Fair Park: Cotton Bowl | V2.0

[CTroyMathis]

Time to continue the discussion in a new thread.

Retired thread can be found here:
http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/showthread.php?t=2651




Some visuals from way back at the beginning of the old thread re: Cotton Dome, just 'cause:

[tamtagon]

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...n1.3ed9e45.html

06:17 AM CDT on Thursday, August 31, 2006

By DAVE LEVINTHAL / The Dallas Morning News

...
Dallas voters in November will decide whether to invest $30 million in the deteriorating facility. The money would be used primarily to expand the Cotton Bowl's capacity to more than 92,000 seats, making it one of the nation's largest stadiums.
...
And while City Hall and State Fair of Texas officials are aggressively courting numerous colleges and athletic conferences to play neutral-site contests in the Cotton Bowl...
...
An annual October game between Texas Tech University and Texas A&M University leads his list, which also includes Notre Dame, Louisiana State University, Oklahoma State University and November conference playoff games for the Big 12, Conference USA and Southwestern Athletic Conference.

Considering the university anticipates to eventually enroll 26,000 student at the Oak Cliff campus, UNT is a logical college to court for an annual Cotton Bowl game.

[Mephis Gooseberry]

What, Dallas will stop being a Mustang town?

[gshelton91]

I saw they are already putting up the new score board... any word on if it will be ready for Texas/OU game?

[mrowl]

I saw they are already putting up the new score board... any word on if it will be ready for Texas/OU game?

that, along with a new jumbotron is suppose to be ready for OU \ TX.

[elmstreetdallas]

What is OU / TX? Never heard of it.

[CityLove]

^And here I was relieved someone finally called it by the right name! I'm from OK, and the other way just sounds wrong to my ears. It's always been OU/TX to me.

[St-T]

It is TEXAS/ou!

[FoUTASportscaster]

It really doesn't matter.

[X Factor]

Well us aggies would say tu/ou, but thats just us!

[mikedsjr]

It really doesn't matter.

So are you a sports fan? I just had to ask.

[elmstreetdallas]

Oh it matters.

[TexasStar]

Well us aggies would say tu/ou, but thats just us!

Fans of any team that needs a goal line stand just to beat Army should refrain from talking.

[St-T]

^lmao

[gc]

^lmao

Classless clowns that think they are better than they are......and get beat by tcu should do the same.

[FoUTASportscaster]

So are you a sports fan? I just had to ask.

Used to be, but am disenfranchised by the improper role sports plays in today's society.

[rantanamo]

what role does it play and what role should it play. Seems like its moving on a continued path down the totem pole compared to the days when your Babe Ruth or Muhammed Ali were more than just players. Difference now is that the media's role has significantly increased, so access is 1000x what it was before, while the role and place of the athlete has significantly decreased. The ratings don't lie. The hayday is over.

[FoUTASportscaster]

People followed it then, but weren't as dumb to the rest of the world. People didn't vote based on the passion in sports like they do now with stadiums. More people know what's going on in college football than they know what's going on in their city, state and world. We have people calling referees who make a mistake and threaten to kill them. We have high schools paying their coach 100,000 dollars while the teachers are at 40,000. That alone shows you sports is better than education.

When college sports first started a century + ago, it was supposed to be student body v student body in a friendly rivalry game. Today's athletes are no longer part of the student body. They have access to facilites that are off limits to everyone else, which actually violates the rules. The major players are there for one reason and that's not education, and not like the rest of the student body

Grand Theft Auto had a parody on one of their radio stations when a caller to the sports show goes something like this, "I could could care less about what's going on in the world around me, but you say one bad thing about my team and I'll kick your ass."

That's pretty accurate for a lot of people, which is a shame.

Sports should provide a recreation, and it does for a lot of people like me. But it shouldn't be all that people know, and unfortunatly, that is the case too often.

