(04-06-2013 03:09 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-06-2013 01:13 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-06-2013 12:38 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(04-04-2013 12:05 PM)JoeJag Wrote:  Probably won't be long after you're gone you'll be wanting back in.

What is your dreamt up scenario in which a former Sun Belt school wants to come back? No disrespect, but it's simply not going to happen, especially when the existing Sun Belt schools are still posturing to be the next CUSA invite should CUSA end up with another defection or decide to expand to 16.

Saying things are not going to happen in conference realignment has proven to be pretty silly.

The Sun Belt squandered its main chance when the WAC blew up. It had a moment when it could have seized the initiative and its leadership failed. It looks unlikely that it will get another chance in this round.

What we ended up with due to that failure are two leagues that are much weakened with both being less attractive than they were.

The future is not the past and how the members of these two weakened leagues perform will set the stage for the future. The past is only a residual lingering aroma that will be replaced with reality after the new lineups take the field and perform.

A lot of new CUSA folks are blowed up with pride thinking they've made it. They are now going to be the new ECU/Houston/USM/Tulsa just because they've been "promoted" to that status. They are the "chosen ones". That's probably a dangerous way of thinking.

How this all plays out for these two weakened leagues...we have no idea yet. CUSA has certain advantages and weaknesses....the Sun Belt has certain advantages and weaknesses.

The argument may even be made moot by some more devastating raids on new CUSA from above.

What the "made it" schools have bought is a chance to reinvent themselves, go to the fans, the students, the alums, the local media, the local folks who haven't bought in and say "It is a new product" others recognize what we have you should but in as well.

For UNT, for FIU, for FAU I think that is highly valuable.

I like UNT a lot, like a lot of their fans but 8 losing seasons in football many of those years not even being very competitive requires a make over. Going into basketball with a player touted as a potential NBA draft pick and staggering through the Belt in a year most of the league wasn't very good requires a make over.

FIU and FAU have had their times of success yet have lost more than they've won the past five years needs a make over especially in what is without doubt a very hard market to sell.

MTSU and WKU have less potential upside from the move because their local brand is stronger, they have less need to reinvent who they are and in many areas don't want to reinvent. Their benefit comes more from the fact the fans were upset they didn't get picked.

Everyone can posture about where they are or what they will be but it does not matter how much the AAC or MWC or MAC or CUSA or Sun Belt blow about what they have. It is going to come down to who impresses people with non-conference wins, who has the stand-out team (not conference, team) that impresses the CFP selection committee and converts on the opportunity it presents.

I tried to pull out the last undefeated non-AQ programs to take a look at where they were ranked in the final AP poll as a gage of how far an undefeated school can go in the rankings. The numbers I have below are sense the adoption of the 16/12 rule for non-AQ schools.

#3 TCU (2010)
#3 TCU (2009)
#7 Utah (2008)
#10 Hawaii (2007)
#9 Boise State (2006)

Average ranking: 6.4

Its easy to assert here that any undefeated G5 is at least going to be ranked in the Top 10 and possibly the Top 5. There will be a lot of noise made about placing an undefeated G5 into the playoff.

The next phase of post season expansion is an eight team playoff with every undefeated team guaranteed a spot and every league an AQ.

(04-07-2013 10:12 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  I tried to pull out the last undefeated non-AQ programs to take a look at where they were ranked in the final AP poll as a gage of how far an undefeated school can go in the rankings. The numbers I have below are sense the adoption of the 16/12 rule for non-AQ schools.

#3 TCU (2010)
#3 TCU (2009)
#7 Utah (2008)
#10 Hawaii (2007)
#9 Boise State (2006)

Average ranking: 6.4

Its easy to assert here that any undefeated G5 is at least going to be ranked in the Top 10 and possibly the Top 5. There will be a lot of noise made about placing an undefeated G5 into the playoff.

The next phase of post season expansion is an eight team playoff with every undefeated team guaranteed a spot and every league an AQ.

Is this including or excluding Bowl Games?

Because NIU went undefeated this past season (excluding bowl game) and was only ranked 16th.

(04-07-2013 10:14 AM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(04-07-2013 10:12 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  I tried to pull out the last undefeated non-AQ programs to take a look at where they were ranked in the final AP poll as a gage of how far an undefeated school can go in the rankings. The numbers I have below are sense the adoption of the 16/12 rule for non-AQ schools.

#3 TCU (2010)
#3 TCU (2009)
#7 Utah (2008)
#10 Hawaii (2007)
#9 Boise State (2006)

Average ranking: 6.4

Its easy to assert here that any undefeated G5 is at least going to be ranked in the Top 10 and possibly the Top 5. There will be a lot of noise made about placing an undefeated G5 into the playoff.

The next phase of post season expansion is an eight team playoff with every undefeated team guaranteed a spot and every league an AQ.

Is this including or excluding Bowl Games?

