(04-18-2014 10:51 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:44 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 08:25 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I'll pass this time because I discussed the symbiotic relationship between the SBC and SEC when everyone was saying the $2K stipend would put them out of business (even though they approved it). We were told about the 'nature' of relationship by the previous SBC Commissioner, who did not tell us why it existed.

It makes some sense that the SEC would want to preserve G-5 schools in their footprint to come in for easy payday games--ULM@Arkansas, Troy@UGA etc. But if the quote is from the previous SBC Commissioner, then it's pretty outdated. The SBC isn't stAte, ULL, ULM, MTSU, Troy, FIU, FAU anymore, half of those schools are in CUSA.

I just don't see the logic where the SEC would be looking out for ULL and MTSU and their conference in 2010 and for ULL and Georgia STate in 2015 but giving the stinkeye to MTSU and LT and their conference in 2015.

Quote:The SEC Commissioner has also gone out of his way when ever asked to defuse the doomsayers, in the media when it comes to the SBC(don't think he cares about message boards)

I was just reading some of the post here about the impact of the changes, picked up the phone and called someone that knows a lot about the SBC and asked if the SEC and SBC were 'in sync' ,and that is where the 'thick-as-thieves' came from.

I'm going to remain unconvinced for awhile that the SEC has a more positive attitude towards the SBC than to CUSA. I know that my opinion doesn't really fry your eggs one way or the other, but there we are.

Again we are forced to go by what the Commissioners of the two Conferences have said (in the case of the SBC) and done (in the case of the SEC).

As to the why who knows, but going forward it is probably the votes.

One good thing is I was told the MAC, MWC, SBC and even the most unlikely of all the AAC, are really working together. I assume they know they are going to be depending on each other more in the future when it comes to scheduling, and bowls.

I did noticed one conference was missing, and the reply was "to be honest we don't care what they(that conference) think, and we are not going to even bother to ask them what they think".

You know what's funny?

Tulane (AAC) are playing UL-M (SBC) and UL-L (SBC) on-and-off for the next 8 years or so. Guess who Tulane is NOT playing? La Tech (C-USA) and USM (C-USA).

You might be right on the scheduling part. There's also the Cure Bowl that is going to feature a mid-table AAC outfit vs. a higher up SBC outfit.

There IS some cooperation right now between the AAC and SBC. It's a "working relationship", I suppose.

Interestingly, the CUSA is the one conference that has been the most cooperative with departing members. There wasn't the nastiness at all. So they should have a good relationship with the AAC. They worked on a merger with the MWC so they should have a good relationship with them. Now maybe the SB doesn't like the conference that took 5 members last year and LT who thought they were too good for them. But it would be strange there would be a disconnect there. Maybe you are just getting a Sun Belt perspective.

(04-18-2014 10:38 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  I keep coming back to this thought...

...why does Idaho want to be in the same league as Alabama? What is "in it" for them? The Idahos never win championships...they only beat Alabamas once every 20 years...the cards are stacked against them in every way.

Why would the Reading Phillies ever fight to be in MLB where they'd lose to the Philadelphia Phillies 19 out of 20 times...and be doormats every year.

Why is everyone pushing their way into the FBS (Division1)? I'm a Penn State fan and we haven't won an outright title in almost 30 years...but we've won it a few times...we've been in the top 5 dozens of times...and we can compete at the FBS level consistently. I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Idaho wants to compete against the G5 teams in the Sun Belt, not P5 teams.

Don't get me wrong there are quite a few of G5 teams that are better than most of the teams In the P5 Conferences.

(04-18-2014 12:15 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Idaho wants to compete against the G5 teams in the Sun Belt, not P5 teams.

Don't get me wrong there are quite a few of G5 teams that are better than most of the teams In the P5 Conferences.
[/quote]

Right. Idaho wants to keep up with Nevada-Reno, and Utah STate, and NEw Mexico State, and would like to catch up with Boise STate and Fresno State. USC and NIke U aren't even on their radar. But UNR wants to keep up with UNLV and UNM and San Diego STate. Meanwhile the Boise States ARE trying to compete with the USCs and Nike U's.

And back east, South Alabama looks at Middle Tennessee looks at Memphis and says, we can do that. And Middle Tennessee looks at MEmphis, who looks at SMU who looks at TCU, who just got a golden ticket.

