Odu will make a new replacement. Good football team and after we hire a new bb coach who knows what hurting well put on other schools. Just hope its utsa first.

Once I found out UTEP was leaving the WAC for C-USA, I literally stopped posting on the old WAC board that belonged to a Rice fan. I found this board and never looked back even though UTEP still played a lame duck season in the WAC. The same applies to fans of departing schools. Just move to the C-TBD board. There's nothing for you here anymore and you'll find fans of schools that are staying here venting or questioning the move. There's no need to get into pissing matches or trying to make a point of why moving or staying is worthy. Just be thankful to your old conference mates, never forget where you came from and move on.

I remember a lot Nevada, Fresno, Hawaii and Boise fans questioning why we were following Rice, Tulsa and SMU to C-USA since the best teams already left C-USA and the WAC was at least a better football conference on the top while C-USA had big question marks. I found it pointless to argue with them the pros and cons of leaving the WAC even thought I kinda agreed with them and was initially opposed for C-USA memberhsip. I wished the WAC well and rooted for them especially when they beat MWC teams and when Boise and Hawaii played in the BCS. I would give the same advice to SMU, Tulsa, Houston, Tulane, Memphis, East Carolina and UCF fans. Move on and wish C-USA well. That's it.

(03-27-2013 04:31 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 03:03 PM)Niner National Wrote:  Still think CUSA goes for the throat and takes ULL and Ark State with WKU to set up this:

East:
ODU
Marshall
WKU
Charlotte
MTSU
UAB
FIU
FAU

West:
Ark State
ULL
La Tech
UNT
UTEP
UTSA
Rice
USM

I'd really love to see USM stay in the east, but I can't imagine that will happen.

It is definitely a step down from the old CUSA, but at least it doesn't include NMSU or Idaho.

+1. I'm praying Arkansas State and Louisiana-Lafayette don't get left behind. There may be something to ULL announcing the coming expantion of it's athletics facilities, especially the football stadium. Maybe it's what CUSA was hoping for and encouraging them to do. ASU and ULL would fit perfectly and UAB could then stay East, where they belong geographically.

We were told specifically by CUSA that commitment to Athletics through facility and budget improvements were key to being considered...budget as of this fiscal year is at 17.4 million, up from 11 million 4 years ago and we will break ground on phase 1a of facility improvements early summer..

(03-26-2013 07:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  thats just ridiculous dont take my word for it look for yourself. the sec insnt worried about playing 1aa schools to keep their rankings up late in the year. thats the last thing they are worried about. if anything a few are set as glorified scrimmages before they play their big rivals. most non conf games come early in the year and the schools that schedule late 1aa games arent worried about acutally losing them.

Actually, there is a lot of merit in the argument - and it was discussed quite a bit by talking heads this past season (the sec scheduling practices) of scheduling some heavy hitting games very early in the season and lighter games late. It's a smart move to do so if you can work it out that way. Everyone knows losing early is the best time to lose - and the sec sets up several teams to benefit from such an arrangement, if need be, every year.

(03-27-2013 08:46 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 07:54 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  I would like the conference office to give us back our home game against Tulsa then. They bolt the conference and yet we have to play at Tulsa two years in a row, with no return game. What a crock.

Best revenge, though, will be to beat them there.

B12 had this issue too. It is not a Rice or Tulsa thing; it is a conference wide issue that affects all teams. If TU moved to back to Rice, then other adjustments in scheduling would have to be made. Oklahoma U played two years in a row @OSU when TCU and WVA were added, in order to set up and balance out the future B12 schedules.

Tulsa was very upfront in their plans, and let us all know what would happen. I have to think that the conference office could have taken better care of Rice (and USM) at the expense of Tulsa, Tulane, and ECU.

I hope the Rice-Tulsa game does prove to be for the West title. You might see some angry Owls make the trip north.

(03-27-2013 05:37 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 08:46 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 07:54 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  I would like the conference office to give us back our home game against Tulsa then. They bolt the conference and yet we have to play at Tulsa two years in a row, with no return game. What a crock.

Best revenge, though, will be to beat them there.

B12 had this issue too. It is not a Rice or Tulsa thing; it is a conference wide issue that affects all teams. If TU moved to back to Rice, then other adjustments in scheduling would have to be made. Oklahoma U played two years in a row @OSU when TCU and WVA were added, in order to set up and balance out the future B12 schedules.

