed by a shared resource. That track should have been taken out and built around a soccer field or something.

A small FBS school can build a workable stadium with a track as long as the needs of the football program are not compromised. After all, football is the main revenue generating sports at FBS schools.

It is fine to have a track around your football field if your stadium seating is on each sideline from goal line to goal line, but usually once you hit a capacity of about 20,000-25,000, any kind of cost effective expansion—the kind a MAC school might do—needs to go in the end zones.

The mistake that poorer Division IA universities often made in the 1970s to late 1990s was to retain the track and build the end zones around the track. Doing this creates thousands of bad seats that fans do not want to sit in. It in essence creates seats that will usually be empty, which in turn makes the stadium feel empty, further discouraging fans from attending.

This is the mistake that EMU made with the 1992 NCAA mandated expansion. That expansion turned what should be a wonderful tribute to a coaching legend into a disrespectful black eye.

It is high time for that to be rectified.

My Suggestions

I try to be as cost effective as I can with my suggestions.

With this stadium, I'm going to start with an ideal recommendation and then follow up with what will probably be a more cost effective and politically palatable recommendation.

Option 1: Demolish Part of the Stadium Seating

While technically the best solution would be to rip out all of the seats south of the goal line—essentially almost all of sections 110-120—how much would that cost, and would the university go for it? That is a lot of concrete.

It would probably reduce capacity by about 20 percent to somewhere around 24,000 seats. That would immediately make the stadium feel less empty and would make the fans in the stadium feel better.

It would dramatically increase the odds of an occasional sell out. The university would be smart to really push the tickets for the season opener after the demolition is complete.

Perhaps a good draw like Army would be willing to come in for the opener. If EMU could pull from student loyalty and local Ypsilanti goodwill to sell out Game One after the stadium work, it could do a ton to change the fortunes of this program overnight.

(The potential of selling out games helps drive ticket sales on hot game tickets. There is currently little chance of a sellout at EMU with a 30,200-seat Rynearson.)

The track could stay, as it doesn't dramatically hurt the fan experience in the seats between the goal lines.

24,000 is a very reasonable maximum attendance number for EMU in the near future. If the NCAA ever does return to a 30K minimum stadium capacity rule—highly unlikely after all the programs that rule killed or hobbled the first time around—EMU could have temporary semi-circular end zone berms created to sit in front of the track behind the end zones. You could throw the band back there.

This does require the university tacitly admitting the old administration blew the 1992 expansion. Some universities—even some in the MAC—have effectively done so.

It should be noted that potentially some ill-will could come the way of any administrator advocating tearing down multiple millions of dollars of concrete construction because it was not well thought out. Care would need to be taken with word choices. Blame the NCAA—not the previous administrations.

EMU has done much better at selling tickets the last couple of years, but I think this course of action would get EMU's attendance up 2000 overnight even over thos improved recent numbers and, if combined with the kind of scheduling and promotional efforts I suggested above, could get that average up to a MAC respectable 17,000 even in bad years.

Option 2: Rip Out the Track and Move the Turf South 30 Yards.

If there is an unacceptable level of push-back to the idea of dropping stadium capacity, another option would be taking out the stadium's track. This would probably be a cheaper option.

This would allow the turf to be moved southwards, making the 6,000 or so bad seats into acceptable seats. That said, I don't think EMU would get the bang for their buck that the first plan offers.

Unlike the first plan, the press box and the seating would be a bit cockeyed, which is generally a bad idea in football stadium design.

Eventually, EMU could do a dig down to move the front row seats closer to the field, but it is debatable that attendance numbers would ever reach that point with that layout.

On the positive side, Rynearson in that configuration would be a great home for an occasional Canadian Football League game or even a Detroit area-based CFL or MLS team. 30,000 seats is perfect for a CFL audience and workable for a MLS team. The stadium in this configuration could hold the wider CFL and MLS turfs. Perhaps that could generate some revenue.

EMU would still need to build a new track with a few bleachers around it. Maybe for a season they could rent out a nearby high school track.

EMU needs to make changes. For the benefit of future students, it is time for the student body and alumni to demand changes from their leadership and support the costs to implement those changes.

Articles in this series:

1) Fix your danged stadium already, Eastern Michigan University!

2) Fix your danged stadium already, Kent State University!

3) Fix your danged stadium already, Rice University!

Hey Sun Belt Conference, Expand Or Die

Tobi Writes — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:28:57 -0400

OK, so maybe a more accurate headline would be, "Expand or Stagnate" or "Expand or Wilt," but those are not nearly as attention-getting and I need your attention.

This is important.

You need to expand as soon as possible after the FBS upgrade moratorium is lifted.

It may seem like things are going great for the conference and the conference has finally turned the corner. After all, the conference has had enough teams to play a full schedule for a couple years now.

You guys have the numbers to push out Denver and to not sweat over the possible loss of New Orleans over budgetary concerns. South Alabama will start league football play in 2013.

Things look great...but really they aren't.

How many of your schools are happy being in the Sunbelt?

Who is happy?

No one in the conference is happy with the travel. Every football playing school plays body bag games to cover the travel shortfalls, and still, most of the programs struggle to stay within budget.

Middle Tennessee State and Western Kentucky would likely prefer being in the MAC. Their travel costs would be significantly less and, as I understand it, there were some talks along those lines at one point.

Louisiana Layfatte has a world of distaste for Louisiana Monroe over the "University of Louisiana" name and would love to be in a different conference if it made sense.

With their team's football dominance, Troy fans probably feel like they have already outgrown the Sun Belt, and they likely dream of affiliation with schools like UAB in Conference USA. South Alabama would also love to be in the same conference as UAB and Southern Miss.

Florida International and Florida Atlantic would jump at the chance to be in the same conference as Central Florida. Both schools have enormous enrollments and alumni bases and are potential TV draws in Miami. Additionally, both schools' stadium issues will be resolved soon. If either program becomes one of the stronger ones in the Sun Belt, it could easily be recruited by C-USA.

Arkansas Little Rock and New Orleans probably wonder when they will be forced out for football playing members. They may jump to another conference to protect themselves from that scenario.

Even lowly North Texas can see the light at the end of the tunnel.

UNT fans don't care for the Sun Belt. The conference is viewed as strictly a way station by UNT fans.

It is plainly clear in the attendance numbers for the last five years, with occasional exceptions for season openers and the like, UNT draws 17,000 for almost any conference opponent, just like it does for most out of conference opponents, but draws 22-30,000 for any opponent from Texas.

I think you could argue that UNT fans generally like Arky State and ULL, but the rest of the Sun Belt doesn't draw crowds in Denton.

UNT's new 30,000 stadium, the nation's first LEED (green) stadium is scheduled to be completed in time for the 2011 season and it appears it could be the key to escaping the Sun Belt.

It is the last piece of a decade-long effort by the UNT athletic director to upgrade all of the university's sports facilities. UNT turned down WAC membership over travel costs that would have devastated its athletic budget at the time, bleeding competitiveness out of the program, and apparently only lost out to UTEP to become the 12th member of C-USA because of out-of-date and inadequate facilities.

The UNT student referendum to fund half of the stadium costs also created a $10 per credit hour fee that can be raised each year without going through another student referendum. The state caps student athletic fees at public schools at $20.

With essentially a $3 athletic fee, UNT's reported athletic budget was $15.8M in 2007. UNT has an enrollment of 34,000. At $10 per credit hour, each full-time student would be contributing another $210 per year for a total increase to the athletic budget of a little over $7 million dollars annually, to about $23 million.

UNT will have by far the largest athletic budget in the conference when the fee goes into effect in 2011.

It is likely that by 2025-2030 the fee will reach the state maximum. Ignoring UNT's growth curve, that would add another $10.2M to the athletic budget bringing UNT's budget to $33M. Today a $33M athletic budget would exceed the budgets of every school in C-USA and would trail only TCU's budget in the Mountain West.

It would probably be the second largest athletic budget outside of the BCS. With those numbers in mind one can see why UNT and its fans feel it is only a matter of time before the Mean Green are in C-USA or even the MWC.

Arkansas State is probably somewhat happy with the conference today, but would be a lot less so if any combination of WKU, MTSU, ULL, and/or UNT left.

ULM may be the only school that is truly happy in the Sun Belt. With an enrollment of 8,000 and an athletic budget of $7M, in a tiny media market, it has no legitimate dreams of moving up to another conference. The Sun Belt is a godsend to them.

When next the dominoes drop

The Big East has eight football playing members; nine teams is an ideal number for football scheduling. Having 12 teams allows for a revenue-generating conference title game and split scheduling to cut travel costs.

The MWC has nine members, but might go to 10 or 12 if the conference thinks such a move would increase its strength measurement that is used to evaluate conferences for potential inclusion in the BCS.

The WAC has nine members, but could add more to allow split scheduling to cut travel costs, prevent potential defections, or add more to protect itself from a raid by the MWC. With UNT's future larger athletic budget, it is possible UNT could change its mind on WAC membership.

The MAC has 13 members and could decide to split into two conferences, although there has not been any printed discussion of that possibility. It could pull some Sun Belt members with its small travel footprint.

What happens when the next realignment of FBS schools occurs?

What happens if the Big East pulls in East Carolina as a football-only member?

What happens if CUSA West and East split?

What happens if an Eastern Conference emerges?

The answer to all of these is likely the same: someone raids the Sun Belt and the Sun Belt is forced to rebuild with an FCS upgrade school, wiping out any perceived progress by the conference.

Sun Belt Progress is an illusion

Despite the fact that perhaps as much as half of the nation's high school talent hotbeds are in the Sun Belt footprint, the Sun Belt is annually the weakest conference at the FBS level.

The combination of high travel costs associated with the large conference footprint that effectively mandates bodybag games and small athletic budgets suck the competitiveness out of every school in the conference.

The member schools play nice and talk about the conference getting better, but almost all of them would jump to another conference in a heartbeat.

Any school that improves will get taken by a higher profile conference and the Sun Belt will have to go through the same FCS upgrade pains it is going through with Western Kentucky currently to replace a school.

As long as the Sun Belt remains the only conference that is admitting FCS schools, nothing will ever change about the way it is perceived.

Time to change the status quo

It is time to acknowledge that the Sun Belt, as configured, is not anyone's ideal home.

It is time to stop trying to run it as if it was the MWC— a conference with an ideal number of teams, where the members feel they are a higher caliber than potential applicants.

There is no difference in the caliber of program between ULL and FCS member Jacksonville State. There is no difference between Troy and FCS power Appalachian State.

Your teams pull so few fans that only small bowls consider your teams. Bowl games outside of your region don't want Sun Belt schools at all.

You are the worst conference in FBS. The difference between your schools and FCS schools is far, far less that the difference between your schools and BCS schools.

The perception among other FBS conferences is the only reason you exist is to provide replacement schools when conferences realign.

The NCAA tourney has rarely admitted more than the automatic qualifier out of your conference.

Once you accept those facts, the reasons to expand outweigh the reasons not to expand.

Expand for security

If you wait until conferences raid the Sun Belt, the perception is that whatever team you added was a desperation add. If you can get ahead of the curve, the loss of a team or two would not impact the conference much at all.

Expand with the idea of a conference split in the near future

Lamar, UTSA, and Texas State want to move up to the FBS level, as do Jacksonville State and South Georgia. Sam Houston State was advised to move up by paid consultants.

Invite them all.

Come to terms with Denver to retain that school. Denver has the conference's largest athletic budget and is in a good media market. A smaller competitive footprint could entice them to stay. The academic prestige of the university could help retain potential western schools in the future.

Finally, try to steal New Mexico State from the WAC. WAC travel is brutal for that school and it has a well developed basketball program— something important to UNT, ULL, Arky State, UALR, and Lamar.

Consider the distances from NMSU to:

Utah State 700+ Miles
LA Tech 900+ Miles
Fresno State 900+ Miles
San Jose 1100 Miles
Nevada 1200+ Miles
Boise State 1500 Miles
Idaho 1500+ Miles

Whereas the Sun Belt as is offers little attraction to NMSU, a split Sun Belt could offer NMSU rich Texas recruiting and as much as a 15-30 percent cost reduction in travel.

And the Sun Belt stealing a school from the higher stature WAC sends a message to the fans that the Sun Belt is improving.

Two projected large divisions in the Sun Belt, circa 2015

Lone Star Division

Denver (bb only)
New Mexico State
North Texas
UT - San Antonio
Texas State
Lamar
Sam Houston State
UALR (bb only)
Arkansas State
UL- Lafayette

Sunbelt Division

New Orleans (bb only)
UL- Monroe
Western Kentucky
Middle Tennessee State
Troy
South Alabama
Jacksonville State
Georgia Southern
Florida Atlantic
Florida International

Are the negatives of a large expansion really that bad?

Most of the negatives that are frequently stated as reasons for a conference not to expand just don't apply as much to the Sun Belt.

"Our bowl revenue per team will decrease!" --- You don't have enough good teams now to generate much bowl revenue.

"Our championship game revenue will be split among more teams!" --- Yes, it would, but your travel costs could be quite a bit less, making up the shortfall.

"Our tourney money will be split between more teams!" --- If you have 20 basketball playing members, the odds are you will get at least two teams into the tourney most years, if not three. That number of teams simply creates far too much pressure on the selection committee to not snub your teams. You are getting one in most years now with 13 members. You do the math.

