(12-06-2013 03:31 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 02:57 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Bowl eligible records for teams that will be in both conference next season:


Rice (9-3)
Marshall (9-3)
North Texas (8-4)
MTSU (8-4)
WKU (8-4)
UTSA (7-5)
FAU (6-6)


UCF (10-1)
Cincinnati (9-3)
ECU (9-3)
Houston (8-4)
Tulane (7-5)

If the top programs in both conferences preform similarly next season, these conferences won't look all that different, aside from the 10-1 record posted by UCF.

Records without any value of SOS to give them context are pretty useless. ODU is 8-4, you could have put them up there because it looks nice but that doesn't mean anything without context of who they played?

You need more context. CUSA leadership choose the BCS Computers just this week as the fairest way to provide that context and pick their best team to host if records were the same.

This was the computer average last week of the teams you posted (or missed like Navy).


46.5 Rice (9-3) Kansas 3-9
56.25 Marshall (9-3) Miami (OH) 0-12
62.25 North Texas (8-4) Ball St. 10-2
68.25 MTSU (8-4) Memphis 3-8
68.5 WKU (8-4) Kentucky 2-10
71.25 UTSA (7-5) New Mexico 3-9
82.75 FAU (6-6) South Florida 2-9

15.5 UCF (10-1) Penn St. 7-5
45.5 Houston (8-4) Rice 9-3
48.25 ECU (9-3) N. Carolina 6-6
48.5 Cincinnati (9-3) Purdue 1-11
50.75 Navy (7-4) not in AAC until 2015
75.5 Tulane (7-5) UL Monroe 6-6

The context of who ODU played is exactly why I didn't include ODU, even though it would have made C-USA look better. They were not an FBS program this past season. Navy won't join the AAC until 2015, not 2014. That is why they are not on the list.

To be honest, neither conferences' OOC wins are outstanding, and to be totally honest, collectively, the AAC's OOC wins were against somewhat better competition. But personally, I think most of the strength of schedule advantage the AAC enjoyed this season came from the high ranking Louisville started the season with, combined with UFC working their way into the rankings. Louisville won't be their to help the AAC's strength of schedule next season. Best OOC wins have been added.

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 04:16 PM)MeanGreenGem Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 11:47 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Whether or not I like C-USA is irrelevant. It is the worst FBS conference.

http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/...f_Men.html
http://warrennolan.com/football/2013/conferencenpi

Why so damn bitter acting?

G5 leagues will vascillate from one year to the next as far as who is the best one. I don't see any of em' ever becoming year in and year out dynasties.

PLUS..........it seems that just last weekend that all 3 CUSA schools leaving for the AAC were all 3 defeated in CUSA action.

The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

Whaaa????!!!

I think North Texas is a better value for C-USA.

North Texas 8-4 - Going bowling, averaged over 21,000 real fans in attendance this season, and has 100,000 alums in the Dallas area.

SMU 5-6 (soon to be 5-7) bowling is unlikely (they have to beat #16 UCF), averaging under 19,000 (and we all know that number doesn't reflect the true attendance), and Alumni in Dallas area? (I have no clue, maybe 15,000???)

How is North Texas replacing SMU not a better value for C-USA?

(12-06-2013 08:35 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  The context of who ODU played is exactly why I didn't include ODU, even though it would have made C-USA look better. They were not an FBS program this past season.

Actually, they are considered FBS, they just played a much weaker SOS schedule which you acknowledge and which is the point exaggerated with out any farther context. Just because they were FBS didn't make them the same or their record a valid comparison which is the point.

Quote:46.5 Rice (9-3) Kansas 3-9
56.25 Marshall (9-3) Miami (OH) 0-12
62.25 North Texas (8-4) Ball St. 10-2
68.25 MTSU (8-4) Memphis 3-8
68.5 WKU (8-4) Kentucky 2-10
71.25 UTSA (7-5) New Mexico 3-9
82.75 FAU (6-6) South Florida 2-9

15.5 UCF (10-1) Penn St. 7-5
45.5 Houston (8-4) Rice 9-3
48.25 ECU (9-3) N. Carolina 6-6
48.5 Cincinnati (9-3) Purdue 1-11
50.75 Navy (7-4) not in AAC until 2015
75.5 Tulane (7-5) UL Monroe 6-6

One game does not sum up the difference, in some cases for example our 2nd or 3rd best OOC win was top 5 to 7 best in CUSA this year and better than some of the others you listed, nor does it tell you a 6-6 UNC might be as highly ranked as a 10-2 Ball St. Again it gives you no information or context beyond a flat record. Their are tools like computer rankings to adjust for all of this you just don't like what they say.

Quote:But personally, I think most of the strength of schedule advantage the AAC enjoyed this season came from the high ranking Louisville started the season

You can say Louisville had an effect on the SOS, but they were also a loss for everyone not name UCF and as you will see with Cincy will cost them spots in a ranking. It didn't help anyone but UCF.

(12-06-2013 08:00 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  PirateMarv I disagree. I think Marshall's football program is on par with all the schools you specifically listed. Our bball is just as good as most of the schools you also listed. No idea where you get acting like this.

