(09-19-2012 08:17 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  Also, as far as going to CUSA, I support the decision that improves the athletic program of my school. Logically this is the best decision.

If moving to CUSA means more money, exposure, respect, etc...then I'm all for it. If not, then I'm not.

I don't really see the point in being blindly loyal to a conference simply because it is the one you are a member of...

This is the correct answer. All schools are as loyal as their options. I'm not getting into the "which conference is better" debate, but if a school gets an invite to a conference that they believe will improve their standing they will take it. There are really only 3 leagues that I think schools are blindly loyal to it. Those are the B1G, PAC, and SEC. Every other league has certain schools that would like to leave.

Let the SEC money fall off the table and see what happens to their loyalty. Also, Conf USA will not be getting the same contracts that they were before the conference shift. My guess is that within a few years the Sun Belt and Conf USA will be getting about the same amount of money for TV etc. As have nots it's important for fans to show up at the games and for schools to come up with a way of keeping good coaches.

(09-18-2012 02:47 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(09-18-2012 02:32 PM)johndavidblue Wrote:  I can't argue with your complaint of the Belt's recent addition. Benson jumped the gun waaaay to soon. It is what it is.

At the end of the day, I still want MT in CUSA as it stands. May be different in a couple of years...

(09-18-2012 01:54 PM)Usajags Wrote:  The only thing CUSA has over the current SBC is Tulsa, ECU and USM. I will tell you, for me, the add of Ga St was a horrible add. There are so many other schools I would have rather seen added.

Your comment about being on TV, this past weekend I saw 4 games on TV that involved SBC teams, I only saw one that included CUSA teams, and that was the ECU-USM game.

Georgia State was a jump of the gun, but Texas State was a very good add. They will be able to compete quickly in the SBC.

Texas State also has a BADASS stadium, and their football team RPI is currently next to App St's

3 or 4 years ago any one of us would have jumped at the opportunity.

it would have been an honor and great move. our fans would have salivated over having memphis hoops.

we went through this on our board when fiu and unt received invites and many of our fans were pissed that we didn't get an invite.

but they are/were basing it simply on name recognition. they were ignorant of what both conferences have become.

i personally believe we are a better football conference overall now.

where our biggest problems lie are in hoops. most of the fans on hilltopper haven are hoops fans first and football fans second. the only school in the conference that's even close to that is south al and that was because they didn't have football.

this conference hasn't given a crap about hoops and it drives our fans nuts. my reply to those folks is for us to just win and not worry about what everyone else does.

i know the coosa folks believe their hoops will survive the loss of memphis but i see them becoming a one bid league just like us unless some team has a year like south al did the year we got two in.

i believe that our president has weighed everything and honestly believes the sunbelt is our best option. he's the one that had the vision to go fbs and if we're gonna be fbs it needs to be in the belt. coosa gains us nothing in football.

i totally understand why unt left. no brainer. i even understand why fiu left. imo, it's mainly a recognition factor and a separation from fau. they want their own identity in soflo. coosa is gonna be a bigger name down there than us.

(09-20-2012 08:12 AM)BlueRaiderFan. Wrote:  Let the SEC money fall off the table and see what happens to their loyalty. Also, Conf USA will not be getting the same contracts that they were before the conference shift. My guess is that within a few years the Sun Belt and Conf USA will be getting about the same amount of money for TV etc. As have nots it's important for fans to show up at the games and for schools to come up with a way of keeping good coaches.

Well lets be honest, the roughly 1 million a year ECU gets from the C-USA TV deal is peanuts. It's pretty much a meaningless number. You nailed what is most important for the have nots to keep up. Filling your stadium and increasing donations. ECU for example made roughly 8 million in ticket sales and something like 4.5 million in Pirate Club donations last year, compared to the 1 million we pulled in from the TV deal, so that's why our administration has been completely against any idea of playing home mid-week games. What we make from TV isn't nearly worth it to bastardize our home attendance and potentially hurt donations.

(09-19-2012 11:58 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  This is just my option which does not mean a hill of beans either way. When it comes to football the kid being recruited is not going to care whether the school is in the SunBelt or CUSA. In there eyes it is not the SEC, ACC, Big10, or Big12 which is a different story. The kid is going to go to the school which ever best meets their needs be that school in the SunBelt or the CUSA. Now living in Alabama my views on this subject will be different than a fan of UNT.
As a member of the SunBelt, UNT was stuck out on and island all by themselfs with no other SunBelt teams anywhere around them. There area's only exposure to the SunBelt was UNT. Because of this the SunBelt has been seen as lower than CUSA in UNT part of the world.