Because NIU went undefeated this past season (excluding bowl game) and was only ranked 16th.

NIU lost to Iowa in OOC play

(04-07-2013 10:39 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(04-07-2013 10:14 AM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(04-07-2013 10:12 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  I tried to pull out the last undefeated non-AQ programs to take a look at where they were ranked in the final AP poll as a gage of how far an undefeated school can go in the rankings. The numbers I have below are sense the adoption of the 16/12 rule for non-AQ schools.

#3 TCU (2010)
#3 TCU (2009)
#7 Utah (2008)
#10 Hawaii (2007)
#9 Boise State (2006)

Average ranking: 6.4

Its easy to assert here that any undefeated G5 is at least going to be ranked in the Top 10 and possibly the Top 5. There will be a lot of noise made about placing an undefeated G5 into the playoff.

The next phase of post season expansion is an eight team playoff with every undefeated team guaranteed a spot and every league an AQ.

Is this including or excluding Bowl Games?

Because NIU went undefeated this past season (excluding bowl game) and was only ranked 16th.

NIU lost to Iowa in OOC play

Then my memory failed me. Whoops.

(04-06-2013 11:29 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(04-06-2013 09:48 PM)Burn the Horse Wrote:  

(04-06-2013 03:37 PM)Kwisatz100 Wrote:  My two cents as a Middle Alumni. Overall, I think it was the correct move. It did give some excitement to the fan base, and helped to feel we were not left behind. In football, I think it is a small step up. Not so much on the field as off. I prefer CUSA's tv package and bowl package. There is an argument for being on ESPN; however, the harm of having to play Tues. and Weds. games to make it on ESPN/ESPN2 is not worth it to me. With MWC and the AAC (Big East) recently signing with ESPN, it is going to be harder for Sun Belt games to be on one of the 2 main channels.

blah, blah, blah...

My friend, what he said is accurate. The move energized the fanbase and we're with more likeminded programs. I will miss the Sun Belt, you know I will, but I honestly believe our future is brighter in CUSA. I know you don't believe that, but you can't fault me, or this guy, for believing that C-USA is the right move for us.

We may disagree on whether or not C-USA is truly better, but if you think that this is move is a mistake, I'm sorry, but you're crazy. We may not see much tangible benefit to the move(I believe we will, but I'll play devil's advocate) but I cannot believe for a single second that this move will be bad for us.

I don't think you get the reinvent benefit the others do but that doesn't make it a negative.

In the long-run I think you are going t find that some of those new friends you think are like-minded are not and some of those taken for potential won't live up to it and there will be others you will love being affiliated with.

Before the Big East turned predatory for survival Houston, Memphis, USM and ECU had some meetings about leaving and forming their own league because they were unhappy with the athletic focus and commitment of a number of members, it is just hard to collect schools that are relying on institutional aid to be competitive into a like-minded group because the athletic department doesn't wield the power to overcome changes in university leadership which can change focus.

(04-06-2013 11:29 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(04-06-2013 09:48 PM)Burn the Horse Wrote:  

(04-06-2013 03:37 PM)Kwisatz100 Wrote:  My two cents as a Middle Alumni. Overall, I think it was the correct move. It did give some excitement to the fan base, and helped to feel we were not left behind. In football, I think it is a small step up. Not so much on the field as off. I prefer CUSA's tv package and bowl package. There is an argument for being on ESPN; however, the harm of having to play Tues. and Weds. games to make it on ESPN/ESPN2 is not worth it to me. With MWC and the AAC (Big East) recently signing with ESPN, it is going to be harder for Sun Belt games to be on one of the 2 main channels.

blah, blah, blah...

My friend, what he said is accurate. The move energized the fanbase and we're with more likeminded programs. I will miss the Sun Belt, you know I will, but I honestly believe our future is brighter in CUSA. I know you don't believe that, but you can't fault me, or this guy, for believing that C-USA is the right move for us.

We may disagree on whether or not C-USA is truly better, but if you think that this is move is a mistake, I'm sorry, but you're crazy. We may not see much tangible benefit to the move(I believe we will, but I'll play devil's advocate) but I cannot believe for a single second that this move will be bad for us.

It will take 3-5 years to know if it was a good move. If the SBC consistently finishes ahead a couple of spots in the payouts or has a BCS representative, and the move results in lost revenue each year then it will go down as a bad move.

No way of knowing that now.

Seems like so little to gain. Mainly a short term media payout gain, but must even offset that with what a $2,000,000 CUSA
entrance fee, and anything having to be left or paid out to SBC.

Going to be great if the tide rolls back to the SBC within the next few years.

(04-07-2013 01:27 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Seems like so little to gain. Mainly a short term media payout gain, but must even offset that with what a $2,000,000 CUSA
entrance fee, and anything having to be left or paid out to SBC.