Top to bottom is the AAC better right now? IMO, Absolutely! Is it as much better as SOME of you are acting like, no not at all. I think we are the 3rd best right now behind the AAC & MWC when I say best, that jmo only.

Marshall sports rely heavily on non-qualifiers. The AAC does not allow non-qualifiers, so where would that leave Marshall in relation to those other schools if Marshall could not accept the student athletes that Marshall strongly rely on. Marshall doesn't have the natural recruiting grounds of Florida, North Carolina, Louisiana, Tennessee or Texas to get players; so without a pipeline of non-qualifiers coming out of Florida, how could Marshall compete long term?

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 04:16 PM)MeanGreenGem Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 11:47 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Whether or not I like C-USA is irrelevant. It is the worst FBS conference.

http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/...f_Men.html
http://warrennolan.com/football/2013/conferencenpi

Why so damn bitter acting?

G5 leagues will vascillate from one year to the next as far as who is the best one. I don't see any of em' ever becoming year in and year out dynasties.

PLUS..........it seems that just last weekend that all 3 CUSA schools leaving for the AAC were all 3 defeated in CUSA action.

The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

This is the same reason you can't blame UConn and to some extent Cincinnati and South Florida fans for not being too happy about being downgraded to a C-USA level league. Especially UConn which was in the best college basketball league in the nation and made it to a BCS bowl (whether they deserved or not it's a moot point, they won the Big East's autobid). Cincinnati had Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette in their court and won made it to the Orange Bowl twice......now they're in the American. South Florida made it as high as being ranked #2 in the BCS. Now they're out of the cartel.

So UAB and Southern Miss fans can relate to UConn, Cincinnati and South Florida fans for being stuck in conferences they had no desire being part of after their rivals left.

(12-06-2013 09:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 04:16 PM)MeanGreenGem Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 11:47 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Whether or not I like C-USA is irrelevant. It is the worst FBS conference.

http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/...f_Men.html
http://warrennolan.com/football/2013/conferencenpi

Why so damn bitter acting?

G5 leagues will vascillate from one year to the next as far as who is the best one. I don't see any of em' ever becoming year in and year out dynasties.

PLUS..........it seems that just last weekend that all 3 CUSA schools leaving for the AAC were all 3 defeated in CUSA action.

The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

Whaaa????!!!

I think North Texas is a better value for C-USA.

North Texas 8-4 - Going bowling, averaged over 21,000 real fans in attendance this season, and has 100,000 alums in the Dallas area.

SMU 5-6 (soon to be 5-7) bowling is unlikely (they have to beat #16 UCF), averaging under 19,000 (and we all know that number doesn't reflect the true attendance), and Alumni in Dallas area? (I have no clue, maybe 15,000???)

How is North Texas replacing SMU not a better value for C-USA?

Are you serious? If SMU can find a competent college coach tomorrow, they (SMU) literally have the money to buy him. Think about that for a minute. They can literally buy your coach.

(12-06-2013 09:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 04:16 PM)MeanGreenGem Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 11:47 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Whether or not I like C-USA is irrelevant. It is the worst FBS conference.

http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/...f_Men.html
http://warrennolan.com/football/2013/conferencenpi

Why so damn bitter acting?

G5 leagues will vascillate from one year to the next as far as who is the best one. I don't see any of em' ever becoming year in and year out dynasties.

PLUS..........it seems that just last weekend that all 3 CUSA schools leaving for the AAC were all 3 defeated in CUSA action.

The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

Whaaa????!!!

I think North Texas is a better value for C-USA.

North Texas 8-4 - Going bowling, averaged over 21,000 real fans in attendance this season, and has 100,000 alums in the Dallas area.

SMU 5-6 (soon to be 5-7) bowling is unlikely (they have to beat #16 UCF), averaging under 19,000 (and we all know that number doesn't reflect the true attendance), and Alumni in Dallas area? (I have no clue, maybe 15,000???)

How is North Texas replacing SMU not a better value for C-USA?

First bowl game for North Texas in what a decade? SMU has had more winning seasons and bowl games in the last decade than North Texas. North Texas has to show that it can sustain winning seasons. SMU has much more brand recognition and more prestige than North Texas. Do not think there is much comparison between the two schools at the moment. North Texas is a fine school, but has yet imo, to replace the value of SMU.

(12-06-2013 09:19 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 04:16 PM)MeanGreenGem Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 11:47 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Whether or not I like C-USA is irrelevant. It is the worst FBS conference.

http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/...f_Men.html
http://warrennolan.com/football/2013/conferencenpi

Why so damn bitter acting?

G5 leagues will vascillate from one year to the next as far as who is the best one. I don't see any of em' ever becoming year in and year out dynasties.

PLUS..........it seems that just last weekend that all 3 CUSA schools leaving for the AAC were all 3 defeated in CUSA action.

The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

This is the same reason you can't blame UConn and to some extent Cincinnati and South Florida fans for not being too happy about being downgraded to a C-USA level league. Especially UConn which was in the best college basketball league in the nation and made it to a BCS bowl (whether they deserved or not it's a moot point, they won the Big East's autobid). Cincinnati had Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette in their court and won made it to the Orange Bowl twice......now they're in the American. South Florida made it as high as being ranked #2 in the BCS. Now they're out of the cartel.

