the only weak sauce is what you're posting.
you're just trying to cover your tracks and save your azz

(02-19-2012 01:08 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:06 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 02:29 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I don't want stuck with the whole Sun Belt, but I wouldn't mind this.

New Conference

North

ECU
Marshall
UMASS
Temple
Old Dominion
Middle Tennessee***

South

UAB
Tulane
So Miss
Ark. St.***
Western Kentucky***
La Tech

You must not be a sports fan

At least that makes some sort of sense.

We don't want to make sense, we want to make Money!

Cover my tracks, what the heck are you talking about???

(02-19-2012 01:20 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:08 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:06 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 02:29 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I don't want stuck with the whole Sun Belt, but I wouldn't mind this.

New Conference

North

ECU
Marshall
UMASS
Temple
Old Dominion
Middle Tennessee***

South

UAB
Tulane
So Miss
Ark. St.***
Western Kentucky***
La Tech

You must not be a sports fan

At least that makes some sort of sense.

We don't want to make sense, we want to make Money!

Well there you have it, it's not about the kids playing the game, it's not about the fans that want to watch the game, it's all about the money. Oh by the way, I've never seen a university write a check to a fan because they made alot of money.

(02-19-2012 12:48 AM)johnnylightnin Wrote:  Could the lack of solid projections be the hold up for Temple?

Probably, especially considering the high exit fees from the Alliance.
They have a high one from the MAC and the exit fee from the Alliance will likely be prohibitive for any team, short of a power conference invite (they think ACC, but they have zero chance at that). Temple looks at the Alliance as a short term move, but it will be too costly for that. It's understandable that Temple (and ECU or Marshall) who actually are in the East might want to go to the Big East, but if things work out as the Alliance plans, the incentive for non-eastern teams won't be there and the cost will be high.

(02-19-2012 01:22 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:20 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:08 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:06 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 02:29 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I don't want stuck with the whole Sun Belt, but I wouldn't mind this.

New Conference

North

ECU
Marshall
UMASS
Temple
Old Dominion
Middle Tennessee***

South

UAB
Tulane
So Miss
Ark. St.***
Western Kentucky***
La Tech

You must not be a sports fan

At least that makes some sort of sense.

We don't want to make sense, we want to make Money!

Well there you have it, it's not about the kids playing the game, it's not about the fans that want to watch the game, it's all about the money. Oh by the way, I've never seen a university write a check to a fan because they made alot of money.

Cry me a river. If you feel that way then become a fan of NAIA sports.

(02-19-2012 01:22 AM)Usajags Wrote:  Well there you have it, it's not about the kids playing the game, it's not about the fans that want to watch the game, it's all about the money. Oh by the way, I've never seen a university write a check to a fan because they made alot of money.

C-USA fans have little interest in their teams playing a slate full of sunbelt teams. Sunbelt can't draw crap for a TV deal. So why depress our fans and go broke?
Most of our games will be regional, with a cross country game or two a year. That makes things interesting.

(02-19-2012 12:52 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 12:48 AM)johnnylightnin Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 12:32 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Why would any of us even consider such a financial hit?

Have there been any REAL solid numbers on what the Alliance media deal will be? Don't get me wrong, I doubt it will be anywhere close to as low as what the Belt offers, but it seems like all that has been leaked are really vague.

Could the lack of solid projections be the hold up for Temple?

That's the thing, they are all argueing how great they are for being in the "Alliance" yet no one knows anything. They don't know how it's going to work, if it can work. Who will be in it. How much money will the media deal be worth, of course there will be no media deal until we know who will be in the conference. No one knows anything about this except how awesome it is.

...and we can do that because it's our board - the CUSA and therefore The Alliance board.

You may not like the Alliance or understand it.

That's fine.

Just don't come over here trashing it.

Comprende Hombre?

(02-19-2012 01:34 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 12:52 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 12:48 AM)johnnylightnin Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 12:32 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Why would any of us even consider such a financial hit?

