|
|
Post by 93beav on Oct 23, 2024 18:32:32 GMT -8
Wilky, you've had too many late nights without a break. Rice would leave in a heartbeat. UNT freaked themselves out at the start. And from what I've read, UTSA was sort of an after thought in the conversations w/ Memphis and Tulane at the start. Pretty certain they'd leave without UTSA. I mean, neat mascot, but that's about it. If Memphis is not leaving the American Athletic Conference, North Texas, Rice, and UTSA are not leaving either. No heartbeats. None of them are leaving without Memphis. Memphis is the cash cow of the American Athletic Conference, primarily because of basketball but also because of the Independence Bowl. I will add that North Texas is in Horse Country and Rice is tiny, so the Pac-12 does not really want them anyway. UTSA is the only one that holds any true value by itself. They may leave without Memphis. If UTSA leaves, all bets are off. North Texas and Rice could probably be convinced to come, as well. But Tulane is the next-best university outside of Memphis. If you are going to start tearing apart the American Athletic Conference, invites #1 and #2 are to Tulane and UTSA. Texas State is better than North Texas and Rice in football and seems less problematic to get, because they are not in the American Athletic Conference. UTSA is important, because they play in the Alamodome in San Antonio. They would be a great add, if they were interested to come by themselves, given UNLV's response. But I am not sure how plausible that all is, given UTSA's response to the Pac-12's first offer. That's my point - UTSA is but an after thought. Memphis, Tulane and UTSA "stuck together" but I'm not sure UTSA wasn't just an addition to make Memphis happy. Rice doesn't care about UTSA. UTSA has a high school level gym for basketball and the Alamodome is like 35 years old. Maybe I've just spent too much time on Texas St message boards, but they seem like a much better option than UTSA, and at a much lower cost. |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Oct 23, 2024 19:42:23 GMT -8
The only Texas teams that are within the Pac-12's reach without Memphis are Sam Houston, Texas State, and UTEP. We already tried to get UTSA. Memphis, Tulane, and UTSA have indicated that they will stick together. If you get UTSA, you could potentially get North Texas or Rice (if anyone actually wanted them). But North Texas and Rice are likely to stay put without a UTSA move, and that is unlikely without a Memphis move. Wilky, you've had too many late nights without a break. Rice would leave in a heartbeat. UNT freaked themselves out at the start. And from what I've read, UTSA was sort of an after thought in the conversations w/ Memphis and Tulane at the start. Pretty certain they'd leave without UTSA. I mean, neat mascot, but that's about it. Regarding Rice, Wilky said “if anyone actually wanted them.” It’s not the 50’s anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Oct 23, 2024 20:17:32 GMT -8
Wilky, you've had too many late nights without a break. Rice would leave in a heartbeat. UNT freaked themselves out at the start. And from what I've read, UTSA was sort of an after thought in the conversations w/ Memphis and Tulane at the start. Pretty certain they'd leave without UTSA. I mean, neat mascot, but that's about it. Regarding Rice, Wilky said “if anyone actually wanted them.” It’s not the 50’s anymore. Hey, the old Pac-12 almost took them. |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Oct 23, 2024 20:18:05 GMT -8
Regarding Rice, Wilky said “if anyone actually wanted them.” It’s not the 50’s anymore. Hey, the old Pac-12 almost took them. Yikes |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 23, 2024 21:01:49 GMT -8
I'm looking for Memphis, Tulane, Texas State, USF, Rice an 2 others to join to make the Pac 14.
