(11-21-2013 03:54 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  The sooner we realize we are all in this together the better off we will all be. To an extent I do understand how the Louisiana fans feel about the newcomers, but it is what it is. I think I speak for most Georgia SOuthern fans when I say we are happy to have been invited to the SunBelt and we are certainly going to try to do all we can to help this league.

I think most Cajun fans will tell you honestly, the problem is not the FCS move as much as another program in the Eastern Time Zone, that we have very little history. Although I don't think Ga Southern will cake walk through the SBC like some of their supporters believe, the program will eventually do well. With USA and WKU, we had established rivalries in basketball and baseball. There is no such history between our programs or App. State. For me, it has always come down to.... 1)No traditional rivalry,2) Another Eastern program outside our foot print, 3) FCS transition. Everything else has been just Smack Exchange.

I do understand that. We are also joining a conference in which we don't have great natural rivalries at this point either. We have not played many SunBelt teams (outside of course Appalachian and to some extent Georgia State). We haven't played many Sunbelt teams in any sport really. But it is exciting for us to play other teams. Many of the teams we have played in the SoCon are small private schools like Wofford, Furman, etc.

We are finally in the conference we belong in-- a conference of public schools with fairly large attendance.

(11-21-2013 03:51 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  Were the F_Us, MT, and UNT the best conference members? Plus with CUSA losing ECU, Memphis, Tulane, and Tulsa I don't see them getting better TV contracts next time they are up for negotiation. To be honest I see them as a future WAC.

CUSA couldn't possibly end up with a TV contract that's any worse than what the SBC currently has. And CUSA will never fall to the depths that the WAC has if for no other reason, CUSA can always raid the SBC of whoever it wants, whenever it wants. That being said, I'm not pulling for the SBC to fall on harder times. I wish we could somehow form a better working alliance between all of the G5 conferences, but everyone is in survival mode and looking out for their own best interest these days, so alliances don't fit into the picture. Once everyone wakes up and realizes that we've all been kicked to the wayside by the P5 conferences, maybe we'll figure out a way to make some sort of alliance work between all of us.

(10-02-2013 08:47 AM)JCGSU Wrote:  ............. The Sun Belt plays more SEC opponents than any other conference year after year. Context always seems to escape articles when you have an agenda. I wonder if we end up better if he will write another article.....

That is very true. Sort of the same thing happens when people have an agenda to discredit GaSou by listing our record against FBS teams. "You have never won a FBS game".. etc. When the fact is that nearly 100% of those people's chosen programs have never beaten the FBS teams that we failed to beat (Mostly SEC teams), and in fact many of them didn't keep those games as close as we did (since we are talking about margin of victory). And those that may have beaten those teams at some point in their history, either A: Didn't do it in the same year's that we lost to those teams (For instance Oregon St just happened to go from the floor mat of the PAC THE year we played them and lost 41-48 - seems nearly every time we have gone up against one of the Giants.. they managed to get bigger that year). OR B: Are one the BCS programs themselves.

When you take losses out of context when comparing conferences or individual teams, it doesn't mean much. I would love to play Minnesota! But oops, aren't they doing really abnormally well this year?

And hey, now we get one in a downward spiral (UF) and dang if we ain't spiraling down ourselves with injuries.

(11-21-2013 06:52 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(11-21-2013 03:51 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  Were the F_Us, MT, and UNT the best conference members? Plus with CUSA losing ECU, Memphis, Tulane, and Tulsa I don't see them getting better TV contracts next time they are up for negotiation. To be honest I see them as a future WAC.

CUSA couldn't possibly end up with a TV contract that's any worse than what the SBC currently has. And CUSA will never fall to the depths that the WAC has if for no other reason, CUSA can always raid the SBC of whoever it wants, whenever it wants. That being said, I'm not pulling for the SBC to fall on harder times. I wish we could somehow form a better working alliance between all of the G5 conferences, but everyone is in survival mode and looking out for their own best interest these days, so alliances don't fit into the picture. Once everyone wakes up and realizes that we've all been kicked to the wayside by the P5 conferences, maybe we'll figure out a way to make some sort of alliance work between all of us.

CUSA's contract might stay the same, but there is little in the way of the Belt gaining ground and signing a better deal than the current CUSA contract. Plus, you have to divide your pie between more members which makes that payout you have less attractive to even an equal payout to the SBC.