So UAB and Southern Miss fans can relate to UConn, Cincinnati and South Florida fans for being stuck in conferences they had no desire being part of after their rivals left.

What? Cincinnati was a founding member of CUSA. Hell USF was brought into CUSA as basically a start up FBS program back around a decade ago even before UCF was in CUSA; so Cincinnati and USF are just as much CUSA as UAB, USM, Memphis, Houston and ECU.

UConn can go wherever they want to go. They were in FCS just a decade ago, so being in the AAC is still a major step up over FCS. And I have new for you: the BE was a CUSA level league, except for the fact that the BE had the U.

(12-06-2013 09:22 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 04:16 PM)MeanGreenGem Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 11:47 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Whether or not I like C-USA is irrelevant. It is the worst FBS conference.

http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/...f_Men.html
http://warrennolan.com/football/2013/conferencenpi

Why so damn bitter acting?

G5 leagues will vascillate from one year to the next as far as who is the best one. I don't see any of em' ever becoming year in and year out dynasties.

PLUS..........it seems that just last weekend that all 3 CUSA schools leaving for the AAC were all 3 defeated in CUSA action.

The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

Whaaa????!!!

I think North Texas is a better value for C-USA.

North Texas 8-4 - Going bowling, averaged over 21,000 real fans in attendance this season, and has 100,000 alums in the Dallas area.

SMU 5-6 (soon to be 5-7) bowling is unlikely (they have to beat #16 UCF), averaging under 19,000 (and we all know that number doesn't reflect the true attendance), and Alumni in Dallas area? (I have no clue, maybe 15,000???)

How is North Texas replacing SMU not a better value for C-USA?

Are you serious? If SMU can find a competent college coach tomorrow, they (SMU) literally have the money to buy him. Think about that for a minute. They can literally buy your coach.

SMU can buy any coach they want. Problem is SMU has a perception issue here in Dallas whether that perception is right or wrong and it's reflected in its attendance in both revenue sports. SMU is seen as a rich, elitist, out of touch, daddy pays for my black American Express card type of school. It's located in one if not the wealthiest neighborhood in Texas where old money and oil money collide. Middle class average Joe here with his wife and two kids won't go to SMU for a game for the reasons I just wrote above. I personally believe that stereotype people have of SMU is way overblown and they have missed a decent product they have put on the field but it is what it is. OTOH, folks in Fort Worth have embraced TCU because that school is seen as more blue collar and part of their community something SMU is far from achieving......even though they've been trying with their "Pony Up" and "SMU Is Dallas Team" marketing campaigns in the last few years. UNT has potential attracting fans in the northern suburbs.

(12-06-2013 09:35 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:22 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 04:16 PM)MeanGreenGem Wrote:  
Why so damn bitter acting?

G5 leagues will vascillate from one year to the next as far as who is the best one. I don't see any of em' ever becoming year in and year out dynasties.

PLUS..........it seems that just last weekend that all 3 CUSA schools leaving for the AAC were all 3 defeated in CUSA action.

The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

Whaaa????!!!

I think North Texas is a better value for C-USA.

North Texas 8-4 - Going bowling, averaged over 21,000 real fans in attendance this season, and has 100,000 alums in the Dallas area.

SMU 5-6 (soon to be 5-7) bowling is unlikely (they have to beat #16 UCF), averaging under 19,000 (and we all know that number doesn't reflect the true attendance), and Alumni in Dallas area? (I have no clue, maybe 15,000???)

How is North Texas replacing SMU not a better value for C-USA?

Are you serious? If SMU can find a competent college coach tomorrow, they (SMU) literally have the money to buy him. Think about that for a minute. They can literally buy your coach.

SMU can buy any coach they want. Problem is SMU has a perception issue here in Dallas whether that perception is right or wrong and it's reflected in its attendance in both revenue sports. SMU is seen as a rich, elitist, out of touch, daddy pays for my black American Express card type of school. It's located in one if not the wealthiest neighborhood in Texas where old money and oil money collide. Middle class average Joe here with his wife and two kids won't go to SMU for a game for the reasons I just wrote above. I personally believe that stereotype people have of SMU is way overblown and they have missed a decent product they have put on the field but it is what it is. OTOH, folks in Fort Worth have embraced TCU because that school is seen as more blue collar and part of their community something SMU is far from achieving......even though they've been trying with their "Pony Up" and "SMU Is Dallas Team" marketing campaigns in the last few years. UNT has potential attracting fans in the northern suburbs.

You just described Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, USC, Notre Dame, Boson College, Wake Forest and Vanderbilt. Guess what happened to all of those programs once they decided to open their wallets and buy good coaches?

For goodness sakes SMU was just stinking up the dump in basketball just 2 years ago and then they went out and bought Larry Brown. Larry Brown!!!! All of a sudden SMU basketball doesn't have a perception problem anymore.

(12-06-2013 09:33 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:19 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 04:16 PM)MeanGreenGem Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 11:47 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Whether or not I like C-USA is irrelevant. It is the worst FBS conference.

http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/...f_Men.html
http://warrennolan.com/football/2013/conferencenpi

Why so damn bitter acting?

G5 leagues will vascillate from one year to the next as far as who is the best one. I don't see any of em' ever becoming year in and year out dynasties.