Have there been any REAL solid numbers on what the Alliance media deal will be? Don't get me wrong, I doubt it will be anywhere close to as low as what the Belt offers, but it seems like all that has been leaked are really vague.

Could the lack of solid projections be the hold up for Temple?

That's the thing, they are all argueing how great they are for being in the "Alliance" yet no one knows anything. They don't know how it's going to work, if it can work. Who will be in it. How much money will the media deal be worth, of course there will be no media deal until we know who will be in the conference. No one knows anything about this except how awesome it is.

...and we can do that because it's our board - the CUSA and therefore The Alliance board.

You may not like the Alliance or understand it.

That's fine.

Just don't come over here trashing it.

Comprende Hombre?

I'm not trashing it, I don't understand it. I want someone to explain it to me without using the word money.

Quote:Just don't come over here trashing it.

Plus starting rep fights. Don't forget that part.

(02-19-2012 01:37 AM)Usajags Wrote:  I'm not trashing it, I don't understand it. I want someone to explain it to me without using the word money.

We've explained it. You won't listen. Better teams, much better money, stability, stay with the teams we're familiar with, get ahead of the trend in college football.
Why do you care what our league does anyway? Worry about what the sunbelt does.

(02-19-2012 01:38 AM)58-56 Wrote:  

Quote:Just don't come over here trashing it.

Plus starting rep fights. Don't forget that part.

OK what the hell is a rep fight and why would I care??? I promise my roof will not fall in and my laptop will not explode if you guys keep giving me negatives.

(02-19-2012 01:40 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:37 AM)Usajags Wrote:  I'm not trashing it, I don't understand it. I want someone to explain it to me without using the word money.

We've explained it. You won't listen. Better teams, much better money, stability, stay with the teams we're familiar with, get ahead of the trend in college football.
Why do you care what our league does anyway? Worry about what the sunbelt does.

You broke the rules.

My only statement on this nonsense is that I'd prefer USM drop to FCS and join the Southland than drop to the Sun Belt. It's hard enough to get people to come see Tulsa and Marshall (not a diss on them), imagine trying to get people to come see WKU or the F_U twins. A few Belt teams (ULL or Troy maybe) would travel ok, but the casual USM fan will go full on $EC before they support Sun Belt football.

(02-19-2012 01:40 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:37 AM)Usajags Wrote:  I'm not trashing it, I don't understand it. I want someone to explain it to me without using the word money.

We've explained it. You won't listen. Better teams, much better money, stability, stay with the teams we're familiar with, get ahead of the trend in college football.
Why do you care what our league does anyway? Worry about what the sunbelt does.

1. Better teams, not really, maybe better named teams, but not better on the field.

2. Stability, How is something that is brand new and never tried before stable???

3. Teams your familiar with, you are joining in a league that you have never been associated with and are seperated by 1000,s of miles

4. Getting ahead of the trend, who knows what the trends are, everything is constintly changing right now. The BCS is even in the works of being changed. There is no trends.

5. Why do I care? Because I am a college football fan that has supported more then one C-USA team over the years. I don't see how this makes the experience better.

(02-19-2012 01:49 AM)Usajags Wrote:  1. Better teams, not really, maybe better named teams, but not better on the field.

2. Stability, How is something that is brand new and never tried before stable???

3. Teams your familiar with, you are joining in a league that you have never been associated with and are seperated by 1000,s of miles

4. Getting ahead of the trend, who knows what the trends are, everything is constintly changing right now. The BCS is even in the works of being changed. There is no trends.

5. Why do I care? Because I am a college football fan that has supported more then one C-USA team over the years. I don't see how this makes the experience better.

1.
2. because 8 of us are still together.
3. 8 of us are still together which is enough for the belt to have for a football conference.
4. you mad bro? your team is left out... and USA has beat UAB what 1x out of the last 7?