That's a bit of an oversimplification, however, it is generally true. But there are some major selling points between C-USA and the Sun Belt, that upon further reflection, might lead a recruit to a C-USA school rather than a Sun Belt school. One is more TV opportunity and second is that C-USA has more bowl game tie-ins.

Third is confrence reputation; now we all know the Sun Belt is a tough football conference but we've only been making noise on the national scene recently. C-USA has had schools in the top-25 consistently over the years and had Houston in the top-10 late in the season last year. Continuing on reputation, C-USA has academic schools that I don't think the Sun Belt can match in Rice, Tulane and to some extent Tulsa.

Some of these points may not be selling points to certain recruits but then again they might. The non-AQ landscape has certainly flattened out after this past realignment especially with the loss of a whole conference, however, there is still a pecking order and over time the line between conferences will become more clear.

(09-20-2012 08:49 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(09-19-2012 11:58 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  This is just my option which does not mean a hill of beans either way. When it comes to football the kid being recruited is not going to care whether the school is in the SunBelt or CUSA. In there eyes it is not the SEC, ACC, Big10, or Big12 which is a different story. The kid is going to go to the school which ever best meets their needs be that school in the SunBelt or the CUSA. Now living in Alabama my views on this subject will be different than a fan of UNT.
As a member of the SunBelt, UNT was stuck out on and island all by themselfs with no other SunBelt teams anywhere around them. There area's only exposure to the SunBelt was UNT. Because of this the SunBelt has been seen as lower than CUSA in UNT part of the world.

That's a bit of an oversimplification, however, it is generally true. But there are some major selling points between C-USA and the Sun Belt, that upon further reflection, might lead a recruit to a C-USA school rather than a Sun Belt school. One is more TV opportunity and second is that C-USA has more bowl game tie-ins.

Third is confrence reputation; now we all know the Sun Belt is a tough football conference but we've only been making noise on the national scene recently. C-USA has had schools in the top-25 consistently over the years and had Houston in the top-10 late in the season last year. Continuing on reputation, C-USA has academic schools that I don't think the Sun Belt can match in Rice, Tulane and to some extent Tulsa.

Some of these points may not be selling points to certain recruits but then again they might. The non-AQ landscape has certainly flattened out after this past realignment especially with the loss of a whole conference, however, there is still a pecking order and over time the line between conferences will become more clear.

The truth is though, that many of thpose points will only apply to specific schools, not the entire league.

UAB for example, is not going to be able to sell recruits on the school by saying "Houston went 12-1 last year." So many recruits that come to our schols only know major conference football, they arent going to recognize any differences between the two leagues, they will have to listen to whatever the coaches are telling them and choose who to believe

There are no significant advantages in recruiting for CUSA unless you can promise increased games against local teams like UNT can. Winning is the easiest way to gain recruits. ASU just beat out Nebraska for a recruit recently...a team that beat us by 29. Now Im just guessing here, but he didnt sign up here because he wantedd to play in the Sun Belt Conference.

Unless you are recruiting SEC vs SBC or CUSA...There are few recruiting advantages.

There are nearly no recruiting advantages by being in C-USA vs the Sun-Belt. Any recruit any of our schools land are because of the school itself not the conference. There's not a single recruit that has ever picked ECU because we play in C-USA, but there are plenty that have gone other places because we play in C-USA.

(09-20-2012 03:28 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  There are nearly no recruiting advantages by being in C-USA vs the Sun-Belt. Any recruit any of our schools land are because of the school itself not the conference. There's not a single recruit that has ever picked ECU because we play in C-USA, but there are plenty that have gone other places because we play in C-USA.

Yep.

(09-20-2012 03:28 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  There are nearly no recruiting advantages by being in C-USA vs the Sun-Belt. Any recruit any of our schools land are because of the school itself not the conference. There's not a single recruit that has ever picked ECU because we play in C-USA, but there are plenty that have gone other places because we play in C-USA.

Exactly.

Why is it the ECU fans that get it? You would think as one of the top programs in the league, they would have a lot more of a snooty attitude.

(09-20-2012 06:24 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 03:28 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  There are nearly no recruiting advantages by being in C-USA vs the Sun-Belt. Any recruit any of our schools land are because of the school itself not the conference. There's not a single recruit that has ever picked ECU because we play in C-USA, but there are plenty that have gone other places because we play in C-USA.

Exactly.

Why is it the ECU fans that get it? You would think as one of the top programs in the league, they would have a lot more of a snooty attitude.

We get it because we are the most outspoken that C-USA sucks and we want out. I have an extremely snooty attitude, but not about C-USA being better than the Sun-Belt. I don't care. I don't care about this battle for the tallest midget conference. If ECU was in the Sun-Belt our recruiting wouldn't be adversely affected one bit.