Going to be great if the tide rolls back to the SBC within the next few years.

And a $500k exit fee.

(04-07-2013 01:19 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  It will take 3-5 years to know if it was a good move. If the SBC consistently finishes ahead a couple of spots in the payouts or has a BCS representative, and the move results in lost revenue each year then it will go down as a bad move.

No way of knowing that now.

You seem to be contradicting yourself friend. You said in another thread that USA, App, and GaSo will be better than MT, WKU, and UNT. So you can know that, but you can't know what conference will be better?

But I agree with you, there is no way of knowing but the administrators of five Sun Belt members have chosen to hitch their wagons to CUSA and several other schools are looking for a way out. Not exactly a sign that the Sun Belt is viewed as the the better conference moving forward by those "in the industry" so to speak.

I'll tell you this though, neither of the Sun Belt or CUSA is getting a BCS representative in the next five seasons.

(04-07-2013 01:39 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(04-07-2013 01:19 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  It will take 3-5 years to know if it was a good move. If the SBC consistently finishes ahead a couple of spots in the payouts or has a BCS representative, and the move results in lost revenue each year then it will go down as a bad move.

No way of knowing that now.

You seem to be contradicting yourself friend. You said in another thread that USA, App, and GaSo will be better than MT, WKU, and UNT. So you can know that, but you can't know what conference will be better?

But I agree with you, there is no way of knowing but the administrators of five Sun Belt members have chosen to hitch their wagons to CUSA and several other schools are looking for a way out. Not exactly a sign that the Sun Belt is viewed as the the better conference moving forward by those "in the industry" so to speak.

I'll tell you this though, neither of the Sun Belt or CUSA is getting a BCS representative in the next five seasons.

Remember the story about UNI reps getting told "you don't belong here" when meeting for the Orange Bowl. Even when you do get to the BCS, you are not wanted.

(04-07-2013 01:43 PM)TheEagleWay Wrote:  Remember the story about UNI reps getting told "you don't belong here" when meeting for the Orange Bowl. Even when you do get to the BCS, you are not wanted.

Americans love their cinderellas in basketball...but they hate, hate, hate cinderellas in football. Not sure why exactly but it is so.

(04-07-2013 04:13 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-07-2013 01:43 PM)TheEagleWay Wrote:  Remember the story about UNI reps getting told "you don't belong here" when meeting for the Orange Bowl. Even when you do get to the BCS, you are not wanted.

Americans love their cinderellas in basketball...but they hate, hate, hate cinderellas in football. Not sure why exactly but it is so.

Because in basketball you have a tournament so you earn every win. In football they say Boise doesn't deserve it because they don't play anyone, but still get in the BCS.

(04-07-2013 04:15 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(04-07-2013 04:13 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-07-2013 01:43 PM)TheEagleWay Wrote:  Remember the story about UNI reps getting told "you don't belong here" when meeting for the Orange Bowl. Even when you do get to the BCS, you are not wanted.

Americans love their cinderellas in basketball...but they hate, hate, hate cinderellas in football. Not sure why exactly but it is so.

Because in basketball you have a tournament so you earn every win. In football they say Boise doesn't deserve it because they don't play anyone, but still get in the BCS.

That may be, but I know a whole lot of BCS team fans that cursed when Boise beat Oklahoma and have had nothing but a sneer for them ever since. Winning on the field didn't seem to matter.

(04-07-2013 10:14 AM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(04-07-2013 10:12 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  I tried to pull out the last undefeated non-AQ programs to take a look at where they were ranked in the final AP poll as a gage of how far an undefeated school can go in the rankings. The numbers I have below are sense the adoption of the 16/12 rule for non-AQ schools.

#3 TCU (2010)
#3 TCU (2009)
#7 Utah (2008)
#10 Hawaii (2007)
#9 Boise State (2006)

Average ranking: 6.4

Its easy to assert here that any undefeated G5 is at least going to be ranked in the Top 10 and possibly the Top 5. There will be a lot of noise made about placing an undefeated G5 into the playoff.

The next phase of post season expansion is an eight team playoff with every undefeated team guaranteed a spot and every league an AQ.

Is this including or excluding Bowl Games?

Because NIU went undefeated this past season (excluding bowl game) and was only ranked 16th.

You are looking at pre bowl game rankings.

(04-03-2013 10:24 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  I think Arkansas State would be a good add in the MAC. I'd prefer them in Conference USA, but the MAC is certainly a quality alternative.

I think if UMass won't go all in that the MAC should hold at 12 or *maybe* try aSu and ULL or aUs and MoSt

(04-05-2013 10:20 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Big Ten had AAU membership as an absolute criteria until Nebraska came available. I think B1G would prefer ACC schools in AAU or Texas but don't rule FSU out. They can bring more money to the table than Nebraska and they bent the rules for the Huskers.

FWIW Nebraska was AAU when the process started..