(04-18-2014 10:51 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:44 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 08:25 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I'll pass this time because I discussed the symbiotic relationship between the SBC and SEC when everyone was saying the $2K stipend would put them out of business (even though they approved it). We were told about the 'nature' of relationship by the previous SBC Commissioner, who did not tell us why it existed.

It makes some sense that the SEC would want to preserve G-5 schools in their footprint to come in for easy payday games--ULM@Arkansas, Troy@UGA etc. But if the quote is from the previous SBC Commissioner, then it's pretty outdated. The SBC isn't stAte, ULL, ULM, MTSU, Troy, FIU, FAU anymore, half of those schools are in CUSA.

I just don't see the logic where the SEC would be looking out for ULL and MTSU and their conference in 2010 and for ULL and Georgia STate in 2015 but giving the stinkeye to MTSU and LT and their conference in 2015.

Quote:The SEC Commissioner has also gone out of his way when ever asked to defuse the doomsayers, in the media when it comes to the SBC(don't think he cares about message boards)

I was just reading some of the post here about the impact of the changes, picked up the phone and called someone that knows a lot about the SBC and asked if the SEC and SBC were 'in sync' ,and that is where the 'thick-as-thieves' came from.

I'm going to remain unconvinced for awhile that the SEC has a more positive attitude towards the SBC than to CUSA. I know that my opinion doesn't really fry your eggs one way or the other, but there we are.

Again we are forced to go by what the Commissioners of the two Conferences have said (in the case of the SBC) and done (in the case of the SEC).

As to the why who knows, but going forward it is probably the votes.

One good thing is I was told the MAC, MWC, SBC and even the most unlikely of all the AAC, are really working together. I assume they know they are going to be depending on each other more in the future when it comes to scheduling, and bowls.

I did noticed one conference was missing, and the reply was "to be honest we don't care what they(that conference) think, and we are not going to even bother to ask them what they think".

You know what's funny?

Tulane (AAC) are playing UL-M (SBC) and UL-L (SBC) on-and-off for the next 8 years or so. Guess who Tulane is NOT playing? La Tech (C-USA) and USM (C-USA).

You might be right on the scheduling part. There's also the Cure Bowl that is going to feature a mid-table AAC outfit vs. a higher up SBC outfit.

There IS some cooperation right now between the AAC and SBC. It's a "working relationship", I suppose.

Well apparently four of the five G5's are really beginning showing to work together, and I expect you will see more regular season competition involving teams in these four, and bowl games involving their teams.

For whatever reason, CUSA does not appear to be in the mix, and is apparently no longer being asked to be in the mix.

[/quote]

Interestingly, the CUSA is the one conference that has been the most cooperative with departing members. There wasn't the nastiness at all. So they should have a good relationship with the AAC. They worked on a merger with the MWC so they should have a good relationship with them. Now maybe the SB doesn't like the conference that took 5 members last year and LT who thought they were too good for them. But it would be strange there would be a disconnect there. Maybe you are just getting a Sun Belt perspective.
[/quote]


Apparently the current MWC Commissioner (who by the way just happens to have a history with the SBC, and a soft spot in his heart for them) does not see it that way. Think it's more along the line of 'we were used to buy time'.

(04-18-2014 01:24 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 01:15 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

Interestingly, the CUSA is the one conference that has been the most cooperative with departing members. There wasn't the nastiness at all. So they should have a good relationship with the AAC. They worked on a merger with the MWC so they should have a good relationship with them. Now maybe the SB doesn't like the conference that took 5 members last year and LT who thought they were too good for them. But it would be strange there would be a disconnect there. Maybe you are just getting a Sun Belt perspective.

Apparently the current MWC Commissioner (who by the way just happens to have a history with the SBC, and a soft spot in his heart for them, but not so much their Commissioner) does not see it that way. Think it's more along the line of 'we were used to by time'.
[/quote]
[/quote]

Do you mean "we were used to buy time"?

(04-18-2014 02:20 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 01:24 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 01:15 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

Interestingly, the CUSA is the one conference that has been the most cooperative with departing members. There wasn't the nastiness at all. So they should have a good relationship with the AAC. They worked on a merger with the MWC so they should have a good relationship with them. Now maybe the SB doesn't like the conference that took 5 members last year and LT who thought they were too good for them. But it would be strange there would be a disconnect there. Maybe you are just getting a Sun Belt perspective.