[grantboston]

I'm sure glad I go to a school where the only D1 sport is sailing. Even with all the money the Kraft family (NE Patriots) has, we still have a pathetic D3 football program playing in a stadium smaller than my 5A high school's.

In defense of sports though, they do give something for a school and community to rally around. It's hard to do that with a new science lab or groundbreaking research.

[tamtagon]

In defense of sports though, they do give something for a school and community to rally around. It's hard to do that with a new science lab or groundbreaking research.

Ya, that's too bad.

[aceplace]

In defense of sports though, they do give something for a school and community to rally around. It's hard to do that with a new science lab or groundbreaking research.

I'll agree with Tamtagon's point... it IS too bad...

But colleges like El Centro, which are training our next generation of technical practitioners, don't need sports teams.

[rantanamo]

no one needs sport teams, but they exist and that speaks for itself. Everything in life isn't about direct survival or "life or technology gains". Some things are diversion. Some things become cultural. All, essential become our permanent record of culture(something I've heard we don't have here in the states.). I'm simply glad to life in a world where we don't just live like animals and are under constant survival stress. I think many would rather we live that way. I'm not one of them. If that's how we'd live, I'd rather be a squirrel or bald eagle or something.

[Columbus Civil]

You'd make a terrible squirrel.

[incrediculous]

I'd rather be a squirrel or bald eagle or something.

Don't eagles eat squirrels?

That's like saying I'd rather be a bird or a worm.

[columbiasooner]

Link
Cotton Bowl is a tradition, but also a relic
By Wendell Barnhouse
Star-Telegram Staff Writer
The second Saturday in October, the State Fair, the Midway, the fried everything...Texas vs. Oklahoma in the Red River Rivalry at the Cotton Bowl.

Tradition. A strong word in college football. The Longhorns vs. the Sooners, with half the stadium in burnt orange and half in crimson, is a traditional rivalry game that will be played regardless of conference affiliation.

Location? That's another matter.

Saturday's UT-OU game will be played in its traditional venue, the aged Cotton Bowl. Both athletic departments agreed to a deal last May that keeps the game in the CBS (Cotton Bowl Stadium) through 2010.

Part of that contract extension involved improving the CBS. Big Texatron, a video board measuring 83 feet wide by 57 feet tall, looms over the south end of the facility. The video board and a new sound system, part of $20 million in improvements provided by the State Fair of Texas, will be up and running for Saturday's game.

Adding a video board to the 76-year-old CBS is like installing a CD player on a horse-drawn carriage. The City of Dallas is hoping for approval of a $30 million bond that will increase seating (all in the end zones) by almost 20,000.

It's all wasted money. The CBS is outdated, cramped and past its prime. No amount of renovation is going to change that.

The City of Dallas fumbled away regaining the Dallas Cowboys' stadium. The Cowboys' state-of-the-art (the required description for any new stadium) facility is being built in Arlington.

Once Jerry's World is complete, watch for a Texas two-step involving the UT-OU game and the CBG (Cotton Bowl game). By the end of this decade, plans will be in place to move the Red River Rivalry and the CBG to the Cowboys' new stadium.

The only question is the order of the moves. By signing only a two-year extension with the CBS, Texas and Oklahoma officials timed the contract expiration with the end of the decade or just about when the Cowboys stadium is open for business.

If UT and OU make the first move -- and if it doesn't involve making the game a home-and-home series -- it would make it easier for the CBG to pull up stakes and follow. The CBG needs to make the move no matter what.

The Citrus Bowl, an out-of-date stadium in Orlando that hosts the best non-BCS game, recently announced $175 million in renovations.

The Georgia Dome is much more modern but the City of Atlanta is considering $150 million in upgrades to that facility.

If the Cotton Bowl game wants to keep pace with other major bowls and perhaps earn a place in the Bowl Championship Series (or its future replacement), the CBG has to leave its obsolete home, even if it is the stadium Doak Walker built.

