Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
this year's conference configuration - why?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
MTPiKapp Offline
Socialist
*

Posts: 16,860
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation: 716
I Root For: MiddleTennessee
Location: Roswell, GA
Post: #41
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-12-2014 06:45 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  MTSU and WKU don't have to be separated for any reason. Let UAB decide which way they want to go and then we'll deal with the rest. The geography wouldn't be so bad for UAB if ULL were added to fill out the West division, but if the fans are more attached to the rivalries in the East, that's understandable. Lets just settle it and move on.

Adding two schools to pacify the divisional alignment desires of one member would be ridiculous.
08-12-2014 08:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoachMaclid Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,424
Joined: Oct 2006
Reputation: 341
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #42
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
Fine, we'll do it this way and everyone wins...

"NORTH" DIVISION
Marshall
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky
Middle Tennessee
Charlotte
UAB
Southern Miss

SOUTH DIVISION
UTEP
UTSA
Rice
North Texas
La Tech
FIU
FAU

Actually, I start out half joking here, but this actually is probably the way it should have been done in hindsight.
(This post was last modified: 08-12-2014 08:48 PM by CoachMaclid.)
08-12-2014 08:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MTPiKapp Offline
Socialist
*

Posts: 16,860
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation: 716
I Root For: MiddleTennessee
Location: Roswell, GA
Post: #43
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-12-2014 08:47 PM)CoachMaclid Wrote:  Fine, we'll do it this way and everyone wins...

NORTH DIVISION
Marshall
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky
Middle Tennessee
Charlotte
UAB
Southern Miss

SOUTH DIVISION
UTEP
UTSA
Rice
North Texas
La Tech
FIU
FAU

Actually, I start out half joking here, but this actually is probably the way it should have been done in hindsight.

FAU/FIU and UTEP in the same division? Sounds fun for Olympic sports.
08-12-2014 08:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoachMaclid Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,424
Joined: Oct 2006
Reputation: 341
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #44
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
Divisions only exist in Football.
08-12-2014 08:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,005
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 394
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #45
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-12-2014 08:47 PM)CoachMaclid Wrote:  Fine, we'll do it this way and everyone wins...

"NORTH" DIVISION
Marshall
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky
Middle Tennessee
Charlotte
UAB
Southern Miss

SOUTH DIVISION
UTEP
UTSA
Rice
North Texas
La Tech
FIU
FAU

Actually, I start out half joking here, but this actually is probably the way it should have been done in hindsight.

No.

UTEP and the Floridas in the same division is not a good idea. It looks like UAB will have to slide over to the west, though I wouldn't be opposed to unequal numbers in our division. If the east really wants UAB, the east could be an 8 team division and the West can stick with North Texas, Rice, Southern Miss, UTEP, UTSA, and LA Tech, and be a 6 team division.
08-12-2014 09:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BeliefBlazer Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,806
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation: 295
I Root For: UAB
Location: Portal, GA

DonatorsDonators
Post: #46
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-12-2014 08:28 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 06:45 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  MTSU and WKU don't have to be separated for any reason. Let UAB decide which way they want to go and then we'll deal with the rest. The geography wouldn't be so bad for UAB if ULL were added to fill out the West division, but if the fans are more attached to the rivalries in the East, that's understandable. Lets just settle it and move on.

Adding two schools to pacify the divisional alignment desires of one member would be ridiculous.

uh-huh. What if that one member is MT? Would you feel differently? Of course you would. You'd try and argue why moving you west is such a bad idea.

Adding more teams would be stupid, though 03-wink
(This post was last modified: 08-12-2014 09:04 PM by BeliefBlazer.)
08-12-2014 09:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoachMaclid Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,424
Joined: Oct 2006
Reputation: 341
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #47
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-12-2014 09:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  No.

UTEP and the Floridas in the same division is not a good idea.

Just pointing out...
Marshall to FIU = 1040 miles
North Texas to FIU = 1340 miles

Both are obvious flying distances. And it's only be one Florida trip a year for each school for the West schools.
08-12-2014 09:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TOPSTRAIGHT Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,862
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 456
I Root For: WKU
Location: Glasgow,KY.
Post: #48
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
North-South football only idea.Not bad.Not bad at all IMHO.
08-12-2014 09:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,005
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 394
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #49
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-12-2014 09:13 PM)CoachMaclid Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 09:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  No.