"That large of a conference is just too hard to manage!" --- Not really. I am advising that you run this like two conferences. I understand that the Summit Conference management is the same group that has worked its butt off to build the Great West. If they can run a conference and work to build another against tremendous odds, you should be able to do this — if you decide to.

A formal West/East split into two conferences

As soon as you can, you'd want to split into two conferences for the added benefits it would offer.

UL-Monroe would go with the eastern schools to allow Louisiana Tech to join the western schools.

Louisiana Tech has a $12M dollar athletic budget with little to no means of changing that status quo.

They play in the WAC with its ridiculously unwieldy footprint. Travel was a constant drain on its programs before the economic crises. LA Tech building a top level program in most sports in the WAC seems highly unlikely.

A regionally friendly conference would allow LA Tech to put a lot more of its money into improvements to raise competitiveness in football and basketball.

The loss of NMSU to a Texas conference would make LA Tech's closest conference game over 1200 miles away. That would be a tough sell to (or by) any university president.

LA Tech should have left the WAC years ago, but does not want to rejoin the Sun Belt over issues with its replacement in the conference, UL-Monroe. There is an issue of prestige there.

LA Tech considers itself Louisiana's No. 2 school. Previous affiliation with ULL and New Orleans was fine (and future affiliation would probably be fine) because both schools are in entirely different regions and were perceived to be a notch below LA Tech athletically and academically.

ULM on the other hand is a half an hour away from Tech and is located in a bigger city. ULM cuts into LA Tech's recruiting. Getting into the same conference as ULM would be removing one of the last recruiting edges that Louisiana Tech has over ULM.

A guarantee that ULM will never be in the same conference as LA Tech is probably all that it would take to add the Bulldogs and the Lady Techsters. Especially if Boise is recruited by the Mountain West Conference in a bid for BCS status.

Finally, Louisiana Tech has a history with ULL, UNT, Lamar, and Arkansas State. They tried forming their own conference years ago but the loss of an automatic bid did in their efforts.

All of these factors could combine to entice LA Tech to join until such a day as a C-USA bid becomes available to the school.

Two conference synergy

With the Sun Belt and the new Texas Conference sharing management and bordering each other, it seems likely that a number of bowl arrangements could emerge.

Now most bowls don't want to commit to the Sun Belt, largely because of the big footprint. The bowls do not want to commit to, say, the third school in the Sunbelt because Sun Belt schools draw poorly and the third-best school could be ridiculously far from the bowl, making travelling fans even more unlikely.

Having two conferences with much smaller footprints would make for more traveling fans and would built up meaningful rivalries. Both factors would spur home attendance at all member schools, making them more attractive to bowl games. Additionally the regional clarification would help the bowls feel comfortable that they could draw the fan base from one of the member schools.

The states of New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Alabama all contain bowl games (or good sites for bowl games) that could find more value in a second, third, or even down the line a fourth place team in either resulting conference.

The New Orleans Bowl could match the No. 1 or No. 2 of the Sunbelt vs. the No. 1 or No. 2 of the Texas Conference (instead of the CUSA No. 4). This potential match-up of champions in a football-crazy city and fun travel destination could quickly grow in popularity and payouts. A match-up of champions alone could do a lot to repair the reputation of the Sun Belt teams.

In the event of a near-BCS bowl miss by a Texas Conference UNT team, the Cotton Bowl might vastly prefer that team over certain SEC schools.

The New Mexico Bowl might prefer a Texas Conference team over what would at that point be a western only WAC No. 2.

The Papa Johns Bowl might be more inclined to consider using a top Sun Belt team as an alternate if the western schools were no longer in the Sun Belt. The Auto Zone Liberty Bowl might as well.

Considering its location, the GMAC bowl would probably take the Sunbelt No. 2 vs. the Texas Conference No. 2 over what it currently has.

Shreveport's Independence Bowl might also look at a team from either conference if it is nearby, like La. Tech, ULM, Arkansas State, or Lamar.

In some years, the Bell Helicopter Armed Forces Bowl in Fort Worth might be more interested in certain Texas conference teams as an option to the Pac 10 No. 6 or a distant C-USA team.

The Texas Bowl might have a lot of interest in a Texas Conference team as an option to a distant Big 12 No. 8 team or a distant CUSA No. 7.

Likewise the Valero Alamo Bowl might want the option of replacing the Big 10's No. 4 team with UTSA or Texas State if either has a 10 win season. The Brut Sun Bowl might want the same option if NMSU has a great year. Or any of the Florida Bowls if FAU and FIU emerge.

Expansion just creates so many more options than the Sun Belt currently has.

Team Retention

Travel costs and the lack of postseason money are the main issues that have teams looking for a way out of the Sun Belt.

Expansion and a split could largely erase both factors within 10 year.

The Sunbelt Conference can either continue to be spare parts for every other conference or step up and build a conference (or two) worth caring about.

UFL Suffers Brutal Attendence Numbers For Game Four

Tobi Writes — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:50:42 -0400

OK, so the picture is not of AT&T Park on Saturday. But it does get to the core of the issue.

The UFL drew 6,341 fans to 41,503 seat AT&T stadium.

This is officially a crisis.

AT&T Park was the XFL's best stadium. The San Francisco Demons drew an XFL best 35,005 fans per game.

Add on the fact that the 49ers have been in a contentious negotiation with the city for years over a new stadium and this should have been the safe play for the UFL. This should have been the best site of any of the UFL sites.

If UFL commissioner Michael Huyghue does not see this red flag, it would be a strong indication the man is colorblind.

The now defunct Arena league numbers are KILLING the UFL's numbers. And with a few more games like this, the Double-A AF2 numbers might start catching up to the league.

Huyghue has delivered what his resume suggested he could deliver—a mini WLAF.

The UFL ownership will have to determine if that is going to suit their long-term needs.

Hey You UNT Fans Who Want Todd Dodge's Head: Now Is Not the Time for That

Tobi Writes — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:25:57 -0400

A lot of North Texas fans want Todd Dodge's head today. I think they need to back up and look at things logically rather than emotionally.

UNT's AD has said that if Dodge's team is competitive this season Dodge will be retained for next season. That is the stated criteria on which Dodge will be judged. Changing the criteria and firing Dodge would only make this job appear less stable and the administration appear less honest for incoming coaching candidates.

Based off that alone, Dodge will probably be back. His team has been competitive, probably nothing any fans or alumni do will change the criteria.

To me, it is not enough that fans begrudgingly accept the likely status quo while calling for Dodge's head on every forum.

This kind of behavior can do a lot of additional harm to the program and for that reason, I think they should stop.

I think that they should forget that his record record is the worst all-time record at UNT. They should stop throwing out the "he hasn't earned more time" and the "his record is worst than X coach we fired" arguments.

Not because those arguments aren't true or valid.

They are.

Rather, they should stop because those arguments hurt this team's chances to win this year, hurt the team's potential in recruiting in the upcoming offseason, and most importantly, are trumped by bigger issues.

Current Year

This team is trying to move from being a team that is competitive to a team that can win every game. That's hard enough for a team with few seniors to do. They don't need the in-season distractions of alumni calling for their coach's head.

Postseason Recruiting

Obviously it hurts the team to have public calls for Dodge's head while the team is chasing recruits. Every three-star recruit that Dodge might lose hurts UNT over the next four years—even if Dodge is not here. That is something that really needs to be understood.

"I can't complain in season or after the season? Forget that!" Certainly you can complain. I am just encouraging you to do it in a way that it doesn't hurt the university. Write the president or the AD and voice your concerns—just don't be lazy about it and complain in forums that potential recruits or current players may read.

Complain all you want, just don't do it in a way that hurts UNT.

The Bigger Issues That May Lead You To Reconsider Complaining

There are a lot of factors that make a coaching changes something likely to set back the football program several more years.

UNT Needs a Big Name Recruiter To Outweigh All of the Other Issues at the School

The last coach was fired because his recruiting classes had fallen off a cliff.

Like him or not, most would agree Dodge is flat out a very good to great recruiter, especially in this area of the country. The fact this team had the worst defensive unit and special teams unit in the country last season on it's way to being the second worst team in FBS last year should have killed recruiting this season. That team was totally non-competitive.

In spite of that, Dodge brought in very promising players like Shavod Atkinson, Kelvin Jackson, Jamaal Jackson, Michael Outlaw, Kyle White, Hilbert Jackson, Tyler Statford, KC Obi, LaChris Anyiam, Daniel Prior, John Webber, Will Atterberry, and DeWayne Baziel.

Off the 2008 season, there is no way UNT should have been able to pull that kind of talent. That may be the best class UNT has had since the big class that ran off the titles in the early years.

And it isn't like UNT has recruited poorly over the other years of the Dodge run either, in spite of the record, the lack of stadium, the lack of TV exposure, and the lousy athletic budget. His classes have generally had a lot more talent than the classes of previous UNT coaches.

Maybe most importantly, Dodge and his staff have clearly gotten a lot better at targeting the right guys lately. They find guys who show the ability to play at the FBS level at some time in their UNT career and who UNT has a legit shot at landing.

The Riley Dodge Factor

If you run off Todd Dodge, you lose Riley Dodge.

I know a ton of fans would think that is perfectly acceptable considering the fragile flower Riley Dodge is today, but consider the fact that the younger Dodge added 10 lbs of muscle in the last year. If he can come close to that over the next two offseasons, he is going to be a much stronger and more durable player.

His mechanics and decision making vs. FBS speed will only improve. By next season he may have sufficient arm strength and timing to hit the deep ball.

In this system, by his senior year he may be a more mobile version of Ty Detemer. UNT has NEVER had that kind of player.

He could be the kind of player who gets UNT into a BCS bowl.

This Team Is Close to Breaking Through

The Mean Green aren't playing consistently well in a number of areas, but they are still about three plays away from being 4-2.

I'd argue even the Middle Tennessee game was there for them if they had stopped the Blue Raiders on that drive at the start of the fourth quarter. With a couple of breaks they could be 5-1 this year, even though they really haven't come close to playing their best full game yet.

If this team puts it together on both sides of the line for four quarters, they can hang with anyone in this conference.

This team is in the game every week. They just haven't learned to close yet.

That really has very little to do with coaching.

Learning to close games is a process that every team that doesn't have a senior dominated starting lineup has to go through. This Mean Green team is getting there.

You can see the progress. In past years, this team didn't think it belonged on the field with teams like Florida Atlantic; now they know they do.

This team has lost two fourth quarter dogfights in a row.

The FAU game is the first game since the Ball State game where UNT competed in the fourth quarter. If this is the start of a run of strong fourth quarters, this team will win this year.

Keeping Dodge vs. Starting Another Four-Year Rebuilding Program

Finally, one of the biggest issues is if you fire Dodge, you start over. That is almost always the case with a coaching change at a losing school.

New coaches force starters from the old regime to earn their playing time. A lot of players don't like that and quit or de-prioritize football.

Some good players will leave.

Players who have bought into the current offensive and defensive schemes may not buy into the new coach's schemes.

Underclassmen and committed recruits with talent who were recruited specifically for these schemes will likely bail for greener pastures. Are you prepared for the possibility of losing guys like Darius Carey, Lance Dunbar, Jeremy Mathis, Royce Hill, Riley Dodge, and others because the new coach wants to build with his guys?

Are you prepared to restart the clock on another four-year rebuilding plan?

The Pay Sucks, the Conference Sucks, the Job Sucks

UNT pays Dodge $265,000 a year to coach the worst team in the worst FBS conference in America.

Like all Sunbelt teams, the team is rarely on TV, hurting recruiting.

Like all Sunbelt teams, the travel costs are ridiculous, forcing member schools to play body bag games against the elites of the SEC to cover budgetary shortfalls. Injuries sustained and "emotional trauma" suffered in those games usually take 2-3 games to recover.

UNT fans don't have any emotional ties to the teams of the Sunbelt, stunting attendance at home games and bleeding potential operating revenue out of the program.

The team won't have it's new stadium until 2011, so if UNT were to fire Dodge and hire a new coach for next season, the new coach would have at least a year of dealing with the same recruiting kick in the balls Dodge has dealt with for his entire run.

The athletic budget is small and (looking at the history of the program) the alumni that graduate from this music school are largely disinterested in making regular or sizeable financial contributions to the football programs.

Fans and alumni may complain a lot, but even with 12,000+ students regularly in the stadium on game day the team rarely tops 22,000 in attendance—even though the majority of the school's 600,000-700,000+ alumni live in the Metroplex. The alumni have high expectations, but they really don't do much to help the university compete.

Really if we are honest about it, the students do just about everything that helps UNT compete.

Fifteen years from now, when the new stadium is built and the per student athletic fee has risen to something near the state maximum of $20 per class hour (bringing the athletic budget up to the levels of the top schools of the MWC), this will be a great job. At that point UNT will be targeted by the western Conference USA schools as a team they need in conference.

At that point the university will have great in-conference draws to a stadium that is designed to promote attendance. 28-30K a game may be likely then.

Today, with neither the stadium nor the large athletic budget in place, this is a lousy job.

That is just a reality UNT fans need to accept.

