(01-17-2014 02:38 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(01-17-2014 12:00 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(01-17-2014 11:34 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-17-2014 10:11 AM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Add more football scholarships, and then get ready to add another women's sports. 85 is at least enough for football.

Maybe this is going to happen?

Several Pac-12 schools recently added sand volleyball as a women's sport, and overall there are almost enough D-I schools sponsoring it to start an official NCAA championship in the sport. (Minimum number of schools for that is 40.)

Why add another women's sport when you're already spending every penny you can find and you're already in compliance with Title IX? Maybe because the scholarship limit might be raised for some men's sports. Even if football stays at 85, men's basketball and baseball have been wanting more scholarships for quite awhile, and if the P5 gets to make the rules now, then the D-I-in-name-only conferences who joined D-I just to get March Madness money can't veto increasing men's hoops to 14-15 scholarships and baseball to 18-20.

I seriously with to see Title IX challenged at some point. It is a major road block to the development of many university athletic programs.

It's okay in high school because parents take up the cost of women's sports and they are very local. But there seriously needs to be a change at the college level.

The only change needed is to exempt football......since women do not play football.

There are quite a few Women's Pro football leagues. I am actually surprised that there hasn't been a push for it in the college ranks yet. They can play in the same stadiums the guys use and could even make it a spring sport so it isn't competing with the guys like basketball tries to do. I attended one of Cleveland's (http://clevelandfusion.com) games and was entertained throughout. It might not rake in millions of dollars but I could see it doing just as well as basketball does. Could even have the season start off same day as the spring game.

(01-18-2014 08:03 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 12:39 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 10:41 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(01-17-2014 07:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-17-2014 05:59 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  It was Nbe/ACC's sole fault, without question. By trying to build a huge national conference with a western division devouring CUSA's and MWC best teams, it was destroying CUSA and MWC. So CUSA and MWC, along with MAC and SBC, supported all of BCS's proposals regarding the 4 team national playoff and BCS bowls. They did this in order to survive.

Nbe/AAC was inviting western CUSA and MWC teams because the Nbe/AAC was going to earn a millions and millions of tv dollars. Talk about having your head in a hole! As many warned, it wasn't just me, this kind of tv money Nbe/AAC fans were spouting at the time of the Times Square Banners was a pile of crock. Nbe/AAC's tv money wasn't even enough to cover the extra travel costs by this humongous Nbe/ACC national conference. So no BYU, AFA, Boise State, or SDSU. The problem was Arseco didn't have a clue as to what his proposals were worth. So, yes, it is entirely Nbe/AAC's fault.

As an Orlando writer pointed out, it would have been far simpiler for CUSA to add USF, Cincy, and UConn and be done with it. Looking back, that is about what happened anyway.

As usual, you see the world through tunnel vision. The Big East/AAC was adding teams due to a raid. They didn't start the avalanche---they were a victim of it.

As for your belief that CUSA would have been better off adding UConn, USF, and Cinci---maybe that's true---but it was never a choice. The only time when the Big East was comprised of only those 3 long term members (Feb 2012), CUSA had already bloated itself to 14 teams (that huge number did NOT including any present or future AAC members).

CUSA tossed aside the MW merger and went on an expansion spree swallowing up Sunbelt, WAC, and FCS teams. They even added a school with NO football team. Had CUSA stuck with the merger plan, they would have added nobody and might have been in a position to create a new CUSA that included ALL of 2011 CUSA along with UConn, Cinci, USF, and Navy. But there was never any chance that could even happen because of CUSA's own massive expansion. So you see, your whole concept is a straw man. The opportunity never existed. To say otherwise is disingenuous and flatly inaccurate.

No, Nbe/AAC didn't start the avalance....but the response by USF, UConn, and Cincy could have been much better.

Everyone realized that as Nbe loaded up with football schools, that the Catholic basketball schools would revolt and throw in Notre Dame. That should have been realized from the Git Go. How much do I give up in basketball to get more football?

It should have been realized at the Git Go what TV monies would be earned via alternative configurations. Evidently, Nbe/AAC Commish Arseco and Nbe/AAC leadership didn't have a clue what it was worth or was ignoring the figures given to them. Boise State then pulled out, and the cluster smuck fell apart.

If I were Cincy, USF, and UConn leadership, I would have offered my football programs to CUSA as a football only member and kept, which in reality was the prize, Catholic basketball.

