I just recently moved here from mass, and i started at defensive tackle all 4 yrs for the varsity. I stopped playing ball for a yr and moved here to edmond to be at the same school with my sister. I wouldnt mind playing again, and while im not good enough to play at osu or ou, i wouldnt mind playing at uco. She has told me that rumors are that uco is trying to apply for division 1 status by 2012.

I've heard the rumor but know nothing of if it is true. Seems like it would be tough for UCO to compete in this state.

its definitly a rumor, but id agree with the post above, its hard fo rthem to compete in this state. i dont think uco has the support to even be a sub division 1 school in athletic, there are high schools that draw more for their football games than uco.

Yes, and they are going to play in either the Big Ten or the Big XII.

LOL davidson big 10 or big 12 nice joke, yes the rumor is true that uco has been actively applying to be a division 1 school in football. They are even recruiting as if this is gonna happen by 2012, but it will be sub division 1 if it happens. sub division 1 is like the old 1-AA. Last i heard is that it probably wont happen, because despite uco having the student body size to support a major d-1 team (UCO is bigger than boise st) they dont have the aumn support or student support. being division 1 has nothing to do with school size look at tulsa, tulsa is a private school with barely 4,000 students but they play major d-1 sports because of huge alumni support and they have tons of money to buy into division 1. Uco has neither the suppolrt or revenue, and the lack of attendance at major sporting events hurts badly, the srudents dont go nor does anyone in the edmond community support uco very much. Its hard when you play your games on saturday afternoon or evening and you have to compete with ou and osu games to draw any support. i think the uco students support ou or osu more than uco lol. Hopefully their application will be accepted but i doubt it, uco needs more support and that aint happening anytime soon, like an earlier post about uco, sometimes i think uco and edmond just prefer it be a "commuter school" and leave it at that

It's been on the radar for awhile. If they go D-I, it'll be FCS. Right now, they have far and away the best facilities in DII football. Most of your road games will be in Texas, some in New Mexico, and at least one good (far away) road game every 2 years. As far as getting a scholarship, you do still have to be pretty good to do that. They only have thirty some-odd scholarships and most of those go to recruited freshmen. They do take walk ons though and if you're good, you'll play.

It's been on the radar for awhile. If they go D-I, it'll be FCS. Right now, they have far and away the best facilities in DII football. Most of your road games will be in Texas, some in New Mexico, and at least one good (far away) road game every 2 years. As far as getting a scholarship, you do still have to be pretty good to do that. They only have thirty some-odd scholarships and most of those go to recruited freshmen. They do take walk ons though and if you're good, you'll play.

That is HIGHLY subjective. There are better ones.

That is HIGHLY subjective. There are better ones.

For the athletes? Probably not. There are definitely some bigger stadiums in DII, Pittsburgh immediately comes to mind. But UCO has newer, better equipment, a damn nice playing surface and much newer locker rooms and other facilities.

If not the best in DII, which I agree, casts a wide net, definitely the best in the LSC.

There are going to be more teams coming into DI-A (I still have the FBS/FCS crap) in the near future that UCO would be a prime candidate in conference alignment. UCO could be one of those in the future.

Texas State (San Marcos) is already D-IAA (Southland Conference) and is planning on moving up and UT-San Antonio is starting from scratch in DI-AA with the plan to move up. Most will probably move into the Sun Belt Conference which is the North Texas is in, they have 9 teams now and with possible conference realignment who know what the landscape will be in a few years.

FCS would be awesome... maybe they could convince Appalachian State to come out here for a game.

FCS is the only possibility as of now as you can probably tell. The stadium would need MAJOR renovations to go d-1, as well as the fieldhouse up there. I would like to see them move up though.

You know, if they went FCS (the old Division 1-AA) I think it would be great! OU plays Weber State, App State, etc. In fact, Harvard is still FCS - I'd definitely go see a game if the Crimson came to Edmond! It would be a good move forward for a school becoming much more than just a stereotypical "commuter school," (Criminal Forensics, Academy of Music, etc.).

With UCO football moving in the right direction now, any chance the move to Division I could be back in fold?

With UCO football moving in the right direction now, any chance the move to Division I could be back in fold?