No Other Name Coaches Want This Job

Who is the name coach for UNT who will be able to recruit at the level Dodge has vs. tough competition for recruits from TCU's Gary Patterson and SMU's June Jones? Who do fans think will come here?

A name thrown around by Mean Green fans as an alternative to Dodge is Turner Gill. Gill is reportedly one of the highest paid coaches in the MAC now. Do you really think Gill would take a pay cut to take this job at $265K a year? Presently that is what UNT can offer.

Gill is on the radar of every athletic director in the Big 12 and all of the AD's in the western part of C-USA. All of those jobs pay a ton better and offer easier recruiting.

Why jump into the fire at UNT when he can sit patiently and be the next coach at Iowa State or Colorado?

There Are Better Arguments To Retain Dodge Than To Replace Him

Dodge is the best coach, the biggest name, and the best recruiter the university can afford today.

The team's increased competitiveness suggests Dodge has the program pointed in the right direction. The starting lineup is loaded with juniors and sophomores and is in every game vs. non-BCS schools, which suggest next season should be a great season for the team if we don't change coaches.

If he wanted to, Dodge could probably be an offensive coordinator at a Big 12 school making more money than he makes at UNT as the head coach. He was considered and possibly offered other FBS head coaching jobs (the news reports are fuzzy there) that paid more.

It seems very probable that UNT's former offensive coach cut the school a discount and took the job when the university's football program was at an all-time low point in talent with little chance to recover, simply to help out his friends in the administration at UNT.

He has out-recruited a bad situation and rebuilt the talent level that matter so much in college.

He was the face of the potential of the program that helped in landing the new stadium.

He has been loyal to the university. He has shut his mouth and worked even though the stadium he was promised by the University President and the Athletic Director to help him recruit won't be up until 2011. It was supposed to be here three years earlier.

Even though the job is a tough one, he may be the only name coach who wants to be here now—while it is a crappy job.

Let's Not Meddle

As fans of pro football, we hate Jerry Jones for his constant meddling that undercuts the coach and the team. Why are we doing the same to UNT?

Some alumni and fans have an axe to grind with the AD over the dismissal of the last coach and as such have had it in for Dodge. Some think Dodge is arrogant. Some just hate losing.

Regardless of the camp you are in, it is time to step back and make sure you are viewing things in perspective.

It is time to swallow bruised alumni pride and park our egos as fans at the door.

Logic suggests that Dodge gives this program the best chance to succeed over the next 18 months. If he can't win next year with a full assembly of his talent, a more physically mature and experienced Riley Dodge, then sure, fire him.

Kick off the new stadium in 2011 with a new coach. (After all, the coach UNT would be able to hire in 2011 with a stadium in hand would be a lot better caliber than the guys the university could chose from in 2010 without a stadium.)

Start over with a new coach when the new coach won't be compromised in his first year.

I personally think we owe it to Dodge to keep him around at least until next season, and if the team does well, beyond that due to his loyalty to UNT. Regardless of whether you agree with that, don't we owe it to the players to let them have their best shot to win? Especially this group that has been through so much losing; bearing the banner of the university we love.

Universities are always for the students first. The alumni have had their day. Fans can cheer, but we just get to share in the joy of the university's success.

Fans and alumni meddling won't make things better, so there is no good reason to meddle at this point.

UNT Does a Ton of Things Right, Still Falls to Howard Schellenberger

Tobi Writes — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:06:15 -0400

Lost in the fury of UNT fans over a now 14 game conference losing streak is the fact that UNT DID show improvement in a lot of areas in this week's loss to Howard Schnellenberger's Florida Atlantic Owls.

Todd Dodge and his offensive coaching staff has played a lot of lip service to taking what the defense gives, but has done the same things all season long—plenty of dinks to Jamaal Jackson and Michael Outlaw, with the occasional running play mixed in.

This week, they clearly saw the opportunity to run on FAU and produced a totally unique and effective ground based gameplan. Frankly, as a Mean Green fan, I was glad to see a pronounced, distinct gameplan tailored specifically for an opponent.

And it worked. In the first series, UNT ran seven times and passed twice and went right down the field for a TD. The defense forced a three and out by the Owls and UNT's offense did it again, this time running nine out of 11 times and scoring a second TD to take a 13-0 lead.

Then things fell apart.

As has been the habit of the team throughout the season, the Mean Green lack a killer instinct. Any lead of over 10 points triggers a noticeable loss of focus on defense.

FAU put together a bazillion play drive from their 12 yard line to cut the score to 13-7.

UNT offense led by Riley Dodge to it's credit was able to do what good offensives do and quickly answer the score taking only 1 play to get Jamaal Jackson loose on a 69 yard TD pass. (The extra point was blocked.)

Hammering away at FAU on the ground loosened up coverage on the receivers setting up the big play in the passing game. It isn't something that has been seen by Mean Green fans all year as the coaching staff has favored the dink pass over all else.

All the credit in the world is owed to the UNT offensive staff for recognizing an opportunity to rectify that and coming up with a great offensive game plan.

Sadly, the Mean Green defense continued to wilt.

An unsportsman-like conduct call gave the Owls a short field and it only took Howard Schellenberger's team 3 minutes and 4 seconds to drive from their 45 to the end zone to bring the game to 19-14.

The Mean Green drove to the FAU 44 after the kickoff, but Riley Dodge was sacked on a third and long and forced out of the game. UNT was forced to punt.

Following a touchback, the Owls took only two minutes and 59 seconds to drive 80 yards for another TD to take their first lead of the game 21-19.

Starting safety Ira Smith fumbled the ensuing kickoff at the Mean Green 41. FAU QB Rusty Smith took only two plays and 44 seconds to score another TD putting the Owls up 27-19. (The extra point was blocked.)

UNT started their next series at the Mean Green 39. Strong armed backup QB Nathan Tune hit electric freshman receiving sensation Darius Carey twice to get the team to a first down at the FAU 48.

Then UNT fumbled the ball over to FAU.

FAU added another FG to take a 30-19 lead into halftime.

The second quarter was a mirror image of UNT's second quarter collapse in the Middle Tennessee game and left every UNT fan at the stadium and following on line sick to their stomachs.

The team bounces back in the second half

Things looked bleak coming out of halftime.

FAU continued their strong play for the first drive of the second half, taking the ball nine plays in three minutes and 59 seconds for another TD and a 37-19 lead. Starting CB Royce hill fumbled the football on the return, but little used senior TE Bryant Siedle prevented a total collapse by recovering the ball at the UNT 43 yard line.

Down by 18, UNT's offensive staff was forced to abandon the "run and run some more" game plan.

Backup QB Tune was up to the task driving the team the length of the field and hitting "Mr. Electricity" Darius Carey for a 19 yard TD to get the team within 11, 37-26.

At this point there seemed a noticeable change in focus for UNT. The Mean Green played like they believed they could play with FAU and more—that they should be beating them!

An inspired UNT Defense forced a rare (for this game) three and out giving the ball back to UNT at the 29 yard line.

RB Lance Dunbar, who in two weeks has emerged from his previous stature as a forgettable change of pace back into the most dangerous offensive weapon on the team, took only three running plays to take the team 71 yards for another Mean Green TD to cut the FAU lead to 37-33.

The game was on again.

UNT's defense forced another three and out and Tune, Dunbar and the UNT offense got the ball back at their own 11. They drove it to the UNT 41 before the Owls' defense forced a punt for a touchback.

In the fourth quarter, Owl RB Alfred Morris powered the Owls down the field until the Mean green defense came up big, stopping Owl QB Rusty Smith three straight times, including a fourth down play.

This was one of the few stops of an opponent's momentum by UNT's defense in the fourth quarter all season and was the one of the few times this season that UNT stopped an opponent on a fourth down without drawing a flag.

UNT's offense and offensive coaching staff responded, feeding off the defensive success. It is usually a good idea to immediately attack an opponent aggressively after a big stop and UNT's staff has shown repeatedly over this season that they believe in that philosophy.

Tune hit WR Michael Outlaw for 46 yards and Lance Dunbar ran it nine yards for the go ahead TD to go up 40-37.

FAU got the ball back at their 28 following the kickoff, but UNT's defense smelled blood and shut down Morris and Smith, forcing a three and out. On fourth down, FAU's punter Mickey Groody had a horrific six-yard punt that mirrored UNT's Will Atterrbury's infamous last punt last week.

Taking over at the FAU 36 with major momentum on UNT's side and being at home, the Mean Green should have been able to score at least a FG and probably a TD. FAU had not shown any ability to control Lance Dunbar. There was nothing there to suggest that the Owls could stop Dunbar from gaining the 10 yards in three plays.

At the end of the game vs. Ball State, Todd Dodge showed he understood how to properly ground out a win in the fourth quarter. In this game, perhaps due to fact there was still 10 minutes left, Dodge didn't do everything he could to put the ball into his running back's hands.

Tune ran for five yards on first down and then was thrown for a five yard loss on second down. On third down, Tune hit Jamaal Jackson for seven yards to get to the 29.

With a 4th-and-3 at the 29, Dodge and his staff decided to go for it. Tune's pass fell incomplete and the Owls took over after a big momentum changing stop.

It was a gutsy call and a very debatable one. If UNT had completed the pass they might have scored a TD. With a 10-point lead and all the momentum, they probably would have won the game. A win here might very well have changed the trajectory of the season.

On the flip side, kicking the FG would have only put UNT up by six, but it would have not resulted in nearly as big of a swing in momentum as getting stopped without points. UNT still would have stopped FAU on the last four drives and would have scored on FAU on four of the last five drives.

Ignoring hindsight, considering the emotional volatility and inexperience of this UNT team, it probably made more sense to kick the FG. Even if FAU scored a TD all UNT would need to do is use the last four minutes or so to get into FG range—but Dodge's choice was understandable.

He wanted to show his team that he had confidence in them and and to really back them up. He wanted to make the swaggering call that would give the team confidence for the stretch run, not to make the safe pick that might result in a one-point loss.

He risked taking it on the chin to help his players over the hump. That in itself is very respectable and very defendable.

If the hope is that Dodge becomes a winning coach, most fans would hope he would be an aggressive good coach like Jimmy Johnson or Mike Leach rather than a good coach who plays it safe, like Marty Schottenheimer or Wade Phillips.

Clearly this decision does show he has a lot more Leach in him than Phillips. That is at least something.

Sadly for UNT fans, the attempt failed. FAU's stop lead to a major swing in momentum was all Rusty Smith and FAU needed. They took the ball right down field and scored a TD to take a 44-40 lead.

UNT had another shot to win the game, but after the emotional kick in the crotch of the FAU TD, Tune, Dunbar and the rest of the offense could not get it together to go the length of the field to score a TD.

Schnellenberger won again and UNT fans were once more left to dream of next season.

ULM Announces They Are a Contender with Smashmouth Win Over ASU

Tobi Writes — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:50:16 -0400

The news of the week had to be ULM's impressive win over Arkansas State.

Coming into the game, ASU was widely considered the second best team in the Sunbelt and ULM something of a mirage.

You are not a mirage when you can punch a good team in the mouth like ULM did ASU, especially without your starting QB for most of the game.

ULM hit two big passing plays, one for a TD and one that was down at the one and lead to a TD. On the surface that may have accounted for the margin of victory, but around those plays ULM grounded out the clock on a wet field, while shutting down the ASU running game.

ULM ran the ball 41 times at 3.0 yards a carry while holding ASU to 0.9 yards per carry. ASU fought back from a 16-0 deficit in the third quarter to get within a TD of the lead, but ULM shut the Red Wolves down in the fourth quarter.

An impressive team win by the Warhawks.

Florida International also notched their first win of the season over the Western Kentucky Hilltoppers. In last week's projections, I had predicted a strong game from freshman QB Kawaun Jakes, but the Golden Panther defense held him under control as FIU won 37-20.

And finally, Louisiana Lafayette's Ragin' Cajuns refused to lose, coming back from a 10 point deficit to beat the North Texas Mean Green 38-34 on a late TD. An argument can be made that UNT gave the game away to ULL, but it is not that valid of an argument. Winning teams make plays when the game is on the line; losing teams do not.

This weeks' schedule:

Mississippi State @ Middle Tennessee State - Is MTSU a good team or are they merely good for the Sunbelt? Mississippi State has lost to a number of good teams... 49-24 to Auburn when Auburn was playing well, 30-26 to LSU, 42-31 to Georgia Tech, and 31-24 to Houston.

I am not prepared to say MTSU belongs with those teams. Add in the distractions of the week and subtract MTSU's home field advantage and I think this is a close 35-32 win for the SEC's Bulldogs.

UL- Lafayette @ Western Kentucky - Which Kawaun Jakes shows up? If the good one shows, the Hilltoppers have a shot to win this one. ULL's tackling is suspect, as is their passing defense. I am not prepared to back Jakes two weeks in a row. ULL 48, WKU 30

Troy @ Florida International - Troy will destroy FIU, to recapture more of their pre-season swagger. 56 -10.

Florida Atlantic @ North Texas - This is potentially a season turning game for each team. Ultimately, I question whether UNT thinks they can beat the Owls. If they don't, they won't.

It is as simple as that. (The fact that Howard Schnellenberger owns UNT doesn't hurt either.) If this game follows the trends of this season, look for UNT to give this game away in the fourth, 37-34.

