(05-03-2012 09:40 AM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 09:06 AM)Mothership Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 08:56 AM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 08:51 AM)Mothership Wrote:  Not sure the parameters...but after losses/gains, the fan perception IMO is...

1. SEC
2. Big 10
3. Pac 12
4. Big 12
5. ACC


6. Big East

7. CUSA
8. MAC
9. MWC
10. Sun Belt
11. FCS

Are you a fan of a MAC school? I love the MAC...

No, but I do think they have some good programs. If Fresno St. and others can get back to where they were, I'd put the MWC ahead...and maybe ahead of C-USA. Certainly the potential is there for that to happen. Fan perception is hard to change but at the lower levels it tends to shift quite a bit more than at the top. JMO.

Fan perception is very hard to change look at the MAC. If you look closely at the history it is much better than people realize but sort of like Betamax even if you have a good product if the marketing is bad then it does not matter. It would certainly take a lot to make people change their minds about the MAC even if is unfair.

That's the same with the Sun Belt. The Sun Belt is not the same league it was 10, 5, 3 years ago. It is a very much stronger league, but peoples perception is what we were 10 yrs ago. Ignorance is Bliss.

(05-03-2012 01:30 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 09:40 AM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 09:06 AM)Mothership Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 08:56 AM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 08:51 AM)Mothership Wrote:  Not sure the parameters...but after losses/gains, the fan perception IMO is...

1. SEC
2. Big 10
3. Pac 12
4. Big 12
5. ACC


6. Big East

7. CUSA
8. MAC
9. MWC
10. Sun Belt
11. FCS

Are you a fan of a MAC school? I love the MAC...

No, but I do think they have some good programs. If Fresno St. and others can get back to where they were, I'd put the MWC ahead...and maybe ahead of C-USA. Certainly the potential is there for that to happen. Fan perception is hard to change but at the lower levels it tends to shift quite a bit more than at the top. JMO.

Fan perception is very hard to change look at the MAC. If you look closely at the history it is much better than people realize but sort of like Betamax even if you have a good product if the marketing is bad then it does not matter. It would certainly take a lot to make people change their minds about the MAC even if is unfair.

I think that fan perceptions of the MAC are already overly optimistic.

When Marshall joined the MAC, I predicted that they would find the competition no more difficult than it had been in I-AA. I was correct, but not even I could have predicted the way they would make a mockery of the MAC. It was as if they had actually gone down a level. Now, Marshall has been OK in CUSA but it's akso very clear that they are not dominating it, or even coming close. The only conclusion one can draw is that CUSA is head and shoulders above the MAC.

I don't enjoy running people down, but what you posted is an example of exactly the kind of soft-headed thinking that's relegated my own alma mater to undeserved obscurity. You MAC people need a reality check, and I feel the same way about most of the defector schools. There's not a crack rock big enough to turn me into a MAC fan (or a Memphis fan).

you fail at logic. UCF didn't win any games at all in their last year in the MAC but went right into cusa competing and won it in either their first or second season. So therefore using your logic, cusa is far below the MAC.

(05-03-2012 02:10 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 01:30 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 09:40 AM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 09:06 AM)Mothership Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 08:56 AM)EerMeNow Wrote:  Are you a fan of a MAC school? I love the MAC...

No, but I do think they have some good programs. If Fresno St. and others can get back to where they were, I'd put the MWC ahead...and maybe ahead of C-USA. Certainly the potential is there for that to happen. Fan perception is hard to change but at the lower levels it tends to shift quite a bit more than at the top. JMO.

Fan perception is very hard to change look at the MAC. If you look closely at the history it is much better than people realize but sort of like Betamax even if you have a good product if the marketing is bad then it does not matter. It would certainly take a lot to make people change their minds about the MAC even if is unfair.

I think that fan perceptions of the MAC are already overly optimistic.



When Marshall joined the MAC, I predicted that they would find the competition no more difficult than it had been in I-AA. I was correct, but not even I could have predicted the way they would make a mockery of the MAC. It was as if they had actually gone down a level. Now, Marshall has been OK in CUSA but it's akso very clear that they are not dominating it, or even coming close. The only conclusion one can draw is that CUSA is head and shoulders above the MAC.

I don't enjoy running people down, but what you posted is an example of exactly the kind of soft-headed thinking that's relegated my own alma mater to undeserved obscurity. You MAC people need a reality check, and I feel the same way about most of the defector schools. There's not a crack rock big enough to turn me into a MAC fan (or a Memphis fan).

When Marshall was in the MAC they had QBs like Leftwich and Pennington, and also Randy Moss. What players have they had like that since? Last year Marshall played Ohio and got pummelled. Also, UCF went winless in their last year in the MAC (and not much better the year before), then went 8-2 against CUSA teams.

One example doesn't make a trend.