Apparently the current MWC Commissioner (who by the way just happens to have a history with the SBC, and a soft spot in his heart for them, but not so much their Commissioner) does not see it that way. Think it's more along the line of 'we were used to by time'.

[/quote]

Do you mean "we were used to buy time"?
[/quote]
Yes!

Interestingly, the CUSA is the one conference that has been the most cooperative with departing members. There wasn't the nastiness at all. So they should have a good relationship with the AAC. They worked on a merger with the MWC so they should have a good relationship with them. Now maybe the SB doesn't like the conference that took 5 members last year and LT who thought they were too good for them. But it would be strange there would be a disconnect there. Maybe you are just getting a Sun Belt perspective.
[/quote]


Apparently the current MWC Commissioner (who by the way just happens to have a history with the SBC, and a soft spot in his heart for them) does not see it that way. Think it's more along the line of 'we were used to buy time'.
[/quote]

But he has a horrible relationship with the current SBC commissioner Benson. The WAC/MWC battles got very personal.

(04-18-2014 10:38 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  I keep coming back to this thought...

...why does Idaho want to be in the same league as Alabama? What is "in it" for them? The Idahos never win championships...they only beat Alabamas once every 20 years...the cards are stacked against them in every way.

Why would the Reading Phillies ever fight to be in MLB where they'd lose to the Philadelphia Phillies 19 out of 20 times...and be doormats every year.

Why is everyone pushing their way into the FBS (Division1)? I'm a Penn State fan and we haven't won an outright title in almost 30 years...but we've won it a few times...we've been in the top 5 dozens of times...and we can compete at the FBS level consistently. I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Then why should any G5 team want to be in the FBS? G5 teams are competing for bowl wins, not national championships. If the whole point of FBS football is a championship, the G5 as a whole should drop down.

And for what it's worth, there is only one team in the Sun Belt that has more bowl wins than Idaho. Our team has sucked for more than half of the time we've played at the FBS level, but at least we CAN compete.

(04-18-2014 04:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:38 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  I keep coming back to this thought...

...why does Idaho want to be in the same league as Alabama? What is "in it" for them? The Idahos never win championships...they only beat Alabamas once every 20 years...the cards are stacked against them in every way.

Why would the Reading Phillies ever fight to be in MLB where they'd lose to the Philadelphia Phillies 19 out of 20 times...and be doormats every year.

Why is everyone pushing their way into the FBS (Division1)? I'm a Penn State fan and we haven't won an outright title in almost 30 years...but we've won it a few times...we've been in the top 5 dozens of times...and we can compete at the FBS level consistently. I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Then why should any G5 team want to be in the FBS? G5 teams are competing for bowl wins, not national championships. If the whole point of FBS football is a championship, the G5 as a whole should drop down.

And for what it's worth, there is only one team in the Sun Belt that has more bowl wins than Idaho. Our team has sucked for more than half of the time we've played at the FBS level, but at least we CAN compete.

You don't get sports.

At least half of the P5 schools aren't realistic contenders to be national champs or win their conference even in a given year, yet they don't walk away to find a place they can win regularly.

In most of the world where soccer rules teams want to win their league to advance to a tougher league where their chances to be successful are slim and they face a high chance of being shipped right back where they were.

(04-18-2014 04:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:38 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  I keep coming back to this thought...

...why does Idaho want to be in the same league as Alabama? What is "in it" for them? The Idahos never win championships...they only beat Alabamas once every 20 years...the cards are stacked against them in every way.

Why would the Reading Phillies ever fight to be in MLB where they'd lose to the Philadelphia Phillies 19 out of 20 times...and be doormats every year.

Why is everyone pushing their way into the FBS (Division1)? I'm a Penn State fan and we haven't won an outright title in almost 30 years...but we've won it a few times...we've been in the top 5 dozens of times...and we can compete at the FBS level consistently. I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Then why should any G5 team want to be in the FBS? G5 teams are competing for bowl wins, not national championships. If the whole point of FBS football is a championship, the G5 as a whole should drop down.

And for what it's worth, there is only one team in the Sun Belt that has more bowl wins than Idaho. Our team has sucked for more than half of the time we've played at the FBS level, but at least we CAN compete.

