(04-23-2013 12:15 PM)TOPPERSonTOP Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:14 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:11 AM)TOPPERSonTOP Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:06 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(04-21-2013 10:09 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  These are the results of the head to head match-ups in the 5 main sports against C-USA that are easily comparable: football, men's basketball, women's basketball, baseball, and softball. The Sun Belt won more head to head games in football, women's basketball, and softball. There are still 3 games left to be played in baseball and the best C-USA can do is tie the Sun Belt. The only sport C-USA did better head to head against the Sun Belt was in men's basketball. The Sun Belt had turned a corner on C-USA. Hopefully our new membership can keep it up.

Football:
9-1-12 Troy 39 vs UAB 29

The Sun Belt has not "turned the corner" on CUSA. Above is the only football game played by teams staying in their current conference. Didn't want to fool with all the colors you used to distinguish winners and losers, but most of the listed games were played by at least one school changing conferences, many were played by two teams that were changing conferences.

I feel dirty already...

This is exactly right.

It was bound to happen at some point.

I guess you cannot be wrong all the time...

Especially when I'm dealing with you apparently.

(04-23-2013 11:06 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(04-21-2013 10:09 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  These are the results of the head to head match-ups in the 5 main sports against C-USA that are easily comparable: football, men's basketball, women's basketball, baseball, and softball. The Sun Belt won more head to head games in football, women's basketball, and softball. There are still 3 games left to be played in baseball and the best C-USA can do is tie the Sun Belt. The only sport C-USA did better head to head against the Sun Belt was in men's basketball. The Sun Belt had turned a corner on C-USA. Hopefully our new membership can keep it up.

Football:
9-1-12 Troy 39 vs UAB 29

The Sun Belt has not "turned the corner" on CUSA. Above is the only football game played by teams staying in their current conference. Didn't want to fool with all the colors you used to distinguish winners and losers, but most of the listed games were played by at least one school changing conferences, many were played by two teams that were changing conferences.

Maybe not turned a corner, but there is no denying those results. The days of C-USA being associated with Cincinnati, Louisville, Marquette, etc. and the quality associated with those schools is over. They did okay with the additions of SMU, Rice, et al, but the reality is there is no gap. Some years, the Sun Belt may be better, other years it won't. The reality is there is parody between the leagues.

I'd also ask that comparisons in Volleyball and women's soccer be added.

That's fantastic! Thanks for compiling this list. GO SBC!

(04-21-2013 10:09 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  Football:
9-1-12 Troy 39 vs UAB 29
9-8-12 Memphis 28 vs ASU 33
9-15-12 FIU 20 vs UCF 33
9-15-12 MTSU 48 vs Memphis 30
9-22-12 USM 17 vs WKU 42
9-29-12 ULM 63 vs Tulane 10
10-6-12 UNT 21 vs Houston 44
10-6-12 Tulane 13 vs ULL 41
12-22-12 ULL 43 vs ECU 34
SBC won head to head 7-2

I'm still a SBC guy for another year but to be fair to CUSA, 5 of the SBC wins were from the top 5 SBC teams against the bottom 3 East CUSA teams and the bottom West CUSA team. The Troy/UAB game was a middle of the pack Troy against the 2nd worst CUSA East team. The ULL/ECU SBC win was the only one that really was between top level teams from each conference. Also, one CUSA win (UCF over FIU) was a top CUSA team against a bottom SBC team. The other CUSA win was Houston over UNT but both were middle of the pack in their respective conferences. In other words, the 7-2 record is a little misleading. What would have been interesting would have been if the Top 5 SBC teams had played the Top 5 CUSA teams. Then we could really say it was a big win by the SBC.

I'm really interested in watching the new-to-FBS teams from C-USA and the Sunbelt over the next several years.

Lets see, we have:
UTSA
TxSt
South Alabama
Georgia St
Charlotte
ODU
Georgia Southern
App St

Am I missing any? Obviously I keep tabs on my UTSA, but I also keep tabs on TxSt.

UTSA will be playing our second transition year this year.
TxSt will be full FBS this season.
South Alabama (I think) is full FBS now.

What about all the others?