This is the arrogance of the current CUSA. Y'all act as if you still have what made CUSA so great. The only thing you have right now is a TV contract and Bowl tie ins that were inked when your conference had "better" members. When that is up for renegotiation, it can only get worse. The Sun Belt's can only get better. Keep thinking that you will "always" be able to raid the Sun Belt of any program you want. As soon as the first Belt member says.. "No thanks" - You will realize what side of the fence you are actually on going forward. The pasture on this side is actually greener!.. Or will be imop :) .

Imagine a Belt that is continuously ranked as the highest G5 conference and getting to that extra access bowl. Say we create our own tie in by doing that. Didn't your conference just publically announce that they were going to try to schedule easier OOC games? Ok, As long as we keep scheduling SEC games, our potential for jumping ahead due to SOS is much greater. Our teams are just plain BETTER. I think that will lead to additional recognition and Bowls for our conference. I used to want to be in CUSA, now I wouldn't want it if it was offered. If our members can hold tight with an "all for one, and one for all" attitude..... There is no telling what the Sun Belt can do!

(11-22-2013 10:21 AM)The4thOption Wrote:  The only thing you have right now is a TV contract and Bowl tie ins that were inked when your conference had "better" members.

CUSAs better days are over; their better members gone. North Texas would not be 7-3 in the old CUSA, or today's SBC for that matter. In that regard CUSA is somewhat of an attractive offer.

(11-22-2013 10:33 AM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  

(11-22-2013 10:21 AM)The4thOption Wrote:  The only thing you have right now is a TV contract and Bowl tie ins that were inked when your conference had "better" members.

CUSAs better days are over; their better members gone. North Texas would not be 7-3 in the old CUSA, or today's SBC for that matter. In that regard CUSA is somewhat of an attractive offer.

These facts will not escape future recruits.

(11-22-2013 10:36 AM)The4thOption Wrote:  

(11-22-2013 10:33 AM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  

(11-22-2013 10:21 AM)The4thOption Wrote:  The only thing you have right now is a TV contract and Bowl tie ins that were inked when your conference had "better" members.

CUSAs better days are over; their better members gone. North Texas would not be 7-3 in the old CUSA, or today's SBC for that matter. In that regard CUSA is somewhat of an attractive offer.

These facts will not escape future recruits.

No, but if UL, stAte, ULM, or Troy were to be called over the tide QUICKLY changes. There are still a lot of programs in CUSA that have potential to be great, same with the SBC. Only time will tell.

(11-21-2013 06:52 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(11-21-2013 03:51 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  Were the F_Us, MT, and UNT the best conference members? Plus with CUSA losing ECU, Memphis, Tulane, and Tulsa I don't see them getting better TV contracts next time they are up for negotiation. To be honest I see them as a future WAC.

CUSA couldn't possibly end up with a TV contract that's any worse than what the SBC currently has. And CUSA will never fall to the depths that the WAC has if for no other reason, CUSA can always raid the SBC of whoever it wants, whenever it wants. That being said, I'm not pulling for the SBC to fall on harder times. I wish we could somehow form a better working alliance between all of the G5 conferences, but everyone is in survival mode and looking out for their own best interest these days, so alliances don't fit into the picture. Once everyone wakes up and realizes that we've all been kicked to the wayside by the P5 conferences, maybe we'll figure out a way to make some sort of alliance work between all of us.

Yes and No. Keep in mind that when the SBC contract renegotiates, all of our new programs...App, Ga State, Ga Southern, USA, even whoever we add next, will have had time to build their programs.

In other words, we have the greater potential to win games, build programs, and build our TV deal that way. When CUSA signs their new deal, that league will be stuck with that contract for 15 years or so. Meaning your value as your league is seen now, is what the value will be 15 years down the road.

Since we don't have to bother renegotiating for another 5 or 6 years...We have time to actually build our brand and settle after this realignment mess takes a break.

(10-02-2013 08:47 AM)JCGSU Wrote:  The Sun Belt plays more SEC opponents than any other conference year after year.

That is not true.

(11-22-2013 10:21 AM)The4thOption Wrote:  

(11-21-2013 06:52 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(11-21-2013 03:51 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  Were the F_Us, MT, and UNT the best conference members? Plus with CUSA losing ECU, Memphis, Tulane, and Tulsa I don't see them getting better TV contracts next time they are up for negotiation. To be honest I see them as a future WAC.

CUSA couldn't possibly end up with a TV contract that's any worse than what the SBC currently has. And CUSA will never fall to the depths that the WAC has if for no other reason, CUSA can always raid the SBC of whoever it wants, whenever it wants. That being said, I'm not pulling for the SBC to fall on harder times. I wish we could somehow form a better working alliance between all of the G5 conferences, but everyone is in survival mode and looking out for their own best interest these days, so alliances don't fit into the picture. Once everyone wakes up and realizes that we've all been kicked to the wayside by the P5 conferences, maybe we'll figure out a way to make some sort of alliance work between all of us.

