(11-21-2014 04:14 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 11:21 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  MAC doesn't want Marshall. But this would work better for everyone:

ECC
Akron, Buffalo, Cincinnati, UConn, Marshall, ODU, ECU, Ohio, Temple, UMass, and then either (Army + Navy) or (UCF + USF)

New MAC
Ball St, BGSU, C Mich, W. Mich, Miami, NIU, Toledo, MTSU, WKU

Both conferences improve flexibility in scheduling, open new recruiting areas, can accommodate weather issues, and don't have the stigma of being confined to OH & MI.

Now, I think Army and Navy will continue to decline football conference invites. And I'm unsure if UCF and USF would want more than fball, and that could increase travel costs. But not worse than already exists.

Cincy is pining for Big 12 membership, and could get it. ECC would have to watch for that. Honestly, NIU is probably #3 or 4 for Big 12 expansion too, so the MAC should be aware.

In the meantime this offers the universities to put out a good product, at an affordable cost to them.

I'm not really a fan of president Obama but you really need to remove that picture.

That is beyond offensive and you must also consider that pictures like that can get people at work in trouble. How does it look if your working a government job and someone walks by and see's the president burning the constitution?

I actually don't entirely disagree. It's a sports forum, so why can't we just keep it focused on sports and leave our political views out of the mix? If I want that, I'll go find a politics forum somewhere...I come here for sports and to get away from all the political nonsense.

(11-20-2014 04:30 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  who's the stronger conference now....the MAC or C-USA?

...What likely happens over time:
---CUSA eventually fails as a conference as the money runs out and teams decide to either discontinue FB altogether (UAB being the first across that bridge) or drop to FCS to preserve their D1 basketball, and Marshall will have to scramble to find a new home...either in the MAC (which I could see as still a more financially viable conference) or somewhere else...

And...

---Temple discontinuing football as the costs of renting Lincoln Financial Field mount and the returns for the non-Power conference teams diminish.

(11-22-2014 09:20 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(11-20-2014 04:30 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  who's the stronger conference now....the MAC or C-USA?

...What likely happens over time:
---CUSA eventually fails as a conference as the money runs out and teams decide to either discontinue FB altogether (UAB being the first across that bridge) or drop to FCS to preserve their D1 basketball, and Marshall will have to scramble to find a new home...either in the MAC (which I could see as still a more financially viable conference) or somewhere else...

And...

---Temple discontinuing football as the costs of renting Lincoln Financial Field mount and the returns for the non-Power conference teams diminish.

Why would CUSA fail as a conference? Makes no sense. We already make more money than the Mac and the Sunbelt. Not to mention that we are only a couple hundred thousand behind you guys. The more likely scenario is that the Sunbelt ends up going bankrupt when all is said and done.

Yeah...yeah, I see the Sunbelt going belly up before C-USA. I also don't see Temple dropping out of FBS football any time soon.

(11-22-2014 11:11 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 09:20 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(11-20-2014 04:30 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  who's the stronger conference now....the MAC or C-USA?

...What likely happens over time:
---CUSA eventually fails as a conference as the money runs out and teams decide to either discontinue FB altogether (UAB being the first across that bridge) or drop to FCS to preserve their D1 basketball, and Marshall will have to scramble to find a new home...either in the MAC (which I could see as still a more financially viable conference) or somewhere else...

And...

---Temple discontinuing football as the costs of renting Lincoln Financial Field mount and the returns for the non-Power conference teams diminish.

Why would CUSA fail as a conference? Makes no sense. We already make more money than the Mac and the Sunbelt. Not to mention that we are only a couple hundred thousand behind you guys. The more likely scenario is that the Sunbelt ends up going bankrupt when all is said and done.

CUSA has a lot of smaller public schools in it like La Tech, Southern Miss, UAB that Marshall can identify with institutionally. That trend will continue once Arkansas State and Troy find their way into the conference.

MAC schools are large population states and larger publics for the most part. Miami is the smallest and they are still 2x the size of Marshall. I don't see a lot of institutional similarites between Marshall and MAC schools. Marshall would be thought of more as a Wright State or a Youngstown State if they were in Ohio.

(11-22-2014 11:11 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 09:20 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(11-20-2014 04:30 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  who's the stronger conference now....the MAC or C-USA?

...What likely happens over time:
---CUSA eventually fails as a conference as the money runs out and teams decide to either discontinue FB altogether (UAB being the first across that bridge) or drop to FCS to preserve their D1 basketball, and Marshall will have to scramble to find a new home...either in the MAC (which I could see as still a more financially viable conference) or somewhere else...

And...

---Temple discontinuing football as the costs of renting Lincoln Financial Field mount and the returns for the non-Power conference teams diminish.