(02-19-2012 01:37 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:34 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 12:52 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 12:48 AM)johnnylightnin Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 12:32 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Why would any of us even consider such a financial hit?

Have there been any REAL solid numbers on what the Alliance media deal will be? Don't get me wrong, I doubt it will be anywhere close to as low as what the Belt offers, but it seems like all that has been leaked are really vague.

Could the lack of solid projections be the hold up for Temple?

That's the thing, they are all argueing how great they are for being in the "Alliance" yet no one knows anything. They don't know how it's going to work, if it can work. Who will be in it. How much money will the media deal be worth, of course there will be no media deal until we know who will be in the conference. No one knows anything about this except how awesome it is.

...and we can do that because it's our board - the CUSA and therefore The Alliance board.

You may not like the Alliance or understand it.

That's fine.

Just don't come over here trashing it.

Comprende Hombre?

I'm not trashing it, I don't understand it. I want someone to explain it to me without using the word money.

None of us like it, but money is the key word in college athletics today. Nothing we can do about it. Learn to live with it or die without it. Sorry, that's just the world of college athletics that we live in today. Not being a @#$, but it's easier to field competitive teams with money than it is without money.

Outside of the money, the Alliance gives like-thinking universities with significant athletic budgets and goals an opportunity to align with each other in a large and strong voice.

Depending on exactly how many members it will eventually have, it can be as large as 20% of FBS D1 schools. That's an extremely strong voice coming from one source.

Additionally, its large enough to provide great regional play/rivalries and the opportunity to venture into other regions at times.

(02-19-2012 01:49 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:40 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(02-19-2012 01:37 AM)Usajags Wrote:  I'm not trashing it, I don't understand it. I want someone to explain it to me without using the word money.

We've explained it. You won't listen. Better teams, much better money, stability, stay with the teams we're familiar with, get ahead of the trend in college football.
Why do you care what our league does anyway? Worry about what the sunbelt does.

1. Better teams, not really, maybe better named teams, but not better on the field.

2. Stability, How is something that is brand new and never tried before stable???

3. Teams your familiar with, you are joining in a league that you have never been associated with and are seperated by 1000,s of miles

4. Getting ahead of the trend, who knows what the trends are, everything is constintly changing right now. The BCS is even in the works of being changed. There is no trends.

5. Why do I care? Because I am a college football fan that has supported more then one C-USA team over the years. I don't see how this makes the experience better.

1. Since 2006 the eight remaining C-USA schools are 16-7 against the Sun Belt, without UAb that record improves to 13-2. So yes, C-USA is better than the Sun Belt, much better in fact.

2. It's more stable because the larger numbers allows you to absorb losses easier. Also, two eight team conferences have a lot of issues with scheduling and revenues, one sixteen team conference does not.

3. This is more of a brand awareness thing. People have heard of UNLV and Hawaii, no one knows where USA or Troy are even located.

4. Fair point, but it's better to be proactive than reactive.

5. You can pretend that money and brand awareness doesn't matter in college football, but you're wrong. People want to see a quality product, you can rarely deliver that on a shoestring budget playing subpar competition.

(02-19-2012 01:49 AM)Usajags Wrote:  1. Better teams, not really, maybe better named teams, but not better on the field.

LOL. With maybe ONE exception, every team on the C-USA side has more football accomplishments than every sunbelt team, and it isn't close. The series records are one sided, the inter league play is one-sided, the bowls, the rankings and everything else are one-sided.
Sun belt needs to make its own way. C-USA teams don't want to be in the sunbelt, for better or worse.

Here is The Super Sun Belt when Hell Freezes Over

Pod A
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech
Louisiana-Monroe
Tulane

Pod B
South Alabama
Southern Miss
Troy
UAB

Pod C
Arkansas State
Georgia State
Middle Tennessee
Western Kentucky

Pod D
East Carolina
Florida Atlantic
Florida International
Marshall