The CBG is in the process of soliciting opinions from corporate sponsors, college administrators and media members about the CBS and the CBG's future.

If those results are negative toward the facility, the CBG would have the facts it needs to move to Arlington. If UT-OU makes the first move, then it would make the CBG's move even more politically correct.

And what about tradition? When money talks, games get moved off of the "traditional" day (Saturday) and the New Year's Day bowl games are played on non-traditional days. Money buys tradition.

[elmstreetdallas]

The Texas/OU game will never be played at Jerryworld. UT will go home and home with OU long before they would ever even consider moving the game from the Cotton Bowl, where it's been played since 1929, and moving it to, gulp, Arlington.

[columbiasooner]

The Texas/OU game will never be played at Jerryworld. UT will go home and home with OU long before they would ever even consider moving the game from the Cotton Bowl, where it's been played since 1929, and moving it to, gulp, Arlington.

OU, in the most recent negotiaions, said that would be fine and that they would treat the Cotton Bowl as their home field for the week and give UT the alloted 2,500 visitor tickets as they would in Norman.

[mgd323]

OU, in the most recent negotiaions, said that would be fine and that they would treat the Cotton Bowl as their home field for the week and give UT the alloted 2,500 visitor tickets as they would in Norman.

I just threw-up in my mouth knowing that you gave me a reason to like OU....I have to go shower now because I feel dirty.

[elmstreetdallas]

OU, in the most recent negotiaions, said that would be fine and that they would treat the Cotton Bowl as their home field for the week and give UT the alloted 2,500 visitor tickets as they would in Norman.

Which UT of course would never allow to happen. Further proof that the Red River Rivalry will be played at the Cotton Bowl (split down the middle 50/50 between the two schools) far into the future.

[columbiasooner]

Let's all hope so.

[mjblazin]

That doesn't make any sense. UT keeps all their money when they play in Austin plus has an extra big game to jack up the price of the luxury boxes. Oklahoma plays an away "home" in an inferior stadium where their fans have travel while the UT fans never have to step foot in Oklahoma. The icing on the cake is that a state institution makes a decision to inflate the lodging, restaurant, and other entertainment businesses of the neighboring state plus a nice kick up into TX state sales taxes while Oklahoma citizens get zip.

I don't know who the OK blowhard was that made the statement during the negotiations, but I assure you that if UT decides to play in Austin, he'll have a come to Jesus session right quick with the businessmen that run OK. He'll be asked why he's giving away money to TX, money that needs to stay in OK to pay the taxes that pay his salary. Very quickly the OK "home" game will be in Norman.

[BigD5349]

I don't think OU is interested in Dallas for tradition, or they're just stupid by sending money south of the Red River. They are interested in playing here to gain a recruiting advantage in North Texas. North Texas offers a bonanza of talent and it is half way between the two schools. If one school can tip the balance in their favor, then that pays for itself in an instant.

That doesn't make any sense. UT keeps all their money when they play in Austin plus has an extra big game to jack up the price of the luxury boxes. Oklahoma plays an away "home" in an inferior stadium where their fans have travel while the UT fans never have to step foot in Oklahoma. The icing on the cake is that a state institution makes a decision to inflate the lodging, restaurant, and other entertainment businesses of the neighboring state plus a nice kick up into TX state sales taxes while Oklahoma citizens get zip.

I don't know who the OK blowhard was that made the statement during the negotiations, but I assure you that if UT decides to play in Austin, he'll have a come to Jesus session right quick with the businessmen that run OK. He'll be asked why he's giving away money to TX, money that needs to stay in OK to pay the taxes that pay his salary. Very quickly the OK "home" game will be in Norman.

[Milkman Dan]

People followed it then, but weren't as dumb to the rest of the world. People didn't vote based on the passion in sports like they do now with stadiums. More people know what's going on in college football than they know what's going on in their city, state and world. We have people calling referees who make a mistake and threaten to kill them. We have high schools paying their coach 100,000 dollars while the teachers are at 40,000. That alone shows you sports is better than education.