Why would CUSA fail as a conference? Makes no sense. We already make more money than the Mac and the Sunbelt. Not to mention that we are only a couple hundred thousand behind you guys. The more likely scenario is that the Sunbelt ends up going bankrupt when all is said and done.

I didn't say it (CUSA) would be the first... And actually, the Sunbelt is in a position where, if they wanted to, they could downgrade as a whole conference to FCS and be just fine. I don't think they will, and hence will probably fall apart one school at a time.

This is such a bs condescending thread. You don't even know which conference temple is in. Why would Marshall go back to the MAC? They've been successful in cusa and don't have to play midweek games. Seriously what a troll job. Do you even watch the games or are you just scoreboard watching?

(11-22-2014 02:35 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  This is such a bs condescending thread. You don't even know which conference temple is in. Why would Marshall go back to the MAC? They've been successful in cusa and don't have to play midweek games. Seriously what a troll job. Do you even watch the games or are you just scoreboard watching?

It is condescending, but use it as a springboard for something more intelligent.

(11-21-2014 11:21 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  MAC doesn't want Marshall. But this would work better for everyone:

ECC
Akron, Buffalo, Cincinnati, UConn, Marshall, ODU, ECU, Ohio, Temple, UMass, and then either (Army + Navy) or (UCF + USF)

New MAC
Ball St, BGSU, C Mich, W. Mich, Miami, NIU, Toledo, MTSU, WKU

Both conferences improve flexibility in scheduling, open new recruiting areas, can accommodate weather issues, and don't have the stigma of being confined to OH & MI.

Now, I think Army and Navy will continue to decline football conference invites. And I'm unsure if UCF and USF would want more than fball, and that could increase travel costs. But not worse than already exists.

Cincy is pining for Big 12 membership, and could get it. ECC would have to watch for that. Honestly, NIU is probably #3 or 4 for Big 12 expansion too, so the MAC should be aware.

In the meantime this offers the universities to put out a good product, at an affordable cost to them.

Ucf is as well. It wouldn't work anyway because uconn Ucf usf and cincy would never agree to that peering. We are far and away in a better league now. The second half of that conf are not anywhere being peer institutions in size or athletics

(11-21-2014 11:33 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Yes it is. The league was never a designed ten team league. In fact I don't think it ever even was ten teams (went from 8 in 2012 with Temple as football only to 11 in 2013 with Navy on the way). The contract signed with NBC, and later matched by ESPN was for a 12 team football league and an 11 team basketball league.

The first year of the AAC, they had 10 teams.
Louisville, Rutgers, UConn, Cincy, USF,
Temple, UCF, SMU, Houston, Memphis

Quote:The fact that at that exact moment there were only 10 teams was not relevant (for that matter two of the teams in the league at that time are no longer in the conference).

Right. The contract was written with the knowledge that those 10 would be joined by NAvy and a school-to-be-named-later.

Quote:Why would CUSA fail as a conference? Makes no sense. We already make more money than the Mac and the Sunbelt.

Yeah, given that the Sun Belt is a "Farm Club" to CUSA, I could see Sun Belt going belly-up before CUSA. However, I don't think they will. Down south, football's the biggest deal vs other parts of the nation, and Sun Belt, even though not as good as the MAC of course, pays their coaches a bit more and their attendance is decent for the bottom G5.

CUSA is riding off of Marshall & LA-Tech with the help of Rice & Mid-Tennessee. If Marshall were to go to the MAC, the MAC would be better than CUSA more years than not. If Temple were to join the MAC again to enhance the MAC East as well, the MAC would be solidified as a better conference than CUSA unless Temple went downhill (which they shouldn't; they're putting more into the program now).

Thing is, there's no incentive to join the MAC for Marshall & Temple. Unless ESPN sweetens the pot with the MAC, Marshall ain't going. And Temple with their basketball team + higher $$ with the AAC even if ESPN sweetened the MAC's pot -- would not want to go.

It would be great IF they did jump to the MAC. The only way I could see that happening is if the AAC starts falling apart due to Cinci, ECU, and Memphis leaving to other conferences + LA-Tech leaving or Rice & Mid-Tenn leaving CUSA... or some max exodus by newer programs joining FBS but not getting enough $$ to continue, thus destabilizing Sun Belt & CUSA.

(11-21-2014 11:33 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 11:22 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 11:06 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

.

while ESPN could reduce the contract if teams left, the amount is so small they likely would not as it is more trouble than it's worth especially with potential lawsuits. But now if you not only lose two marquee teams, but don't replace them and now ALSO lose inventory [estimated 10 less total football games (8 conference) plus CCG from 2015 on, and 22 less basketball games (17 less conference),plus 2 less conference tourney games] then it may force their hand.