I doubt that UCO would make a move any time soon. The Bronchos seem to be finally adjusting to play in the MIAA, which is significantly better than the LSC in terms of talent and competition. The Bronchos need to keep on winning in the MIAA before even considering stepping up to even better competition. I could see the move happening in maybe ten years, at the earliest.

I will note, however, that the school raised student fees quite a bit about two years ago, and about half of the funds raised will go to the athletic department. Other funds will go to improving the campus in general. As previously mentioned, a general lack of interest from the student body is likely a factor in UCO remaining D2 at the moment. A huge chunk of UCO students are commuters and working adults, which doesn't bode well for campus events and school spirit. UCO needs to continue to have success at the D2 level, regenerate some interest in UCO athletics, and develop more of a college lifestyle on campus. Having communicated that, UCO is definitely making an effort to better fund the sports programs and to add to the campus experience. This may indicate a desire to later move up to D1, if not to just improve its success at the D2 level.

I can't believe I forgot this last night.

"All D-I schools must field teams in at least seven sports for men and seven for women or six for men and eight for women, with at least two team sports for each gender. There are several other NCAA sanctioned minimums and differences that distinguish Division I from Divisions II and III."
Division I (NCAA) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_I_%28NCAA%29)

Before it can move up to D1, UCO must first add another men's sport while meeting other minimum standards. I'd imagine that some of the standards pertain to Title IX, which I believe require a 1:1 ratio of athletic scholarships for men and women. Perhaps UCO was trying to add to its female's numbers when it added women's rowing. This would free up some scholarships for a men's sport. Perhaps?

To sum it all up, UCO is probably at least a decade away from going D1.

Before it can move up to D1, UCO must first add another men's sport while meeting other minimum standards. I'd imagine that some of the standards pertain to Title IX, which I believe require a 1:1 ratio of athletic scholarships for men and women. Perhaps UCO was trying to add to its female's numbers when it added women's rowing. This would free up some scholarships for a men's sport. Perhaps?

Title IX does not require any equivalence in scholarships, facilities or other funding between men's and women's teams, it is more aimed at participation. It probably means they were at risk of being being ruled non compliant (which can make them loose access to federal funds) or wanted to expand men's teams numbers.

Also the ratio is not 1:1, it is either to be near or improve toward having a ratio of men:women athletes reflecting the ratio of men:women enrolled at the university.

Rowing pretty much has been one of go to sports to help when an athletic department needs to be showing progress toward compliance, partially since there are not many other options that can on their own have a roster size easily over half to three-quarters the size of a football team worth fielding.

For the athletes? Probably not. There are definitely some bigger stadiums in DII, Pittsburgh immediately comes to mind. But UCO has newer, better equipment, a damn nice playing surface and much newer locker rooms and other facilities.

If not the best in DII, which I agree, casts a wide net, definitely the best in the LSC.

I don’t have any experience with other D2 stadia, so I don’t know how others were back then, let alone now after the passage of 14 years. What I do know is that UCO has really improved its stadium, so I’m curious as to how it would compare to other D2 programs and FCS programs today. If other schools are engaged in a facilities arms race, then the improvements may be neutral relative to other institutions. But if UCO made significant strides relative to its peers, it may be better positioned to go FCS, although I think that the university will have to sort out its debt prior to focusing on making a jump to FCS.

That said, now that OU is in the SEC (a conference which is known for softening up its otherwise meat-grinder of a schedule with FCS opponents), how cool would it be for UCO to occasionally play OU in Norman? I recall reading something a while back which suggested that FBS schools would no longer be permitted to play FCS schools, but I wasn’t able to track down anything about it immediately prior to posting here. So if they could play each other, if UCO ever made the jump, how cool would that be? It could certainly be a nice financial payoff for the Bronchos.

For reference as to the recent upgrades, see this post: https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=37701&p=1213369#post1213369

I don’t have any experience with other D2 stadia, so I don’t know how others were back then, let alone now after the passage of 14 years. What I do know is that UCO has really improved its stadium, so I’m curious as to how it would compare to other D2 programs and FCS programs today. If other schools are engaged in a facilities arms race, then the improvements may be neutral relative to other institutions. But if UCO made significant strides relative to its peers, it may be better positioned to go FCS, although I think that the university will have to sort out its debt prior to focusing on making a jump to FCS.