Easy scheduling, long travel complaint largely evaporates, larger TV contract per school than a two timezone league. All the schools happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Oct 23, 2024 21:14:59 GMT -8
Regarding Rice, Wilky said “if anyone actually wanted them.” It’s not the 50’s anymore. Hey, the old Pac-12 almost took them. That's not true. The Pac-12 was going to take SMU. When that fell through, the ACC took SMU. Tulane and UTSA were fallbacks, in case SMU did not work out for one reason or another. The Pac-12 wanted to break into the Louisiana/Texas market. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Oct 23, 2024 21:18:06 GMT -8
I'm looking for Memphis, Tulane, Texas State, USF, Rice an 2 others to join to make the Pac 14. Easy scheduling, long travel complaint largely evaporates, larger TV contract per school than a two timezone league. All the schools happy. Texas State is nowhere near on the same level as the rest and Rice is worse, despite being in a better market. I would like for Memphis, Tulane, USF, and UTSA to join to make 11. UNLV is hopefully 12. If not, maybe Air Force or Texas State or someone else East of Logan. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Oct 23, 2024 21:43:41 GMT -8
If Memphis is not leaving the American Athletic Conference, North Texas, Rice, and UTSA are not leaving either. No heartbeats. None of them are leaving without Memphis. Memphis is the cash cow of the American Athletic Conference, primarily because of basketball but also because of the Independence Bowl. I will add that North Texas is in Horse Country and Rice is tiny, so the Pac-12 does not really want them anyway. UTSA is the only one that holds any true value by itself. They may leave without Memphis. If UTSA leaves, all bets are off. North Texas and Rice could probably be convinced to come, as well. But Tulane is the next-best university outside of Memphis. If you are going to start tearing apart the American Athletic Conference, invites #1 and #2 are to Tulane and UTSA. Texas State is better than North Texas and Rice in football and seems less problematic to get, because they are not in the American Athletic Conference. UTSA is important, because they play in the Alamodome in San Antonio. They would be a great add, if they were interested to come by themselves, given UNLV's response. But I am not sure how plausible that all is, given UTSA's response to the Pac-12's first offer. That's my point - UTSA is but an after thought. Memphis, Tulane and UTSA "stuck together" but I'm not sure UTSA wasn't just an addition to make Memphis happy. Rice doesn't care about UTSA. UTSA has a high school level gym for basketball and the Alamodome is like 35 years old. Maybe I've just spent too much time on Texas St message boards, but they seem like a much better option than UTSA, and at a much lower cost. If you went to a high school with a basketball arena as nice or nicer than UTSA's, you went to a much nicer high school than mine. Also, I went to Pepperdine Law School and played at Firestone Fieldhouse. The Convocation Center is much nicer than Firestone Fieldhouse. Neither approaches Gill Coliseum, but I think that you are going to get a good flavor of what is really out there for basketball beyond the Power Five Conferences this year playing all of the WCC teams. The Alamodome is 30 years old, and I fail to see why that matters, when Oregon State is playing in a smaller 70-year-old stadium. Plus, the Alamodome has been upgraded seven times since 1993. More suites than Reser. More luxury suites at the Alamodome. More club level seating at the Alamodome. And that is also to add to the fact that UFCU Stadium in San Marcos is 45 years old and nowhere near comparable to Reser Stadium much less the Alamodome. Plus, to come back to your basketball knock, the Alamodome can be configured for basketball should the need arise. The Spurs played at the Alamodome until 2002. The Alamodome has already hosted four Final Fours in the past 30 years and is scheduled to host the Final Four just this year. And UTSA may also be able to play at Frost Bank Center (the Spurs' new arena), if necessary as well. Texas State is in no way comparable to UTSA in term of facilities or market. San Antonio is also night and day better than San Marcos in pretty much every way that immediately comes to my mind. History, architecture, etc. Ridiculous! Texas State might have an argument about recent success, but the Pac-12 would be foolish to seriously ponder selecting Texas State, if UTSA is also available. |
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Oct 24, 2024 8:37:06 GMT -8
Hey, the old Pac-12 almost took them. That's not true. The Pac-12 was going to take SMU. When that fell through, the ACC took SMU. Tulane and UTSA were fallbacks, in case SMU did not work out for one reason or another. The Pac-12 wanted to break into the Louisiana/Texas market. That is true. They didn't offer them but they definitely had them on the list. Do not make me go back and dig this up! Rice and Tulane were part of the contingent being evaluated when Stanford and others still had some pull. I'm talking post USC/UCLA. Because they wanted to keep academic standards high. I definitively remember Rice being discussed because everyone was wondering what they brought other than a once-good baseball team, the academic standing and belief they had some money sitting around. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Oct 24, 2024 8:54:04 GMT -8
Not to nitpick, but Reser Stadium is not 70 years old. Except for a very small portion of the Valley Football Center, no part of Reser Stadium is more than 20 years old. Every part of the current stadium was built in or after 2004.