Exactly right. The money and risk of losing the inventory is greater than the savings at this point. Much like what happened with CUSA last time.
AAC would back fill, and anyone in CUSA would jump. 24 mil a year is still cheap programing, considering they pay almost that per team in P5 leagues. The odds are much higher that AAC will get a decent $$ jump, and extension at look in, than they get a cut because of raids.

(11-23-2014 12:41 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 11:21 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  MAC doesn't want Marshall. But this would work better for everyone:

ECC
Akron, Buffalo, Cincinnati, UConn, Marshall, ODU, ECU, Ohio, Temple, UMass, and then either (Army + Navy) or (UCF + USF)

New MAC
Ball St, BGSU, C Mich, W. Mich, Miami, NIU, Toledo, MTSU, WKU

Both conferences improve flexibility in scheduling, open new recruiting areas, can accommodate weather issues, and don't have the stigma of being confined to OH & MI.

Now, I think Army and Navy will continue to decline football conference invites. And I'm unsure if UCF and USF would want more than fball, and that could increase travel costs. But not worse than already exists.

Cincy is pining for Big 12 membership, and could get it. ECC would have to watch for that. Honestly, NIU is probably #3 or 4 for Big 12 expansion too, so the MAC should be aware.

In the meantime this offers the universities to put out a good product, at an affordable cost to them.

Ucf is as well. It wouldn't work anyway because uconn Ucf usf and cincy would never agree to that peering. We are far and away in a better league now. The second half of that conf are not anywhere being peer institutions in size or athletics

Not sure which half you mean by second half.

But fortunes change. Wasn't that long ago that no major conference really wanted TCU or Baylor for football.

(11-24-2014 04:42 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(11-23-2014 12:41 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 11:21 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  MAC doesn't want Marshall. But this would work better for everyone:

ECC
Akron, Buffalo, Cincinnati, UConn, Marshall, ODU, ECU, Ohio, Temple, UMass, and then either (Army + Navy) or (UCF + USF)

New MAC
Ball St, BGSU, C Mich, W. Mich, Miami, NIU, Toledo, MTSU, WKU

Both conferences improve flexibility in scheduling, open new recruiting areas, can accommodate weather issues, and don't have the stigma of being confined to OH & MI.

Now, I think Army and Navy will continue to decline football conference invites. And I'm unsure if UCF and USF would want more than fball, and that could increase travel costs. But not worse than already exists.

Cincy is pining for Big 12 membership, and could get it. ECC would have to watch for that. Honestly, NIU is probably #3 or 4 for Big 12 expansion too, so the MAC should be aware.

In the meantime this offers the universities to put out a good product, at an affordable cost to them.

Ucf is as well. It wouldn't work anyway because uconn Ucf usf and cincy would never agree to that peering. We are far and away in a better league now. The second half of that conf are not anywhere being peer institutions in size or athletics

Not sure which half you mean by second half.

But fortunes change. Wasn't that long ago that no major conference really wanted TCU or Baylor for football.

Essentially any of the teams we are currently not affiliated with. They are just in different states of their programs with respect to facilities, attendance, etc. Maybe I shouldn't have said never but if I were looking at those programs that we are not currently in a conference with Ucf would not agree to join. I am fairly certain cincy, uconn, etc would be the same.

(11-22-2014 01:54 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 11:11 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 09:20 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(11-20-2014 04:30 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  who's the stronger conference now....the MAC or C-USA?

...What likely happens over time:
---CUSA eventually fails as a conference as the money runs out and teams decide to either discontinue FB altogether (UAB being the first across that bridge) or drop to FCS to preserve their D1 basketball, and Marshall will have to scramble to find a new home...either in the MAC (which I could see as still a more financially viable conference) or somewhere else...

And...

---Temple discontinuing football as the costs of renting Lincoln Financial Field mount and the returns for the non-Power conference teams diminish.

Why would CUSA fail as a conference? Makes no sense. We already make more money than the Mac and the Sunbelt. Not to mention that we are only a couple hundred thousand behind you guys. The more likely scenario is that the Sunbelt ends up going bankrupt when all is said and done.

CUSA has a lot of smaller public schools in it like La Tech, Southern Miss, UAB that Marshall can identify with institutionally. That trend will continue once Arkansas State and Troy find their way into the conference.

MAC schools are large population states and larger publics for the most part. Miami is the smallest and they are still 2x the size of Marshall. I don't see a lot of institutional similarites between Marshall and MAC schools. Marshall would be thought of more as a Wright State or a Youngstown State if they were in Ohio.

Troy has absolutely no chance. They bring no value to the table whatsoever. Ark State was talked about briefly in the last round but not seriously. Trust me when I tell you that the short list is Louisiana, Texas State and a couple "Ohio Mac Schools" that are in consideration. Who are those Ohio schools?....I've heard possibility of Akron. Not sure who the other is. In the end, my money would be on Louisiana.

