TexasTerror

Not at all -- I'm putting you 3rd or 4th in the SLC this year. I probably watch more volleyball in a week than most of you during a whole season. Just telling you how I see it...

Cards were outshot 23-11 including a 12-5 difference with shots on goal...got to bring that margin down, though the five corner kicks seemed to be a bright spot. Then again, UTSA had eight... Worth noting SHSU, once the cellar dweller in the league, has reeled off SIX straight wins and ALL were shutouts! We may actually have a legitimate soccer program in Huntsville... New coach has made the difference, just like I feel Hardman will for you guys..

You beat a bad SHSU team...and a UT-Arlington team that is just as bad, if not worse. You guys know how this league is. It's top heavy and then it falls out from there. If Lamar wants to win this conference, it goes through San Marcos and Nacogdoches...outside of that, not much happening in the league, outside of UT-San Antonio...

Well - with SLC TV -- I think there's more money to be made, especially if it's the conference that is responsible for covering all the costs by selling the advertisements, etc.

Come on MFFL -- we've talked about the SLC TV network quite a bit. Don't you recall? It's going to be on that -- which also means a few games on Fox College Sports probably. FSN has not be friendly to the SLC, so this is what we got -- it's much better if you ask me!

They are an affiliate of the SLC TV Network...now if you are referring to games outside of the SLC TV package, I don't know...

2001. If my memory serves me right, they went to the Div I playoffs in 2003... Now the trick question would be...how old is Schnelly?

Considering they had to pay to get on FSN, this deal probably isn't costing the SLC much more than they were paying back then. Better exposure too...

We discussed this on here before. First game was 1997.

I know it -- but Lamar has gone off and put themselves back with the schools they (what makes up most of the Sun Belt) originally rejected...

2008-09 Southland TV Network Basketball Broadcast Schedule Date Day Game Time Jan. 10 Sat. Sam Houston State at Stephen F. Austin* (men) 2 p.m. Jan. 17 Sat. Texas State at Central Arkansas* (men) 2 p.m. Jan. 24 Sat. Texas State at Lamar* (women) 2 p.m. Jan. 31 Sat. Texas A&M-Corpus Christi at Sam Houston State* (men) 2 p.m. Feb. 7 Sat. UTSA at Southeastern Louisiana* (men) 2 p.m. Feb. 14 Sat. UTSA at UT Arlington* (men) 2 p.m. Feb. 21 Sat. Northwestern State at Lamar* (men) 7 p.m. Feb. 25 Wed. Northwestern State at UTSA* (women) 7 p.m. Feb. 28 Sat. McNeese State at Nicholls State* (men) 2 p.m. Mar. 4 Wed. Wildcard Game TBA* (women) 7 p.m. Mar. 7 Sat. Wildcard Game TBA* (men) 2 p.m. Mar. 13 Fri. Women's Tournament Semifinal 1 Noon Mar. 13 Fri. Women's Tournament Semifinal 2 2:30 p.m. Mar. 13 Fri. Men's Tournament Semifinal 1 6 p.m. Mar. 13 Fri. Men's Tournament Semifinal 2 8:30 p.m. Mar. 14 Sat. Women's Tournament Championship 2 p.m.

I am speaking from history -- recall when the group of SFA, SWT, SHSU and company tried getting into the SLC? The schools, now in the Sun Belt, rejected them. Those schools eventually got in when a few of those SLC schools moved on. The SFA, SWT, SHSU, NWST, etc formed the Gulf Star conference, which lasted all of two, three years. I'm a youngin, but I've spoken to individuals involved with that -- most recently did so on a trip to San Antonio and UTSA. Same situation now -- there's a lot of pride on the line. Just ask administrators of ULL if they'd want to be in a conference with McNeese. Ask North Texas admin if they want to see the "new" SWT or SFA around their midst...

ABR3 -- As far as the Sun Belt goes, Lamar is going to have the same tough time as any SLC school. Most of those former SLC schools want nothing to do with the current SLC schools, look down upon them. Look for the SBC to look at Georgia State and Jacksonville State before they give two thoughts about a Lamar or even a Texas State-San Marcos...

Nope. Why would La Tech go to the SLC? They already looked down upon the league in the 1980s and 1990s. The Sun Belt won't take them back. They are in a tough spot -- where they are in the WAC until a new SWC is formed as I think they are rather low on the C-USA list behind a few Sun Belt squads and even UTSA... What if that doesn't happen? Then you become a Louisiana Tech like school... Or UTSA program in the Southland in a major market and could help with tie-ins to the Alamo Bowl?