PLUS..........it seems that just last weekend that all 3 CUSA schools leaving for the AAC were all 3 defeated in CUSA action.

The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

This is the same reason you can't blame UConn and to some extent Cincinnati and South Florida fans for not being too happy about being downgraded to a C-USA level league. Especially UConn which was in the best college basketball league in the nation and made it to a BCS bowl (whether they deserved or not it's a moot point, they won the Big East's autobid). Cincinnati had Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette in their court and won made it to the Orange Bowl twice......now they're in the American. South Florida made it as high as being ranked #2 in the BCS. Now they're out of the cartel.

So UAB and Southern Miss fans can relate to UConn, Cincinnati and South Florida fans for being stuck in conferences they had no desire being part of after their rivals left.

What? Cincinnati was a founding member of CUSA. Hell USF was brought into CUSA as basically a start up FBS program back around a decade ago even before UCF was in CUSA; so Cincinnati and USF are just as much CUSA as UAB, USM, Memphis, Houston and ECU.

UConn can go wherever they want to go. They were in FCS just a decade ago, so being in the AAC is still a major step up over FCS. And I have new for you: the BE was a CUSA level league, except for the fact that the BE had the U.

UConn was a founding member of the Big East. Cincinnati and South Florida got to enjoy the benefits of being affiliated with a BCS conference. Now they're back in a conference they thought they escaped forever. Do you honestly believe those three want to be associated with East Carolina, Temple, Tulane, SMU, Houston, etc? Especially UConn which is P5 school (just look at their budget) stuck in C-USA aka the American. That's no different on how UAB and Southern Miss might feel about C-USA 3.0

(12-06-2013 09:43 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:33 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:19 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 04:16 PM)MeanGreenGem Wrote:  
Why so damn bitter acting?

G5 leagues will vascillate from one year to the next as far as who is the best one. I don't see any of em' ever becoming year in and year out dynasties.

PLUS..........it seems that just last weekend that all 3 CUSA schools leaving for the AAC were all 3 defeated in CUSA action.

The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

This is the same reason you can't blame UConn and to some extent Cincinnati and South Florida fans for not being too happy about being downgraded to a C-USA level league. Especially UConn which was in the best college basketball league in the nation and made it to a BCS bowl (whether they deserved or not it's a moot point, they won the Big East's autobid). Cincinnati had Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette in their court and won made it to the Orange Bowl twice......now they're in the American. South Florida made it as high as being ranked #2 in the BCS. Now they're out of the cartel.

So UAB and Southern Miss fans can relate to UConn, Cincinnati and South Florida fans for being stuck in conferences they had no desire being part of after their rivals left.

What? Cincinnati was a founding member of CUSA. Hell USF was brought into CUSA as basically a start up FBS program back around a decade ago even before UCF was in CUSA; so Cincinnati and USF are just as much CUSA as UAB, USM, Memphis, Houston and ECU.

UConn can go wherever they want to go. They were in FCS just a decade ago, so being in the AAC is still a major step up over FCS. And I have new for you: the BE was a CUSA level league, except for the fact that the BE had the U.

UConn was a founding member of the Big East. Cincinnati and South Florida got to enjoy the benefits of being affiliated with a BCS conference. Now they're back in a conference they thought they escaped forever. Do you honestly believe those three want to be associated with East Carolina, Temple, Tulane, SMU, Houston, etc? Especially UConn which is P5 school (just look at their budget) stuck in C-USA aka the American. That's no different on how UAB and Southern Miss might feel about C-USA 3.0

The BE was not a football league until much later and even then UConn's football team was in FCS. People keep forgetting that the Big East was founded as a basketball league, not a football league.

Secondly, ECU should have been in the BE for football nearly from the time that football was added to that league. Miami and WVU openly pulled for ECU in that league for years. Don't forget that Miami and VT were football only members of the Big East and they wanted ECU as a football only too. The fact that VT and Temple were added is one of those goofy historical footnotes, but even then VT joined in with WVU and Miami in openly pulling for ECU to get into the BE. The BE gave those schools no choice but to leave, because it was apparent those schools that the BE was not going to make football a priority. The real silly part is that Cincinnati used to be as horrible at football as UTEP. Cincy didn't get decent until they got into the BE.

1 or 2 G5 conferences seem to be the biggest intercollegiate athletics social climbers around. Many of their schools never happy where they are and once they get to where they think they want to be, they're still not happy it seems and then WALA!...........here will come yet another re-alignment sending some of these schools back to Square 1. All this would make for a good TV sitcom.

UNT, Bowls & Traveling Fans: Strange is how North Texas has traveled as many as 20,000 fans to UT in the past and 17,000 to a Tuesday night New Orleans Bowl game last decade.

HOD Bowl officials have said they feel because of our proximity to them (and I suppose) our past history of traveling Mean Green fans at strategic games that we would bring 25,000 (+/-) to their bowl game if we were to get the HOD Bowl. Not really sure we will go to the HOD.

UNT actually has over 200,000 UNT alums in the DFW area and a school that will reach 40,000 in enrollment according to a state of Texas education board that projects future enrollment for public universities in Texas. So obviously this makes some of us feel we are not doing our best at selling football season tickets along with large group promotions for a school that has room for new fans in its stadium on Game Days. Hope that aspect changes very soon.