That's what I keep trying to explain to you. If CUSA had not added all the new FCS, Sunbelt, and MAC teams---then that might have been an option. But once CUSA watered itself down and bloated itself to 14 with such weaker additions--there was no way the long time Big East members would even consider joining such a mishmash.

The rumor was floating about for a while that UConn and Cinci were considering moving thier Olympic sports to the Big East while playing football in the AAC, MAC, or MW. To the best of my knowledge CUSA was never considered. I'm actually surprised it didn't happen.

4 of the 6 new additions had fine seasons in C-USA. North Texas, MTSU, UTSA, and FAU all posted bowl eligible records this past season. C-USA is not watered down. We just need some of the established C-USA programs to get back to being more competitive.

Rice won CUSA this year. It was their first conference championship in football in over 50 years. They have never even been to a CUSA championship game, much less won one. One of the worst teams in CUSA over the last decade has been Tulane. They qualified for their first bowl in ages competing in CUSA this year. You want to believe that's just a coincidence---but I don't think it is (JMHO). Over time, I do think the league will get better---but the league may go backwards before moving forward with move ups like ODU and Charlotte on the way. The wild card is S Miss. If they can recover, CUSA can regain some of its old luster quickly through the performance of one of its old football flagships. Over the long term, the league will be fine.

In the short term, I do think it will be a fun league for its schools because there is a lot of parity and the divisional geography has been tightened.

(01-18-2014 10:33 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 09:46 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(01-17-2014 07:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-17-2014 05:59 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(01-17-2014 12:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  You mean while CUSA was stealing Sunbelt schools to grow wildly to 14? Or do you mean while CUSA was in negotiations with the MW to merge (which would require adding no schools, no FCS schools, or damaging any other conferences), but was actually planning to expand by moving up FCS teams and stealing teams from other conferences? Do you mean that period of time where the MW and CUSA---who were supposedly merging, were BOTH extending invitations to UTSA? There were plenty of uncooperative and insincere "gyrations" going on in that period by multiple conferences. To claim the AAC alone is responsible is equal parts ridiculous and simplistic. At some point you will realize that ALL conferences, just like individual schools, always act in their own best interests.

I do agree that a united voice would help and if there is anyplace that such a voice should be used is to prevent an expansion of the scholarship limit over 85. In fact, lowering the limit to 80 and the promise of guaranteed access in any future playoff expansion should be the two bargaining chips the G5 receive for allowing the P5 to have everything they want in NCAA governance.

It was Nbe/ACC's sole fault, without question. By trying to build a huge national conference with a western division devouring CUSA's and MWC best teams, it was destroying CUSA and MWC. So CUSA and MWC, along with MAC and SBC, supported all of BCS's proposals regarding the 4 team national playoff and BCS bowls. They did this in order to survive.

Nbe/AAC was inviting western CUSA and MWC teams because the Nbe/AAC was going to earn a millions and millions of tv dollars. Talk about having your head in a hole! As many warned, it wasn't just me, this kind of tv money Nbe/AAC fans were spouting at the time of the Times Square Banners was a pile of crock. Nbe/AAC's tv money wasn't even enough to cover the extra travel costs by this humongous Nbe/ACC national conference. So no BYU, AFA, Boise State, or SDSU. The problem was Arseco didn't have a clue as to what his proposals were worth. So, yes, it is entirely Nbe/AAC's fault.

As an Orlando writer pointed out, it would have been far simpiler for CUSA to add USF, Cincy, and UConn and be done with it. Looking back, that is about what happened anyway.

As usual, you see the world through tunnel vision. The Big East/AAC was adding teams due to a raid. They didn't start the avalanche---they were a victim of it.
.

CUSA tossed aside the MW merger and went on an expansion spree swallowing up Sunbelt, WAC, and FCS teams. They even added a school with NO football team.

The AAC even as things turned out make More $$ and has far better exposure than the rest of the gang. Cusa just grabbing BE left overs was never a possibility. Had the B10 not added its last 2 schools the BE would have had a shot at a decent tv deal with UL, Rutgers, SD state, and Boise in the mix, along with the BB only schools still being on board.

The Merger was not tossed aside, It was already dead. You had real issues, to force a new TV deal you needed a new conf, Which caused other problems. Up until the day Boise made its special MWC deal, CUSA looked like they were set up as a clear #7 behind the AAC. Once Boise and SD went back, the MWC stabilized, and the AAC was forced to cherry pick CUSA again.

The P5 even with their own in fighting, has worked hard to set up a P5 and not a P6, The BE was very close to a 14 or 15 mil per school deal that would have added only TCU and UCF. Doing very little damage to CUSA or MWC, but the powers that be made sure that did not happen.