Following Collapse Against ULL, UNT Returns To Denton To Play FAU

Tobi Writes — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:46:51 -0400

North Texas played tough enough on the road for three quarters to win vs. UL Lafayette's Ragin' Cajuns, but unfortunately for Mean Green fans, they could not overcome early mistakes, and once more lost the fourth quarter as the team returned to dead least in the conference.

Redshirt freshmen Riley Dodge showed his inexperience throwing an interception that was returned for a TD, and a second one that lead to a field goal. The Mean Green also allowed a blocked punt for a touchdown as they spotted the Ragin' Cajuns 17 first half points.

UNT hung tough behind Dodge in the first half, playing to a 24-24 tie at the half. UNT continued their tough play on both sides of the ball, and eliminated the mistakes in the third quarter to take a 10 point lead, but the inexperienced Mean Green could not hold on to the lead, and were again outplayed in the fourth quarter.

Mid-season overview

UNT has flashed a lot on both sides of the ball. If the Alabama game is eliminated from the team's stats, UNT has scored 28.4 points per game, and allowed 29 points per game vs. non-BCS FBS opponents of varying talent levels. The team plays similar caliber teams in the season's second half, so the team should be competitive.

Offensive inconsistency

Coach Todd Dodge has a well conceived spread offense. Regardless of personnel, UNT under Dodge has moved the ball between the 20's and scored at a pretty good clip.

Still this year was supposed to be a bit of a breakout year with an experienced proven OL and quality talent and depth all recruited for this offense. QB Riley Dodge, the most highly decorated recruit in UNT's recent memory was supposed to use his familiarity with the scheme to transform this offense into a juggernaut.

Well, that just hasn't occurred.

The coaching staff went with a lighter more athletic offensive line to protect the still undersized and fragile Riley Dodge.

It was a very defensible decision, but the results suggest it has hurt the team in those short yardage situations that are so necessary to win games. The coaching staff (and I think the players) lack confidence in their ability to consistently pick up short yardage by running up the middle. They lack the swagger of top offenses.

Todd Dodge may very well need to consider developing a rotation of personnel designed specifically to give the team the best shot in situations where they need less than 3 yards. They have the depth and are not likely to run slow developing passing plays on 3rd and shorts and 4th and shorts, so why not?

Good coaching staffs put their teams in situations where they have a better chance to succeed. Dodge and his staff have improved a lot in that regard this season, but this is an area where more improvement is possible with help from the staff.

Riley Dodge has struggled at times with the speed of the game (regardless of his father's claims to the contrary) and the weaknesses of the scheme (one of the disadvantages of the Dodge scheme vs. a run and shoot is the fact that it is easier to read a QB and jump the passes because the QB and receiver are not reading and reacting to the DB).

In high school where your opponents are a step slower, you can throw a rainbow deep and not worry about the safety having the speed to make a play on the ball (as happened vs. Ohio). In High School you can get away with telegraphing your passes, but at the FBS level those passes are at risk (as happened vs. Ohio and ULL.)

It is entirely possible that if Todd Dodge is around for Riley Dodge's senior year, Riley may become the mobile version of Ty Detemer that many feel he has the potential to become.

This year, he is still just a promising underclassman starting his first year as a QB at the FBS level. In many ways UNT's struggles are no different from the struggles teams like ULL have with their new QBs.

Riley Dodge and the offense have given up turnovers that have turned games.

The Middle Tennessee game was a close game until Riley Dodge threw an interception that was returned to the six yard line, that tipped off 17 straight MTSU points.

The Ohio game partially turned on a Nathan Tune interception that was returned for a TD.

The ULL game would likely have been a UNT win, if not for Dodge's two interceptions early.

Probably the best way to look at the issue of interceptions is that more precision is needed from Riley Dodge and his receivers to prevent interceptions.

Defensive Lack of Consistent Focus and Intensity

The offense is not solely to blame. When these backbreaking turnovers occur, UNT's defense responds like the inexperienced unit it is. They don't generally elevate their individual games in those situations, and stuff the opposition to reclaim momentum, they allow their emotions to rule them and yield TDs.

Without question one can look at UNT's Defense and see major improvement, but there simply has not been enough improvement to overcome the problems the offense is having transitioning to Riley Dodge, and all the new personnel. UNT boasts one of the most talented back 7's in the conference and has a lot of quality defensive linemen. They are lead by one of the best defensive coordinators in the conference.

This is a unit that should not be yielding almost 30 points a game to non-BCS opponents. It is far too talented for that.

Players like alleged shut down sophomore CB Royce Hill, former all-conference junior LB Craig Robertson, senior DE turned DT Eddrick Gilmore, last year's leading tackler senior S turned LB Kylie Hill, junior DE Sam Owusu-Hemeng, and former JUCO DTs Shavod Atkinson, and Kelvin Jackson need to start regularly making game changing plays. Waiting for the emotional volcano that is senior MLB Tobe Nwigwe to make the big play is simply not good enough.

These guys have been in place long enough to know what they need to do. Watch the films and start making some plays already.

Fourth Quarter Nightmares

For the season, UNT has outscored their opponents in the fourth quarter only once, in their only win of the season vs. Ball State, 10-7.

Versus Ohio, the Mean Green lost the fourth quarter 3-7.

In the throwaway game vs. Alabama, UNT lost the fourth quarter 0-9.

Versus Middle Tennessee, UNT lost the fourth quarter 0-7.

Versus ULL the final period went to the Ragin' Cajuns 0-14.

In the last four games, UNT hasn't scored a TD in the fourth quarter, and has yielded at least seven points. It appears the team is confident that they have the ability to compete in each game, but the team lacks the leadership from upperclassmen, and key performers, to suck it up, and make plays at the end of games.

Howard Schnellenberger Comes to Town.

Schenellenberger has owned UNT. Only the fact that FAU has played so badly this year makes this game winnable for UNT.

UNT has a shot to turn around recent history vs. FAU, and turn around the Mean Green's season this week, but they have to believe they can win. This was probably a game in which the Mean Green assumed they would not be able to compete prior to the season.

What UNT believes will determine the outcome of this game. If that pre-season belief remains, UNT will lose this game.

It seems likely this game could turn around one of these team's fortunes.

UFL moves Locomotives' Third Game Moved to Las Vegas in likely corrective action

Tobi Writes — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 00:11:43 -0400

The UFL's Commissioner Michael Huyghue announced the league will be moving the third home game for the Las Vegas Locomotives to Las Vegas. It was originally scheduled to be played in Los Angeles.

This is an excellent and clear headed move by the commissioner and the owners. Over the first three games of the UFL season the league has averaged an announced attendance of 12,524.

Two of those games were in Vegas and were to be the only games for Vegas this season, leaving the Vegas franchise with a really, really bad looking season attendance number of 13,185 and facing very dim prospects of that city having a UFL team next season.

When you add in the published impression that the numbers in Las Vegas were inflated, it was the kind of situation that would look horrible to potential fans this year and to potential owners in the offseason.

The early attendance numbers could have translated into a lower than expected turnout in Los Angeles. (One suspects the league may have already seen sluggish Los Angeles ticket sales and that might have been part of this decision making process.)

Having Las Vegas showing an unwillingness to support a UFL team and then drawing poorly in LA, say 18,000 or less, could have turned off potential owners in both markets.

(Remember the LA game was supposed to be Las Vegas vs. what looks to be the worst team in the league in the NY Sentinels. That late season game would draw a lot better in Vegas with LV chasing a playoff spot than in LA where fans would not have a stake in either team.)

By playing a game in LA off a weak start the league was looking at potentially burning LA as a market too. That would have been devastating. Far better to hold off on LA until next season.

Now the league really needs to sell that last Vegas regular season game. If they can draw 30K for that game the Vegas average will be a respectable 18K—about equal to what the worst teams in the USFL averaged in their initial year.

In that kind of scenario, even the fact that Las Vegas only averaged 18k is more acceptable because you can attribute it in meetings with potential owners to a slow developing market.

This reads to the public like the league working with the city and fans of Vegas. That will help with the draw on the final Vegas regular season game.

The Championship Game Factor

Las Vegas is also the site of the league championship game. With the murder of a CFL franchise on the city's resume, the Vegas choice was a very debatable pick for the league's first championship game. San Francisco would have been much safer. This change dramatically decreases the chance of a championship game black eye for the UFL.

Putting on my handicappers hat, IMO, there is now about a 40 percent chance Las Vegas will be in the championship game, and that would really help the league draw a decent crowd. If Las Vegas draws 30K to their last game and makes the championship game, the odds of a face-saving sellout would be dramatically higher.

I am critical of many of the decisions of the UFL leadership, but this was a good move by Huyghue and the league owners and it is an excellent first step in pulling the league's premiere season out of the toilet.

Will the UFL's Atrocious First Week Attendance Numbers Sink the New League?

Tobi Writes — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:53:14 -0400

The UFL silently opened play last week in Las Vegas at 45,000-seat Sam Boyd Stadium in front of an annouced crowd of 14,209, although reports suggested the actual number of fans in attendance was much lower.

(The local paper, the Las Vegas Review-Journal, suggested real attendance was about a third of that, putting attendance in the range of 5,000, but doesn't really say where they attained that number. 10,000 would be my estimate looking at the number of fans in the stadium. You can stream UFL games live from their website to reach your own conclusions.)

The league played its second game of the year at Orlando's 65,000-seat Citrus Bowl in front of an announced crowd of 11,203, but Shannon Owens, a columnist for the Orlando Sentinel, reported some of those in attendance were using giveaway tickets.

These are, to put it bluntly, horrible numbers. They are the kind of numbers a very bad team in the first year of a pro startup league might see at the end of a lengthy season. To see them in the first to games is shocking to say the least.

To give some perspective on the perception those teams might have locally, UNLV drew almost 30,000 to see the Rebels beat Hawaii's Warriors a couple weeks ago. UCF drew 40,000 to their stadium in Orlando to see a matchup vs. the Memphis Tigers recently. Those aren't even BCS schools, which makes these attendance figures look really bad to the public in these cities.

Both of those college teams were not playing at home those nights, so it isn't like the UFL teams were competing against the FBS teams for fans last week.

Compounding matters, the UFL's lack of promotion about the launch of the season has skunked their TV numbers. The Internet is full of people like myself who loudly bemoaned the fact they didn't realize the UFL season started and as such missed the opening broadcasts.

I have never watched Versus in my life, but I apparently have it as a channel on my cable. If I had seen some kind of promotional reminder, I'd have watched the game on Versus.

The fact that the games are on the UFL's site is a good idea—it allowed me to see the first two games—but still doesn't make up for a lack of sufficient promotion.

How many potential fans are going to think to look on the UFL site for games? How many are going to want a to watch a three-hour game on their computer? How many are going to watch a game that has already been played?

The lack of promotion just hurts their broadcast partners and hurts the measurables that will be used to judge the viability of future seasons.

The Premiere Season Plan

The whole concept of the Premiere Season was to play a limited schedule (as there were only a couple of owners) and show that the league can be viable in the league's preferred markets. The teams would theoretically draw well as the games would be rare curiosities and each cities home schedule would conclude before fans grew jaded or lost interest.

The TV carriers had extremely modest goals, so anything that happened on that regard could be spun to be positive.

The point was to create a strong arguement to entice other rich prospective owners into buying in.

These attendance numbers instead loudly send the message that the league's core concept is not viable and threaten to turn the Premiere Season concept into a wrecking ball hammering away at any shred of perceived viability the league possesses.

Consider the fact that the UFL plays their second and final game in Vegas this week. There is no time for a marketing staff to launch and implement a program to correct the first week's troubles. There is no way that game exceeds 12k in real attendance, and after that the UFL season in Vegas is done.

Vegas will have averaged 10-12,000 in the UFL's first year.

That can be taken as the thoughts of football fans on the UFL applied to the Vegas market. No owner is going to want to play a six-game home schedule in front of a crowd that history suggests will be that size or smaller next season. IMO, the UFL has just burned Vegas as a market.

(It should be noted that the initial plan was for the league to open in San Franscico, but a baseball playoff run by the Giants made the stadium's availability questionable forcing the league to move the opening game to Las Vegas. San Franscisco would have been a much better draw. Still, drawing 12,000 at any of their cities, especially opening week, is just inexcusable.)

Minor League

It is clear that it is not valid to compare this league to leagues like the XFL or USFL.

Those were pro leagues.

As startup pro leagues, they drew startup pro attendance numbers. The Las Vegas Outlaws of the XFL averaged 22,619 in 2001 when Las Vegas was a much less populous city and Sam Boyd Stadium was considered a bit of a trip. The city suburbs have expanded outwards since then.

The USFL's Orlando Renegades were a relocation of that league's worst franchise, but they still averaged 24,136 to the Citrus Bowl over 20 years ago. Orlando has grown a lot in the last 20 years.

The league has spent a lot of time trying to brand itself as the NFL's new minor league—the new WLAF.

Well, Commissioner Huyghue...Mission accomplished.

The UFL owners are seeing the result of selling their league as a minor league.

A comparison to the CFL's Las Vegas disaster might be reasonable—their average attendance at Sam Boyd was just under 9,000, and they drew 12,213 to their home opener. But even the CFL, with their team's modest attendance numbers, quickly admitted the Posse was a disaster.