UTEP and the Floridas in the same division is not a good idea.

Just pointing out...
Marshall to FIU = 1040 miles
North Texas to FIU = 1340 miles

Both are obvious flying distances. And it's only be one Florida trip a year for each school for the West schools.

Hell, you can fly to Alaska too. That's a terrible argument.

So it would basically be about 1,300 miles or more for 3 of the Texas programs, and a little less for LA Tech and USM? And how far is it from UTEP to the FAU and FIU?

Marshall, Charlotte, ODU, FAU, and FIU are all on the Atlantic coast. They need to be together in the eastern division. El Paso is much closer to the Pacific Ocean than it is to Florida. UTEP has no business in the same division with the Florida schools. In 2015 FAU and FIU will be in the eastern division, and UAB will probably be in the west. C-USA is just not structured to be a North/South conference.
(This post was last modified: 08-12-2014 09:31 PM by Side Show Joe.)
08-12-2014 09:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ESE84 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,607
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 205
I Root For: Rice then UH
Location: Houston

New Orleans BowlDonators
Post: #50
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-12-2014 09:13 PM)CoachMaclid Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 09:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  No.

UTEP and the Floridas in the same division is not a good idea.

Just pointing out...
Marshall to FIU = 1040 miles
North Texas to FIU = 1340 miles

Both are obvious flying distances. And it's only be one Florida trip a year for each school for the West schools.

Wasn't it Marshall that wanted the Florida schools to help recruiting?
08-12-2014 09:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoachMaclid Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,424
Joined: Oct 2006
Reputation: 341
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #51
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
Yes, it was Marshall that wanted the Florida recruiting.

So, having nothing better to do this evening, I did crunch the numbers, and it does make more sense to throw USM/UAB to the "West" than FIU/FAU into the "South".

Average East with FAU/FIU: 627 miles
Average "North" with UAB/USM: 460 miles

Average West with UAB/USM: 559 miles
Average "South" with FAU/FIU: 876 miles

Thanks for making me disprove my own argument for keeping Southern Miss in our division. In short, West Division school should accept an average 40-minute longer flight so that UAB can stay east.
08-12-2014 10:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Ragu Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,840
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 608
I Root For: FAU/FSU
Location:
Post: #52
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
Do people really want all of the Texas and Florida schools in one division also? Would seem to help that division a lot more in recruiting if you set it up like that...

I'd rather stay East since my school is one of the furthest East in the conference....
08-13-2014 07:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blazers9911 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,818
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation: 224
I Root For: UAB
Location:

Survivor Runner-up
Post: #53
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
The biggest problem is we have a school in El Paso, and two in Miami. Neither area is convenient to any other school.(not knocking the schools, I love being in a conference with utep). There is no ideal way to divide the schools because of these outliers though. Charlotte to Miami is roughly 700 miles. For UAB, the location is not ideal based on where everybody else is. Charlotte, la tech, mtsu, wku, and southern miss are the most convenient locations from Birmingham. These teams will be split up one way or another.

Personally, I liked the idea of the north south divisions because it would keep the schools see hat clustered outside of the Florida schools, which don't cluster with any group. That isn't ideal for them or the Texas schools, and I get that. Nothing is ideal for the school(s) that get moved when we see what the conference does in a year.
08-13-2014 10:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MinerInWisconsin Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,689
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
Post: #54
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
I believe the ncaa is supposed to rule on the conference division issue as regards the ccg soon. If they rule that divisions are not needed, just have your 2 best teams play in the ccg, then C-USA could just create the most logical fb schedules and not worry about divisions.
08-13-2014 10:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Afflicted Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,249
Joined: Sep 2009
I Root For: Rice and UH
Location:
Post: #55
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-12-2014 08:28 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 06:45 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  MTSU and WKU don't have to be separated for any reason. Let UAB decide which way they want to go and then we'll deal with the rest. The geography wouldn't be so bad for UAB if ULL were added to fill out the West division, but if the fans are more attached to the rivalries in the East, that's understandable. Lets just settle it and move on.