Tulsa was very upfront in their plans, and let us all know what would happen. I have to think that the conference office could have taken better care of Rice (and USM) at the expense of Tulsa, Tulane, and ECU.

I hope the Rice-Tulsa game does prove to be for the West title. You might see some angry Owls make the trip north.

It'll be a cold day in Hell before CUSA ever does right by USM.

(03-27-2013 05:40 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  It'll be a cold day in Hell before CUSA ever does right by USM.

We can start, in my opinion, by having the basketball tournament in Biloxi and really working hard with the casinos to promote it. It would be fun to have, say, the Isle/Golden Nugget be the official hotel for Rice and UTEP.

(03-27-2013 05:17 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Once I found out UTEP was leaving the WAC for C-USA, I literally stopped posting on the old WAC board that belonged to a Rice fan. I found this board and never looked back even though UTEP still played a lame duck season in the WAC. The same applies to fans of departing schools. Just move to the C-TBD board. There's nothing for you here anymore and you'll find fans of schools that are staying here venting or questioning the move. There's no need to get into pissing matches or trying to make a point of why moving or staying is worthy. Just be thankful to your old conference mates, never forget where you came from and move on.

I remember a lot Nevada, Fresno, Hawaii and Boise fans questioning why we were following Rice, Tulsa and SMU to C-USA since the best teams already left C-USA and the WAC was at least a better football conference on the top while C-USA had big question marks. I found it pointless to argue with them the pros and cons of leaving the WAC even thought I kinda agreed with them and was initially opposed for C-USA memberhsip. I wished the WAC well and rooted for them especially when they beat MWC teams and when Boise and Hawaii played in the BCS. I would give the same advice to SMU, Tulsa, Houston, Tulane, Memphis, East Carolina and UCF fans. Move on and wish C-USA well. That's it.

Well, we're still members of this conference whether you like it or not. Some of us will leave when we choose to leave. Don't let a few bad apples ruin it for everyone else who has been nothing but respectful to their conference mates.

(03-26-2013 09:31 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 09:20 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 04:34 PM)Freshy Wrote:  With the exception of some sketchy tallies in the SEC back in the day (ask the Tulane old-timers about it), every conference that has ever played has always finished at exactly .500 in conference play. If all you are going to go by is conference play, then you have exactly zero empyrical evidence to base a claim of dominance on. Not even the almighty SEC can claim to be even a single point better than any other conference out there based solely on conference play.

Everything either directly or indirectly ties back to non-conference schedules. This is just as true of basketball as it is of football. CUSA finished as the 11th ranked conference in RPI this past season precisely because we flat out stank against the higher ranked conferences, but were pretty good against the conferences ranked 12-32.

Football will work the same way. Beat nobody out of conference, and no one will care how competitive or tough your conference is.

In fact, not only is non-conference the only games that will matter as far as the auto-bid goes, but non-conference games against power conference teams will be so important that they make games against a Boise or BYU seem pointless. A win against a 3-9 power conference team that then goes on to beat some school that finishes 10-2 will have more power than your school being the reason Boise finishes 11-1.

In the grand scheme of things, a school can finish 12-0 against a conference with a weak non-conference showing all it wants to, but it won't matter much when it comes time to decide the auto-bid if there is another conference out there that managed to beat more power conference teams. Games against the other Go5 conferences will only be useful as tiebreakers. Games against FCS opponents will be meaningless at this level aside from gate revenue.

This is not 2011 any more. The power conferences have changed the rules, and they are going to make you beat them if you want a piece of their money.

Arguing C-TBA versus CUSA in SOS is flat-out pointless.

Why bother, Freshy? Those you are trying to convince are still wondering how their 1/10 of 1% share of a big market city, but only when "State U" is in a bye week, isn't generating $10 million per year per school. They have zero concept of SOS computations and apparently little desire to actually learn about it.....instead they prefer to chest thump and yell "we've changed our uniform patches and therefore are a better league than we were last year!!!"

God you're butthurt. For what its worth, I've preached all along that USM was the common sense selection for CTBA. Good luck in CUSA.

Nope - not butthurt at all. Actually, far from it. I've stated it quite often that I'd prefer to be with the no-namers however due to history, though if it's not to be it's not to be -- and that the quality of C-USA football is lessened, mostly in the name recognition area as opposed to quality of play, but not severely and that the quality of basketball is increased top to bottom (top isn't as "top" but there's more depth).