........

Sports should provide a recreation, and it does for a lot of people like me. But it shouldn't be all that people know, and unfortunatly, that is the case too often.

100% disagree. The level of athlete-worship now is simply not anywhere near the rabid levels with regards to the great athletes of the past. Only decades ago sports was ALL there was for entertainment for a majority of Americans. Today the options are widespread. Trogs have existed in the past in far greater numbers than now - don't make the same "back in the good ol' days...." argument.

And... what does voting have to do with sports?

[FoUTASportscaster]

That doesn't make any sense. UT keeps all their money when they play in Austin plus has an extra big game to jack up the price of the luxury boxes. Oklahoma plays an away "home" in an inferior stadium where their fans have travel while the UT fans never have to step foot in Oklahoma. The icing on the cake is that a state institution makes a decision to inflate the lodging, restaurant, and other entertainment businesses of the neighboring state plus a nice kick up into TX state sales taxes while Oklahoma citizens get zip.

I don't know who the OK blowhard was that made the statement during the negotiations, but I assure you that if UT decides to play in Austin, he'll have a come to Jesus session right quick with the businessmen that run OK. He'll be asked why he's giving away money to TX, money that needs to stay in OK to pay the taxes that pay his salary. Very quickly the OK "home" game will be in Norman.

The Cotton Bowl doesn't seat much less than the home stadium, but one valuable thing you are foregtting is the travel. There is a huge amount of OU alums who live here who travel to Norman for the games. Most who travel will actually travel less to get here, so that is not a viable reason.

100% disagree. The level of athlete-worship now is simply not anywhere near the rabid levels with regards to the great athletes of the past. Only decades ago sports was ALL there was for entertainment for a majority of Americans. Today the options are widespread. Trogs have existed in the past in far greater numbers than now - don't make the same "back in the good ol' days...." argument.

And... what does voting have to do with sports?

Could be good old day syndrome, but I think more people were educated back then and knew what was going on around them. My old roommate knew very little about what's happening in his city or the area, or his home city, but could tell you every detail about the Spurs, including who was going out with who. It is a little sad to me.

As for voting, it amazes me that you can't see the connection between some of the LaMi hate and the Cowboys stadium. Same thing with Arlington. That stadium will not help the area and will actually decline the areas tax revenue. But because it was the Cowboys and no ther reason, a lot of people voted yes. That's why I think sports has a displaced priority in society. It trumps reason and logic based on fan passion.

[mjblazin]

How far the alums travel is only a secondary consideration. Where they spend their money would become the primary consideration for the state of Oklahoma. The location of these games is mostly about money. Why do you think they started playing at the Cotton Bowl?
Financial benefits went up by moving the big game to a shared market. Now the game doesn't need that market and travel costs have dropped dramatically. New financial considerations = new location criteria.

If UofM/OSU, Harvard/Yale, and numerous others' rivalries can combine making money and tradition with home/home schedules, and UT decides they can make more money playing in Austin, you are spitting in the wind if you think OK won't make a similar decision for the same reasons. Economics always wins out. Emotional arguments like tradition and recruiting advantages might delay action, but like a few per cent points advantage in blackjack, eventually the financial numbers wear you down.

Are the emotional arguments from Arlington for its stadium much different than some of the Cotton Bowl defenses I've read? Like it or not, the new football stadium in Arlington will become the football center for the Dallas Metroplex. We are not going to build another one for Dallas. I'll have to vote for the renovations because the council tied it to bond items that we really need. But I also expect a future council agenda item will be tearing down the Cotton Bowl, in the not very distant future.

[Milkman Dan]

As for voting, it amazes me that you can't see the connection between some of the LaMi hate and the Cowboys stadium.

Actually, I was referring to your original use of being "disenfranchised" by the focus on sports. Um maybe another word would make sense.

It trumps reason and logic based on fan passion.