No, it does not, but the MAC has a long history. You guys were playing the Big West champ in the California Raisin Bowl back in the 1980s. USM went to the Citrus Bowl in the 1980s. I think that's called the Capital One Bowl now and it's just one notch below the BCS. I sympathize with MAC fans but you're not in the same category as CUSA and you never will be. Prestige, performance,, history,, facilities, and fan support are all superior in CUSA.

If you don't agree... make a play for ECU and Marshall.

If we are talking football:

1. SEC
2. B12
3. PAC (they've been to/won more title games recently than anyone else below them)
4. B1G
5. CBE (Classic Big East)
6. ACC

If we are talking raw strength (money, power, markets, ability to poach and stability)

1. B1G
2. SEC
3. PAC
4. ACC
5. B12
6. NBE (New Big East)

(05-03-2012 01:30 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  I think that fan perceptions of the MAC are already overly optimistic.

When Marshall joined the MAC, I predicted that they would find the competition no more difficult than it had been in I-AA. I was correct, but not even I could have predicted the way they would make a mockery of the MAC. It was as if they had actually gone down a level. Now, Marshall has been OK in CUSA but it's akso very clear that they are not dominating it, or even coming close. The only conclusion one can draw is that CUSA is head and shoulders above the MAC.

I don't enjoy running people down, but what you posted is an example of exactly the kind of soft-headed thinking that's relegated my own alma mater to undeserved obscurity. You MAC people need a reality check, and I feel the same way about most of the defector schools. There's not a crack rock big enough to turn me into a MAC fan (or a Memphis fan).

I can turn that right back at you and say how bad is CUSA that UCF could go winless their last season in the MAC and then win a championship in CUSA the next season.

Also, Marshall was already going downhill their last season in the MAC.

If anyone needs a reality check it is people like you.

(05-03-2012 05:28 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  No, it does not, but the MAC has a long history. You guys were playing the Big West champ in the California Raisin Bowl back in the 1980s. USM went to the Citrus Bowl in the 1980s. I think that's called the Capital One Bowl now and it's just one notch below the BCS. I sympathize with MAC fans but you're not in the same category as CUSA and you never will be. Prestige, performance,, history,, facilities, and fan support are all superior in CUSA.

If you don't agree... make a play for ECU and Marshall.

Miami went to the Tangerine Bowl from 1973-1975 beating Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina in those games. The Tangerine Bowl is the same bowl game you just brought up that USM lost in.

If you rank them on the amount of players with criminal records, the SEC is #1 there too.

1. SEC
2. Big 10
3. PAC-12
4. Big 12
5. ACC

6. CUSA
7. MWC

8. The alliance
9. Big East
10. Mac
11. Sub belt

(05-03-2012 08:55 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  1. SEC
2. Big 10
3. PAC-12
4. Big 12
5. ACC

6. CUSA
7. MWC

8. The alliance
9. Big East
10. Mac
11. Sub belt

You need to switch #'s 6 & 7 around. There's no way that CUSA is better than the MWC.

(05-03-2012 05:28 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  No, it does not, but the MAC has a long history. You guys were playing the Big West champ in the California Raisin Bowl back in the 1980s. USM went to the Citrus Bowl in the 1980s. I think that's called the Capital One Bowl now and it's just one notch below the BCS. I sympathize with MAC fans but you're not in the same category as CUSA and you never will be. Prestige, performance,, history,, facilities, and fan support are all superior in CUSA.

If you don't agree... make a play for ECU and Marshall.

What an ignorant statement. Who cares that USM played in ONE Capital One Bowl. Miami of the MAC played in FOUR and stomped Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina during said bowls. USM's football program pales in comparison to ours and Toledo. When it comes to history, performance, and prestige in program history, USM needs to bow down and know their place. Facts don't lie. Southern Miss has never even ended the season in the Top 12. Never! Miami has twice, Northern Illinois has, others in the MAC have. No current CUSA member can say that. Ever. The real teams have long past left CUSA behind and a shell of FCS teams remain. There is a reason Southern Miss is left behind and there is a reason Miami and Toledo turned down CUSA in 2004.



.

(05-03-2012 11:27 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 05:28 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  No, it does not, but the MAC has a long history. You guys were playing the Big West champ in the California Raisin Bowl back in the 1980s. USM went to the Citrus Bowl in the 1980s. I think that's called the Capital One Bowl now and it's just one notch below the BCS. I sympathize with MAC fans but you're not in the same category as CUSA and you never will be. Prestige, performance,, history,, facilities, and fan support are all superior in CUSA.

If you don't agree... make a play for ECU and Marshall.