That said, now that OU is in the SEC (a conference which is known for softening up its otherwise meat-grinder of a schedule with FCS opponents), how cool would it be for UCO to occasionally play OU in Norman? I recall reading something a while back which suggested that FBS schools would no longer be permitted to play FCS schools, but I wasn’t able to track down anything about it immediately prior to posting here. So if they could play each other, if UCO ever made the jump, how cool would that be? It could certainly be a nice financial payoff for the Bronchos.

For reference as to the recent upgrades, see this post: https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=37701&p=1213369#post1213369

My nephew played football a few years ago at SWOSU and my son played Lacrosse at Jenks, so in traveling around to games I’ve been to NSU, Central Oklahoma, SWOSU, SEOSU and Oklahoma Baptist in the last few years. I would rate Central Oklahoma’s stadium and facilities as better than all the other Div II schools except maybe NSU. But not as good as Jenks. That’s true of attendance as well. There are not many fans going to see Div II football games, not that I have seen.

As a Sooner Alumni I would be Down to Dunk on my UCO friends once a year when they get absolutely demolished by one of the only true Blue Blood football programs in the country by 50 points. The amount of **** talking that single game would allow me to do leaves me salivating over the prospect. Literally lets ****ing go boys material right here.

I would rate Central Oklahoma’s stadium and facilities as better than all the other Div II schools except maybe NSU. But not as good as Jenks.

Richison Stadium is much nicer than Trimble at Jenks. I've been to both.

It also holds 12,000 vs. 7,700 at Jenks.

Richison Stadium is much nicer than Trimble at Jenks. I've been to both.

It also holds 12,000 vs. 7,700 at Jenks.

Agreed on Jenks. Union after the renovation might have an argument for being near the same level on the quality front, but UCO has come a LONG way. It is a very nice DII stadium and would fit in at the FCS level.

Richison Stadium is much nicer than Trimble at Jenks. I've been to both.

It also holds 12,000 vs. 7,700 at Jenks.

Jenks seats 9,000 since it's last renovation which greatly upgraded the whole stadium And to be clear, the facilities are more than just the stadium itself.

Agreed on Jenks. Union after the renovation might have an argument for being near the same level on the quality front, but UCO has come a LONG way. It is a very nice DII stadium and would fit in at the FCS level.

Broken Arrow and Owasso's stadiums are both better/larger than Jenks. Union is on the level with some of the north Texas high school stadiums.

Jenks seats 9,000 since it's last renovation which greatly upgraded the whole stadium And to be clear, the facilities are more than just the stadium itself.

UCO has much nicer overall athletic facilities than Jenks HS.

I would think that now, with Todd Lamb, who isn't going to see his star rise because of academics, athletics might be where he looks to make his mark. That said, I'm not sure he's going to be able to do that. One of his very first acts--even before he took office was to run off UCO's biggest donor, Chad Richison over political differences.

So UCO might be pushed up because of Todd Lamb's ego... or it might go nowhere, again, because of Todd Lamb's ego. Time wil tell.

The current facilities at UCO are at the absolute top of Division II. UCO is one of the larger Division 2 schools out there. Athletics would be a good path to developing its funding as the State isn't likely going to be part of the solution for improving that situation.

I think that the current professionalization of college athletics is so unknown that any upward movement by a school is incredibly risky.

I think that the current professionalization of college athletics is so unknown that any upward movement by a school is incredibly risky.

That probably is going to be much more a thing within the power 4 conferences, the G5 conferences probably will not be impacted as much. There might be an argument there will be more reasons for transfers, but it seems questionable how many were passing offers in the current system.

I think that the current professionalization of college athletics is so unknown that any upward movement by a school is incredibly risky.

it would be FCS if so .... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NCAA_Division_I_FCS_football_programs

if it was true it would be huge for their basketball team ...

One of the huge barriers to going FCS would be the travel schedule though.

They'd probably be the best fit in the UAC for FCS schools. In fact, several of the former members of the Lone Star Conference, Tarleton and Abilene Christian are FCS, but there are ZERO Oklahoma FCS schools, and these would be the closest opponents.

That travel schedule would probably be the largest impediment for any kind of business case for UCO to move up.

That said, I'm not sure the travel distances in the current conference are all that much better than what they'd have in the UAC.