So does 3/4 of the crap Miller proposes. Do you agree with the bridges? Do you see one bit of logic and reason and fiscal responsibility in those things? What about public artwork? Any real reason other than "it's pretty"? A downtown stadium (or F.P.) would have at least generated national attention / activity / sales revenue for surrounding businesses. If you want only reason and logic then move elsewhere.

[columbiasooner]

I don't think OU is interested in Dallas for tradition, or they're just stupid by sending money south of the Red River. They are interested in playing here to gain a recruiting advantage in North Texas. North Texas offers a bonanza of talent and it is half way between the two schools. If one school can tip the balance in their favor, then that pays for itself in an instant.

Bingo.

Another interesting point, the OU Club of Dallas membership is actually larger than the UT counterpart.

[DSM]

Where is the vision for this project? Orlando is spening $175 million dollars to upgrade an archaic stadium ( I encourage everyone to look at the plan), with no tenant and no one seems to be questioning their motives. However, Dallas is faced with a similair situation and we are throwing $30 million dollars at it. Why are we not getting behind a master plan to finally bring up the Cotton Bowl to quality standards? This "renovation" will simply not be enough. However, if it is coupled by other renovations including skyboxes and a dome, then I believe that there can two football epi-centers in the Metroplex. Arlington for Pro-football and the Cotton Bowl as the home of college football. All it takes is vision and public support. I think the public support is there, now how do we get the local government behind this project before it is too late?

[mjblazin]

Whom or what does it "pay" in an instant? It doesn't rent rooms, buy meals, provide tips, or pay taxes in the local Norman economy. If your point is more BCS or TV money, that doesn't get back to the taxpayers. The athletic departments eat that money up. None of that money helps reduce the taxpayers' burden on paying for the "other" parts of the school like classrooms, tuition, dorms, etc. At this point, doesn't the number of dates in Norman, not the W-L record, drive the total revenue?

I agree the marginal increase in recruiting talent (I personally think getting stomped by an eventual national champion would have a greater impact, but I'm no expert) might translate into a better record, but it doesn't translate into more local business and tax revenue. Once UT changes the rules of the game, who gets paid and how they will actually see the green will get a lot more discussion. OU is a state institution run by politicians that know taking care of local businesspersons is the key to job retention.

[rantanamo]

I say let the games go and look for some schools from some real football conferences and real national followings that really understand this game.

Sentiments from reading this thread:

- Austin or Norman would recieve huge revenues from this match up if the games are their, but Dallas wouldn't.

- Record and recruiting only marginally affect revenue. That's why UT was making so much money in the Mackovic era

- Exposure from special events mean nothing to cities or schools. That is why they join the BCS, so they can profit $100,000 from their payout. Nothing to do with getting their program/university/traditions any exposure at all.

- Revenues and made money is a totally direct corelation. That's why Best Buy or DirectTV should never buy ad slots during big games(more audience) or sponsor things like stadiums(company name said 1,000,000 times over the course of a season + logo shots and promo tie-ins)

Texas and OU fans, and Alumni should consider this. WE ARE NOT Michigan/tOSU, no matter how much we have won. Those schools were playing when our institutions were founded. Those schools were seating 80,000/game in the 1930s. Considering viewing audiences/fanbase, we aint Notre Dame/USC. Miami/Florida St/Florida have found this out lately. I wouldn't be surprised if our rivalry went by the wayside in the middle of the next decade once the new bowl/playoff structure is in place. Let's get real here.

[BigD5349]

What I'm trying to say is that recruiting is the lifeblood of a college program. You attract recruits by winning at a national level. If you were up in Oklahoma, a more sparsely populated state, you'd also want to extend the borders of Oklahoma, to better recruit at a regional level. The OU program has relied upon recruits from Texas for many years.

I think OU believes that the TX/OU game has helped them to do that.

