A sign of things to come?

[dawg80]

Prior to the official announcement of Tech accepting a bid into the WAC, Oakes had scheduled both Rice and SMU in football. Before we could play those games, they became conference games. Y'all remember that?

When the WAC announcement came many of us assumed (correctly or not) that the WAC offer had been in the works all along, that is why Tech, Rice and SMU all agreed to play, knowing we would have to schedule them soon anyway.

Well, we've seen ULL and now we are seeing UNT on the football slate. No, I am not saying that the 2005 UNT game will end up being a conference game, but, after that (2006?), it may be.

Is this a parallel to what we saw heading into the WAC, or I am reading too much into this UNT scheduling?

[champion110]

Reading too much into it.

[dawg80]

Reading too much into it.

At least we hope so, eh.

Unless UNT is joining the WAC.

[qng001]

I think you are reading too much into it. I think he added those sunbelt games to take the load off on having tough OCC.

Using that logic..we played Tenn/Auburn this year, Florida next year...hrm Tech to the SEC? I think not.

[dawg80]

I think you are reading too much into it. I think he added those sunbelt games to take the load off on having tough OCC.

Using that logic..we played Tenn/Auburn this year, Florida next year...hrm Tech to the SEC? I think not.

You are probably right, and for the record, I like the idea of scheduling UNT. Unless UNT joins the WAC, I hope it remains a non-conference game for us.

But, you can not ignore the facts about the Rice-SMU-WAC connection that DID occur just 4 short years ago. Scheduling schools like Rice and SMU was a departure from the previous scheduling philosophy of I-AAs, current Belch schools, and the biggy payday schools. That is why it jumped out at us at the time. It was so different. Then shortly thereafter, we hear we are WAC-bound and it all suddenly made sense.

And, you can not equate our scheduling SEC schools with the scheduling of any non-BCS schools. It is beyond the realm of possibility for Tech to be invited to the SEC. It is not far-fetched for us to be Belch-bound.

Anyway, here's hoping it's just a more sensible scheduling philosophy. I can live with that!

[HogDawg]

I think it's more about "geographic" scheduling than anything. The reality is, La Tech needs to replace games against nearby SMU, Rice and Tulsa with SOMEBODY in this region, and ULL, UNT --and probably somebody else-- makes sense.

Hey, Oakes and Reneau put us in this situation when they didn't have the vision to see the CUSA train coming until it was far too late.

HD

[oledawg66]

Anyway, here's hoping it's just a more sensible scheduling philosophy. I can live with that!

That's the way I'm looking at it. I just hope I'm not readng too much into that .

[DeepGreen]

Reading too much into it.

You're reading way too much into it. North Texas was just looking for a warmup game.

C'mon, I just couldn't resist!

[DeepGreen]

At least we hope so, eh.

Unless UNT is joining the WAC.

Or maybe UNT and La Tech preparing themselves for CUSA invites in a few years? It could happen.

[oledawg66]

If you get your wish and we keep our brilliant young coach, you may well have your warm up game. I'm looking forward to it.

[markay714]

Prior to the official announcement of Tech accepting a bid into the WAC, Oakes had scheduled both Rice and SMU in football. Before we could play those games, they became conference games. Y'all remember that?

When the WAC announcement came many of us assumed (correctly or not) that the WAC offer had been in the works all along, that is why Tech, Rice and SMU all agreed to play, knowing we would have to schedule them soon anyway.

Well, we've seen ULL and now we are seeing UNT on the football slate. No, I am not saying that the 2005 UNT game will end up being a conference game, but, after that (2006?), it may be.

Is this a parallel to what we saw heading into the WAC, or I am reading too much into this UNT scheduling?

Please don't make me throw-up. I'll be sick enough to have to find a new hobby if Tech keeps JBIII after this season. Don't kick me when I'm down and now suggest we'd be so stupid as to stoop to Sunbelt level. I'd be at least semi-permanently gone from loving Tech sports! And, I don't want that to happen!

[champion110]

I feel the same way, Markay. That would be the death of this program. At least now we are dying a slow death. We get rid of JBIII and I will begin to see signs of hope, though.

[Bigdog13]

I think it's more about "geographic" scheduling than anything. The reality is, La Tech needs to replace games against nearby SMU, Rice and Tulsa with SOMEBODY in this region, and ULL, UNT --and probably somebody else-- makes sense.

Hey, Oakes and Reneau put us in this situation when they didn't have the vision to see the CUSA train coming until it was far too late.

HD

I agree, Oakes is making a smart move and wants to maintain a presence in D/FW. Now make another smart move and fire Bicknell.

[TulsaDawg]

Unfortunately, IMHO, the sign was when we were not accepted to CUSA. Or, even before that, when SMU, Rice and Tulsa were admitted and we weren't.

[Rustonite]

Lets start to schedule Gsu and Nsu, look slike that is where we are headed.