We've had almost a decade of under .500 seasons until this Fall so for our students (and our football players) this winning thing is a whole new experience. I hope it continues one more game whatever bowl game we go to.

(12-06-2013 09:43 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:35 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:22 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

Whaaa????!!!

I think North Texas is a better value for C-USA.

North Texas 8-4 - Going bowling, averaged over 21,000 real fans in attendance this season, and has 100,000 alums in the Dallas area.

SMU 5-6 (soon to be 5-7) bowling is unlikely (they have to beat #16 UCF), averaging under 19,000 (and we all know that number doesn't reflect the true attendance), and Alumni in Dallas area? (I have no clue, maybe 15,000???)

How is North Texas replacing SMU not a better value for C-USA?

Are you serious? If SMU can find a competent college coach tomorrow, they (SMU) literally have the money to buy him. Think about that for a minute. They can literally buy your coach.

SMU can buy any coach they want. Problem is SMU has a perception issue here in Dallas whether that perception is right or wrong and it's reflected in its attendance in both revenue sports. SMU is seen as a rich, elitist, out of touch, daddy pays for my black American Express card type of school. It's located in one if not the wealthiest neighborhood in Texas where old money and oil money collide. Middle class average Joe here with his wife and two kids won't go to SMU for a game for the reasons I just wrote above. I personally believe that stereotype people have of SMU is way overblown and they have missed a decent product they have put on the field but it is what it is. OTOH, folks in Fort Worth have embraced TCU because that school is seen as more blue collar and part of their community something SMU is far from achieving......even though they've been trying with their "Pony Up" and "SMU Is Dallas Team" marketing campaigns in the last few years. UNT has potential attracting fans in the northern suburbs.

You just described Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, USC, Notre Dame, Boson College, Wake Forest and Vanderbilt. Guess what happened to all of those programs once they decided to open their wallets and buy good coaches?

For goodness sakes SMU was just stinking up the dump in basketball just 2 years ago and then they went out and bought Larry Brown. Larry Brown!!!! All of a sudden SMU basketball doesn't have a perception problem anymore.

You're just forgetting one little detail. Those schools you mentioned are in power conferences which benefit from having high profile teams visit their stadiums. And please don't ever lump USC and Notre Dame with the likes of Wake and BC. Those two are in a league of their own with decades on tradition, national championships, Heisman Trophy winners, etc. Take BC or Wake out of the ACC and put them in the American and see how their fan support falls. SMU anyone?

I live in Dallas. Heck, I live 10-15 minutes away from SMU. I live surrounded by SMU alumni. They just don't care. They would rather go tailgate at the Boulevard than going to the games. June Jones has put a semi decent product on the field and Ford Stadium is 3/4 empty most of the time. Doesn't matter if East Carolina, Temple, Houston, UConn, Cincinnati, Tulane, UCF, etc play in Dallas, they just won't show up. The only C-USA school that brought any fans to Ford Stadium was UTEP. The ex SWC schools and UNT bring fans in OOC but that's it. If the alumni don't care, what makes you think the average Joe here in Dallas will?

As for basketball, it's Larry Brown's first season and we'll see how attendance goes. But don't hold your breath, Dallas is a pro sports town and it's all about the Cowboys season, Cowboys off season, Cowboys pre season, Cowboys training camp, Cowboys scandals followed by the Rangers, Mavericks, Stars, FC Dallas.....oh and the Big XII is in DFW now with powerhouse Kansas making an annual trip to Fort Worth now followed by Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Baylor, etc.

I wish SMU nothing but the best and I'll miss the short drive when UTEP came to Dallas but they have a perception issue that will be hard to get rid of and they have many obstacles that they have to overcome.

(12-06-2013 09:15 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 08:35 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  The context of who ODU played is exactly why I didn't include ODU, even though it would have made C-USA look better. They were not an FBS program this past season.

Actually, they are considered FBS, they just played a much weaker SOS schedule which you acknowledge and which is the point exaggerated with out any farther context. Just because they were FBS didn't make them the same or their record a valid comparison which is the point.

Quote:46.5 Rice (9-3) Kansas 3-9, New Mexico St. 2-10
56.25 Marshall (9-3) Miami (OH) 0-12
62.25 North Texas (8-4) Ball St. 10-2, Idaho 1-11
68.25 MTSU (8-4) Memphis 3-8
68.5 WKU (8-4) Kentucky 2-10, Navy 7-4 (totally forgot WKU beat Navy)
71.25 UTSA (7-5) New Mexico 3-9
82.75 FAU (6-6) South Florida 2-9, New Mexico St. 2-10

15.5 UCF (10-1) Penn St. 7-5, Akon 5-7, FIU 1-11
45.5 Houston (8-4) Rice 9-3, UTSA 7-5
48.25 ECU (9-3) N. Carolina 6-6, NC State 3-9
48.5 Cincinnati (9-3) Purdue 1-11, Miami (OH) 0-12
50.75 Navy (7-4) not in AAC until 2015
75.5 Tulane (7-5) UL Monroe 6-6

One game does not sum up the difference, in some cases for example our 2nd or 3rd best OOC win was top 5 to 7 best in CUSA this year and better than some of the others you listed, nor does it tell you a 6-6 UNC might be as highly ranked as a 10-2 Ball St. Again it gives you no information or context beyond a flat record. Their are tools like computer rankings to adjust for all of this you just don't like what they say.