[elmstreetdallas]

"Texas and OU fans, and Alumni should consider this. WE ARE NOT Michigan/tOSU, no matter how much we have won. Those schools were playing when our institutions were founded."

Huh? Texas is the third-winningest program in college football history. UT's first game was in 1893, Ohio State's was 1890. UT is the largest university in the country, in the second most populous state. If you think that UT only has a regional fan base, you're fooling yourself.

[columbiasooner]

From Wikipedia

Most national championships

This is a source of much debate. Before 1901 the national title was dominated by teams that are now members of the Ivy League. Yale and Princeton each claim as many as 24 national championships. However, Yale's last title was in 1927 and Princeton's was in 1935 (according to Dunkel, not reflected above). The University of Michigan won the first non-Ivy League national championship in 1901 (game played in January, 1902).

Using only the sources from the National Championship Foundation or the "consensus" champion, the following teams have won the most championships since 1901:
Team Recognized titles
Notre Dame 13
Alabama 11
USC 11
Oklahoma 9
Michigan 7
Ohio State 7
Minnesota 6
Miami (FL) 5
Nebraska 5
Pittsburgh 5
Georgia Tech 4
Harvard 4
Tennessee 4
Texas 4

Several universities claim more championships than are listed above (e.g., Michigan claims 11 national championships) and some claim fewer championships than are listed above (e.g., Notre Dame claims 11 national championships, and Oklahoma claims 7).
[edit]

[mjblazin]

What teams besides Notre Dame and maybe the service academies, for very different reasons, have anything beyond a regional fan base? Interested in watching a game because it involves the two good and competitive teams does not make you part of a fan base. Notre Dame is the only school with its own national tv network. Now that's a national fan base and that's where the bar is. Having watched my alma mater play ND numerous times in many locations, I'm convinced ND could have games in Anchorage, Belize, or the Sudan with an 2-8 record and they'd still fill the stadium.

[Mark Lea]

Texas is no longer the largest university. Arizona St and Ohio St. are bigger. That said UT definitely doesnt have only a regional fan base. Reason, record. Saying record doesn't affect revenues is ridiculous. The university of Texas set a merchandise record this past year when they werent 8-3, but undefeated. No only did the set the record, but they broke the record by like 40%. I attend school in Georgia, Atlanta specifically. You see a LOTTT of peopel wearing Burnt orange nowadays. I read over summer that Burnt Orange is becoming the new Carolina blue. And finally, one last piece of evidence that Tex has more than a regional fanbase. Dave Chappelle wore a UT hat when he was lil jon. Last I checked, Chappelle doesn't live in Texas.

[SCARLETandBLACK]