Going forward there are going to be about 10-15 teams max, that have even a slight chance of winning a P5 Conference Championship, much less a NC in football, and it will be the same group of schools year in and year out, and that is why they want a committee selecting the teams.

One or more of those that have a shot year in and year out at a NC will be from the G5 (might still be Boise).

What most fans cannot grasp is what is rally happening now is separation, separation of the real big boys from the hanger-on's in their conference's. If the new format does not accomplish it, they will change it again. The national powers and the media that profits off them do not want parity at the P5 level.

(04-19-2014 09:17 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 04:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:38 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  I keep coming back to this thought...

...why does Idaho want to be in the same league as Alabama? What is "in it" for them? The Idahos never win championships...they only beat Alabamas once every 20 years...the cards are stacked against them in every way.

Why would the Reading Phillies ever fight to be in MLB where they'd lose to the Philadelphia Phillies 19 out of 20 times...and be doormats every year.

Why is everyone pushing their way into the FBS (Division1)? I'm a Penn State fan and we haven't won an outright title in almost 30 years...but we've won it a few times...we've been in the top 5 dozens of times...and we can compete at the FBS level consistently. I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Then why should any G5 team want to be in the FBS? G5 teams are competing for bowl wins, not national championships. If the whole point of FBS football is a championship, the G5 as a whole should drop down.

And for what it's worth, there is only one team in the Sun Belt that has more bowl wins than Idaho. Our team has sucked for more than half of the time we've played at the FBS level, but at least we CAN compete.

Going forward there are going to be about 10-15 teams max, that have even a slight chance of winning a P5 Conference Championship, much less a NC in football, and it will be the same group of schools year in and year out, and that is why they want a committee selecting the teams.

One or more of those that have a shot year in and year out at a NC will be from the G5 (might still be Boise).

What most fans cannot grasp is what is rally happening now is separation, separation of the real big boys from the hanger-on's in their conference's. If the new format does not accomplish it, they will change it again. The national powers and the media that profits off them do not want parity at the P5 level.

There are at least 13 SEC schools every year who think they're going to win the NC.

(04-19-2014 09:17 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 04:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:38 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  I keep coming back to this thought...

...why does Idaho want to be in the same league as Alabama? What is "in it" for them? The Idahos never win championships...they only beat Alabamas once every 20 years...the cards are stacked against them in every way.

Why would the Reading Phillies ever fight to be in MLB where they'd lose to the Philadelphia Phillies 19 out of 20 times...and be doormats every year.

Why is everyone pushing their way into the FBS (Division1)? I'm a Penn State fan and we haven't won an outright title in almost 30 years...but we've won it a few times...we've been in the top 5 dozens of times...and we can compete at the FBS level consistently. I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Then why should any G5 team want to be in the FBS? G5 teams are competing for bowl wins, not national championships. If the whole point of FBS football is a championship, the G5 as a whole should drop down.

And for what it's worth, there is only one team in the Sun Belt that has more bowl wins than Idaho. Our team has sucked for more than half of the time we've played at the FBS level, but at least we CAN compete.

Going forward there are going to be about 10-15 teams max, that have even a slight chance of winning a P5 Conference Championship, much less a NC in football, and it will be the same group of schools year in and year out, and that is why they want a committee selecting the teams.

One or more of those that have a shot year in and year out at a NC will be from the G5 (might still be Boise).

What most fans cannot grasp is what is rally happening now is separation, separation of the real big boys from the hanger-on's in their conference's. If the new format does not accomplish it, they will change it again. The national powers and the media that profits off them do not want parity at the P5 level.

If the whole point of FBS football is a championship, then half the P5 should step down as well. But it isn't the whole point. The point is exposure, and entertaining deep-pocketed alumni. The G5 have those, too.

(04-19-2014 11:16 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  

(04-19-2014 09:17 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 04:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:38 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  I keep coming back to this thought...

...why does Idaho want to be in the same league as Alabama? What is "in it" for them? The Idahos never win championships...they only beat Alabamas once every 20 years...the cards are stacked against them in every way.

Why would the Reading Phillies ever fight to be in MLB where they'd lose to the Philadelphia Phillies 19 out of 20 times...and be doormats every year.

Why is everyone pushing their way into the FBS (Division1)? I'm a Penn State fan and we haven't won an outright title in almost 30 years...but we've won it a few times...we've been in the top 5 dozens of times...and we can compete at the FBS level consistently. I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Then why should any G5 team want to be in the FBS? G5 teams are competing for bowl wins, not national championships. If the whole point of FBS football is a championship, the G5 as a whole should drop down.