Quote:But personally, I think most of the strength of schedule advantage the AAC enjoyed this season came from the high ranking Louisville started the season

You can say Louisville had an effect on the SOS, but they were also a loss for everyone not name UCF and as you will see with Cincy will cost them spots in a ranking. It didn't help anyone but UCF.

It's called strength of schedule. You don't have to win to earn a higher strength of schedule. You just have to show up. Louisville's high ranking still helped everyone's strength, even though only UCF could beat them.

I added in all the other OOC games against FBS programs. It really didn't change much. Of either conferences bowl eligible teams, only UCF managed to beat 3 FBS programs, and their 3rd best win was over a 1-11 FIU team. Looking at all the OOC FBS wins doesn't really add any additional separation. This season C-USA manages to pick up 2 wins over bad AAC teams (Memphis & South Florida), while Houston managed to beat 2 quality C-USA teams (Rice & UTSA), to go with UCF's win over FIU. The AAC certainly has an advantage right now, but with Louisville and Rutgers leaving next season, I think the gap will shrink even more.

ECU and Tulane had fine seasons and will play in bowls, but they didn't dominate C-USA this season. Neither will play for the C-USA title tomorrow. Tulsa has been a solid program for a long time, and I expect them to improve and be a force in the AAC, but right now they are down. I just don't see how the AAC can avoid taking a step back next season when Louisville leaves. I see no reason why C-USA won't have just as much of a chance of earning the playoff spot. By this time next season, we will see which one of us is right.

(12-06-2013 09:52 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:43 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:33 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:19 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 06:02 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  The problem is that CUSA's movement has been continuously downward, which is why some UAB and USM fans are probably more than a little pissed. Newbie CUSA school fans obviously have no idea what CUSA used to be in all sports if they don't understand what some UAB and USM fans are feeling now. Just 8 short years ago CUSA used to have Louisville, TCU, Marquette, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and DePaul (when DePaul was actually good) as members. That means that CUSA literally had nationally ranked teams in every sport and in all fairness should have been a BCS conference, but the Big East had the U.

Eight miserable years later CUSA has now lost the remaining schools that formed it solid middle (ECU, Memphis, Houston, USF and Tulane), as well as some other schools that replaced the original group (UCF, Tulsa and SMU). This is not an insult to schools like UNT, UTSA, Marshall and ODU; but there is no way that those schools are of equal replacement value the departed members. Think about it; in just 8 years CUSA has went from being the 3rd best basketball conference with multiple bids each spring and 5th best football conference; to dead last in FBS football and pretty awful overall in basketball.

This is the same reason you can't blame UConn and to some extent Cincinnati and South Florida fans for not being too happy about being downgraded to a C-USA level league. Especially UConn which was in the best college basketball league in the nation and made it to a BCS bowl (whether they deserved or not it's a moot point, they won the Big East's autobid). Cincinnati had Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette in their court and won made it to the Orange Bowl twice......now they're in the American. South Florida made it as high as being ranked #2 in the BCS. Now they're out of the cartel.

So UAB and Southern Miss fans can relate to UConn, Cincinnati and South Florida fans for being stuck in conferences they had no desire being part of after their rivals left.

What? Cincinnati was a founding member of CUSA. Hell USF was brought into CUSA as basically a start up FBS program back around a decade ago even before UCF was in CUSA; so Cincinnati and USF are just as much CUSA as UAB, USM, Memphis, Houston and ECU.

UConn can go wherever they want to go. They were in FCS just a decade ago, so being in the AAC is still a major step up over FCS. And I have new for you: the BE was a CUSA level league, except for the fact that the BE had the U.

UConn was a founding member of the Big East. Cincinnati and South Florida got to enjoy the benefits of being affiliated with a BCS conference. Now they're back in a conference they thought they escaped forever. Do you honestly believe those three want to be associated with East Carolina, Temple, Tulane, SMU, Houston, etc? Especially UConn which is P5 school (just look at their budget) stuck in C-USA aka the American. That's no different on how UAB and Southern Miss might feel about C-USA 3.0

The BE was not a football league until much later and even then UConn's football team was in FCS. People keep forgetting that the Big East was founded as a basketball league, not a football league.

Secondly, ECU should have been in the BE for football nearly from the time that football was added to that league. Miami and WVU openly pulled for ECU in that league for years. Don't forget that Miami and VT were football only members of the Big East and they wanted ECU as a football only too. The fact that VT and Temple were added is one of those goofy historical footnotes, but even then VT joined in with WVU and Miami in openly pulling for ECU to get into the BE. The BE gave those schools no choice but to leave, because it was apparent those schools that the BE was not going to make football a priority. The real silly part is that Cincinnati used to be as horrible at football as UTEP. Cincy didn't get decent until they got into the BE.

UConn founded the Big East with Providence, Georgetown, St Johns, Syracuse, Boston College and Seton Hall. Football started in the early 90's when Miami was invited.