(04-23-2013 08:58 PM)slow-runner Wrote:  I'm really interested in watching the new-to-FBS teams from C-USA and the Sunbelt over the next several years.

Lets see, we have:
UTSA
TxSt
South Alabama
Georgia St
Charlotte
ODU
Georgia Southern
App St

Am I missing any? Obviously I keep tabs on my UTSA, but I also keep tabs on TxSt.

UTSA will be playing our second transition year this year.
TxSt will be full FBS this season.
South Alabama (I think) is full FBS now.

What about all the others?

I believe, but may not be correct that this is the case.

Ga St and ODU are transitional teams, not eligible for FCS Playoffs or bowls. Georgia Southern, App State, are eligible for playoffs one more season, will be transitioning in 2014. Charlotte is just starting their program, so I don't know what their timetable is, but if their plan is to be FBS by 2015, then they will experiance more growing pains than any team on this list

(04-23-2013 04:18 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Maybe not turned a corner, but there is no denying those results. The days of C-USA being associated with Cincinnati, Louisville, Marquette, etc. and the quality associated with those schools is over. They did okay with the additions of SMU, Rice, et al, but the reality is there is no gap. Some years, the Sun Belt may be better, other years it won't. The reality is there is parody between the leagues.

hey, Burn The Horse isn't the only one that doesn't know the difference

I agree with the bolded part completely

I put this men's bball historical RPI information together a few weeks ago.

Wow, we were undefeated against CUSA. How bout that!

I'm gonna inject some knowledge into this thread.... i went through all future CUSA and Sun Belt Teams schedules from 2012-2013....

The Fact that MTSU or stAte beat Memphis this year has nothing to do with our 2 conferences going forward.....

So using last years records here's how we stack up against the future of each conference....

Sun Belt
ULM 5-0
GSouthern 1-0
stAte 3-1
UL 3-1
Troy 3-3
Appy 0-0
USA 1-4
GState 0-2
Idaho 0-2
Texas State 0-2
NMSU 0-3

Total 16-18

*Only 1 school (Appy) played no future CUSA schools*

CUSA

UTSA 5-0
LT 3-0
UTEP 1-0
MT 2-2
WKU 2-2
ODU 1-1
USM 0-0
Rice 0-0
Marshall 0-0
Charlotte 0-0
UNT 2-3
FAU 1-3
FIU 1-4
UAB 0-1

Total 18-16

*4 CUSA Schools played 0 Future Sun Belt Schools (Charlotte obviously hasn't played anybody yet)

Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

(04-23-2013 11:06 PM)surlycanon Wrote:  Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

How dare you inject a more apple to apples comparison into this argument!

(04-23-2013 11:06 PM)surlycanon Wrote:  Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

Apples to apples eh...

How about this, The new sunbelt has 3 bowl teams from the 2012 season. With 3 extra teams, New CUSA only sent 2 teams to bowl games last year. We went 2-1 in our bowls, yall went 1-1, and those are the games that matter.

(04-23-2013 11:59 PM)Tuffguy21 Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:06 PM)surlycanon Wrote:  Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

Apples to apples eh...

How about this, The new sunbelt has 3 bowl teams from the 2012 season. With 3 extra teams, New CUSA only sent 2 teams to bowl games last year. We went 2-1 in our bowls, yall went 1-1, and those are the games that matter.

Well, LaTech should've had a bowl but politics and timing got in the way. I know that "technically" they didn't go to a bowl but they missed out for non-football reasons.

(04-24-2013 12:14 AM)slow-runner Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:59 PM)Tuffguy21 Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:06 PM)surlycanon Wrote:  Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

Apples to apples eh...

How about this, The new sunbelt has 3 bowl teams from the 2012 season. With 3 extra teams, New CUSA only sent 2 teams to bowl games last year. We went 2-1 in our bowls, yall went 1-1, and those are the games that matter.

Well, LaTech should've had a bowl but politics and timing got in the way. I know that "technically" they didn't go to a bowl but they missed out for non-football reasons.

Same could be said for Middle Tennessee, in the end, they still didnt go. Heck, tech didn't go because they refused to play ULM in a bowl game. That says more about their incompetent administration than anything.