The UFL for it's part announced the league was hoping for 15,000 on opening night --- presumably to dampen expectations.

That the UFL could not meet their low expected attendance numbers or even pull half of USFL or XFL numbers in either of those NFL-free cities, in spite of those cities growing dramatically since those previous competitive leagues failed, is a huge red flag to any prospective owner.

It says very bluntly that either the concept underlying the league is a bad one or the people in charge have proven incapable of delivering. Either take on these measurables will smother whatever appeal the UFL may have to new owners.

This league may turn out to have Arena Football League-level support and perhaps Arena Football League-level revenue streams as well. That league folded with each team having fewer than half the players to pay that each UFL team employs.

Is there any hope for the UFL?

Well, there is always hope.

The UFL owners are quite wealthy. Maybe they are rich enough that this is all funny money to them. Maybe they are willing to eat huge losses for quite a while and pay out of pocket to start additional teams in the future if no new owners buy in.

Looking at other assets of the league, a lot of very talented and hightly regarded people work for the UFL. For example, the league's marketing arm has produced a very impressive printable 100+ page guide to the UFL with player, owner, and coach profiles as well as details on the league's development (available at the league's website).

Clearly the League has employed some talented people. (One wonders if those people had much of a role in establishing the league's promotional plan for opening weekend.)

Will we see major improvements in attendance in later games? Certainly San Franscisco will out draw Las Vegas, but you probably won't see a major improvement. San Francisco and New York tend to be very strong football attendance regions and should be strong cities, but the problem is it appears this league's identity has been established with the football viewing public.

The majority of the league's potential fans have deemed this league an afterthought not long for this world.

Could some star power turn this around? Probably not. J.P. Losman is the only guy in the league who shows any star talent, but he needs a ton of work on his mechanics, discipline, and consistency to tap it.

The only star power I see in the league is color commentator Doug Flutie, who as many other have pointed out is a star in the making with good unique insights communicated clearly, but obviously no fan will ever attend a football game for a TV color commentator.

Best hope for the league owners to save this league

I used to handle marketing for an Inc 500 company. Not the same animal, I know, but I know enough to at least look at this thing from the right perspective.

It is a lot easier to market to consumers when they haven't already made up their minds about a product.

Unfortunately, that ship has sailed.

The fans think this is a minor league that probably won't be able to draw the numbers to survive. The public has deemed it not worthy of notice.

The potential UFL fans aren't going to want to throw their entertainment dollars down the money pit on a non-viable, boring, one-and-done minor league.

Now the owners are going to have to spend more than twice as much in marketing to change that view of this league.

The awful numbers in Vegas and Orlando will depress attendance in good attendance markets San Francisco and New York and may totally skunk a bad one like Los Angeles if corrective action is not taken.

Will the owners spend the money now and try to save the league, or would that type of effort be seen as throwing good money after bad (a cardinal sin in the minds of successful business owners)?

(Keep in mind the XFL's TV guys knew after the first half of their initial game that their league had failed. The UFL probably had some numbers in mind --- Did they come anywhere near those numbers?)

A new aggressive plan needs to be implemented immediately to save the Premiere Season and the League's future viability. Will the people the owners have hired make the right choices to make this a possibility? The past policies implimented by those employees do not suggest Michael Huygue and the current leadership will deliver for the owners.

Huygue was hired to build a solid competitive league. His resume suggested that was in his skillset could deliver. Huygue and staff have built what their skillset suggested they would --- a minor league that employs a bunch of credible NFL caliber backups.

Can they convince fans it is worth watching a pair of Jr. Level Kansas City Cheifs each week instead of MLB, the NFL, college football, or even high school football? The UFL needs a P.T. Barnum. Is there anything in the resume of Huygue that suggests he posesses those instincts and skills?

The UFL has problems to work through.

Really after the first few games, heads should be rolling...but that is an article for another day.

Rivals Sacks the Sunbelt in Their Midseason FBS Rankings...Again

Tobi Writes — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:07:12 -0400

Rivals.com put out their midseason full FBS rankings.

Here is Rivals's ranking of the sunbelt.

71. Troy (3-2)
79. Arkansas State (1-3)
80. Middle Tennessee (3-2)
87. Louisiana-Lafayette (3-2)
90. Louisiana-Monroe (3-2)
109. North Texas (1-4)
110. Florida International (1-4)
115. Florida Atlantic (0-4)
120. Western Kentucky (0-5)

Overall, I think they have the sequence mostly right.

I'd still put FAU over FIU and UNT as both latter teams likely expect FAU to beat them. I would not move FIU up that much for beating Western Kentucky.

I think UNT and FAU are playing in the hundreds level today and FIU is playing in the 110's level.

I think the Louisiana schools are ranked a little high. I think they are 90s quality teams.

Middle Tennessee also hits me as too highly ranked. They were destroyed by Troy while ASU lost by three. It doesn't make any sense to me that they are only ranked 1 slot behind ASU.

I'd say they are a mid-80s quality team today.

I'd rank Arkansas State one slot behind Troy. If that means 72 today, fine. There is no doubt Troy was the better team by a good bit when the two teams played, but the Red Wolves only lost by 3 and have vastly outplayed Troy out of conference.

Some may complain that with the highest team ranked 71st out of 120 FBS schools, the sunbelt is underrated.

Highest rated schools in other conferences

SEC: 1. Alabama (6-0)
Big 12: 3. Texas (5-0)
PAC 10: 4. USC (4-1)
ACC: 5. Virginia Tech (5-1)
Big 10: 6. Iowa (6-0)
Big East: 7. Cincinnati (5-0)
WAC: 8. Boise State (5-0)
MWC: 10. TCU (5-0)
CUSA: 20. Houston (4-1)
INDYs: 24. Notre Dame (4-1)
MAC: 40. Central Michigan (5-1)

To a point, I disagree. Troy has beaten the two likely contenders for the conference title. They are at this point, by definition, the flag bearers of the conference.

No Sunbelt team is going to be rated higher than Troy until the results of the head to head matchups with Troy fade a bit.

The problem for the conference is that Troy showed nothing out of conference.

They lost on the road to No. 78 2-4 Bowling Green 31-14 and were a total no show vs. No. 2 Florida, unable to even score a TD in their 56-6 loss, before finally beating the 102nd ranked 2-3 UAB blazers fairly soundly (27-14) in Troy's home opener.

This created the same kind of problem the conference used to have when UNT was dominating it. When the best team in a conference stinks it up out of conference and dominates in conference, it has the effect of sapping the conference's perceived strength.

Now will Troy eventually climb back up to the edge of the top 25 by season's end? Maybe, but it isn't a given. If they are upset at some point in conference they may top out in the 40s.

If only Arkansas State had beaten Troy, the Red Wolves might be ranked around 30th now and the entire conference would be viewed better, but alas in typical Sunbelt form, it did not happen.

Why is No One Talking About the Idaho Vandals?

Tobi Writes — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 11:05:11 -0400

I am shocked by the overall lack for press given to Rob Akey's Idaho Vandals for their play this year and the underliying lack of respect.

Not from "football insiders"—ESPN put Idaho vs. a good Colorado State team on TV. I am talking about a lack of respect from WAC fans, who should know better at this point having seen the team for a few weeks now.

With the WAC despirately trying to prove that Boise is not going to play a cupcake schedule in conference so Boise can maintain their high ranking, one would think that WAC fans would be pushing Idaho after each win.

Maybe they are still mad about having to admit the Vandals... Afterall Idaho was the fat kid no one in the WAC wanted on their team. The WAC didn't want to deal with the black eye of adding a team with the smallest venue at the FBS level --- Idaho's 15,000 seat Kibbie Dome*.

(*The Kibbie Dome is named after a guy one would have to think of as the patron saint of Idaho football, Bill Kibbie. Kibbie attended Idaho for only a month before lack of finances forced him into the real world. He became the head of a contracting company in Utah and in spite of his short time at the university contributed $300,000 of the dome's $1M price tag in 1970.)

Idaho has had a rough decade plus trip to FBS competence.

Glory Days?

It wasn't always this way for Idaho. Idaho was a member of the Pacific Coast Conference, a precursor to the Pac 10 from 1922 to 1959. True by the end of that era their smaller budget and conference outlier status caught up to them, bleeding the competitiveness out of their programs, but still, they were affiliated with UCLA and Cal for 37 years! Who in the WAC can make that claim?

With the collapse of the PCC, Idaho looked for a level of play where their resources would better allow them to compete. After four years as an independent, Idaho was a founding member of the Big Sky Conference.

In the late 1980s Idaho emerged as a football power in the conference winning four conference titles in five years and launching a number of big time coaches' careers. The university began making plans to move up to an FBS conference.

In 1996 Idaho left the Big Sky for the Big West, joining Boise State, UNT, and Cal Poly as replacements for UNLV, Arkansas State, Louisiana Tech, and Southwestern Louisiana (now ULL).

These additions were seen as too marginal and were too dispersed to save the Big West's football programs leading that conference to drop football in 2000. Big West football survivors like Idaho faced the tough decision of moving back down to FCS or risking another run as a conference outlier, where travel costs would probably bleed the competitveness out of the program again.

The long walk back

Probably assuming that a move down to the FCS level would be taken as an admission of failure in state and as such would create a huge hurdle for Idaho's state flagship university in a future move to become the FBS school they want to be, Idaho went east to the distant confines of the Sunbelt Conference as a football-only member.

It may have been the right choice, but it would prove to be a brutal move.

There, travel costs and their small stadium further crushed the competitiveness out of their program and damaged their reputation as an FBS school.

But the capricious fingers of fate finally begun to let off Idaho. A few years earlier, in 1999, fate had begun to poke someone else in the eye for a change. This time, it would be the WAC.

In 1999, the eight schools with the best MWC programs and TV markets staged a bloody (and possibly technically illegal) coup. The WAC was now a two halves of a marginal FBS conference. There were eight teams spread across a giant footprint where travel costs bled the competitiveness out of all member programs.

Nevada joined in 2000. TCU bailed in 2001. Boise State and La Tech joined in 2001.

Idaho sat sadly overlooked with each new team recruited.

The SMU, Rice, and Tulsa walked away from the high travel costs of the WAC effective in 2005, forcing the WAC to consider Idaho, Utah State, and New Mexico State.

Despite proximity, USU and NMSU got the invites in 2003. Idaho was again left in the cold.

Only when TCU's departure from CUSA to the MWC forced CUSA to add UTEP did the WAC finally relent and add Idaho's Vandals of the Kibbie Dome, a move that triggered years of complaints about the bottom three schools not winning and dragging down the conference.

Finally in—time to win?

Finally having achieved membership in an FBS conference with decent travel, Idaho made a big hire landing former Idaho and NFL head coach Dennis Erickson. With excitement at a decade high level, Idaho began talk of lowering the turf in the Kibbie Dome and adding an upper deck that would bring capacity up to a very workable and FBS respectable 25,000.

Then after one year Erickson turned his back on the folks in Idaho leaving the Idaho fans with shattered dreams of an upgraded stadium and an improved team.

Idaho hired a some unknown assistant coach by the name of Rob Akey to pick up the pieces.

Akey and his staff lost most of Erickson's players and rebuilt the team essentially from scratch. The Vandals were awful in 2007 and awful again in 2008, vying with UNT and FCS upgrade Western Kentucky for the title of worst FBS team in the country.

But while Akey was not a big name, he was well known in coaching circles as a good recruiter. With two years of playing experience, his team matured over the 2009 off-season.

The team opened the 2009 season with an expected win over the lousy NMSU Aggies. The next week the Vandals were beaten by a very talented Washington team in a game they probably could have won if they expected to win.

Regardless, the Washington game appears to have been a turning point. A tougher minded Idaho team beat San Diego State at home and Northern Illinois on the road earning them attention from ESPN and a nationally televised game from the Kibbie Dome vs. a very improved Colorado State team.

The game was fantastic TV with Colorado State jumping on the Vandals early and silencing the home crowd before Idaho came raging back to win the game. To top it off, the Vandals played the game without their leading receiver.

The Vandals sit alone in second place in the WAC with a 4-1 record overall. The state of Idaho has a 9-1 record at the FBS level this year with the rest of the WAC at 11-20.

Their QB, a tall skinny kid with a good arm by the name of Nathan Enberle suddenly has apparently become of the NCAA's best NFL QB prospects, and Akey has been getting a lot of credit for turning around what was probably the fifth or sixth toughest rebuilding job at the FBS level.

The Future for Idaho

Is is possible the Vandals will implode vs. better competition? Sure. Is it likely? Probably not.

Anyone who saw the Colorado game saw a tough minded veteran Vandals team who's play exceeds their talent on both sides of the ball. The fans also saw the Kibbie Dome for what it really is—a great venue from which to broadcast a football game that gets rocking and loud when the Vandals are playing well.

Idaho hosts every contender in the WAC besides Boise State. They host Hawaii who doesn't play well on the mainland and recently lost QB Greg Alexander for the season. He appeared to have been one of the best QBs in the conference.

They host La Tech who has quite a distance to travel for the game as well.

They host Fresno State who appears to once more not have a defense.

Do not be suprised if the Vandals are a three-loss team at the end of the season and are in the top 25.