We can discuss all day long about ECU and the Big East and all the what ifs but the fact is ECU was never part of the Big East 1.0 and 2.0 whether that was fair or not. C-USA was founded in 1995 so it's been around for 18 years. The Big East was around longer in basketball and then football was sponsored four years before C-USA was in existence.

The fact is the American is C-USA circa 1999. There's nothing wrong with that and it's an upgrade over what's left of C-USA. It's a bunch of urban public schools located in markets saturated by pro sports and BCS schools with a strong emphasis in basketball and decent football. That's basically C-USA 1.0

We can't deny the fact UConn, Cincinnati and South Florida were in a BCS conference. Now we can argue all day if their inclusion was fair or not but they were at the big boy's table for 8 years (10 for UConn). Temple was in the Big East 1.0 for football only but got kicked out for neglecting their football program and wandered as an independent and in the MAC before being invited back to the Big East to take West Virginia's spot. After being in a BCS conference, do you honestly blame UConn, Cincy and USF....especially UConn for being stuck in C-USA 1.0? So why is it OK for USM and UAB fans to complain about C-USA 3.0 and how they went from being in a great conference (a conference that's been around since 1995) to 3.0 but not OK for UConn fans to complain because UConn, Cincy and USF were not in the Big East for too long?

(12-06-2013 10:00 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:43 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:35 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:22 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Whaaa????!!!

I think North Texas is a better value for C-USA.

North Texas 8-4 - Going bowling, averaged over 21,000 real fans in attendance this season, and has 100,000 alums in the Dallas area.

SMU 5-6 (soon to be 5-7) bowling is unlikely (they have to beat #16 UCF), averaging under 19,000 (and we all know that number doesn't reflect the true attendance), and Alumni in Dallas area? (I have no clue, maybe 15,000???)

How is North Texas replacing SMU not a better value for C-USA?

Are you serious? If SMU can find a competent college coach tomorrow, they (SMU) literally have the money to buy him. Think about that for a minute. They can literally buy your coach.

SMU can buy any coach they want. Problem is SMU has a perception issue here in Dallas whether that perception is right or wrong and it's reflected in its attendance in both revenue sports. SMU is seen as a rich, elitist, out of touch, daddy pays for my black American Express card type of school. It's located in one if not the wealthiest neighborhood in Texas where old money and oil money collide. Middle class average Joe here with his wife and two kids won't go to SMU for a game for the reasons I just wrote above. I personally believe that stereotype people have of SMU is way overblown and they have missed a decent product they have put on the field but it is what it is. OTOH, folks in Fort Worth have embraced TCU because that school is seen as more blue collar and part of their community something SMU is far from achieving......even though they've been trying with their "Pony Up" and "SMU Is Dallas Team" marketing campaigns in the last few years. UNT has potential attracting fans in the northern suburbs.

You just described Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, USC, Notre Dame, Boson College, Wake Forest and Vanderbilt. Guess what happened to all of those programs once they decided to open their wallets and buy good coaches?

For goodness sakes SMU was just stinking up the dump in basketball just 2 years ago and then they went out and bought Larry Brown. Larry Brown!!!! All of a sudden SMU basketball doesn't have a perception problem anymore.

You're just forgetting one little detail. Those schools you mentioned are in power conferences which benefit from having high profile teams visit their stadiums. And please don't ever lump USC and Notre Dame with the likes of Wake and BC. Those two are in a league of their own with decades on tradition, national championships, Heisman Trophy winners, etc. Take BC or Wake out of the ACC and put them in the American and see how their fan support falls. SMU anyone?

I live in Dallas. Heck, I live 10-15 minutes away from SMU. I live surrounded by SMU alumni. They just don't care. They would rather go tailgate at the Boulevard than going to the games. June Jones has put a semi decent product on the field and Ford Stadium is 3/4 empty most of the time. Doesn't matter if East Carolina, Temple, Houston, UConn, Cincinnati, Tulane, UCF, etc play in Dallas, they just won't show up. The only C-USA school that brought any fans to Ford Stadium was UTEP. The ex SWC schools and UNT bring fans in OOC but that's it. If the alumni don't care, what makes you think the average Joe here in Dallas will?

As for basketball, it's Larry Brown's first season and we'll see how attendance goes. But don't hold your breath, Dallas is a pro sports town and it's all about the Cowboys season, Cowboys off season, Cowboys pre season, Cowboys training camp, Cowboys scandals followed by the Rangers, Mavericks, Stars, FC Dallas.....oh and the Big XII is in DFW now with powerhouse Kansas making an annual trip to Fort Worth now followed by Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Baylor, etc.

I wish SMU nothing but the best and I'll miss the short drive when UTEP came to Dallas but they have a perception issue that will be hard to get rid of and they have many obstacles that they have to overcome.

Talking about tradition? SMU has some tradition as well. The schools claims 3 national championships in football; a Heisman trophy winner (Doak Walker) and a second guy (Eric Dickerson) who should have won a Heisman trophy himself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMU_Mustangs_football


And I am going to go out on a limb and say that Boston College has a Heisman trophy winner. Doug "Flukie"Flutie won it for them.

(12-06-2013 11:41 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  Maybe the question is not "can" but how often a team from CUSA will be in that spot? The talk amongst AAC and MWC posters is that slot will belong to those two conferences 90% of the time.