What an ignorant statement. Who cares that USM played in ONE Capital One Bowl. Miami of the MAC played in FOUR and stomped Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina during said bowls. USM's football program pales in comparison to ours and Toledo. When it comes to history, performance, and prestige in program history, USM needs to bow down and know their place. Facts don't lie. Southern Miss has never even ended the season in the Top 12. Never! Miami has twice, Northern Illinois has, others in the MAC have. No current CUSA member can say that. Ever. The real teams have long past left CUSA behind and a shell of FCS teams remain. There is a reason Southern Miss is left behind and there is a reason Miami and Toledo turned down CUSA in 2004.



.

I thought ECU had a top 12 finish some time in the 90's? Idk

(05-04-2012 12:27 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 11:27 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 05:28 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  No, it does not, but the MAC has a long history. You guys were playing the Big West champ in the California Raisin Bowl back in the 1980s. USM went to the Citrus Bowl in the 1980s. I think that's called the Capital One Bowl now and it's just one notch below the BCS. I sympathize with MAC fans but you're not in the same category as CUSA and you never will be. Prestige, performance,, history,, facilities, and fan support are all superior in CUSA.

If you don't agree... make a play for ECU and Marshall.

What an ignorant statement. Who cares that USM played in ONE Capital One Bowl. Miami of the MAC played in FOUR and stomped Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina during said bowls. USM's football program pales in comparison to ours and Toledo. When it comes to history, performance, and prestige in program history, USM needs to bow down and know their place. Facts don't lie. Southern Miss has never even ended the season in the Top 12. Never! Miami has twice, Northern Illinois has, others in the MAC have. No current CUSA member can say that. Ever. The real teams have long past left CUSA behind and a shell of FCS teams remain. There is a reason Southern Miss is left behind and there is a reason Miami and Toledo turned down CUSA in 2004.



.

I thought ECU had a top 12 finish some time in the 90's? Idk

You are correct, ECU as an independent did in 1991. Southern Miss has never, nor has Southern Miss ever won the Capital One Bowl.

SEC
bIG 10
BIG 12
PAC 12
Big East
ACC
MWC
C-USA
Sunbelt
MAC

(05-03-2012 08:51 AM)Mothership Wrote:  Not sure the parameters...but after losses/gains, the fan perception IMO is...

1. SEC
2. Big 10
3. Pac 12
4. Big 12
5. ACC


6. Big East

7. CUSA
8. MAC
9. MWC
10. Sun Belt
11. FCS

You might as well quit watching college football. PAC-12 ahead of the Big 12? MWC in 9th behind C-USA and MAC?

(05-04-2012 06:50 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 08:51 AM)Mothership Wrote:  Not sure the parameters...but after losses/gains, the fan perception IMO is...

1. SEC
2. Big 10
3. Pac 12
4. Big 12
5. ACC


6. Big East

7. CUSA
8. MAC
9. MWC
10. Sun Belt
11. FCS

You might as well quit watching college football. PAC-12 ahead of the Big 12? MWC in 9th behind C-USA and MAC?

The PAC-12 has it's merits. I only ranked it ahead because of fan perception of the recent instability in the Big XII. The Big XII seems poised now to retake that spot...of course, in the opinion of fans. With the the losses C-USA and MWC took and what still remains...the fan bases alone speak for C-USA. If C-USA falters, then fans will again see the MWC as stronger. But my feeling is that folks are down on the MWC right now. Same with C-USA, but not a much. The MAC rose only because the others fell.

It's only my opinion...but seeing as how I'm in the collegiate merchandising business, I think I have a pretty good feel of what the average fan is like. Sometimes people blur the line between their own die-hard reality and the reality of what the general fan thinks. Many times, neither is right. I might not be either. The general fan is what drives the $$$ in my business. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. But I think I'll keep watching football.

(05-03-2012 11:27 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 05:28 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  No, it does not, but the MAC has a long history. You guys were playing the Big West champ in the California Raisin Bowl back in the 1980s. USM went to the Citrus Bowl in the 1980s. I think that's called the Capital One Bowl now and it's just one notch below the BCS. I sympathize with MAC fans but you're not in the same category as CUSA and you never will be. Prestige, performance,, history,, facilities, and fan support are all superior in CUSA.

If you don't agree... make a play for ECU and Marshall.

What an ignorant statement. Who cares that USM played in ONE Capital One Bowl. Miami of the MAC played in FOUR and stomped Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina during said bowls. USM's football program pales in comparison to ours and Toledo. When it comes to history, performance, and prestige in program history, USM needs to bow down and know their place. Facts don't lie. Southern Miss has never even ended the season in the Top 12. Never! Miami has twice, Northern Illinois has, others in the MAC have. No current CUSA member can say that. Ever. The real teams have long past left CUSA behind and a shell of FCS teams remain. There is a reason Southern Miss is left behind and there is a reason Miami and Toledo turned down CUSA in 2004.



.

Hey I agree with many things you are saying but let us not start going down to their level with the disdain. USM may not have the better final ranking but they do have a strong history of winning overall for many seasons over and over again. The idea is to make people know about how the MAC has a better history than is commonly known not to make us look like the jerks that populate many other boards here.