One of the huge barriers to going FCS would be the travel schedule though.


the other is how many sports you sponsor

D2 is 5 mens and 5 womens min ..

EDIT: looks like they would need to add 1 mens sports .. and have womens covered .. (to be 6 men 8 women)

also the scholarship funding issue is a big deal ..

It's funny to think that it wasn't that long ago when OCU played D1 basketball.

Abe Lemmons and the Cheifs.

It's funny to think that it wasn't that long ago when OCU played D1 basketball.

Abe Lemmons and the Cheifs.

1984 ...


Oklahoma only has 4 D1 schools ..

Louisiana has 12

1984 ...


Oklahoma only has 4 D1 schools ..

Louisiana has 12

But most Big 10 states only have a few D1 schools and usually only one in a major conference (Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska, Illinois, even Ohio until very recently).

But most Big 10 states only have a few D1 schools and usually only one in a major conference (Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska, Illinois, even Ohio until very recently).

pennsylvania has 14
ohio has 13 D1 schools and all most all have been D1 for a long time
Illinois has 13
indiana has 11
maryland has 9
new jersey has 8
michigan has 7
iowa has 4
wisconsin has 4
nebraska has 3
minnesota has 2

future big 10 ..

California has 27
Oregon has 4
Washington has 5

the other is how many sports you sponsor

D2 is 5 mens and 5 womens min ..

EDIT: looks like they would need to add 1 mens sports .. and have womens covered .. (to be 6 men 8 women)

also the scholarship funding issue is a big deal ..

Really, I just looked at the UAC footprint. Outside of the Utah schools, most of the other schools are about 1 day travel to/from on a bus.

As far as the enrollment size, in that league, UCO would be one of the largest schools. ACU is only an enrollment of 6,000 or so. With OU going to the SEC, a lot of families will be priced out of the OU gameday experience. There's a big opportunity there for a school like UCO.

My point about D1 schools in Big 10 states was for some very large populations they have comparatively few in major conferences when compared to Oklahoma.

In fact, I'm sure the same holds true for the SEC, ACC, etc.

HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/d1schools.jpg

Really, I just looked at the UAC footprint. Outside of the Utah schools, most of the other schools are about 1 day travel to/from on a bus.

As far as the enrollment size, in that league, UCO would be one of the largest schools. ACU is only an enrollment of 6,000 or so. With OU going to the SEC, a lot of families will be priced out of the OU gameday experience. There's a big opportunity there for a school like UCO.

i agree and with the local bball talent they could be competitive in that conf from Day 1 ..

My point about D1 schools in Big 10 states was for some very large populations they have comparatively few in major conferences when compared to Oklahoma.

In fact, I'm sure the same holds true for the SEC, ACC, etc.

HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/d1schools.jpg

Indiana has Purdue IU and Notre Dame so 3 in major conf football plus Butler who is in a major conf for basketball (the BIG EAST)

illinois has Illinois and northwestern in the big 10 ... plus depaul in the Big east ..

creighton is major conf basketball as well

and ohio has 2 major conf football and xavier major conf basketball

Indiana has Purdue IU and Notre Dame so 3 in major conf football plus Butler who is in a major conf for basketball (the BIG EAST)

You are just arguing to argue.

Doesn't change anything.

i agree and with the local bball talent they could be competitive in that conf from Day 1 ..

The biggest problem is that UCO doesn't get donor support like OU and OSU get--a lot of that is probably due to the historic nature of it as a commuter school and the lack of a very strong identity. UCO does a poor job at that.

I'm a bit concerned that Todd Lamb is going to be a problem where it comes to donors, but I'm willing to give him a shot. He's already as much as run Chad Richison off, who was the all time historic #1 donor to UCO, but who knows? With Lamb's conservative politics and connections, he might be able to draw an 'anti-woke' crowd of donors to pick up the slack. I'm sure that dollar signs were what the regents saw then they picked a former Lt. Governor with no experience running an office with more than ten or so people to run a school with 14,000+ students and upwards of 1,000 staff and faculty. Otherwise, I'm not sure what on his resume was compelling.

UCO is also in the regional system, which I think holds it back. The state could support a third research university, and it would absolutely make sense for UCO to have more graduate, especially PhD programs, especially in the areas of education and liberal arts, but I'm sure the politics in this state, both in terms of Tulsa interests and rural interests are going to hold UCO back from climbing out of that hole for the foreseeable future.