I was born and raised in the metroplex. I have followed this bord for quite a while, but I have never joined or posted before. I thought this would be the perfect opportunity.
Texas Tech Athletic Director Gerald Meyers is completely on board about moving the home-and-home Tech/A&M game to the Cotton Bowl, but I cannot understand why.
The argument is that Texas Tech would benefit from the publicity in the metroplex, and that they would receive a few million dollars for every game that they play there.
First of all, I'm sure you all realize that The Dallas Morning News would rarely paint Texas Tech in a good light, not matter what. Even if Tech moved to the Cotton bowl and helped to save it from the bulldozers and from turning into another Dallas parking lot, what would Texas A&M have to benefit?
As repeated so many times during the last game on ABC last weekend, Tech has beat A&M 9 out of the past 12 games, but Texas Tech is not a rival of Texas A&M.
Texas Tech students are currently allowed to attend the game at Jones [fill in the current name of the telecommunications giant here] Stadium every other year without paying anything other than the fees that they are required to pay with their tuition anyway. Essentially, Tech students go to the game for free by just swiping their student I.D. cards. They would lose that privlege if the game moves to Dallas.
Second, though many Tech students are from Dallas, they live 360 miles away in Lubbock. There are already too many auto accidents that claim the lives of Red Raiders. The Tech flag is almost constantly lowered to half-staff at Memorial Circle on campus. Besides, why would Dallas' good athletes want to travel 360 miles to visit Texas Tech just because they play a game at the Cotton Bowl every year.
Third, the city of Lubbock overwhelmingly disagrees with the idea of moving the game to Dallas. It would cost the city millions upon millions of dollars every other year as Tech alumni fail to return to Lubbock to spend money on rooms, food, parties, etc. while they watch their favorite game of the year.
When Texas Tech went to the Cotton Bowl last year, there was a lot of excitement, and the school made a lot of money, but the school also spent a lot of money. If I remember right, the trip ended up just about breaking even, according to the Lubbock Avalanche Journal , after including the price of sending the football team, the coaching staff, the 400+member band, and who knows who else to Dallas.
Why would two schools decide to forget about their students and their home cities just to possibly recruit in Dallas?
I love Dallas. It is my home, but I would hate to see it take this from Lubbock. Even if it is just a wind-swept, dry, dusty place with no hills and rare trees, it has character, and part of that character is the Texas Tech/Texas A&M game.
If Dallas wants to save the Cotton Bowl, why doesn't it get some Historic Preservationist Architects to remodel and recreate the stadium in a real (from architecture schooling, I shudder to say the words) Art Deco form? The stadium doesn't need to be one of the largest in the nation, but to make it one of the nicest would be wonderful. When I saw the Cotton Bowl during the Tech loss to Alabama, it looked ragged. It looked like they had plastered banners everywhere to cover the cracks and the lack of technology.
Football does not need to be equivalant to technology. The Cotton Bowl could be elegant and impressive if done the right way. Not everything needs to be bigger, or built by a Pritzker Prize winner (much less so many in a contiguous block).
The Cotton Bowl has history. Don't try to erase that history, embrace it. (This isn't an empty Train Depot in the West End).

Thank you for reading my first rant. Hopefully, it will be shorter next time.

[elmstreetdallas]

This from www.utexas.edu:

The preliminary figures show enrollment at The University of Texas at Austin dropped this spring to 46,545 from 47,444 in spring 2005. The decreased spring 2006 enrollment is a result of a plan proposed by a Task Force on Enrollment Strategy that includes increasing the size of the faculty while reducing the student population. The goal is to achieve a better student/faculty ratio.

More faculty, fewer students can only be a good thing. I had no idea that UT had limited enrollment THAT much though. Guess I better keep up with my alma mater a little more closely!

Mjblazin is correct in that Notre Dame really may be the only truly "National" college football program. But it's also not accurate to think that a school as large as UT (or Michigan, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Arizona State etc.) only have regional fans. The UT alumni association has a sizeable base in every major city in the US. Therefore "fans" in all of those cities....

[elmstreetdallas]

Since Fair Park is a National Landmark, and the Cotton Bowl sits inside of Fair Park, does anyone know if the stadium has protected status, or is it just the exposition buildings along the Esplanade?

[FoUTASportscaster]

Playing in a nuetral rivalry game like this adds to the program's prestige. Only big time schools or schools with a lot of tradition, like the SWAC, play nuetral football games. As mentioned, Notre Dame plays a lot of those games and it allows their fans all over to see one game. Texas Tech would benefit from a recruiting standpoint by playing in front of the metroplex schools, inviting the Fair atmosphere into the game would be great. The best thing Tech would do is play some sort of annual game at the Fair.That gives Tech and edge, because players would loe to play in that kind of atmosphere.

Scarlett and Black, that posts sounds a lot like the typical TT fan.

[AeroD]

The City of Dallas should forget football and work with that which we have that is top notch: American Airlines Center and Convention Center.

Dallas should focus its efforts on hosting NCAA Basketball Championship, RNC and DNC conventions, and other large events with huge media coverage.

It will be another 25 years before Dallas will probably have a shot at building a damn good stadium (presuming Jerry Jones Jr. will want a new stadium at that time).