In five years' time

It is entirely possible that Idaho could string together two very good years in a row. If that is the case, I think the money to further expand the Kibbie Dome would likely become available (the state legislature did provide the money to lower the turf and increase capacity to 20,000 after Erickson left his old school in the lurch and the state's reputation in a shamble).

Even with a capacity of 16,000, the Kibbie Dome is a very loud stadium. On TV, it favors a packed arena league stadium with no bad seats in the house.

The Kibbie Dome is shaped like a plane hanger. It seems like the dome could be extended to add space for endzone seating that might get capacity up to 24,000 or so. Adding an upper deck could get it up to 30,000 at that point.

That is perfectly appropriate for a football crazy school with 12,000 students and compairs very well to respected schools like SMU or Houston's stadiums, except unlike their stadia it offers protections from rain or snow crushing fan attendance and would be significantly louder.

Idaho has a very bright future. WAC fans should embrace Idaho's success instead of continuing to look down on the Vandals. Afterall, isn't this what WAC fans have claimed to want for years --- to want to see some life out of the 3 cellar dwellers?

UNT-ULL: Will Lafayette Tackle Well Enough To Beat UNT?

Tobi Writes — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 13:15:18 -0400

The bye week has come and gone for the UL Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns and the North Texas Mean Green, restoring both teams to near full strength and now the fans of both teams are chomping at the bit for the coin-flip.

ULL

ULL has a decent offense, but their ability to score is questionable. ULL lacks the playmakers of a team like MTSU to whom UNT yielded 37 points.

(One can make the argument the game was played in Denton, but I'd argue that UNT played their worst quarter of the season vs. MTSU giving away 20 points in a quarter while being totally incompetent on offense, so at worst it is a wash.)

ULL has a good veteran OL, a solid senior RB, and a promising QB, but the receiving corps is not reliable or explosive as MTSU's. That will hurt vs. UNT's strong pass coverage which is allowing a conference low 54 percent completion rate despite a weak pass rush.

While I think the top notch competition ULL has faced paints a misleading picture of the competence of the Cajun offense, I have a hard time seeing ULL's offense scoring more than 28-31 points at the high end—with a UNT gift TD.

UNT's defense generally plays well for three quarters of the game. There is usually a quarter where they give up 80 yard drives and generally look like last year's team.

For the rest of the game UNT's defense plays very well. They are very focused on three and outs as evidenced by the fact that they are first in the sunbelt in stopping opponents on third down, allowing successful conversions only 34 percent of the time.

ULL for their part is the conference's best at converting third downs, completing just under 43 percent of their plays.

It is highly probable that UNT will force a number of ULL punts. It is also very likely they will allow ULL to run run the length of the field and run off two to three TDs at some point in the game.

UNT's week off

UNT spent their off week working on a number of trouble areas, the most relevant to this game being their ability to convert short yardage and long passing plays.

UNT has the talent to move people out in short yardage situations, but has opted to go with a lighter more athletic OL to better protect the brittle Riley Dodge. I think for UNT to convert short yardage situations they will need to platoon in bigger stronger linemen in for those situations.

I don't think Coach Todd Dodge has arrived at that conclusion yet, so I doubt that happens in this game. If short yardage plays amount to UNT's starting line trying to go outside vs. ULL's DL and their great linebackers, I think UNT may struggle in that regard. And I cannot see UNT's starting OL opening holes up the middle vs. ULL's front seven.

Now, the deep passing may be a factor. If UNT has made an effort to get more than Micheal Outlaw involved in deep passing attempts and the coaching staff has ironed out Riley Dodge's slow release on those plays, UNT might have a shot to complete a few 20-30 yard passes against a young and fairly ordinary ULL secondary.

Ultimately I think the game boils down to whether ULL is able to tackle well enough to control big plays. Todd Dodge's offense is a very low risk offense that generally doesn't attack downfield too often. Like the west coast offense, the Dodge offense throws to receivers short and hopes the receivers can evade the first tackler and go on a big run.

ULL has allowed opponents to complete an astounding 62.9 percent of their passes. UNT QB Riley Dodge has completed 65.4 percent of his passes in the UNT dinkathon offense.

UNT's offense has averaged 38 passes a game. As ULL has allowed such a high completion percentage and has no pass rush, it would be very in character for Dodge to throw the ball even more this week. If UNT throws 45 passes and completes a conservative 65 percent, ULL will need to not blow 29 tackles in their secondary.

For a team that misses tackles like ULL, this will be a tough test.

IF ULL tackles well

If ULL tackles well, the mean green will not break more than one to two big plays and the odds of UNT scoring TDs drops dramatically, greatly increasing the chance of ULL being able to score enough points to win.

Compounding the ULL pass defense issue, ULL has also allowed opponents to convert 47 percent of third-down plays. Now certainly the level of competition they have faced has swelled this number. Their run defense is better than the stats suggest. They have simply been facing bigger stronger lines..

This stat still has big ramifications.

While UNT may be fairly low in their third down completion rate at 30 percent, it should be noted that UNT has only had 17 third down conversions (third fewest in the Sunbelt), in spite having 78 first downs (middle of the pack). UNT doesn't get into a lot of third down situations.

UNT should be able to move into FG range repeatedly.

On the flipside, if UNT throws that much, ULL should also be able to pick off Riley Dodge a couple of times.

If ULL can do that and hold UNT to one TD and say six field goals—25 points or less, ULL has a great shot to win.

IF ULL misses some tackles allowing big plays

UNT is very likely to have a number of FGs in this game.

If UNT's big play guys, RBs Cam Montgomery and Lance Dunbar and WRs Darius Carey, BJ Lewis, and Jamaal Jackson get by some tacklers for breakaway TDs or escape coverage for a long TD pass, UNT's point total would likely exceed what the Ragin' Cajuns offense can generate vs. UNT's defense.

As much as I'd like to see the latter, I think ULL is the more mature and focused team with the coaching staff more focused on winning now at this point.

ULL 28, UNT 22

Week Five: Troy Retakes the Sunbelt Lead

Tobi Writes — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:32:22 -0400

Troy absolutely crushed Middle Tennessee on Tuesday in a statement game.

What was the statement? "The rumours of our demise are greatly exaggerated?" "Unlike Arkansas State, Middle Tennessee still has a long way to go to be in our class?"

The first, sure. The second, lets hold off that conclusion until the Nov. 21 matchup between MTSU and ASU.

Whatever the message, it is very clear Troy has now found their sea legs and having dispatched their two strongest contenders seems very likely to run away with the conference, barring injury.

Troy is now 2-0 in conference and 3-2 overall. That is enough to put them into a tie for first with UL Monroe who managed to complete the Florida sweep by outpacing winless FIU 48-35.

Arkansas State gave another tough team all they could handle, this time losing to Big Ten power No. 13 Iowa by 3, 24-21.

Florida Atlantic was beaten at home 30-28 by a weak road team in Wyoming to remain winless. (I actually nailed that score dead on in last week's predictions...but I also bought into the Blue Raider Kool Aid instead of attributing their success vs. UNT to a really bad second quarter by the Mean Green...so...basically don't go to Vegas on my predictions.)

And UNT, WKY, and ULL sat impatiently through their bye week.

===================================

This week's slate:

It is another light week for the sunbelt with only three games as the Troy and MTSU take the week off.

FIU@ Western Kentucky—FIU SHOULD get off the snide this week and win this game by two TDs, but I am going to say they won't. Western has kept the scores within a reasonable number—they are playing respectable defense when you look at the scoreboard—but offense has been a problem.

(The Hilltopers cannot stop the run, but FIU cannot run the ball, making it less of an issue.)

In the last two games, the Hilltoppers may have found their offensive solution in freshman QB Kawaun Jakes, who has replaced senior Brandon Smith. Looking into my Christobal (Ha! get it?!) I am going to call this 31-28 for Western Kentucky.

HOTSEAT: (This is a new feature in my weekly conference columns. I'll talk about which coach might be in trouble.)

I think this may very well be the exact game that breaks the camel's back and gets Mario Christobal fired at season's end. One of the Shula or Bowden boys would be a reasonable fit at FIU.

They can all recruit the region and have seen their stars dimmed to the point where they would accept a contract in the FIU financial realm. Going 5-6 to 8-3 every year would keep any of them employed at FIU.

North Texas @ ULL—Based on what we have seen so far, the Ragin' Cajuns should win a low scoring game something like 24-20 with UNT scoring late to make the score closer. The Ragin' Cajuns are the very definition of a conference spoiler. You can look at their stats and get a false reading thinking they aren't very good.

They fumble a lot. Their QB is average the this point in his career. They give up high percentage passing and are sometimes poor tacklers. That is just not looking deep enough.

They have played a tough schedule that has their stats jacked up. In spite of that they are good in a number of categories that translate into winning.

They are:

Best in the conference in completing third down plays.

Second best red-zone defense.

Best in third down conversions

Second best in fourth-down conversions.

Allowed fewest opponent's first downs allowed per game.

Allowed fewest sacks allowed per game.

Least penalized team.

Second in the league in interceptions.

...This team lacks talent at spots, but is just a well coached team that does what it needs to do to win.

UNT has a shot. They match up well. ULL has fantastic linebackers but a mediocre secondary. ULL won't score a lot of points and UNT should be able to move the ball between the 20's all day long collecting FGs. If ULL has one of their bad tackling days, UNT could score 3-4 TDs as well. If that occured UNT would run away with the game as ULL would not be able to match those scores.

As much as I'd like to see UNT break some big plays and win this game (it is possible), I think on the road it is too much to ask from a young team that has some confidence, identity, and execution problems that probably were not adequately addressed during the bye week, that usually plays young players over upperclassmen to build for the future vs. winning now, and that rotates players in and out like it is the preseason thwarting team chemistry.

ULL 28, UNT 22

Arkansas State @ ULM - We find out how good ULM is this week. Over the last four years the home team has won. I am going to pick against that as I think ASU is very good this year and they have a lot of pent up frustration after the past two weeks. I think ASU will shut down the ULM offense and win this handily, 38-14.

Its Time For Top Eastern FCS Schools To Form a Coalition To Move To FBS

Tobi Writes — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 14:56:34 -0400

For over 10 years, the University of Massachusetts, an FCS sometimes-powerhouse, has pined for FBS membership. Specifically they have wanted admission into the Big East with its somewhat high academic standards, media revenue, very good reputation, and BCS membership.

For years the Big East has declined to offer UMass membership as their stadium is too small and to a much lesser degree, their other athletic facilities are not up to date or up to BE standards.

"Admit us and then we will gain the support to build a Big East appropriate 40,000 seat stadium and new facilities like UCONN did," UMass administrators and fans beg.

"Build the stadium and new facilities and then we will admit you" seems the Big East's response behind closed doors.

A very old saying comes to mind. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing year after year and expecting different results.

After years of this status quo, I think we should all be able to agree that the only way UMass will finally get to move up to FBS is if they create their own conference.

If you wait for somone else to create your opportunity, you'll never see your opportunity when it comes.

That opportune time is here for UMASS.

The viability of an eastern conference

There are a great number of schools within a reasonable travel footprint that would be capable of starting an all-sports FBS conference with UMass today. (...If the NCAA would allow it today. For the record, the NCAA's rules on upgrades currently do not. That doesn't mean UMASS should not do the legwork today. The BCS schools have pushed to have the NCAA set up rules requiring years of lead time specifically to discourage school like UMASS from moving up. That may change by 2010. We will discuss that in a minute).

An FBS conference only requires eight football playing members.

Looking at attendance numbers in FCS this season, there about 12-15 schools in that footprint that have pulled more than 15,000 per game. (15,000 has been the NCAA's soft minimum number for FBS membership for a while although there was talk of it going up to 17,000. I am not sure if that has occurred yet.)

(That is ignoring another 5 to 10 who possibly could get the money to expand their stadiums and attendance and join this crowd if there was the real potential of joining a solid and regionally sensible FBS home.)

Now most of these schools will end the season in the 13-15,000 range as average attendance, but that is a bit of a false reading. You have to consider that they aren't currently in a push to move up to FBS. The excitement of an impending status upgrade would certainly electrify a school's fan base and allow most of these 15 or so FCS schools to stay above the 15,000 threshold requirement (a very soft requirement) for upgrading.

In football terms, finding 7 more members is very doable. There are obviously more considerations than just football in building a conference and we will discuss those a little later.

Making it happen

In order for an eastern conference to form, I think a long time fence sitter has to make the decision to put all of their eggs in one basket and go all out.

That school has to be of such a stature that they act as a domino that starts the university movement.

The school has to be well respected, to have a pretty large endowment, to be a large school and preferrably a state flagship with statewide support, to have marketable athletics, to be relevant in a large TV market, to have sway with a number of universities, to be in a conference with over 12 basketball playing members --- many of whom may be dissatisfied, and finally to see a much better future for itself at the FBS level than at the FCS level.

UMass is one of the few schools to fit all the criteria, and may be the only one.

UMass has a strong basketball program and has won an FCS football title. They have an enrollment of 26,000, an functional 17,000 seat stadium that could be cheaply and easily temporarily expanded to an FBS capable 22,000 or so.

They have a state-wide following in a very populous state. Academically they are respected in BCS crowds. They have a pretty large endowment. They are the kind of school with which every sub-BCS FBS school wants to be affiliated.