And for what it's worth, there is only one team in the Sun Belt that has more bowl wins than Idaho. Our team has sucked for more than half of the time we've played at the FBS level, but at least we CAN compete.

Going forward there are going to be about 10-15 teams max, that have even a slight chance of winning a P5 Conference Championship, much less a NC in football, and it will be the same group of schools year in and year out, and that is why they want a committee selecting the teams.

One or more of those that have a shot year in and year out at a NC will be from the G5 (might still be Boise).

What most fans cannot grasp is what is rally happening now is separation, separation of the real big boys from the hanger-on's in their conference's. If the new format does not accomplish it, they will change it again. The national powers and the media that profits off them do not want parity at the P5 level.

There are at least 13 SEC schools every year who think they're going to win the NC.

I agree with that, but going forward their will be 4-5, and that will be a bit chunk of the 10-15 that really have a shot every year.

(04-18-2014 06:06 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 04:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:38 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  I keep coming back to this thought...

...why does Idaho want to be in the same league as Alabama? What is "in it" for them? The Idahos never win championships...they only beat Alabamas once every 20 years...the cards are stacked against them in every way.

Why would the Reading Phillies ever fight to be in MLB where they'd lose to the Philadelphia Phillies 19 out of 20 times...and be doormats every year.

Why is everyone pushing their way into the FBS (Division1)? I'm a Penn State fan and we haven't won an outright title in almost 30 years...but we've won it a few times...we've been in the top 5 dozens of times...and we can compete at the FBS level consistently. I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Then why should any G5 team want to be in the FBS? G5 teams are competing for bowl wins, not national championships. If the whole point of FBS football is a championship, the G5 as a whole should drop down.

And for what it's worth, there is only one team in the Sun Belt that has more bowl wins than Idaho. Our team has sucked for more than half of the time we've played at the FBS level, but at least we CAN compete.

You don't get sports.

At least half of the P5 schools aren't realistic contenders to be national champs or win their conference even in a given year, yet they don't walk away to find a place they can win regularly.

In most of the world where soccer rules teams want to win their league to advance to a tougher league where their chances to be successful are slim and they face a high chance of being shipped right back where they were.

Your post doesn't contradict anything I wrote. I was responding to the post asking why Idaho even wants to be in the same league as Alabama. Long story short, we don't. Realistically, Idaho isn't playing to win a national championship, and neither are most G5 schools.

(04-19-2014 06:15 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 06:06 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 04:16 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 10:38 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  I keep coming back to this thought...

...why does Idaho want to be in the same league as Alabama? What is "in it" for them? The Idahos never win championships...they only beat Alabamas once every 20 years...the cards are stacked against them in every way.

Why would the Reading Phillies ever fight to be in MLB where they'd lose to the Philadelphia Phillies 19 out of 20 times...and be doormats every year.

Why is everyone pushing their way into the FBS (Division1)? I'm a Penn State fan and we haven't won an outright title in almost 30 years...but we've won it a few times...we've been in the top 5 dozens of times...and we can compete at the FBS level consistently. I can't imagine being an Idaho fan and feeling indignant that they want me to play against teams that are LIKE my team and against whom I can reasonably COMPETE.

Then why should any G5 team want to be in the FBS? G5 teams are competing for bowl wins, not national championships. If the whole point of FBS football is a championship, the G5 as a whole should drop down.

And for what it's worth, there is only one team in the Sun Belt that has more bowl wins than Idaho. Our team has sucked for more than half of the time we've played at the FBS level, but at least we CAN compete.

You don't get sports.

At least half of the P5 schools aren't realistic contenders to be national champs or win their conference even in a given year, yet they don't walk away to find a place they can win regularly.

In most of the world where soccer rules teams want to win their league to advance to a tougher league where their chances to be successful are slim and they face a high chance of being shipped right back where they were.

Your post doesn't contradict anything I wrote. I was responding to the post asking why Idaho even wants to be in the same league as Alabama. Long story short, we don't. Realistically, Idaho isn't playing to win a national championship, and neither are most G5 schools.

Always fun to mindread and speculate:
Maybe Arkstfan was responding to Allthatyoucan'tleavebehind and not to Dmacfour?