CUSA's contract might stay the same, but there is little in the way of the Belt gaining ground and signing a better deal than the current CUSA contract. Plus, you have to divide your pie between more members which makes that payout you have less attractive to even an equal payout to the SBC.

This is the arrogance of the current CUSA. Y'all act as if you still have what made CUSA so great. The only thing you have right now is a TV contract and Bowl tie ins that were inked when your conference had "better" members. When that is up for renegotiation, it can only get worse. The Sun Belt's can only get better. Keep thinking that you will "always" be able to raid the Sun Belt of any program you want. As soon as the first Belt member says.. "No thanks" - You will realize what side of the fence you are actually on going forward. The pasture on this side is actually greener!.. Or will be imop :) .

Imagine a Belt that is continuously ranked as the highest G5 conference and getting to that extra access bowl. Say we create our own tie in by doing that. Didn't your conference just publically announce that they were going to try to schedule easier OOC games? Ok, As long as we keep scheduling SEC games, our potential for jumping ahead due to SOS is much greater. Our teams are just plain BETTER. I think that will lead to additional recognition and Bowls for our conference. I used to want to be in CUSA, now I wouldn't want it if it was offered. If our members can hold tight with an "all for one, and one for all" attitude..... There is no telling what the Sun Belt can do!

If you could pull that off, you'd actually have a chance to build the SBC into a rock solid G5 conference. The problem is, not a single G5 conference has ever been able to get its members to hold tight with a "one for all and all for one" attitude. Instead, everyone looks out for #1, and as a result, schools jump at the first offer that comes along from a conference that is perceived to be a step up. UNT, MT, FIU, FAU, and WKU all thought leaving the SBC for CUSA was a step up, so they left. Given the chance, ULL, Ark ST, TX St, and any other SBC member will leave for CUSA too. It isn't just the SBC that has to deal with this. CUSA has been raided too. ECU, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis, UCF, and Houston all left CUSA for the AAC because they felt like it was a step up. Every member in CUSA would leave today for the AAC if given the chance. That's just the way it is.

(11-22-2013 05:50 PM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  

(10-02-2013 08:47 AM)JCGSU Wrote:  The Sun Belt plays more SEC opponents than any other conference year after year.

That is not true.

http://www.colleyrankings.com/curconf.html

Reality would like to have a chat with you. Two years in a row now.

(11-25-2013 06:36 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(11-22-2013 05:50 PM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  

(10-02-2013 08:47 AM)JCGSU Wrote:  The Sun Belt plays more SEC opponents than any other conference year after year.

That is not true.

http://www.colleyrankings.com/curconf.html

Reality would like to have a chat with you. Two years in a row now.

I think c-usa is a little bit of a step up perception wise as long as they hang onto rice and so miss and utep and marshall...untexas and la tech are not far behind those others but c-usa is gaining wku which has been improving their name value. we have a little better conference football wise and just need to hang onto the schools we have and win more games..we are going to make a name for ourselves in baseball and before long in basketball too. adding two state flagship schools next year will help with the perception thing and I think nmsu and Idaho will be better next year in football.

(11-25-2013 06:49 PM)runamuck Wrote:  

(11-25-2013 06:36 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(11-22-2013 05:50 PM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  

(10-02-2013 08:47 AM)JCGSU Wrote:  The Sun Belt plays more SEC opponents than any other conference year after year.

That is not true.

http://www.colleyrankings.com/curconf.html

Reality would like to have a chat with you. Two years in a row now.

I think c-usa is a little bit of a step up perception wise as long as they hang onto rice and so miss and utep and marshall...untexas and la tech are not far behind those others but c-usa is gaining wku which has been improving their name value. we have a little better conference football wise and just need to hang onto the schools we have and win more games..we are going to make a name for ourselves in baseball and before long in basketball too. adding two state flagship schools next year will help with the perception thing and I think nmsu and Idaho will be better next year in football.

Everything hinges on what happens this year in realignment. If the P-5 conferences have invited every G5 school that they're going to, then the SBC will probably hold on to all of its current members and can build from there. If a couple of schools from the AAC manage to get a spot in the ACC, then look for Rice and either UNT, UTEP or UTSA to leave CUSA for the AAC as replacements. Then it will be a matter of whether CUSA stays at 12, or if it goes back to 14 by grabbing two of either ULL, Ark St, or TX St. It's starting to look more and more like realignment may be over and that conference membership is pretty well set for the next decade or two.