http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sun-belt-se...ncaaf.html

The SBC can and will improve its overall product; however, if our television money does not substantially increase then we will continue to lose schools to other mid-major leagues.

It very well could happen but I am not banking on it. Just my personal opinion.

Shut'em Shut'em Down

''What my goal would be is for the Sun Belt to enhance our assets, our characteristics, so if and when the time comes that Conference USA comes looking to the Sun Belt for a replacement team because Conference USA lost school A, B or C, that the Sun Belt member will look at what the Sun Belt provides and come to the conclusion that there's no reason for us to leave the Sun Belt.''.

Until the Belt can match TV revenue & bowl slots, schools will always have an incentive to change.

This conference will pass CUSA eventually

(08-27-2012 12:27 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  This conference will pass CUSA eventually

We have matched CUSA already in on the field performance by returning members. True USM would have won the SBC last year, and Tulsa would have been near the top, but no one else that will be in CUSA this year would have been in the top half of the Sun Belt last year.

(08-27-2012 12:46 PM)Vobserver Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 12:27 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  This conference will pass CUSA eventually

We have matched CUSA already in on the field performance by returning members. True USM would have won the SBC last year, and Tulsa would have been near the top, but no one else that will be in CUSA this year would have been in the top half of the Sun Belt last year.

Could be the case.. We will never know for sure...But fact is CUSA has more tv contracts and Bowls at the moment and until we atleast match that, CUSA will be viewed as the better conference OFF the field.

Yeah, you can't look at one or two years in a vacuum and say one conference is better than another. The TV revenue and bowl commitments determine the pecking order in reality as well as perception.

(08-27-2012 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Yeah, you can't look at one or two years in a vacuum and say one conference is better than another. The TV revenue and bowl commitments determine the pecking order in reality as well as perception.

It will change. Once apon a time the SBC only sent 1 team bowling a year. We now send no less than 3

(08-27-2012 12:27 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  This conference will pass CUSA eventually

Adding App and Georgia Southern would achieve this by 2017: The year UNCC might become slightly competitive.

(08-27-2012 01:01 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Yeah, you can't look at one or two years in a vacuum and say one conference is better than another. The TV revenue and bowl commitments determine the pecking order in reality as well as perception.

It will change. Once apon a time the SBC only sent 1 team bowling a year. We now send no less than 3

That was before there were more bowls than bowl eligible teams

(08-27-2012 01:01 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Yeah, you can't look at one or two years in a vacuum and say one conference is better than another. The TV revenue and bowl commitments determine the pecking order in reality as well as perception.

It will change. Once apon a time the SBC only sent 1 team bowling a year. We now send no less than 3

I wasn't suggesting otherwise. Fact is, I see not a huge difference between any of the non-cartel conferences. We're all fighting over the same bread crumbs that fall off the table. I also don't think in terms of "This will hurt the Sun Belt, or the MAC, or whoever." I just want my school's conference to play its cards as well as it can.

Because we're all non-cartel conferences, we're all vulnerable to being picked clean.

(08-27-2012 01:13 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 01:01 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Yeah, you can't look at one or two years in a vacuum and say one conference is better than another. The TV revenue and bowl commitments determine the pecking order in reality as well as perception.

It will change. Once apon a time the SBC only sent 1 team bowling a year. We now send no less than 3

I wasn't suggesting otherwise. Fact is, I see not a huge difference between any of the non-cartel conferences. We're all fighting over the same bread crumbs that fall off the table. I also don't think in terms of "This will hurt the Sun Belt, or the MAC, or whoever." I just want my school's conference to play its cards as well as it can.

Because we're all non-cartel conferences, we're all vulnerable to being picked clean.

For once I agree with a UAB fan....

(08-27-2012 01:10 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  That was before there were more bowls than bowl eligible teams

We have New Orleans and GoDaddy bowls.

GoDaddy was MAC vs CUSA from the inception of the bowl (then Mobile, Al Bowl) till 2009. They signed a deal with ACC. That year ACC was not able to fill the slot so SBC did. The bowl committee was impressed enough with the SBC that they signed a new deal with the SBC.

As this empty bowl slots continue to happen over the next few years, the SBC will garner new bowls contracts.

Our conference continues to get better while CUSA continues to get worse. We will slowly get more bowl games.

Remember we are only 10 years old as a conference.

Also, until this year the SBC only had nine teams. CUSA and MAC have 12 teams which allows them the chance to have more bowl eligible teams.

(08-27-2012 01:23 PM)TrojanNation Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 01:10 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  That was before there were more bowls than bowl eligible teams

We have New Orleans and GoDaddy bowls.

GoDaddy was MAC vs CUSA from the inception of the bowl (then Mobile, Al Bowl) till 2009. They signed a deal with ACC. That year ACC was not able to fill the slot so SBC did. The bowl committee was impressed enough with the SBC that they signed a new deal with the SBC.

As this empty bowl slots continue to happen over the next few years, the SBC will garner new bowls contracts.

Our conference continues to get better while CUSA continues to get worse. We will slowly get more bowl games.

Remember we are only 10 years old as a conference.

I like that Benson's being aggressive. Put it out there, let 'em know we're coming . . . if he can successfully renegotiate the TV deal, that'll go a long way towards closing the gap . . . GO BELT!

(08-27-2012 01:16 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 01:13 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 01:01 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote:  

(08-27-2012 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Yeah, you can't look at one or two years in a vacuum and say one conference is better than another. The TV revenue and bowl commitments determine the pecking order in reality as well as perception.

It will change. Once apon a time the SBC only sent 1 team bowling a year. We now send no less than 3

I wasn't suggesting otherwise. Fact is, I see not a huge difference between any of the non-cartel conferences. We're all fighting over the same bread crumbs that fall off the table. I also don't think in terms of "This will hurt the Sun Belt, or the MAC, or whoever." I just want my school's conference to play its cards as well as it can.

Because we're all non-cartel conferences, we're all vulnerable to being picked clean.

For once I agree with a UAB fan....

Had to happen sooner or later. Law of Averages mandated it.

(08-27-2012 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Yeah, you can't look at one or two years in a vacuum and say one conference is better than another. The TV revenue and bowl commitments determine the pecking order in reality as well as perception.

This is 100% accurate, and the toughest part... It's a chicken/egg type deal.

You have to improve your perception. You do that by getting on TV more. But to get on TV more, you have to improve perception.

It's not impossible, but it's a tough one to crack. The best bet is that the SBC can get multiple teams into bowls and win. That will get people thinking about the SBC, and then the TV contracts will change.

lol, remember what happened last time he tried to target a conference...