The WAC needs to "regionalize"...I just do not see that happening. They got bit hard when the WAC fell out from under them a few years ago and they want to keep that solid core together. Karl Benson is looking at all sorts of options that he was not willing to before because of the problems, particularly for postseason championships and other things that directly come from travel woes.

Easy to agree when I make some sense of what I say, isn't it? Best part of C-USA is that you guys would get to make short trips to Rice and Houston. Lots of Cards fans in that area too. With increased travel costs of going to such a conference, you'd probably still maintain a few of your SLC rivalries, which are short trips away as well (Lake Charles and Huntsville). I still see Lamar third or fourth in the pecking order of schools that have a high desirability from the SLC. UTSA and TxSt are #1 and #2. After that, not really sure -- Lamar needs to get on the field and make those upgrades as far as football goes...

This is an old story -- Aug. 30. Why do they keep including North Texas? They rejected the WAC! UTSA will pick C-USA over WAC and should have that choice. If Lamar or Texas State-San Marcos wanted to send their programs in shambles, have fun in the WAC. The NCAA even put out a report in the last week re: the high cost of travel and how lots of schools are having serious problems with it. That won't be a fun conference to travel -- flights EVERYWHERE and that includes your non-revenue sports. How much is it going to cost to send your VB team out to Hawaii and California? Most of you think narrow -- football and hoops. There's many more sports in your athletic department than that... WAC makes no sense for either or any of the Texas schools in this new world of the economy and travel junk...

From the SFA student newspaper... [Hidden Content] With SHSU and SFA in the fold, if LU, UT-Arlington, UTSA and our friends in San Marcos join in as they are looking at doing -- we'd have the six schools required to make it a conference championship sport! If that's the case, the "bowling alliance" would not be needed. Don't think I see the SLC schools necessarily wanting to add La Tech, Tulane and Arkansas St, if they do not have to...

Get back to your WAC, Mountain West, Great West or whatever basketball you enjoy the most... UTA returns Guignard, Vereen, Long. All three averaged more than 12 ppg...and you have got to figure Moffitt will do more this year plus they got a nice incoming class... They even got Marquez Haynes, the Boston College transfer, who is done sitting out...played 18 minutes a game for BC, started three games and according to their Prospectus, could end up being the top player for UT-Arlington.

Thanks to our friend from Western Ky on AGS...Athlon. Southland West 1) Texas-Arlington 2) Lamar 3) Sam Houston State 4) Texas-San Antonio 5) Texas State 6) Texas A&M-Corpus Christi Southland East 1) Stephen F. Austin 2) Northwestern State 3) McNeese State 4) Southeastern Louisiana 5) Central Arkansas 6) Nicholls State

I'd place the west like this...as I am just not sure what to make of SHSU, but I do not see them falling below the four spot in this division. Really interested to see what things shake up to be...but I'd love for UT-Arlington to really make some noise OOC before coming into SLC play... 1) Texas-Arlington 2) Lamar 3) Sam Houston State 4) Texas State-San Marcos 5) Texas-San Antonio 6) Texas A&M-Corpus Christi

If you need it, Lindy's SLC Predictions...anyone else got other magazine predictions? Lindy's-Southland East 1) Stephen F. Austin 2) Northwestern State 3) Southeastern Louisiana 4) McNeese State 5) Nicholls State 6) Central Arkansas Lindy's-Southland West 1) Texas-Arlington 2) Sam Houston State 3) Lamar 4) Texas A&M-Corpus Christi 5) Texas-San Antonio 6) Texas State

Axe our track and field program, we wouldn't have enough sports to be Div I anymore! May need to add rifle, which is a full championship sport -- in addition to emerging sports like archery, badminton and team handball. What about the field itself? And reducing the size of men's track and field team? They didn't have many scholarships to begin with. I think men's tennis has 4, 4.5 or something thereabouts. Not the whole team is scholarshiped compared to women's tennis where you can have eight.

As I said, nothing against softball, but LU may need both to satisfy Title IX -- unless you want to cut men's tennis -- thanks to the addition of football. Bowling is the cheapest sport, so that sport could be added with softball not too far behind it. Remember, with Title IX, your softball facility, better not be too big a drop off from baseball. So, if you are going to put some good money into Vincent-Beck, get ready to pay up for softball! Wonder if the axe of tennis is on the table right now at the Montagne Center...? Guess, you could always axe men's golf instead of tennis? Well, I'll stop before I even dare touch that can of worms! ;D

I think the pecking order of Div II schools is... 1) Tarleton St 2) Delta State Houston Baptist, though Div I would fall behind UIW in the pecking order with UIW having football... North Alabama would be fun, but I just do not see them coming into the SLC. The OVC may be their stomping grounds, especially with Samford now in the SoCon and JaxSt possibly going FBS. UCO has loads of financial issues from what I hear...