(03-17-2014 10:34 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:43 AM)EagNBran Wrote:  You do realize the OP is referring to all the schools that left, correct? You want to compare your major sports to Louisville, Cincinnati, UCF, Marquette, Memphis, and other great programs that have come from C-USA?

Well, I would agree with you until threw Memphis in there. Aside from basketball we've outperformed Memphis in most sports. But back to the original issue, it's unreasonable to expect you could have done much to prevent these changes. What has happened over the last 10 years is bigger, much bigger than one man or even one conference.

Aside from Basketball ? That was his whole point. Memphis ruled C-USA for almost a decade . We have won 20 games or more for the last 14 years. .It took a last second 50 yard field for MTSU to beat one of the worst Memphis football in the school history. C'mon dude , get real. Memphis was a big loss.

(03-17-2014 11:40 AM)First Family Forever Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 10:34 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:43 AM)EagNBran Wrote:  You do realize the OP is referring to all the schools that left, correct? You want to compare your major sports to Louisville, Cincinnati, UCF, Marquette, Memphis, and other great programs that have come from C-USA?

Well, I would agree with you until threw Memphis in there. Aside from basketball we've outperformed Memphis in most sports. But back to the original issue, it's unreasonable to expect you could have done much to prevent these changes. What has happened over the last 10 years is bigger, much bigger than one man or even one conference.

Aside from Basketball ? That was his whole point. Memphis ruled C-USA for almost a decade . We have won 20 games or more for the last 14 years. .It took a last second 50 yard field for MTSU to beat one of the worst Memphis football in the school history. C'mon dude , get real. Memphis was a big loss.

No, I don't believe that's what he was talking about. I thought he was talking about all of the athletics programs that have left not just the basketball teams. And yes I understand that losing Memphis basketball is a major loss, so I don't need to get real, because I'm as real as they come.

I think the trend I'm noticing is that USM fans who have been here when it was good and know the crap we've had to deal with with BB are frustrated while the newbies don't even understand.

(03-17-2014 12:01 PM)EagNBran Wrote:  I think the trend I'm noticing is that USM fans who have been here when it was good and know the crap we've had to deal with with BB are frustrated while the newbies don't even understand.

If it was up to me Memphis would still play Southern Miss in both football and basketball .Memphis has played more games against USM than anyone else , Louisville is second. I would also play UAB in basketball. They were good rivasl .

At least BB is not Karl "Marx" Benson



The future is so bright, gotta wear shades

(03-17-2014 09:38 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 04:35 AM)TTT Wrote:  you've allowed this conference to become a joke in the ONLY sports that matter.

You Southern Miss guys really know how to make others feel welcome and wanted.

You know two of the four teams that shared the regular season title came from elsewhere. It's not like the legacy schools have significantly outperformed new schools in both of those sports that matter. Perhaps some self reflection is warranted??

If only he could have kept the original defectors (UL/UC/USF/Marq) from leaving... I'd of personally preferred this- Playing our TRUE rivals; UL, UC, USM, and UAB. It'd be a powerhouse conference.

I have never been a BanBan supporter, but he did do a darn good job of keeping a decent slate of bowl games together.

Where I disagreed with him, and Terry Holland for that matter, was the continuous desire to increase the number of schools in the conference. Instead of watering down the conference with pure numbers, they should have focused on developing a small core of schools, say 8 to 10, and then building from there.

No doubt losing Memphis basketball was a loss, any other sport, no

(03-17-2014 10:45 AM)AtlantaEagle Wrote:  Wonder why the C-USA/MWC merger never went down? One reason is either Commissioner didn't want to give up his head position.
Obviously, it's the best gig in sports. Big salary, big perks, no accountability.

BB's never wanted to have the strongest conference possible, just one to secure his position. Personally, I felt C-USA should have never gone up to 14 schools.

Honestly, I think they would have worked with a three-man board of sorts, but I think when that alliance plan failed, BB had no backup plan to draw on, cause he really thought it would get approved, because he would back off on the opposition to expansion.

Then when the NCAA's put a kibosh on the alliance, he had no ammunition to fight expansion moves, and he's sort of lost any idea of what to do.

Quote:I'd suggest folks write their local sportswriters, & University Presidents to question BB's accomplishments & lack of a plan. That's a beginning point to light a fire, or get someone who really wants to see C-USA succeed.

I would go through the AD's first, before going after the University Presidents.

(03-17-2014 10:34 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  it's unreasonable to expect you could have done much to prevent these changes. What has happened over the last 10 years is bigger, much bigger than one man or even one conference.

This.

What has he done?
He brought in every school that is in the league into the league except for UAB and USM.

And as Rice, UTEP and Marshall may tire of him, MTSU, UNCC,ODU, FIU, FAU, La Tech UNT, and UTSA have his back.

That is what he has done.

(03-17-2014 04:54 PM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  What has he done?
He brought in every school that is in the league into the league except for UAB and USM.
And as Rice, UTEP and Marshall may tire of him, MTSU, UNCC,ODU, FIU, FAU, La Tech UNT, and UTSA have his back.
That is what he has done.

We need no division among conference mates, as a matter of fact we should be working more closely with the other G5 conferences to insure our future viability.