They even have a regionally sensible and marketable knickname that translates well into a mascot. Really only thing that degrades the public perception of the university is the fact that they play football at the small school level and they aren't a small school.

Football Championship Subdivision

The FCS classification is set up to allow medium to small publics (say enrollments of 6-15,000 students) at the Division 1 level to play football at a cheaper cost in which shortfalls can be managed with their resources. The classification also allows DI privates (most of which have enrollments less than 6000) the chance to compete in football in cost-friendly conference travel footprints.

The NCAA has competition levels for smaller schools that allow football and other sports on even smaller budgets. Division II is designed for small publics with enrollments up to 6000 and small privates with enrollments up to 1500. Finally Divison III is for schools that want to say they have sports but don't want to give out any scholarships and would really like to avoid spending money on sports when possible.

UMASS playing at the FCS level creates a number of situations that degrades the school's credibility with sports fans and makes them look like an inferior school in sports fans' eyes.

First, there is the appearance of unbalanced competition. UMASS appears to be a bully school beating up on schools that lack the resources to compete. A school with an enrollment over 15,000 Like UMASS has a sizeable competitive advantage over the average school at the FCS level.

Additionally a school of that size competing at the FCS level in football brands itself as inferior to the schools it may consider it's peers who play at the FBS level. For UMASS, flagships Rutgers and UCONN are good examples of school UMASS may see as peers, but sports fans do not.

Football Bowl Subdivision

College football is a generally a money loser at any level. Schools play football to provide opportunities for athletes to strive to be their best and to promote their universities. In the latter regard, football for a university is like a loss leader in retail.

The question any DI football playing university needs to ask is does the limited budget and potential low cap on losses at the FCS level vs. the FBS level outweigh the potential positive promotional and financial gain of competing at the FBS level vs. the FCS level?

If UMass played at the FBS level they would attract more prospective students. Some students (even the brilliant ones) refuse to attend a school that doesn't have an FBS football program.

Getting these additional students appplying means more revenue for the school, more enthusiastic alumnis (and alumni endowments) , and just following the logic, could very well mean UMASS would be able to bring in additional top level students raising the perception of the academics at the university as well.

On the flip side, playing at the FBS level can be a money pit. For most FBS schools today, it is.

I would strongly argue that it does not have to be the case. Most FBS schools are chasing their conference mates who are spending money they don't have. If they play at the non-BCS level, they are trying to compete at the BCS level. If they play at the bottom of the BCS level they are trying to keep up with the BCS powers like Ohio State with it's 100 Million dollar annual athletic budget.

It doesn't have to be that way.

There are a small number of schools who stick to their budgets, promote their schools well to the local community, and are able to achieve modest financial success ---football programs that are not consistent large financial drains on their schools --- even at the non-BCS level. A conference of like minded schools in big media markets could use those schools as a conference model to control spending while pulling in big revenue.

Sports could be a positive revenue generator that pays for all sports teams and possibly even yeilds financial dividends.

But really the big yield would be allowing UMASS to be seen for it's academic excellence and not it's lack of something other peer schools possess and take for granted. Fixing this blemish seems very possible today.

Which schools might buy in

For a second we will forget the larger issue of the how and deal with the issue of who.

There are two general categories in football terms. There are the FCS schools with good attendance numbers I mentioned above who might be interested in upgrading, and there are regionally displaced FBS schools who might want a conference with a better footprint.

FCS candidates

To move up with little trouble you need a well supported program (FCS attendance average of 12K or above with spikes that go over 15K), a stadium that seats at least 15K that could in short order realistically be expanded to at least 22-25k, and a sufficient enrollment to absorb financial shortfalls painlessly. With regards to absorbinf shortfalls, a minimum of 15,000 enrolled students seems about right for public schools and maybe 7,000 for private schools where their students' tuition and fee expectations are much higher.

I am going to list nine good candidates that are currently pulling in over 15,000 per home game. There are other candidates like SUNY Stony Brook, Hofstra, and a few more who have many qualities that suggest they might be good candidates to upgrade, but most lack the fan support and/or the ability to secure a useable sized stadium.

The Youngstown State Penguins: With 15,000 students and a 21,000 seat stadium, YSU dreams of MAC membership, but may not see it anytime soon. Perhaps due to their enrollment being smaller than most MAC schools, the MAC seems disinterested. The MVC as an all-sports member would be a decent home financially, but the Penguins are only wanted by the MVC for football. The attitude is not suprising. People forget that YSU won four FCS titles in the 1990s. One gets the impression that YSU has outgrown FCS but has nowhere to go at the FBS level.

The Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens: With attendance numbers regularly in the low 20K range and an enrollment of 19,000 (sufficient to absorb shortfall costs), Delaware could move to the FBS level with little trouble. They are an FCS unicorn --- the mythical regularly profitable FCS team. In the past they have expressed an interest in staying at the FCS level as they are in a good financial position (similar to Montana's position in the west). Attitudes could be changing, though, as Delaware is enlarging their stadium capacity a bit. They are an annual FCS power with an FCS football title to their name. Moving up means more expenses for Delaware and there is a real question of whether an FBS conference would take them. Joining the Big East would mean expanding their stadium to 40K and building up their facilities in all other sports -- not a cheap process. A conference that would take their stadium as it is might suit one of the penny-pinching powers of FCS just fine.

The James Madison Dukes: Bridgeforth Stadium is being enlarged to 25K. That is a strange number for a school without FBS dreams. With an enrollment of 18,000 and a good football following, JMU seems a good candidate to move up. JMU has one FCS title to their name. Their current FBS prospects are not great. They would likely be a replacement candidate for the very spread out Sunbelt Conference if someone leaves. That would likely bleed the competitiveness out of the program. They would likely be a lot more interested in an east coast conference with a smaller footprint and higher caliber member universities if one would arise.

The Liberty Flames: With over 12,000 residential students, Liberty is a pretty large private university. Founded by Jerry Falwell, Liberty ran through some financial troubles a few years back, but it is my understanding that Falwell had a life insurance policy that paid off Liberty's debts when he died. Their stadium seats 12,000 today although they drew over 15,000 for their home opener. This is a university that might really be looking to improve their visibility to help bring in new students and donors. The school also has another 38,000 students enrolled though distance learning as well as an affiliation with Falwell and is located in a very populous state (Virginia), so their alumni base and fan base is quite a bit larger than what would normally be present at a school this size.

The Old Dominion Monarchs: ODU recently renovated Foreman Field and added FCS football starting this season. The stadium seats 20,000 and in their initial season attendance has not dropped under 19K. ODU has a student enrollment of 24,000 which makes it a large public university. ODU has started play as an FCS school, but might be able to modify plans and play as an FBS school. The guidelines in this scenario do not appear to be without grey areas. Additionally the NCAA has a reclassification moritorium in place until the 2010 season specifically to look at their reclassification rules. No one knows what changes might be in store, especially as the nation has taken a very strong lean against the BCS schools and our President is both a sports fan and an avid poll watcher. In this environment, the NCAA may feel a need to be seen as less of a BCS stooge.

The Appalachian State Mountaineers: One hardly needs to introduce three-time FCS champion App. State after their upset of Michigan a few seasons ago. They draw in the high 20's in football despite having seating for only 22,000. With an enrollment of 16,000 App. State could weather a move up, but the problem is their academics are not at the level that top conferences pursue, so they have chosen to instead remain an FCS power rather than just being another faceless Sunbelt team.

The Georgia Southern Eagles: The Eagles have won the FCS national title a record six times, but are still relatively unknown outside of FCS fan circles. They play in an 18,000 seat stadium and have a university enrollment of 18,000. They are strongly investigating moving up, even though their upgrade options mirror JMU's and App. State's (ie. The Sunbelt).

The Florida A&M Rattlers: Tallahassee's other university. A one-time FCS champion, FAMU has an enrollment of 13,000 and has a stadium that seats 26,000. They were ready to jump to the FBS level a few years ago. They had revenue streams lined up and then put it off. They are probably still interested in moving up, but the Sunbelt doesn't have openings any more and there are not other FBS conferences that would have sensible travel that would want them currently.

HBCUs: What they are and why more of them are not listed as possibilites

FAMU brings to light the issue of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). FAMU is an HBCU.

There are a number of HBCUs in the region with attendance numbers that suggest they could make a go of it at the FBS level.

There are two conferences that are comprised of HBCUs in FCS, the MEAC along the southeast coast and SWAC along the Gulf of Mexico. FAMU has the bad luck of being on the fringe of both conferences, making travel much more expensive for them than their conference mates. This is likely a big reason why FAMU would publically consider leaving their HBCU FCS affiliation to play at the higher profile FBS level. If they have to pay to travel anyway, they may feel "Why not move up to a higher exposure level?"

The majority of the HBCU schools appear quite content at the FCS level, so I have not addressed them much. They draw decent numbers playing non-HBCU schools and dynamite ones playing other HBCU schools.

I think the unstated question is "Would HBCU schools in general draw better playing non-HBCU opposition from a higher level?" I think the consensus among the member universitities is that they would not and as such there is little talk of upgrading.

FAMU appears to have looked at that dynamic and decided that their fans are football fans first, not HBCU football fans first. That hardly seems suprising in football crazy Florida.

(Oddly one of the most pronounced examples of the HBCU attendance phenomenon is an FCS school not in the 2 HBCU conferences. Tennessee State is not a member of either HBCU conference but if you look at their attendence, they probably should be. They show a staggering HBCU game attendances vs. underwhelming non-HBCU game attendences.)

FBS candidates

The SUNY Buffalo Bulls: One of the newer members of the MAC, Buffalo has found their niche in football and basketball at the FBS level in the MAC. Still, they dream of the Big East. It is not likely to happen in the next 20 years. Buffalo is a great academic university with a relatively large endowment and is the right size with an enrollment of 28,000, but they have facility issues and financial competition issues in football with the NFL. UB expanded their stadium to 30,000 a few years back, but in doing so created an absolute nightmare of a stadium. It looks pretty and new to the non-football fan, but it is laid out totally incorrectly for building fan turnout. The stadium suppresses turnout like UNT's Fout's field, but is too nice to make it politically palitable to suggest tearing down big chunks of it and rebuilding. And the Bills suck up the fall football fan's dollars in Buffalo, leaving little for the Bulls. Almost all college teams in what I have named NFL Killzones tend to fare poorly at the gate. Barring an NFL Bills relocation, the Bulls aren't going to draw well and if they don't draw well, they aren't moving up. Barring the arrival of a new regional conference, the Bulls are stuck in the MAC for a very long time. They might be very interested if a poor man's Big East arose.

The Army Black Knights: A former football playing member of CUSA, Army might consider a similar arrangement with a new eastern conference. Air Force's arrangement with the MWC could be mirrored or Army could seek football-only membership (more likely). Army could likely compete fairly well in a conference where half the teams are upgrading from FCS. Army is a great draw on the road.

The Temple Owls: The Owls, with a large enrollment and a huge alumni base situated in a major city (Philadelphia), are potentially a big-time media draw. Since being booted out of the Big East, the Owls have been in no man's land. They are the ultimate outlier in a MAC Conference where the competition is generally considered very marginal. Being an outlier means they pay more than their competition just to travel to the games. Those higher costs tend to bleed the competitiveness out of conference outliers. The schools' biggest problem by far is that they lack a much needed on or near campus stadium. They play in the cavernous 69000 seat Lincoln Financial Field, which makes the Owl fans who attend the game notice their lack of numbers and not want to come back. They probably draw half to a third of what they could draw with a more appropriate sized on or near campus stadium. Lincoln is a good stadium to use when hosting Penn State, but it is a useless luxury beyond that. Even playing at Penn's Franklin filed might be better for Temple. Having closer opponents who might travel some fans would be a godsend for Temple. I think they would love to be in a poor man's Big East as a football member and if UMass were in for all sports, Temple would likely be in as well.

The Navy Midshipmen: A similar situation to Army's. A good draw, well respected, and a welcome conference mate, especially as a football-only member.

The Marshall Thundering Herd: I think Marshall, the two-time FCS champion and poster child for successful FCS upgrades, realizes joining CUSA was a mistake. They have a stadium that seats 38,000, but only have an enrollment of 16,000 to makeup shortfalls. Their athletic budget is very small for CUSA and the travel budget is enormous. They are bleeding the money that used to make their program so strong in the MAC. Still I think a return to the MAC would be a major blow to the reputation of the university. It would be an admission that they could not compete in CUSA, even if other legitmate factors are working against them. A move to a new east coast conference would solve the travel cost issue and mask the underlying embarrassing economic factors.

The UNC Charlotte 49ers: The 49ers (enrollment 22,000) joined the A10 when CUSA went to all sports. Now UNCC is adding FBS football. Where will they play? Is it possible that CUSA will pull them in? Is it possible that CUSA will softly boot Marshall to add UNCC? It seems likely that UNCC may have to look at the very unpleasant possibility of playing as a football independent. They may want to look at this new conference as well.

The East Carolina Pirates: I think ECU is myopic about the Big East, but at the end of the day the academics, endowment, market, and prestige are not there to get them in barring some new pressure within the BE creating a desire to expand. ECU has to look at the fall of Marshall and realize the same dynamic could potentially drag down their program --- although not to the same degree, as they have a much larger student body to bear shortages. They have an enrollment of 28K and a stadium that seats 43K. I think they would stay in CUSA rather than take a risk on a new eastern conference.