When I look at Nbe/AAC, really, what is it? I don't view Nbe/AAC as a brand new conference.

Rather, it is basically the old CUSA that was able to break its existing tv contract without violating contract law. So, Nbe/AAC, composed of 9 former CUSA schools plus 1 MAC school, was able to cash in on the strong sports tv market. I hope all NonBCS conferences will enhance their status likewise in the future.

In a way, I am giving a compliment to the 9 former CUSA schools and 1 MAC school for their upgraded tv contract. To say that the upgraded contract is due to UConn and Navy along is not correct.

I would love to see you answer this if nothing else. You truly believe that the new AAC Is nothing more than the old CUSA. Your implying that teams don't change with conference changes. The Sun Belt was considered the bottom pit of FBS for years. CUSA is now made of Sun Belt, FBS, and some of the worst programs from the old CUSA. Does that not mean CUSA is now the bottom pit of FBS?

Please justify how this is not true without hypothetical situations because the numbers do in fact imply CUSA has become terrible.

(01-18-2014 10:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 08:03 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 12:39 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 10:41 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(01-17-2014 07:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  As usual, you see the world through tunnel vision. The Big East/AAC was adding teams due to a raid. They didn't start the avalanche---they were a victim of it.

As for your belief that CUSA would have been better off adding UConn, USF, and Cinci---maybe that's true---but it was never a choice. The only time when the Big East was comprised of only those 3 long term members (Feb 2012), CUSA had already bloated itself to 14 teams (that huge number did NOT including any present or future AAC members).

CUSA tossed aside the MW merger and went on an expansion spree swallowing up Sunbelt, WAC, and FCS teams. They even added a school with NO football team. Had CUSA stuck with the merger plan, they would have added nobody and might have been in a position to create a new CUSA that included ALL of 2011 CUSA along with UConn, Cinci, USF, and Navy. But there was never any chance that could even happen because of CUSA's own massive expansion. So you see, your whole concept is a straw man. The opportunity never existed. To say otherwise is disingenuous and flatly inaccurate.

No, Nbe/AAC didn't start the avalance....but the response by USF, UConn, and Cincy could have been much better.

Everyone realized that as Nbe loaded up with football schools, that the Catholic basketball schools would revolt and throw in Notre Dame. That should have been realized from the Git Go. How much do I give up in basketball to get more football?

It should have been realized at the Git Go what TV monies would be earned via alternative configurations. Evidently, Nbe/AAC Commish Arseco and Nbe/AAC leadership didn't have a clue what it was worth or was ignoring the figures given to them. Boise State then pulled out, and the cluster smuck fell apart.

If I were Cincy, USF, and UConn leadership, I would have offered my football programs to CUSA as a football only member and kept, which in reality was the prize, Catholic basketball.

That's what I keep trying to explain to you. If CUSA had not added all the new FCS, Sunbelt, and MAC teams---then that might have been an option. But once CUSA watered itself down and bloated itself to 14 with such weaker additions--there was no way the long time Big East members would even consider joining such a mishmash.

The rumor was floating about for a while that UConn and Cinci were considering moving thier Olympic sports to the Big East while playing football in the AAC, MAC, or MW. To the best of my knowledge CUSA was never considered. I'm actually surprised it didn't happen.

4 of the 6 new additions had fine seasons in C-USA. North Texas, MTSU, UTSA, and FAU all posted bowl eligible records this past season. C-USA is not watered down. We just need some of the established C-USA programs to get back to being more competitive.

Rice won CUSA this year. It was their first conference championship in football in over 50 years. They have never even been to a CUSA championship game, much less won one. One of the worst teams in CUSA over the last decade has been Tulane. They qualified for their first bowl in ages competing in CUSA this year. You want to believe that's just a coincidence---but I don't think it is (JMHO). Over time, I do think the league will get better---but the league may go backwards before moving forward with move ups like ODU and Charlotte on the way. The wild card is S Miss. If they can recover, CUSA can regain some of its old luster quickly through the performance of one of its old football flagships. Over the long term, the league will be fine.

In the short term, I do think it will be a fun league for its schools because there is a lot of parity and the divisional geography has been tightened.