(03-17-2014 04:54 PM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  What has he done?
He brought in every school that is in the league into the league except for UAB and USM.

And as Rice, UTEP and Marshall may tire of him, MTSU, UNCC,ODU, FIU, FAU, La Tech UNT, and UTSA have his back.

That is what he has done.

As an ODU fan I have a slightly positive opinion of the commissioner based on the bowl negotiations which I thought went well and that CUSA may have actually over performed. I can sort of understand why USM fans (and others) aren't exactly happy with the performance since you guys have a longer history to draw from.

One point that seems to be missed is that many of the new schools came from conferences where the commissioner/conference leadership situation wasn't any better. It is hard to get up in arms when its 1)expected, par for the course & 2) there's no/little history to base an opinion on.

Again from a new school fan's perspective, the big test coming up is the next TV deal. That's a big milestone that will shape the future of CUSA.

Here's the rub. Charlotte, ODU, WKU are all very serious about basketball. The new will wear off very soon with another few seasons of no television and no postseason to speak of.
BB is in trouble, he just doesn't know it yet.

(03-17-2014 04:54 PM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  And as Rice, UTEP and Marshall may tire of him,

I thought he handled the football championship game hosting tie-breaker decision very well.

(03-17-2014 10:32 AM)TTT Wrote:  BUT, what you (and others-ODU, UTSA, La Tech, Charlotte, FIU/FAU) FAIL to realize is that WE'VE BEEN HERE FROM DAY ONE. CUSA from 96-2002 was awesome in the TWO MAJOR-REVENUE SPORTS: football was dominant and filled w/ multiple teams finishing every season ranked in the top-25 and basketball was a 4-bid league every year (w/ ranked teams). Pretty much what the MWC is NOW (respected football and basketball)....is what CUSA was then: the best conference in america that isn't in the BCS. Heck, CUSA of the late 90's/early 00's was probably BETTER than the MWC of the late 00's-present....now where are we at?? We are a 1-bid bball league....and our football conference is a JOKE! (<<<<------A JOKE RELATIVE TO WHAT WE USED TO BE!). And every since Banowski took over, he's been touting CUSA as the "stepping stone" conference: come here! we'll fix you right up so you could leave us!

Damn right man, CUSA, the "early years" was legit in football and basketball. Then the ACC raided the BE and the BE came after CUSA. The CUSA version that followed was OK, but nowhere as "premier" as it was previously and it didn't help that during that time no one could nut up and give Memphis some competition in hoops. The football wasn't too bad, but not as good as its predecessor. This new CUSA... ehhh......it will need some time to sort itself out but it is better than the SBC but its not quite as good as the AAC.

I've known Crap USA since 2001 when I was at USM. It was more respected then than now...period. Take it as it is but the new schools will not understand that BB has only seen this conference as a stepping stone. He does have some good bowl contracts, however, he has watered down this conference. I wish we were independent but probably not going to happen. I am not going to start bashing other schools but YEARS of watching BB as commish have led me to reject his leadership approach to improving this conference.

SMTTT

(03-17-2014 08:06 PM)SethManKA1 Wrote:  I've known Crap USA since 2001 when I was at USM. It was more respected then than now...period. Take it as it is but the new schools will not understand that BB has only seen this conference as a stepping stone. He does have some good bowl contracts, however, he has watered down this conference. I wish we were independent but probably not going to happen. I am not going to start bashing other schools but YEARS of watching BB as commish have led me to reject his leadership approach to improving this conference.

SMTTT

I hadn't thought about this before, but isn't the bolded statement true about almost every conference except the SEC?......perhaps the PAC could be considered marginally better or equal? Otherwise hasn't the image of all conferences fallen in this whole process?

That's not an excuse for BB not doing a better job of improving that current/past product, but it's been a tough life for a conference commissioner not named Slive the last few years now in my opinion.

I feel your pain and frustration. Once upon a time there was a group of independents that need to band together for mutual benefit; Tulane, Louisville, Cincy, Va Tech, Ga Tech, South Carolina, Florida State, USM and Memphis.....and a group of basketball schools. Tulane, USM and Memphis are the only members of that group that haven't moved on or actively campaigning for moving....and I acknowledge that GT, FSU, and USC were never going to be in a longterm conference with the rest of us.

However that are 0.00 reasons why Louisville, Cincy, Va Tech, (and even TCU at this point) should be in better situations than the rest of us except better university leadership.

BB nor anyone else could have stopped the moving chairs of conference realignment. The schools that could did move up. Those who were left behind were left because of some of the very things that make them unique (location, emphasis, and history).

The number one challenge for CUSA going forward is TV exposure WHICH SHOULD EQUAL MONEY. And one of the first places TV looks at is market. BB has done a good job of adding large TV markets to the conference, which benefits (could be the competitive salvation) of the schools left behind. So BB's top three responsibilities are TV, TV, an TV exposure.

The next largest challenge for the conference is out of BB hands and the is a winning tradition by the individual schools. Winning will be achieved by the local schools investing in their programs by hiring successful coaches with a winning track record.

(03-17-2014 08:06 PM)SethManKA1 Wrote:  I wish we were independent but probably not going to happen.

Absolutely, positively, 100% guaranteed not to happen.