The UCF Knights: UCF is one of the largest universities in the country with an enrollment of 51,000 and a large stadium that seats 45,000 located in a very nice market in Orlando (#19 in the US and rising). I think they would likely stay in CUSA even if ECU and Marshall left as they have the student body to bear the travel costs even if gas goes to $6 a gallon. Now if CUSA splits in half... Well, that's a whole 'nother story.

The Troy Trojans: Troy has quickly leveraged their large student body (28K) into strong FBS fan support and financials to establish themselves as the cream of the Sunbelt Conference. With their 30,000-seat stadium and proximity to school like JMU, Charlotte, FAMU and others mentioned, they could be a candidate to jump conference. They really have nothing left to prove in the Sunbelt. I think it is a lot more likely they end up in the same conference as UAB than an eastern conference though.

FIU and FAU are still works in progress, but could join this list as well as they are very large public universities in the Miami DMA that are building large stadiums.

Recruiting schools to join UMASS

Having deal with the who, now let's deal with the how.

The only way recruiting becomes a possibility is if UMass is prepared to walk away from the Atlantic 10 and put their full sports membership on the table. I think they'd have to commit to getting the conference off the ground to a point where they are playing in the playoffs in football and basketball in both money sports --- plus say 5 years.

How long becoming playoff eligible would take depends on the new rules for upgrading that the NCAA adopts.

Getting the conference to the playoffs could be an instant thing (A small grace period may be implimented. "Everyone who is ready can reclassify in 2010 then we apply the new rules in 2011"), a short period like 3-5 years (the smaller FBS schools and the public creates enough pressure on the NCAA that they buckle and reduce the red tape), or a long period like 10-15 years (if the BCS schools continue to use the NCAA like a hand puppet). We really don't know what the NCAA's new classification rules will be when the moritorium ends.

If the first instance is the case, UMASS needs to be ready to go.

Whatever the rules are, UMass basketball has to be the lure to attract members.

The NCAA's 5/6/7 rule for conferences earning automatic bids to March Madness...and why it matters in a FBS football discussion.

There are two sports that generate revenue for DI schools nationwide --- football and basketball.

Schools want both athletic revenue streams, but they are very hesitant to sacrifice a guaranteed share of NCAA basketball tourney money as a member of a conference with an automatic basketball tourney bid to join a startup football conference that doesn't have one.

To have an FBS football conference that can play in bowl games, the NCAA rules are pretty simple. You have to have 8 football playing FBS members who play together for 2 years. (The rules are mostly the same for every other sport except basketball.)

For a conference to get an automatic bid to the NCAA Basketball tournament, their conference has to contain 6 core members of Division I who have played together for 5 years joined by a 7th core member school which is not required to have a prior affiliation with the other schools.

(Core membership means you have satisfied the NCAA's --- really the BCS schools' --- time requirements for being a member of Division I and qualifying to share the money. 95% of all schools at the FBS, FCS, and I-AAA level are core members of Division I. All schools mentioned in this article are core members.)

The hard part is obviously getting 6 members who have played together for 5 years to leave an existing conference.

(This rule was put in place to control how many non-BCS teams make the NCAA baskeball tourney. Each time a team wins in the toruney they take home another one of the 65 shares of the total March Madness TV money pool. By limiting the number of non-BCS schools who make the field, the BCS schools effectively maintain tight control over how much basketball revenue the non-BCS conference can take home. The fewer eligible conferences that arise, the fewer automatic bids for conference champions and the more at large bids available --- which the BCS conferences dominate.)

For UMASS to be able to pull members from other FCS and FBS conferences they need to satisfy the criteria to "merit" an automatic bid to the basketball tourney.

Getting that automatic bid

The Atlantic 10 expanded to a curious 14 teams a few years ago.

The number is very curious as 10 is perfect for a basketball conference as it allows each school to play each other in an 18 game schedule. 14 is just a really odd number for a basketball conference.

I think they may have done it to protect themselves from the possibility of a Temple/UMass-led 6 team defection.

If UMass announces they are leaving the A10 to go play FBS football, I think it is highly likely Temple would see it as a godsend and immediately promise to join. The MAC would always be there for Temple if nothing materializes and their basketball program is strong enough to find a good home even if the A10 would not accept them back following a failed attempt to build a conference.

Charlotte didn't join the A10 to be affilliated with Dunesque or Fordam; they joined to be with the name basketball programs that defined the A10 and provide their markets --- the large publics like UMASS and Temple --- and to share the conference TV revenue. With UNCC's need for a football home, they would likely give a tenative approval to follow Temple.

That gives you Boston, Philadelphia, and Charlotte --- three very good native TV markets. Boston and Philadelphia alone are two of the US's top 7 DMAs.

Rhode Island, as the last remaining public in the A10, would probably want in even if it may be a few years before they could afford to expand their stadium to a size that would allow a jump to FBS. They would want in to protect their option of moving up to FBS at their leisure.

George Washington is a very large private school with no football aspirations, but as a non-denominational school with no religious affiliations, there is no higher calling for them to stay in the A10. They'd probably go with the publics to chase the better revenue and increased media exposure that FBS brings. That would give the conference 3 of the US's top 9 markets ---all with large local alumni-bases living in those DMAs.

Getting the 6th member could be contentious if not handled properly. Adding Fordham (New York City market) would really hurt the financial viability of the Atlantic 10, potentially creating further unplanned defections and alienating friendly A10 members. Additionally as the A10 is at it's core a collection of Catholic private schools, it would create further bad blood to seduce a Catholic private school to leave for financial reasons.

A less contentious get would be Richmond.

Richmond is a well endowed, non-sectarian, and highly respected private. They would be of much greater value to an FBS eastern conference than they are to the A10. They would likely sign on as a sixth non-sports member. Richmond is a tiny private that is something of an outlier in the A10, but would be much better situated in this conference.

This arrangement gives Richmond a chance to have their cake and eat it too. They'd have less in travel costs. They'd be one of the better basketball programs in this conference. They'd get the better exposure FBS conferences receive and they could continue to be an FCS football power, playing as a football-only member of the CAA.

That would give UMass six conference mates who have played together for five years. Adding any of the previously listed "candidate schools" would give the 7th core member to satisfy the NCAA's criteria for retaining an automatic basketball tourney berth.

(The NCAA does state they are not currently looking to add new slots to the tourney, but when similar situations have arisen in the past, they have added the slot in short order to avoid lawsuits. With the proposed eastern conference having met the NCAA/BCS's obnoxious criteria, it seems highly unlikely the NCAA would suddenly grow a spine and risk fighting it out in court.)

This schism would also leave an intact and still strong 8 member A10. The A10 schools would have basketball powers St. Louis, St. Joe's, Dayton, & Xavier that they could leverage against a lot of good markets --- NYC, Philadelphia, Pittsburg, Cincinati, and St. Louis. The A10 could add 2 more catholic private schools --- Detroit Mercy (adding the Detroit DMA) and Loyola Chicago (adding Chicago DMA) jump to mind --- to get back to an easy to schedule and stable 10 team league with a much more sensible footprint.

This kind of split could lead to much lower costs and added bonuses like tight scheduling alliances between both of the resulting conferences that could be lucrative.

General dissatisfaction in the A10

One thing that should not be overlooked is the fact that expansion has not been an outright success for the A10. While the TV revenue is good, it is split 14 ways. Additionally, the conference has an enormous footprint driving up everyone's travel costs.

14 teams does not allow easy scheduling for basketball like 10 did. A lot of rivalry games are lost.

Finally, a lot of programs have lost stature being in the A10. St. Louis and Charlotte have not made the NCAA tourney since joining. They used to be annual participants.

I believe they lost the rivalries with powers Louisville and Memphis that excited their fan bases and now have to put more money into travel than their opponents do, creating a drain on revenue that used to be used for recruiting and general improvement of the programs. Plus the travel likely wears on the players a bit.

Whatever the reasons, the teams look less talented and seem to look more like bubble teams most of the time. This hurts because it seems like the A10 bubble schools seem to knock each other out of the NCAA tourney.

Unlike the Big East, where in conference games seem to help the stature of the member teams as the conference is so strong at the top--- especially last year --- in the A10, it seems like expansion has hurt the member schools by making it strong in the middle.

The 12 member A10 had 3 teams make the tourney in 2001, 1 team in 2002, 3 in 2003, 4 teams in 2004, and 1 in 2005. The now 14 team A10 had only 2 members make the field in 2006 & 2007 and 3 members in 2008 & 2009.

The loss of a tourney slot is potentially a big loss of revenue for the conference as teams make more money with each win.

3 teams in the tourney out of 14 is not great. The 14 teams may feel they could likely split into 2 conferences and get at least 2 teams into the tourney each year from each conference. And they might be right to think that.

The A10 would likely get Xavier and Dayton in with St. Louis and St. Joe's as annual bubble teams. The Eastern Conference would likely send Temple and George Washington with Richmond, UMASS, Rhode Island, and Charlotte as sometimes bubble teams.

Adding football members

At this point, UMass's 6 member basketball eastern conference would have 3 football playing members with a possible 4th down the road in Rhode Island.

If landing full members of the neccessary caliber appears difficult, UMASS could likely recruit Army and Navy as football-only members. Army would give the conference a presence just outside of the New York City DMA.

With both academies' national appeal and the lack of other FBS schools in NYC, New York City would almost certainly be considered a native DMA of this conference.

Both academies draw well at home and on the road. For smaller schools a game against an academy may add as much as 6000-12,000+ fans to the gate attendence.

FBS schools play 6 home games a year. A game against Army could add 1000-2000 to an east coast member's average home attendance each season with Navy doing the same the following season.

Additionally both Academies drew well at home which would drag up the conference's average attendance numbers, which would help the national perception of the conference from day 1. (We will futher investigate how conference attendence might play out in a minute.)

Marshall would likely kill to get in for the lower travel costs and big TV potential. This would create an impression that the conference is at least a peer of CUSA, so if played it right to the media, admitting Marshall could have a lot of value from a credibility perspective. Additionally, Marshall is a pretty good road draw in the area.

Buffalo and Delaware would make good 7th and 8th football members. They are close by, keeping travel cost reasonable. Both are high stature academic schools with good athletic programs.

Youngstown State could move up to be a 9th member or a replacement for Delaware if the Hens are content to remain at the FCS level. YSU adds some value with their football past and the fact that Buffalo and Youngstown could be travel partners.

If Delaware declines the conference could either go with Rhode Island as football team #9 or even better, could add a Virgina school --- either JMU or ODU --- creating an 9 team conference for football and a 10 team conference for basketball --- ideal for scheduling.

This scenario really works well for UMASS in that there are a lot of other schools who can fill the football slots if any of the teams suggested above decline.

Any limitations the NCAA can put on the football conference to attempt to stop the formation of a new conference are again somewhat irrelevant. Most of the schools involved are despirate for affiliation with high caliber, regionally sensible members af the FBS level.

Even if the NCAA institutes even harsher guidelines on upgrading when the moritorium ends, making UMASS, Delaware, and YSU's upgrades to FBS take longer, all of the schools are going to want to schedule each other to save money, which is the real bottom line.

Really, all UMASS has to do is get the basketball members, which if done done with respect and in a transparent manner may actually be done with the A10's blessing.

It seems hard to imagine the religious privates taking umbrage with longtime loyal programs UMass and Temple for trying to make their athletic programs stable and secure--- especially if every care is taken to leave the A10 in good shape and to work with them on scheduling, tounaments, and whatnot.

An FBS future

Once UMASS is playing at the FBS level, it seems very likely that more funding sources will become available. Fans and alumi who might consider the school's athletics to be trivial today and not worth their donations, could quickly re-evaluate that opinion if the school played at the FBS level.

Politicians would feel renewed pressure to not allow UCONN to one up UMASS as they would then be at the same level of competition. Rather than avoiding the issue, politicians would flock to be seen as the pol who lead the charge to stand up for the state's pride.

UMASS would likely see a stadium built that was slightly larger than UCONN's in fairly short order. Shortly thereafter an invite would likely come from the Big East.

Perhaps UMASS would chose to accept it. Perhaps they would decline, choosing instead to patiently tap the resources of their conference's markets. Maybe they could build their conference to a position where it could raid the Big East of its eastern football teams a decade or so down the road.

Even if UMASS chooses to leave the new conference when that invitation from the BE comes, at that point they would have created a conference that would help Marshall and Temple not bleed to death, would help Buffalo grow beyond the MAC, and would allow other FCS universities in the northeast that are just as stumped as UMASS today like state flagships Stony Brook, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and so many others a chance to evolve into FBS universities and claim the increased prestige that classification delivers.

In short, UMASS will have been a leader among universities in its region, taking up the role once championed by Joe Paterno and later abandoned by Penn State as being too difficult.

UMASS would be the heavyweight trailblazer among universities in its region, no different than what the University of Michigan, The University of Texas, and the University of Southern California are in theirs.

I emplore the university to take up the challenge.

UMASS needs to make their own way, not wait for an invitation from the Big East that may never come. Hopefully students, alumni, and fans will sieze upon this idea and light a fire under that portion of UMASS's leadership that favors waiting for Godot.