PonyFans.com

Certainly, the Texas Tech and OSU games have helped our home attendance each of the past two years and the game against Baylor last year helped UNT's attendance, but who is TCU scheduling that is giving their attendance such a boost? Would it not be better to schedule weaker teams at home knowing that getting wins will ultimately help attendance? What is TCU doing besides winning games to have more than double the attendance that SMU has? It is painful to see that even UNT averages more people at games than we do. THE TIME TO START WINNING IS NOW!

UNT has an attendance problem. Not in Denton, but the other Sunbelt schools are not keeping up enough to maintain the viabilitiy of their conference in the NCAA. Their future is very much in doubt unless they can get out of the Sun Belt into the WAC where the other schools will do their part to meet the Div. I-A home attendance problem. SMU may have to pay people to sit in the stadium until we start winning again, but at least the C-USA will be there for us when we get better.

ponysnob is on to something - TCU built their program by scheduling easy out of conference, they are just now switching to a harder OC schedule - in so doing they have built their own fan base instead of borrowing everybody else's. We must do this to survive - we need 2-3 OC wins so that we can get to a bowl with 3-4 conference wins - then you build your own fan base. Atarting out of the chute with no wins kills the season.

Sam I Am wrote:UNT has an attendance problem. Not in Denton, but the other Sunbelt schools are not keeping up enough to maintain the viabilitiy of their conference in the NCAA. Their future is very much in doubt unless they can get out of the Sun Belt into the WAC where the other schools will do their part to meet the Div. I-A home attendance problem. SMU may have to pay people to sit in the stadium until we start winning again, but at least the C-USA will be there for us when we get better.

UNT will have close to 32,000+ season tickets sold this next Fall, ie, 32,000+ UNT students forecasted to enroll this Fall who will each buy a football season ticket (among other things) when they enroll. It's called student service fees at Texas public universities.

SMU (since the Russ Potts era) sells a a whole bunch of corporate tickets to Dallas businesses who have no intention of using those tickets. UNT has students who have no intention of using their "paid for out of their own pockets" football season tickets just the same. So.......

......seems to me as if both schools just need to work on getting a very fair percentage of folks out to their respective stadiums who already have tickets in their hands?

UNT has had about 6 winning football seasons in the last quarter of a century with about 12 of those years spent in the NCAA's version of purgatory or the Bermuda Triangle, ie, NCAA D1-AA.

We lost 12 years worth of fans/students who would not support a 1-AA existence for the Mean Green just as your fans would have never done for your school's athletic program.

In fact, to this day we are still gettting over our own 12 year "Death Penalty" and getting fans back we had lost. It has been a slow process, but one we are now seeing results even with only just 6 winning seasons out of the last 25 years.

can we call this the [deleted] ("false") post of the week?

32k season tickets sold?

Ok...in a 30k seat stadium.

C'mon.

Please some reality before you post.

That's 32,000 tickets for 5 home games. Translation = 6,400 season tickets sold. UNT speak. Winning will cure all, and Copeland did try to lose the OSU game for a winnable OC game, but with no success. Next year we get Baylor, Wake and Northwestern, all winnable OOC games againt BCS teams which would really boost the program. I think you'd find that Texas State, A&M Commerce would not draw much in the way of crowds at Ford. Also, the 5 home game rule against 1-A teams makes it difficult to schedule as many patsy's as before. Also, 1-AA teams may keep you from being bowl eligible if you have a .500 season. I'd rather beat Baylor and have that win work toward a potential bowl bid than to beat Texas State and lose out on a bowl bid. In 2005, I think our conference schedule should be pretty helpful to us. Tulsa, Rice, UTEP, Tulane, Houston are all teams that we should be able to compete with. If we get ECU, UAB and UCF the first year for our out of division games it could be a pretty good year. (We'll probably get USM, Memphis and Marshall). Anyway, we should be able to win some games and excite fans in 2005, and with Chris at QB running and passing all over the field, we might get a taste of that excitement this year.

TCU built its program by easily outrecruiting the level of competition in its conferences-their out-of-conference scheduling is merely a symptom. Easy non-conference schedules do not build football teams no matter how much you people wish. Look we've already weakened our schedule enough-we ain't playing the Four Horsemen of the Apocalyse-we have been playing teams though that have a much more conducive Model on which they have built their program. Seriously, our schedule is filled with teams we wouldn't even associate with 20 years ago. I wouldn't mind playing NTSU (that game makes a certain amount of financial sense) but I am dead set against playing the Texas States, Arkansas St., Louisiana Directional U. et al just to make a couple of you guys proud again. If we can't be successful against other mid-level Division 1A programs in Texas with whom we have competed for generations then perhaps we ought to think about joining Rice in the Magnolia League. Suck it up. Compete or Die.

Sam I Am wrote:SMU may have to pay people to sit in the stadium until we start winning again, but at least the C-USA will be there for us when we get better.

If we don't start paying people to "sit in the stadium" right now, we may not be there for C-USA. Tech will bring a big crowd for the opener, but will it be enough to average us out to 15k fannies in seats for the rest of the home schedule with the likes of SJ State, LaTech, Tulsa and Nevada coming in? If the new rule is enforced as written, we are likely to be on the D-1 eligibility bubble based on attendance requirements. This is worrisome folks, 'cause another likely 0-fer September won't help.