(04-23-2013 11:59 PM)Tuffguy21 Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:06 PM)surlycanon Wrote:  Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

Apples to apples eh...

How about this, The new sunbelt has 3 bowl teams from the 2012 season. With 3 extra teams, New CUSA only sent 2 teams to bowl games last year. We went 2-1 in our bowls, yall went 1-1, and those are the games that matter.

You went 1-1 against the MAC and beat a future AAC team..... please tell me how that compares our two conferences again??

(04-24-2013 12:51 AM)surlycanon Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:59 PM)Tuffguy21 Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:06 PM)surlycanon Wrote:  Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

Apples to apples eh...

How about this, The new sunbelt has 3 bowl teams from the 2012 season. With 3 extra teams, New CUSA only sent 2 teams to bowl games last year. We went 2-1 in our bowls, yall went 1-1, and those are the games that matter.

You went 1-1 against the MAC and beat a future AAC team..... please tell me how that compares our two conferences again??

I'm sorry, I just figured since we played in the "Football Bowl Subdivision" the amount of bowl teams and bowl records might be important to a conferences standing, but I must be completely crazy. We won the games we needed too, and I have no doubt that either UL or stAte could and would be able to beat any team in the new CUSA. Stats bear this out too as in RPI terms those 2 would be #1 and #3 in total combined rankings.

(04-24-2013 01:14 AM)Tuffguy21 Wrote:  

(04-24-2013 12:51 AM)surlycanon Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:59 PM)Tuffguy21 Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:06 PM)surlycanon Wrote:  Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

Apples to apples eh...

How about this, The new sunbelt has 3 bowl teams from the 2012 season. With 3 extra teams, New CUSA only sent 2 teams to bowl games last year. We went 2-1 in our bowls, yall went 1-1, and those are the games that matter.

You went 1-1 against the MAC and beat a future AAC team..... please tell me how that compares our two conferences again??

I'm sorry, I just figured since we played in the "Football Bowl Subdivision" the amount of bowl teams and bowl records might be important to a conferences standing, but I must be completely crazy. We won the games we needed too, and I have no doubt that either UL or stAte could and would be able to beat any team in the new CUSA. Stats bear this out too as in RPI terms those 2 would be #1 and #3 in total combined rankings.

You talk about things that "matter" and then you bring up football RPI?? Seriously? Are you gonna start thumping your chest about sagarin ratings, too?? I'm talking about actual games on an actual field.

(04-23-2013 11:59 PM)Tuffguy21 Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:06 PM)surlycanon Wrote:  Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

Apples to apples eh...

How about this, The new sunbelt has 3 bowl teams from the 2012 season. With 3 extra teams, New CUSA only sent 2 teams to bowl games last year. We went 2-1 in our bowls, yall went 1-1, and those are the games that matter.

And the new CUSA had four bowl eligible teams, one of which didn't go bowling due to Sun Belt membership. The last time an eligible CUSA team sat at home was 2006 when SMU went 6-6 and didn't receive a bowl bid, since then the Sun Belt has had one 7-5 team and two 8-4 teams left sitting at home.

(04-24-2013 10:10 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:59 PM)Tuffguy21 Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:06 PM)surlycanon Wrote:  Furthermore Sun Belt additions went 1-9 against the Future of CUSA, while CUSA Additions went 17-15 against the future of the Belt.

Apples to apples eh...

How about this, The new sunbelt has 3 bowl teams from the 2012 season. With 3 extra teams, New CUSA only sent 2 teams to bowl games last year. We went 2-1 in our bowls, yall went 1-1, and those are the games that matter.

And the new CUSA had four bowl eligible teams, one of which didn't go bowling due to Sun Belt membership. The last time an eligible CUSA team sat at home was 2006 when SMU went 6-6 and didn't receive a bowl bid, since then the Sun Belt has had one 7-5 team and two 8-4 teams left sitting at home.

Not that bowl tie ins will not change in a few years, but I think this was main reason at least in football we seeked a CUSA membership....Has to be frustrating fininshing second in conf. and left out.....I think the SBC can get to 3 bowl tie ins, but CUSA will still have 4 if nothing else changed or they did not gain one...