(05-04-2012 07:08 AM)Mothership Wrote:  

(05-04-2012 06:50 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 08:51 AM)Mothership Wrote:  Not sure the parameters...but after losses/gains, the fan perception IMO is...

1. SEC
2. Big 10
3. Pac 12
4. Big 12
5. ACC


6. Big East

7. CUSA
8. MAC
9. MWC
10. Sun Belt
11. FCS

You might as well quit watching college football. PAC-12 ahead of the Big 12? MWC in 9th behind C-USA and MAC?

The PAC-12 has it's merits. I only ranked it ahead because of fan perception of the recent instability in the Big XII. The Big XII seems poised now to retake that spot...of course, in the opinion of fans. With the the losses C-USA and MWC took and what still remains...the fan bases alone speak for C-USA. If C-USA falters, then fans will again see the MWC as stronger. But my feeling is that folks are down on the MWC right now. Same with C-USA, but not a much. The MAC rose only because the others fell.

It's only my opinion...but seeing as how I'm in the collegiate merchandising business, I think I have a pretty good feel of what the average fan is like. Sometimes people blur the line between their own die-hard reality and the reality of what the general fan thinks. Many times, neither is right. I might not be either. The general fan is what drives the $$$ in my business. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. But I think I'll keep watching football.

Pac 12 to me has been solid recently. Even w/o USC- Oregon and Stanford would have had legit chances the last 2 years. USC is preseason #1/2 depending on who you look at .

I've got to agree, Sultan. Let's play nice now, children...

I just don't think I am gonna judge a conference by how many shirts they sale. I am also not gonna judge them by how many people are in the stands. The best way to do it is to create a system that uses 3 tiers. The top tier is for Consistent top 20 teams. A middle tier for teams that usually go bowling and does not hurt the conference with their RPI. Then the bottom tier schools that do nothing for the conference.
When you do it that way the ACC is below The Big East and was pretty close to being passed up by the MWC the last few years before realignment. Also- The MWC had just as many NCAA tournament teams as the SEC and ACC this year with 4 teams. So the fact you have the MWC so low is a joke. Not to mention in the last few years we saw Fresno beat Cincinnati in football, Nevada beat B.C., and Boise beat VA Tech. Also UNLV beat UNLV in hoops this year. The MWC never gets any respect on this board. Even claiming C-USA is a better conference is a joke because it simply is not true. Hawaii has accomplished something no C-USA team has and Nevada has a better winning % over the last 4 years then any C-USA team. And C-USA can't even come close to touching the MWC in basketball.
I don't know if it is because ECU fans are the majority on this board, no one likes the western conference's football, or you all just do not like agreeing with the media or paying attention to stats but it has been proven on several occasions that the MWC is better than C-USA. Putting the MAC up there was just the icing on the cake that you do not know what you are talking about. I guess you did not notice Boise throwing Toledo all over the field over the last 2 seasons.

(05-04-2012 09:39 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  I just don't think I am gonna judge a conference by how many shirts they sale. I am also not gonna judge them by how many people are in the stands. The best way to do it is to create a system that uses 3 tiers. The top tier is for Consistent top 20 teams. A middle tier for teams that usually go bowling and does not hurt the conference with their RPI. Then the bottom tier schools that do nothing for the conference.
When you do it that way the ACC is below The Big East and was pretty close to being passed up by the MWC the last few years before realignment. Also- The MWC had just as many NCAA tournament teams as the SEC and ACC this year with 4 teams. So the fact you have the MWC so low is a joke. Not to mention in the last few years we saw Fresno beat Cincinnati in football, Nevada beat B.C., and Boise beat VA Tech. Also UNLV beat UNLV in hoops this year. The MWC never gets any respect on this board. Even claiming C-USA is a better conference is a joke because it simply is not true. Hawaii has accomplished something no C-USA team has and Nevada has a better winning % over the last 4 years then any C-USA team. And C-USA can't even come close to touching the MWC in basketball.
I don't know if it is because ECU fans are the majority on this board, no one likes the western conference's football, or you all just do not like agreeing with the media or paying attention to stats but it has been proven on several occasions that the MWC is better than C-USA. Putting the MAC up there was just the icing on the cake that you do not know what you are talking about. I guess you did not notice Boise throwing Toledo all over the field over the last 2 seasons.

The MWC I'm sorry but- the new MWC is just not that strong right now. Their avg BCS rating last year was like 89.55. Thats brutal. BBall is hurt losing San Diego St. I mean think about it- they've lost Utah, BYU, TCU, and Boise, while picking up Fresno, Nevada, Hawaii, San Jose St, and Utah St. Does that sound like a good trade in any shape or form?

CUSA- you could make a real good argument that MWC is stronger overall. It's a lot closer than it was before.