That's as dumb as anything that is normally said. Northern Illinois has proven that past 2 years that it's easy to be ranked higher than either of those conferences. ANY team that is either undefeated or has an early loss then wins out will easily be ranked the highest.

IF multiple schools from CUSA, MAC, Sun Belt, MTN Weat, and the ''Murica go undefeated then and only then will a debate rage and it will be based on the normal factors and those deciding are not going to look at the AAC and think they are anything more than what they are. A conf not in the "Power 5". The resume from that given year by that given team will be looked at. The Roy Kramer types don't give F about SMU playing South Florida or Marshall playing ECU or whatever games you want to throw out there.

(12-06-2013 11:50 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 11:47 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Whether or not I like C-USA is irrelevant. It is the worst FBS conference.

http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/...f_Men.html
http://warrennolan.com/football/2013/conferencenpi

I seem to remember Boise getting to a BCS Bowl game being in the WAC. What is your point?

There is no point. That's obvious. Unless his name is Nostradamus.

(12-06-2013 10:16 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 10:00 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:43 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:35 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(12-06-2013 09:22 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Are you serious? If SMU can find a competent college coach tomorrow, they (SMU) literally have the money to buy him. Think about that for a minute. They can literally buy your coach.

SMU can buy any coach they want. Problem is SMU has a perception issue here in Dallas whether that perception is right or wrong and it's reflected in its attendance in both revenue sports. SMU is seen as a rich, elitist, out of touch, daddy pays for my black American Express card type of school. It's located in one if not the wealthiest neighborhood in Texas where old money and oil money collide. Middle class average Joe here with his wife and two kids won't go to SMU for a game for the reasons I just wrote above. I personally believe that stereotype people have of SMU is way overblown and they have missed a decent product they have put on the field but it is what it is. OTOH, folks in Fort Worth have embraced TCU because that school is seen as more blue collar and part of their community something SMU is far from achieving......even though they've been trying with their "Pony Up" and "SMU Is Dallas Team" marketing campaigns in the last few years. UNT has potential attracting fans in the northern suburbs.

You just described Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, USC, Notre Dame, Boson College, Wake Forest and Vanderbilt. Guess what happened to all of those programs once they decided to open their wallets and buy good coaches?

For goodness sakes SMU was just stinking up the dump in basketball just 2 years ago and then they went out and bought Larry Brown. Larry Brown!!!! All of a sudden SMU basketball doesn't have a perception problem anymore.

You're just forgetting one little detail. Those schools you mentioned are in power conferences which benefit from having high profile teams visit their stadiums. And please don't ever lump USC and Notre Dame with the likes of Wake and BC. Those two are in a league of their own with decades on tradition, national championships, Heisman Trophy winners, etc. Take BC or Wake out of the ACC and put them in the American and see how their fan support falls. SMU anyone?

I live in Dallas. Heck, I live 10-15 minutes away from SMU. I live surrounded by SMU alumni. They just don't care. They would rather go tailgate at the Boulevard than going to the games. June Jones has put a semi decent product on the field and Ford Stadium is 3/4 empty most of the time. Doesn't matter if East Carolina, Temple, Houston, UConn, Cincinnati, Tulane, UCF, etc play in Dallas, they just won't show up. The only C-USA school that brought any fans to Ford Stadium was UTEP. The ex SWC schools and UNT bring fans in OOC but that's it. If the alumni don't care, what makes you think the average Joe here in Dallas will?

As for basketball, it's Larry Brown's first season and we'll see how attendance goes. But don't hold your breath, Dallas is a pro sports town and it's all about the Cowboys season, Cowboys off season, Cowboys pre season, Cowboys training camp, Cowboys scandals followed by the Rangers, Mavericks, Stars, FC Dallas.....oh and the Big XII is in DFW now with powerhouse Kansas making an annual trip to Fort Worth now followed by Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Baylor, etc.

I wish SMU nothing but the best and I'll miss the short drive when UTEP came to Dallas but they have a perception issue that will be hard to get rid of and they have many obstacles that they have to overcome.

Talking about tradition? SMU has some tradition as well. The schools claims 3 national championships in football; a Heisman trophy winner (Doak Walker) and a second guy (Eric Dickerson) who should have won a Heisman trophy himself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMU_Mustangs_football


And I am going to go out on a limb and say that Boston College has a Heisman trophy winner. Doug "Flukie"Flutie won it for them.

It's nice but still way behind USC and Notre Dame. I would put BYU in that category as well with their 60k+ attendance and they have a Heisman winner as well in Ty Detmer in 1991.

Stanford, Northwestern, etc don't have much of a wealth perception issue like SMU does. They're labeled as being full of nerds and geeks but I've never heard anyone refer to the average Stanford student as "daddy paying for the BMW and the credit cards" like I've heard people refer to SMU students. Heck, even Rice does not have the same perception issue. Usually you hear people say Rice students are smart and nerds but not arrogant or trying to keep up with the Joneses although I could be wrong though (Rice fans can correct me if I'm wrong).

Like I said before, the stereotype is way overblown and I know SMU grads who got financial aid and had a part time job while in school. But regardless if the label is wrong, people here in Dallas think of SMU students as rich, arrogant, selfish, out of touch, etc. It is what it is.