In the world of college football, teams are always jockeying for position. If you closer at C-USA this season, Southern Miss wasn't the only traditional power to fall on hard times. Tulsa, probably the strongest program over the last few seasons, finished the year at 3-9. They lost to new additions North Texas and UTSA. Yes Rice won the conference, but they were on a roll at the end of the 2012 season, when they won 6 out of 7 games and beat Air Force in the Armed Forces Bowl. This season they won the title by beating a Marshall team that won the Military Bowl over Maryland. They did it by beating ECU, a team most expected to win the C-USA title. Tulane is an improving program. I don't think either of these successes are a coincidence. I think both earned it on the field. Next season will be different with ODU moving into the conference, but there is hope. UTSA had a great first season, though that certainly isn't the norm. Charlotte doesn't join the conference until 2015. WKU also moves into C-USA next season. They were the second best team in the Belt this year and should be able to contend for the east title. I think C-USA still has some strong programs at the top of the conference. I don't believe it is watered down, but I do agree, C-USA needs Southern Miss to be a contender again.

(01-19-2014 10:10 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 10:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 08:03 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 12:39 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-18-2014 10:41 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  No, Nbe/AAC didn't start the avalance....but the response by USF, UConn, and Cincy could have been much better.

Everyone realized that as Nbe loaded up with football schools, that the Catholic basketball schools would revolt and throw in Notre Dame. That should have been realized from the Git Go. How much do I give up in basketball to get more football?

It should have been realized at the Git Go what TV monies would be earned via alternative configurations. Evidently, Nbe/AAC Commish Arseco and Nbe/AAC leadership didn't have a clue what it was worth or was ignoring the figures given to them. Boise State then pulled out, and the cluster smuck fell apart.

If I were Cincy, USF, and UConn leadership, I would have offered my football programs to CUSA as a football only member and kept, which in reality was the prize, Catholic basketball.

That's what I keep trying to explain to you. If CUSA had not added all the new FCS, Sunbelt, and MAC teams---then that might have been an option. But once CUSA watered itself down and bloated itself to 14 with such weaker additions--there was no way the long time Big East members would even consider joining such a mishmash.

The rumor was floating about for a while that UConn and Cinci were considering moving thier Olympic sports to the Big East while playing football in the AAC, MAC, or MW. To the best of my knowledge CUSA was never considered. I'm actually surprised it didn't happen.

4 of the 6 new additions had fine seasons in C-USA. North Texas, MTSU, UTSA, and FAU all posted bowl eligible records this past season. C-USA is not watered down. We just need some of the established C-USA programs to get back to being more competitive.

Rice won CUSA this year. It was their first conference championship in football in over 50 years. They have never even been to a CUSA championship game, much less won one. One of the worst teams in CUSA over the last decade has been Tulane. They qualified for their first bowl in ages competing in CUSA this year. You want to believe that's just a coincidence---but I don't think it is (JMHO). Over time, I do think the league will get better---but the league may go backwards before moving forward with move ups like ODU and Charlotte on the way. The wild card is S Miss. If they can recover, CUSA can regain some of its old luster quickly through the performance of one of its old football flagships. Over the long term, the league will be fine.

In the short term, I do think it will be a fun league for its schools because there is a lot of parity and the divisional geography has been tightened.

In the world of college football, teams are always jockeying for position. If you closer at C-USA this season, Southern Miss wasn't the only traditional power to fall on hard times. Tulsa, probably the strongest program over the last few seasons, finished the year at 3-9. They lost to new additions North Texas and UTSA. Yes Rice won the conference, but they were on a roll at the end of the 2012 season, when they won 6 out of 7 games and beat Air Force in the Armed Forces Bowl. This season they won the title by beating a Marshall team that won the Military Bowl over Maryland. They did it by beating ECU, a team most expected to win the C-USA title. Tulane is an improving program. I don't think either of these successes are a coincidence. I think both earned it on the field. Next season will be different with ODU moving into the conference, but there is hope. UTSA had a great first season, though that certainly isn't the norm. Charlotte doesn't join the conference until 2015. WKU also moves into C-USA next season. They were the second best team in the Belt this year and should be able to contend for the east title. I think C-USA still has some strong programs at the top of the conference. I don't believe it is watered down, but I do agree, C-USA needs Southern Miss to be a contender again.

Excellent post! With the past massive realignment, there are going to be winners and losers within each new reconfigured conference. A conference is a 50/50 zero sum game. For every conference victory by a conference team, there is a conference loss for a corresponding conference team. Half of Nbe/AAC teams are going to be losers.

On the other side of the coin, half of CUSA teams are going to emerge as consistent conference winners and going to bowls. Undoubtedly, these winning CUSA teams will surpass the losing Nbe/AAC teams and push themselves to a level of the winning Nbe/AAC teams.