Stallion wrote:TCU built its program by easily outrecruiting the level of competition in its conferences-their out-of-conference scheduling is merely a symptom. Easy non-conference schedules do not build football teams no matter how much you people wish. Look we've already weakened our schedule enough-we ain't playing the Four Horsemen of the Apocalyse-we have been playing teams though that have a much more conducive Model on which they have built their program. Seriously, our schedule is filled with teams we wouldn't even associate with 20 years ago. I wouldn't mind playing NTSU (that game makes a certain amount of financial sense) but I am dead set against playing the Texas States, Arkansas St., Louisiana Directional U. et al just to make a couple of you guys proud again. If we can't be successful against other mid-level Division 1A programs in Texas with whom we have competed for generations then perhaps we ought to think about joining Rice in the Magnolia League. Suck it up. Compete or Die.

And I totally AGREE. The KANSAS STATE model works if you are in the BIG12, already playing a great CONFERENCE schedule.

Back to TCU, they left CUSA supposedly because their strength of schedule is what has killed them in their bid for BCS inclusion.

Let's face facts:

1) their CUSA CONFERENCE schedule is what has given them their LOSSES and kept them from their perfect seasons 3 of the last 4 years.
2) their weak NON-CONFERENCE schedules (Arizona, SMU, UNT, etc) has had more to do with their denials from BCS overtures.


They COULD have stayed in CUSA and with the addition of Texas Tech and OU on their NON-CONFERENCE plate, if they were to WIN those games and win out in CUSA, NO ONE IN AMERICA would be able to deny their right to a BCS bid....

Instead, they will routinely play 50% of their games out of the state of Texas. Meanwhile, we are scheduling local/regional rivals to complement our CUSA schedule...

We will make out in the scheduling wars -- they will lose out.

Back to the point, though. Weak-ass non-conference games do NOTHING for attendance and do NOTHING for preparing us for CUSA games, and do NOTHING for $$$.

I am ok with UNT in 2005 and beyond, when we have a chance at actually beating them, since it is such a LOW COST game to travel to, and a possible attendance draw relative to who we might schedule in their place (i.e., Wake/NWestern/BC, etc. which we may wipe from our slate).

GoRedGoBlue wrote:can we call this the [deleted] ("false") post of the week?

32k season tickets sold?

Ok...in a 30k seat stadium.

C'mon.

Please some reality before you post.

Reading comprehension not your strong suit?:( Where did I say all 32,000 UNT students were coming to our football games?

No, no, no, please take a little more time to read what I was saying. Each UNT student buys the equivalent of a football season ticket out of their student service fees. We will have 32,000+ enrolling at UNT this Fall if the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board's forecast prove to be true.

WHAT I WAS SAYING WAS: Our school's are needing to do whatever it takes to get those who buy season tickets out to our stadiums to utilize them. UNT is trying to get all the soccer dads/moms/kids (thousands?) out to our games by having 6 PM kick-off for each game this Fall.

I have been trying for years to get UNT to use one of our strengths (2'nd largest College of Music in USA) and have an annual Band Day with 10,000 bandsmen which would fill both end zones at Fouts. Hellsbells, if UNT just had all its UNT-graduated HS Band Directors bringing all their HS bands alone, we'd need more than 10,000 seats for just that group!

I was also implying that (obviously) all 32,000 students don't use their "purchased at Fall registration" season tickets. If they all did, screw the MWC, the WAC, CUSA or whoever because we'd be Big 12 bound!:)

From MeanGreenGem:

"If they all did, screw the MWC, the WAC, CUSA or whoever because we'd be Big 12 bound!"

While certainly NTSU program is winning games at a much fast rate the SMU's, I don't think one win over the worst team in the Big 12 last year makes you ready to replace them as a member.

PonySnob wrote:From MeanGreenGem:

"If they all did, screw the MWC, the WAC, CUSA or whoever because we'd be Big 12 bound!"

While certainly NTSU program is winning games at a much fast rate the SMU's, I don't think one win over the worst team in the Big 12 last year makes you ready to replace them as a member.

Jeez! Anyone over here reading an entire post from me or just bits and pieces on this subject?!?!?:(

Don't think I mentioned anything about wins, Baylor, blowouts or whatever. HELLO?!?!?!

I said "IF" we had all 32,000 UNT students utilizing their season tickets and all 32K coming to our games (a total impossibility) then we'd be ready for the Big 12! R-E-A-D**T-H-O-R-O-U-G-H-L-Y !

I did read all of your post. If UNT was drawing 32,000 per game, why would that make them ready for the Big 12?

PonySnob wrote:I did read all of your post. If UNT was drawing 32,000 per game, why would that make them ready for the Big 12?

I know, its slow today on message boards...

BIG 12 for UNT? BECAUSE if we were getting all 32,000, uh, "students" (I repeat, 32K students) at games coupled with our present non student fans, we'd be ahead of the game of what is presently happening at most non BCS outposts (and some BCS) from an attendance standpoint.

WE ARE NOT drawing those kind of numbers at present, SMU'ers', don't get excited.

dear MeanGreenIdiot:

You wrote "Reading comprehension not your strong suit? Where did I say all 32,000 UNT students were coming to our football games?"

Now, go re-read my post. Where did I say that you said 32k UNT students were coming to your football games?

I merely pointed out that you could not possible have 32k season tickets sold for a 30k stadium. I guess I did not take your rediculous math into account where you count each season ticket holder's individual game's tickets as a season ticket sale.

Normally, and this goes for the more intelligent arguers, normally, when you say "Season Ticket Sales" that means the number of sets of tickets sold for the season in question -- NOT the sum total of all tickets sold in the season ticket sales allotment.

If you are going to use that sort of math, don't forget to add in single game ticket pre-sales as well.

Your loving MeanGreenIdiot basher,

GRGB