(11-24-2014 04:58 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(11-24-2014 04:42 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(11-23-2014 12:41 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 11:21 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  MAC doesn't want Marshall. But this would work better for everyone:

ECC
Akron, Buffalo, Cincinnati, UConn, Marshall, ODU, ECU, Ohio, Temple, UMass, and then either (Army + Navy) or (UCF + USF)

New MAC
Ball St, BGSU, C Mich, W. Mich, Miami, NIU, Toledo, MTSU, WKU

Both conferences improve flexibility in scheduling, open new recruiting areas, can accommodate weather issues, and don't have the stigma of being confined to OH & MI.

Now, I think Army and Navy will continue to decline football conference invites. And I'm unsure if UCF and USF would want more than fball, and that could increase travel costs. But not worse than already exists.

Cincy is pining for Big 12 membership, and could get it. ECC would have to watch for that. Honestly, NIU is probably #3 or 4 for Big 12 expansion too, so the MAC should be aware.

In the meantime this offers the universities to put out a good product, at an affordable cost to them.

Ucf is as well. It wouldn't work anyway because uconn Ucf usf and cincy would never agree to that peering. We are far and away in a better league now. The second half of that conf are not anywhere being peer institutions in size or athletics

Not sure which half you mean by second half.

But fortunes change. Wasn't that long ago that no major conference really wanted TCU or Baylor for football.

Essentially any of the teams we are currently not affiliated with. They are just in different states of their programs with respect to facilities, attendance, etc. Maybe I shouldn't have said never but if I were looking at those programs that we are not currently in a conference with Ucf would not agree to join. I am fairly certain cincy, uconn, etc would be the same.

Are you saying that for all sports, or just major ones?

And even in the major ones, do the current conference-mates really provide better attendance than the ones I proposed?

I'm not saying that you're wrong, what you describe may be the decision process for administrators. But, I am saying they might be wrong. Huge differences exist even w/in the Big 10, and not just N'western (look at Minnesota's stadium capacity for example) but they make it work.

What goes into making a good conference is largely proximity and competitiveness. That's what stirs up fan interest, and keeps costs manageable.

(11-26-2014 11:26 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(11-24-2014 04:58 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(11-24-2014 04:42 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(11-23-2014 12:41 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 11:21 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  MAC doesn't want Marshall. But this would work better for everyone:

ECC
Akron, Buffalo, Cincinnati, UConn, Marshall, ODU, ECU, Ohio, Temple, UMass, and then either (Army + Navy) or (UCF + USF)

New MAC
Ball St, BGSU, C Mich, W. Mich, Miami, NIU, Toledo, MTSU, WKU

Both conferences improve flexibility in scheduling, open new recruiting areas, can accommodate weather issues, and don't have the stigma of being confined to OH & MI.

Now, I think Army and Navy will continue to decline football conference invites. And I'm unsure if UCF and USF would want more than fball, and that could increase travel costs. But not worse than already exists.

Cincy is pining for Big 12 membership, and could get it. ECC would have to watch for that. Honestly, NIU is probably #3 or 4 for Big 12 expansion too, so the MAC should be aware.

In the meantime this offers the universities to put out a good product, at an affordable cost to them.

Ucf is as well. It wouldn't work anyway because uconn Ucf usf and cincy would never agree to that peering. We are far and away in a better league now. The second half of that conf are not anywhere being peer institutions in size or athletics

Not sure which half you mean by second half.

But fortunes change. Wasn't that long ago that no major conference really wanted TCU or Baylor for football.

Essentially any of the teams we are currently not affiliated with. They are just in different states of their programs with respect to facilities, attendance, etc. Maybe I shouldn't have said never but if I were looking at those programs that we are not currently in a conference with Ucf would not agree to join. I am fairly certain cincy, uconn, etc would be the same.

Are you saying that for all sports, or just major ones?

And even in the major ones, do the current conference-mates really provide better attendance than the ones I proposed?

I'm not saying that you're wrong, what you describe may be the decision process for administrators. But, I am saying they might be wrong. Huge differences exist even w/in the Big 10, and not just N'western (look at Minnesota's stadium capacity for example) but they make it work.

What goes into making a good conference is largely proximity and competitiveness. That's what stirs up fan interest, and keeps costs manageable.

I think in all sports. Also none of the brands really cut down on costs and travel for the fl schools. Cincy is talking about discontinuing the rivalry game with Miami I doubt they would want to add Akron etc. we left many of those schools in the Mac. Buffalo is great academically but most don't fit out peer group. I just don't see any advantages or motivation for the AAC schools IMO.