Adding two schools to pacify the divisional alignment desires of one member would be ridiculous.
It's not about one member. It's about tightening the geography of both divisions. Foster rivalries and decrease travel.
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2014 02:29 PM by Afflicted.)
08-13-2014 02:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MTPiKapp Offline
Socialist
*

Posts: 16,860
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation: 716
I Root For: MiddleTennessee
Location: Roswell, GA
Post: #56
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-13-2014 02:26 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 08:28 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 06:45 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  MTSU and WKU don't have to be separated for any reason. Let UAB decide which way they want to go and then we'll deal with the rest. The geography wouldn't be so bad for UAB if ULL were added to fill out the West division, but if the fans are more attached to the rivalries in the East, that's understandable. Lets just settle it and move on.

Adding two schools to pacify the divisional alignment desires of one member would be ridiculous.
It's not about one member. It's about tightening the geography of both divisions. Foster rivalries and decrease travel.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all about both of those things, but isn't the revenue distribution set up so that after twelve members there's diminishing returns or something like that?

I'd be fine with a 16 member conference, but the two additions have to add value, I'm not sure that there are two such adds out there, if I'm mistaken, I can get on board with two adds.
08-13-2014 03:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ESE84 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,607
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 205
I Root For: Rice then UH
Location: Houston

New Orleans BowlDonators
Post: #57
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-13-2014 10:15 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  The biggest problem is we have a school in El Paso, and two in Miami. Neither area is convenient to any other school.(not knocking the schools, I love being in a conference with utep).

El Paso is a relatively cheap, short non-stop flight from Houston, Dallas, or San Antonio.
08-13-2014 04:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goliath74 Offline
5318008
*

Posts: 8,966
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 567
I Root For: FAU, FSU
Location: Hollywood, Florida
Post: #58
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
My question is how some on this thread go from "UAB to the West or not" argument to "split Florida schools". Really? There are no other options before we go to something as silly as splitting schools that are 50 miles apart (with no other schools within 200)?
08-13-2014 04:38 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DaSaintFan Offline
Dum' Sutherner in Midwest!
*

Posts: 15,873
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 411
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: Stuck in St. Louis
Post: #59
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
(08-12-2014 04:33 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 03:57 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I still vote Zipper configuration.... thus nobody has any advantage travelwise over anyone else...

No. We're at 14 because we wanted some geographic rivals. The four Texas programs, and Louisiana Tech, need to play each other every year. I feel lucky to see the storied Southern Mississippi program also slotted into the West.

So add in a permament rotation for game #7 and then a "free choice" for #8. (i'm assuming an 8 game conference slate and 4 OOC games.)

Permament Rival Rotating Division
Texas 1............. UTSA Rice Texas 2/ Gulf Coast
UTSA would have to play La Tech or UNT every other year
RIce would have to play USM or UTEP every other year.

Texas 2............. UTEP UNT Texas 1/Gulf Coast
UTEP would have to play Rice or La Tech every other year
UNT would have to play USM or UTSA every other year

Appalachian....... Marshall WKY TN Valley/Florida
Marshall: UAB or Charlotte
WKY: MTSU or FIU

Gulf Coast......... USM La Tech Texas 1/Texas 2
USM: UNT or Rice
La Tech: UTEP or UTSA

East Coast........ ODU Charlotte Florida/TN Valley
ODU: FAU or UAB
Charlotte; FIU or MTSU

TN Valley.......... MTSU UAB Appalachian/East Coast
MTSU: WKY or Charlotte
UAB: Marshall or ODU

Florida.............. FIU FAU East Coast/Appalachian
FIU: Charlotte or WKU
FAU: Marshall or ODU

If FIU were to play charlotte than FAU would have to play Marshall that year. And vice-versa. The only catch is you have to be willing to divvy up the home/aways to make it right for everyone.
08-13-2014 06:25 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MTPiKapp Offline
Socialist
*

Posts: 16,860
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation: 716
I Root For: MiddleTennessee
Location: Roswell, GA
Post: #60
RE: this year's conference configuration - why?
How about

East
Charlotte
FAU
FIU
Marshall
MT
ODU
WKU

West
Louisiana Tech
Rice
UAB
UNT
USM
UTEP
UTSA
08-13-2014 10:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.