The biggest problem is that UCO doesn't get donor support like OU and OSU get--a lot of that is probably due to the historic nature of it as a commuter school and the lack of a very strong identity. UCO does a poor job at that.

I'm a bit concerned that Todd Lamb is going to be a problem where it comes to donors, but I'm willing to give him a shot. He's already as much as run Chad Richison off, who was the all time historic #1 donor to UCO, but who knows? With Lamb's conservative politics and connections, he might be able to draw an 'anti-woke' crowd of donors to pick up the slack. I'm sure that dollar signs were what the regents saw then they picked a former Lt. Governor with no experience running an office with more than ten or so people to run a school with 14,000+ students and upwards of 1,000 staff and faculty. Otherwise, I'm not sure what on his resume was compelling.

UCO is also in the regional system, which I think holds it back. The state could support a third research university, and it would absolutely make sense for UCO to have more graduate, especially PhD programs, especially in the areas of education and liberal arts, but I'm sure the politics in this state, both in terms of Tulsa interests and rural interests are going to hold UCO back from climbing out of that hole for the foreseeable future.

agree on all counts ...

The biggest problem is that UCO doesn't get donor support like OU and OSU get--a lot of that is probably due to the historic nature of it as a commuter school and the lack of a very strong identity. UCO does a poor job at that.

I'm a bit concerned that Todd Lamb is going to be a problem where it comes to donors, but I'm willing to give him a shot. He's already as much as run Chad Richison off, who was the all time historic #1 donor to UCO, but who knows? With Lamb's conservative politics and connections, he might be able to draw an 'anti-woke' crowd of donors to pick up the slack. I'm sure that dollar signs were what the regents saw then they picked a former Lt. Governor with no experience running an office with more than ten or so people to run a school with 14,000+ students and upwards of 1,000 staff and faculty. Otherwise, I'm not sure what on his resume was compelling.

UCO is also in the regional system, which I think holds it back. The state could support a third research university, and it would absolutely make sense for UCO to have more graduate, especially PhD programs, especially in the areas of education and liberal arts, but I'm sure the politics in this state, both in terms of Tulsa interests and rural interests are going to hold UCO back from climbing out of that hole for the foreseeable future.

Is Tulsa not already the state's third research university?

With OU going to the SEC, a lot of families will be priced out of the OU gameday experience. There's a big opportunity there for a school like UCO.

Plus, as I mentioned earlier, UCO could serve as OU’s sacrificial lamb every now and then since SEC programs love to schedule local FCS programs to add “automatic” wins for postseason eligibility. This would allow OU to play an in-state team other than Tulsa, and it would help put the UCO athletic department in the black while also giving a little nationwide exposure, albeit on the receiving end of a lopsided score in an EPSN stat column.

Is Tulsa not already the state's third research university?

Is it? I'm pretty sure it's just a private liberal arts university with a law school. Kind of like OKCU with a football team.

Tulsa is a private research university, at least according to Wikipedia.

Is it? I'm pretty sure it's just a private liberal arts university with a law school. Kind of like OKCU with a football team.

OU and OSU are R1 Universities.
TU is an R2 university.

Where R1 are Doctoral Universities with Very high research activity and R2 are Doctoral Universities with High research activity

For some reason, Tulsa had been the top-rated university in the state by US News.

Now at #195, it is well below OU at #124 and even below OSU at #185. The only other rated National University is OCU at #280.

Not to get into yet another debate about the veracity of these ratings, but that is a significant fall and like it or not, applicants very much care about this stat.

Didn't TU basically get rid of the majority of their liberal arts programs? I'm sure that had something to do with it.

^

Thanks, I had forgotten about that; happened in 2019 which coincided with their dramatic ratings slide:

University of Tulsa slashes its liberal arts programs, prompting protests, accusations of mismanagement (https://www.thecollegefix.com/university-of-tulsa-slashes-its-liberal-arts-programs-prompting-protests-accusations-of-mismanagement/)

I fear for OCU and the various smaller colleges, especially the relatively undistinguished private varieties.

Tuition has become crazy expensive and there are so many more appealing choices. In the information age, applicants care a ton about ratings and return on their investment.

I fear for OCU and the various smaller colleges, especially the relatively undistinguished private varieties.