It's best summed up by another USM poster (I'd give specific credit but can't remember who and don't care to look it up)......our fans won't care too much for the new teams in C-USA, but what the hell, we don't care too much for the ones in the old C-USA either. It's a six of one, half-a-dozen of the other kind of thing.

(03-27-2013 05:51 PM)St. H. Gink Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 05:17 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Once I found out UTEP was leaving the WAC for C-USA, I literally stopped posting on the old WAC board that belonged to a Rice fan. I found this board and never looked back even though UTEP still played a lame duck season in the WAC. The same applies to fans of departing schools. Just move to the C-TBD board. There's nothing for you here anymore and you'll find fans of schools that are staying here venting or questioning the move. There's no need to get into pissing matches or trying to make a point of why moving or staying is worthy. Just be thankful to your old conference mates, never forget where you came from and move on.

I remember a lot Nevada, Fresno, Hawaii and Boise fans questioning why we were following Rice, Tulsa and SMU to C-USA since the best teams already left C-USA and the WAC was at least a better football conference on the top while C-USA had big question marks. I found it pointless to argue with them the pros and cons of leaving the WAC even thought I kinda agreed with them and was initially opposed for C-USA memberhsip. I wished the WAC well and rooted for them especially when they beat MWC teams and when Boise and Hawaii played in the BCS. I would give the same advice to SMU, Tulsa, Houston, Tulane, Memphis, East Carolina and UCF fans. Move on and wish C-USA well. That's it.

Well, we're still members of this conference whether you like it or not. Some of us will leave when we choose to leave. Don't let a few bad apples ruin it for everyone else who has been nothing but respectful to their conference mates.

I can understand East Carolina, Tulane and Tulsa fans still hanging out here because they still have another season in C-USA. But I don't see the point for Memphis, UCF, Houston and SMU fans staying here especially since both football and basketball seasons are over. I'm not kicking anybody out from this board (which I would be against and besides I don't moderate nor own this board) or asking the mods to ban certain posters (it's something I'm always been against) but it's time to move on and let both sides take a break. I know the bad apples get more attention than the good apples but I'm sure you get my point.

(03-27-2013 07:33 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 04:54 AM)Big Dub Wrote:  [obligatory] NBE sucks, Tulsa is stupid for going, I will LOL when Cincy and Uconn leave, I'm so relieved USM isn't invited[/obligatory]

Every school that can move has to move. It is not only about $$ and where you are today. but being in the right place for the next round. My guess is Cincy and Uconn will be next in line if and when any of the Big 5 move, and for the USF haters they very likely are #3 in line. after those 3, look to those who were on the top of BE add list this time. Houston, Boise, UCF, SMU,

Is this correct.....(as of now)...
pac12 = 12
bigxii = 10
big10 = 14
sec = 14
acc = 14

This is 64......it's going to ultimately be 64 + notre dame special deals ... no more (maybe less if they can figure out how to drop a few of their own version of "dead weight" teams). Wherever cinci and/or uconn end up they better hope it's the "cartel included" winner between the big12 and the acc. If not, they will have done nothing more than ecu, houston, tulane, ucf, etc.....paid for the priviledge of staying right where they are and for being the same as everyone else in the Go5.

(03-27-2013 06:27 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 07:33 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 04:54 AM)Big Dub Wrote:  [obligatory] NBE sucks, Tulsa is stupid for going, I will LOL when Cincy and Uconn leave, I'm so relieved USM isn't invited[/obligatory]

Every school that can move has to move. It is not only about $$ and where you are today. but being in the right place for the next round. My guess is Cincy and Uconn will be next in line if and when any of the Big 5 move, and for the USF haters they very likely are #3 in line. after those 3, look to those who were on the top of BE add list this time. Houston, Boise, UCF, SMU,

Is this correct.....(as of now)...
pac12 = 12
bigxii = 10
big10 = 14
sec = 14
acc = 14

This is 64......it's going to ultimately be 64 + notre dame special deals ... no more (maybe less if they can figure out how to drop a few of their own version of "dead weight" teams). Wherever cinci and/or uconn end up they better hope it's the "cartel included" winner between the big12 and the acc. If not, they will have done nothing more than ecu, houston, tulane, ucf, etc.....paid for the priviledge of staying right where they are and for being the same as everyone else in the Go5.

Bull.