|
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Oct 24, 2024 8:57:23 GMT -8
That's my point - UTSA is but an after thought. Memphis, Tulane and UTSA "stuck together" but I'm not sure UTSA wasn't just an addition to make Memphis happy. Rice doesn't care about UTSA. UTSA has a high school level gym for basketball and the Alamodome is like 35 years old. Maybe I've just spent too much time on Texas St message boards, but they seem like a much better option than UTSA, and at a much lower cost. If you went to a high school with a basketball arena as nice or nicer than UTSA's, you went to a much nicer high school than mine. Also, I went to Pepperdine Law School and played at Firestone Fieldhouse. The Convocation Center is much nicer than Firestone Fieldhouse. Neither approaches Gill Coliseum, but I think that you are going to get a good flavor of what is really out there for basketball beyond the Power Five Conferences this year playing all of the WCC teams. The Alamodome is 30 years old, and I fail to see why that matters, when Oregon State is playing in a smaller 70-year-old stadium. Plus, the Alamodome has been upgraded seven times since 1993. More suites than Reser. More luxury suites at the Alamodome. More club level seating at the Alamodome. And that is also to add to the fact that UFCU Stadium in San Marcos is 45 years old and nowhere near comparable to Reser Stadium much less the Alamodome. Plus, to come back to your basketball knock, the Alamodome can be configured for basketball should the need arise. The Spurs played at the Alamodome until 2002. The Alamodome has already hosted four Final Fours in the past 30 years and is scheduled to host the Final Four just this year. And UTSA may also be able to play at Frost Bank Center (the Spurs' new arena), if necessary as well. Texas State is in no way comparable to UTSA in term of facilities or market. San Antonio is also night and day better than San Marcos in pretty much every way that immediately comes to my mind. History, architecture, etc. Ridiculous! Texas State might have an argument about recent success, but the Pac-12 would be foolish to seriously ponder selecting Texas State, if UTSA is also available. Good thing we aren't adding Pepperdine then. I almost went to Pepperdine. Came down to OSU and Pepperdine. At the last minute I decided that perhaps going to a school just because it was in Malibu was perhaps not the best choice. Now that I see you went there, I feel comfortable knowing I made the right choice.  San Marcos is almost equidistant from San Antonio and Austin. If we're going to play the "But UTSA is in San Antonio proper" game, then OSU is in Corvallis and can't count Portland. Texas St also has slightly higher enrollment. Texas St also has had more students actually see a football team playing there (as they've been playing longer). And, again, to top it all off, Texas St could get us to 8 immediately at maybe less than 1/3rd of the cost. |
|
ftd
Sophomore
"I think real leaders show up when times are hard." Trent Bray 11/29/2023
Posts: 2,495
|
Post by ftd on Oct 24, 2024 9:03:32 GMT -8
If you went to a high school with a basketball arena as nice or nicer than UTSA's, you went to a much nicer high school than mine. Also, I went to Pepperdine Law School and played at Firestone Fieldhouse. The Convocation Center is much nicer than Firestone Fieldhouse. Neither approaches Gill Coliseum, but I think that you are going to get a good flavor of what is really out there for basketball beyond the Power Five Conferences this year playing all of the WCC teams. The Alamodome is 30 years old, and I fail to see why that matters, when Oregon State is playing in a smaller 70-year-old stadium. Plus, the Alamodome has been upgraded seven times since 1993. More suites than Reser. More luxury suites at the Alamodome. More club level seating at the Alamodome. And that is also to add to the fact that UFCU Stadium in San Marcos is 45 years old and nowhere near comparable to Reser Stadium much less the Alamodome. Plus, to come back to your basketball knock, the Alamodome can be configured for basketball should the need arise. The Spurs played at the Alamodome until 2002. The Alamodome has already hosted four Final Fours in the past 30 years and is scheduled to host the Final Four just this year. And UTSA may also be able to play at Frost Bank Center (the Spurs' new arena), if necessary as well. Texas State is in no way comparable to UTSA in term of facilities or market. San Antonio is also night and day better than San Marcos in pretty much every way that immediately comes to my mind. History, architecture, etc. Ridiculous! Texas State might have an argument about recent success, but the Pac-12 would be foolish to seriously ponder selecting Texas State, if UTSA is also available. Good thing we aren't adding Pepperdine then. I almost went to Pepperdine. Came down to OSU and Pepperdine. At the last minute I decided that perhaps going to a school just because it was in Malibu was perhaps not the best choice. Now that I see you went there, I feel comfortable knowing I made the right choice. San Marcos is almost equidistant from San Antonio and Austin. If we're going to play the "But UTSA is in San Antonio proper" game, then OSU is in Corvallis and can't count Portland. Texas St also has slightly higher enrollment. Texas St also has had more students actually see a football team playing there (as they've been playing longer). And, again, to top it all off, Texas St could get us to 8 immediately at maybe less than 1/3rd of the cost. Corvallis is know as 'The Malibu of the Willamette Valley' |
|
|
|
Post by johnnychimpo on Oct 24, 2024 10:08:09 GMT -8
For all intents and purposes UFCU was built in 2012 as it was nearly torn down to the studs. Adjusted for inflation there's been somewhere around or even more than $150M spent in and around the football facility itself over time. To build from scratch in 2025 starting with securing a vacant piece of raw land I would expect the total cost to be much more exorbitant than even that.
Perhaps if you are able to look past UTSA's AAU basketball arena, then look no further than their baseball field which is commonly referred to as the bird bath. That's not hyperbole either because it literally looks like an inner city apartment complex was bulldozed behind someone's backyard and a Baby Ruth facility was just thrown from the sky.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnnychimpo on Oct 24, 2024 10:08:41 GMT -8
I have the impression that baseball is important to the PNW but I could be wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnnychimpo on Oct 24, 2024 10:16:45 GMT -8
But don't take my word for it. I'm sure any Road Runner student would gladly take you in to their parents house to throw a few back for their tailgate and tell you all about their facilities and commuting.
|
|