Tuition has become crazy expensive and there are so many more appealing choices. In the information age, applicants care a ton about ratings and return on their investment.

Even the distinguished small private schools are struggling. My wife is an alum of one that has a great earned reputation and many distinguished alum and it is struggling to stay open too. It suffers from lack of physical care, money for new programs, etc., etc.

There probably needs to be some serious consolidations but that completely sucks for any alum of a particular school.

There probably needs to be some serious consolidations but that completely sucks for any alum of a particular school.

It suck for the alumni, but the schools have been digging their own grave for the last three decades. Tuition costs and all other related costs to going to school have become absolutely insane. It was bad enough in the early 00s when I was going to school. I was very fortunate that my family was able and actually did put more than enough aside for me to get through four years without loans. I had to work throughout school for fun money and to help cover bills, but it wasn't that bad. Kids these days are getting absolutely bent over for a worse quality of education.

It suck for the alumni, but the schools have been digging their own grave for the last three decades. Tuition costs and all other related costs to going to school have become absolutely insane. It was bad enough in the early 00s when I was going to school. I was very fortunate that my family was able and actually did put more than enough aside for me to get through four years without loans. I had to work throughout school for fun money and to help cover bills, but it wasn't that bad. Kids these days are getting absolutely bent over for a worse quality of education.

Don't know about the broad brush "worse quality". I went to OU and it was relatively inexpensive vs now, but the quality of the school is much better and the school is much more respected. Earning power of new grads is generally good unless they received in fields of low demand. That's on the student and their parents, or whoever advises them. But, that's always been the case. All degrees are not the same and of the same earning potential. Running up big debts for degrees that earn you $36,000 a year when you get out is pretty hard to justify in the real world. Better have a good life plan.

OU's average class size is way smaller than when I graduated in 1982.

I think the Covid year kids have a lot to say about the value/quality of the education they recieved. Also, the degrees we all received were substantially more marketable at the time. The job market is absolutely more difficult for fresh grads now than the past 40 or 50 years previously.

I think the Covid year kids have a lot to say about the value/quality of the education they recieved. Also, the degrees we all received were substantially more marketable at the time. The job market is absolutely more difficult for fresh grads now than the past 40 or 50 years previously.

only depends on what degree you get .... just like always ..

Your ability to be reductive is always impressive.

I fear for OCU and the various smaller colleges, especially the relatively undistinguished private varieties.

Tuition has become crazy expensive and there are so many more appealing choices. In the information age, applicants care a ton about ratings and return on their investment.

It boggles the mind as to how OKCU could be having money troubles, but they are. But the above comment is correct. Lots of these schoolsÂ’ bottom lines depend on a certain level of enrollment and when you charge undergrads 35k+ for degrees which will be of similar or better quality at state schools, youÂ’re not going to find many takers.

OKCU is hard to justify the expense for with just about any of its programs, same for TU, except they are still better deals than your for-profit schools, but most of those are gone nowadays.

Which back to the point of this thread, kind of bodes well for a school like UCO which is conveniently located and can charge less than a third of what these other schools charge for similar or better quality programs.

But that said, UCOÂ’s enrollment is down about 3,000 from what it was when I was an undergrad there.

Recent article in Non-Doc that was written by former UCO VP of Enrollment, Myron Pope:

https://nondoc.com/2024/03/02/day-of-reckoning-faces-uco-other-regional-universities/

Lots of good information about the recent history of higher education in Oklahoma and the issues being faced, one that stands out to me is regarding the rising costs of tuition at the directional/regional universities seems to be in relation to less state appropriations.

"During my tenure at UCO in the early 2000s, I witnessed firsthand the institution’s reliance on state funding, which constituted approximately 65 percent of its budget initially, dropping to 50 percent by 2008, and now hovering around 25 percent as of the latest report in 2023. This shift toward increased reliance on tuition and fees has placed a heavier financial burden on students" - Myron Pope

Related to the topic of the post, what's the overall benefit to UCO going D1? Would it actually lead to increased enrollment, or just increase additional non-academic operating costs? I think Wichita State University would be a good comparison as they probably serve similar demographics of students as UCO. Wichita State is D1 and received a lot of national attention with their basketball program in recent years, but they have not had a football program for almost 40 years.