(03-27-2013 06:29 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 06:27 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 07:33 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 04:54 AM)Big Dub Wrote:  [obligatory] NBE sucks, Tulsa is stupid for going, I will LOL when Cincy and Uconn leave, I'm so relieved USM isn't invited[/obligatory]

Every school that can move has to move. It is not only about $$ and where you are today. but being in the right place for the next round. My guess is Cincy and Uconn will be next in line if and when any of the Big 5 move, and for the USF haters they very likely are #3 in line. after those 3, look to those who were on the top of BE add list this time. Houston, Boise, UCF, SMU,

Is this correct.....(as of now)...
pac12 = 12
bigxii = 10
big10 = 14
sec = 14
acc = 14

This is 64......it's going to ultimately be 64 + notre dame special deals ... no more (maybe less if they can figure out how to drop a few of their own version of "dead weight" teams). Wherever cinci and/or uconn end up they better hope it's the "cartel included" winner between the big12 and the acc. If not, they will have done nothing more than ecu, houston, tulane, ucf, etc.....paid for the priviledge of staying right where they are and for being the same as everyone else in the Go5.

Bull.

So, you think the cartel conferences will increase their number? The cartel will choose to take on more mouths to feed?

I'm not saying those five conferences will remain as they currently are - I'm saying that the total of the teams in the cartel conferences will remain constant. How they organize themselves will change - how many they include in their club will not.

(03-27-2013 06:50 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 06:29 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 06:27 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 07:33 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 04:54 AM)Big Dub Wrote:  [obligatory] NBE sucks, Tulsa is stupid for going, I will LOL when Cincy and Uconn leave, I'm so relieved USM isn't invited[/obligatory]

Every school that can move has to move. It is not only about $$ and where you are today. but being in the right place for the next round. My guess is Cincy and Uconn will be next in line if and when any of the Big 5 move, and for the USF haters they very likely are #3 in line. after those 3, look to those who were on the top of BE add list this time. Houston, Boise, UCF, SMU,

Is this correct.....(as of now)...
pac12 = 12
bigxii = 10
big10 = 14
sec = 14
acc = 14

This is 64......it's going to ultimately be 64 + notre dame special deals ... no more (maybe less if they can figure out how to drop a few of their own version of "dead weight" teams). Wherever cinci and/or uconn end up they better hope it's the "cartel included" winner between the big12 and the acc. If not, they will have done nothing more than ecu, houston, tulane, ucf, etc.....paid for the priviledge of staying right where they are and for being the same as everyone else in the Go5.

Bull.

So, you think the cartel conferences will increase their number? The cartel will choose to take on more mouths to feed?

I'm not saying those five conferences will remain as they currently are - I'm saying that the total of the teams in the cartel conferences will remain constant. How they organize themselves will change - how many they include in their club will not.

Utah and TCU are in, UConn, Cincinnati and South Florida are out.

The number will remain more or less the same. I can see the number of members in the cartel decreasing by 4 or 5 but not increasing. Once the SEC, Big Ten and Big XII kill their ugly sister the ACC, I can see the likes of Wake Forest, Boston College, Syracuse, etc out in what's left of the ACC and C-TBD.

(03-27-2013 06:50 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 06:29 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 06:27 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 07:33 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 04:54 AM)Big Dub Wrote:  [obligatory] NBE sucks, Tulsa is stupid for going, I will LOL when Cincy and Uconn leave, I'm so relieved USM isn't invited[/obligatory]

Every school that can move has to move. It is not only about $$ and where you are today. but being in the right place for the next round. My guess is Cincy and Uconn will be next in line if and when any of the Big 5 move, and for the USF haters they very likely are #3 in line. after those 3, look to those who were on the top of BE add list this time. Houston, Boise, UCF, SMU,

Is this correct.....(as of now)...
pac12 = 12
bigxii = 10
big10 = 14
sec = 14
acc = 14

This is 64......it's going to ultimately be 64 + notre dame special deals ... no more (maybe less if they can figure out how to drop a few of their own version of "dead weight" teams). Wherever cinci and/or uconn end up they better hope it's the "cartel included" winner between the big12 and the acc. If not, they will have done nothing more than ecu, houston, tulane, ucf, etc.....paid for the priviledge of staying right where they are and for being the same as everyone else in the Go5.

Bull.

So, you think the cartel conferences will increase their number? The cartel will choose to take on more mouths to feed?

I'm not saying those five conferences will remain as they currently are - I'm saying that the total of the teams in the cartel conferences will remain constant. How they organize themselves will change - how many they include in their club will not.

I'm sorry for my last post, I'm just tired of this argument. We don't know if there will be a 64-team supercartel at some point. We can't just speculate that it will happen and then use that as an excuse for mediocrity. Everyone basically knows which direction is "up." Will we ever be in one of the best five conferences? I have no idea. It seemed likely in the early 1980s. It seemed somewhat likely circa 2000. Now, we have a younger, more materialistic / media-savvy fan base, and they all tell me "no" (along with "go away"... it's not like we need attendance to meet their goal of staying in CUSA, I guess).

But we can choose to try and move in the right direction or the wrong direction. Trying to stay flat doesn't work. And if we don't even dream about reaching the highest level, and just want to build something for the kids to amuse themselves with, like AAA baseball... well , that's just not OK with me and that's NOT the USM that made me a fan back in the (LOL) last century.

(03-27-2013 07:09 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 06:50 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 06:29 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 06:27 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(03-27-2013 07:33 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

Every school that can move has to move. It is not only about $$ and where you are today. but being in the right place for the next round. My guess is Cincy and Uconn will be next in line if and when any of the Big 5 move, and for the USF haters they very likely are #3 in line. after those 3, look to those who were on the top of BE add list this time. Houston, Boise, UCF, SMU,

Is this correct.....(as of now)...
pac12 = 12
bigxii = 10
big10 = 14
sec = 14
acc = 14

This is 64......it's going to ultimately be 64 + notre dame special deals ... no more (maybe less if they can figure out how to drop a few of their own version of "dead weight" teams). Wherever cinci and/or uconn end up they better hope it's the "cartel included" winner between the big12 and the acc. If not, they will have done nothing more than ecu, houston, tulane, ucf, etc.....paid for the priviledge of staying right where they are and for being the same as everyone else in the Go5.

Bull.

So, you think the cartel conferences will increase their number? The cartel will choose to take on more mouths to feed?

I'm not saying those five conferences will remain as they currently are - I'm saying that the total of the teams in the cartel conferences will remain constant. How they organize themselves will change - how many they include in their club will not.

I'm sorry for my last post, I'm just tired of this argument. We don't know if there will be a 64-team supercartel at some point. We can't just speculate that it will happen and then use that as an excuse for mediocrity. Everyone basically knows which direction is "up." Will we ever be in one of the best five conferences? I have no idea. It seemed likely in the early 1980s. It seemed somewhat likely circa 2000. Now, we have a younger, more materialistic / media-savvy fan base, and they all tell me "no" (along with "go away"... it's not like we need attendance to meet their goal of staying in CUSA, I guess).

But we can choose to try and move in the right direction or the wrong direction. Trying to stay flat doesn't work. And if we don't even dream about reaching the highest level, and just want to build something for the kids to amuse themselves with, like AAA baseball... well , that's just not OK with me and that's NOT the USM that made me a fan back in the (LOL) last century.

No problem --- but you won't catch me bellyaching about our conference and blaming it for any GOLDEN EAGLE shortcomings.....I'm old school USM, chip on the shoulder and all.

On the other hand I'm quite confident that there will never be anything significant beyond "64 + notre dame" in the conferences being paid mega television dollars.....since money became worth measuring in college athletics back in the early 90's that's been the approximate number of "included" teams and I'm sure it'll remain fairly constant. I'm not saying there will be a division created that in actuality separates those +/- 64 teams from the rest of FBS teams ... but the perceived difference will remain.

Interesting article regarding the move to Conference Whatever, and the economic benefit. As much as $3 million more per year. I guess that explains the decision.

Tulsa World

(04-01-2013 05:25 AM)TU 1978 Wrote:  Interesting article regarding the move to Conference Whatever, and the economic benefit. As much as $3 million more per year. I guess that explains the decision.

Tulsa World

Except those numbers are from January, before the TV deals were completed. We know what the numbers are now. About $2 million a year for each team.

(03-26-2013 03:03 PM)nastybunch Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 03:02 PM)99Tiger Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 02:52 PM)Fear The Frog Wrote:  Tallgrass on suicide watch...

Haven't seen him in awhile...maybe we were too late to issue the watch?

Hopefully not, and we'll get to witness an epic backpedal effort.

Nah, he knows it was a stupid move also. Feel sorry for you guys.

Feel sorry for us? Why? It's still more money, and we don't have to work on any new rivalries with teams all of you looked down upon until they were thrust upon you as new conference mates. Talk up UNT, UTSA, and F_U all you want...but all you USM fans know you would have been ready to fight someone a couple year ago if they suggested you'd soon share a conference with them.