Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)


Post Reply 
Realignment is Silly part 127
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
chiefsfan Offline
No Seriously, they let me be a mod
*

Posts: 43,710
Joined: Sep 2007
Reputation: 1061
I Root For: ASU
Location:
Post: #1
Realignment is Silly part 127
So to make sure I have a decent idea of what is happening here.

CUSA is stuck in a power struggle. It's Eastern Membership would love to add a JMU or Liberty to make it to 14. It's Western Membership would prefer grabbing a Western SBC school to get to 14. Neither side will go with what the other wants, thus they both continue to block each other resulting in a stalemate, that will only be resolved by either going 16, or working a compromise. Eastern Division controls more votes, but must have the West for this to work.

SBC is stuck in a power struggle. It's Western Membership would love to bring NMSU in all sports to balance out basketball scheduling, and working on a 12th football member from there. It's East Members have no desire to travel to New Mexico State for Olympic Sports, and are proposing Liberty or James Madison for all sports as alternatives. West Membership has no desire for either because of their lack of football success and is blocking them, as a result, the East is blocking NMSU. The West controls greater number of votes, but still must have the Eastern votes to get what it wants.

Yet through all of this, both leagues continue to ignore the dwindling television interest in covering G5 leagues, and continue to be stuck in their old ways, rather than stopping the madness and going geographic, they would rather continue with whatever worked in the past.

This sound right to anyone else?
03-31-2015 11:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,299
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 446
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #2
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(03-31-2015 11:04 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  So to make sure I have a decent idea of what is happening here.

CUSA is stuck in a power struggle. It's Eastern Membership would love to add a JMU or Liberty to make it to 14. It's Western Membership would prefer grabbing a Western SBC school to get to 14. Neither side will go with what the other wants, thus they both continue to block each other resulting in a stalemate, that will only be resolved by either going 16, or working a compromise. Eastern Division controls more votes, but must have the West for this to work.

SBC is stuck in a power struggle. It's Western Membership would love to bring NMSU in all sports to balance out basketball scheduling, and working on a 12th football member from there. It's East Members have no desire to travel to New Mexico State for Olympic Sports, and are proposing Liberty or James Madison for all sports as alternatives. West Membership has no desire for either because of their lack of football success and is blocking them, as a result, the East is blocking NMSU. The West controls greater number of votes, but still must have the Eastern votes to get what it wants.

Yet through all of this, both leagues continue to ignore the dwindling television interest in covering G5 leagues, and continue to be stuck in their old ways, rather than stopping the madness and going geographic, they would rather continue with whatever worked in the past.

This sound right to anyone else?

I see what you are trying to say, but no.

All I hear from CUSA "We are better than the Sun Belt."

Anything else is just noise.

---

I don't think JMU would be blocked by anyone as a candidate for all sports membership in the Sun Belt. I also think that Missouri State would get in as well (Idaho might not like the result of that). Both show up, Idaho gets its notice, we take NMSU as an all sports, and get rid of the football sharing with UTA and UALR noise (they stay - but they're not participating in football revenue)

---

JMU would get in as an all sport member

Missouri State would get in as an all sport member

---

EKU is going to have difficulty and Liberty will have great difficulty. Because of issues with the school's fit or value to the conference, rather than any rivalry between the East and West.

---

CUSA actually does have a East - West problem (but its pretty much overblown - no one other than UTEP can really do much about it - and even them might not be able to do much about it). The Belt, not so much. I'm not aware of any other issue than NMSU's all sport membership.
(This post was last modified: 03-31-2015 11:40 PM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
03-31-2015 11:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Usajags Offline
Sun Belt Nationalist
*

Posts: 9,540
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 269
I Root For: South Alabama
Location: Jaguar Nation
Post: #3
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
Everyone is working with the theory "Bigger is Better", I don't agree.

The end.
04-01-2015 06:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NewTimes Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,107
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 95
I Root For: Flames & Canes
Location: Rome, GA
Post: #4
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
The lynchpin seems to be what, if any action CUSA takes regarding UAB. There have been many what if scenarios in how that will/may play out and it had been discussed in great detail. That seems to be the largest determining factor in membership shifts. This one single potential action is likely the most pertinent factor to determine SBC and CUSA memberships in the near future.
04-01-2015 07:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EigenEagle Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,216
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 643
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
The solution could be to create an 11th FBS conference and let the present G5 reorganize themselves in geographic lines. Of course I don't see that happening.
04-01-2015 07:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Curtisc83 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,658
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 76
I Root For: Liberty U/Clemson
Location: Minot, ND
Post: #6
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-01-2015 07:19 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  The solution could be to create an 11th FBS conference and let the present G5 reorganize themselves in geographic lines. Of course I don't see that happening.

That might happen anyway if there are enough teams in the west without a home. The MWC is already full so existing teams and moveups have no where to go.
04-01-2015 07:38 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


NewTimes Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,107
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 95
I Root For: Flames & Canes
Location: Rome, GA
Post: #7
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-01-2015 07:19 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  The solution could be to create an 11th FBS conference and let the present G5 reorganize themselves in geographic lines. Of course I don't see that happening.
When the ACC was formed, geographical proximity was a factor. Most teams were a short drive to one another and fan traveling was easy. Somehow that principle has been lost due to the necessary expansion to form or expand conferences. Comments are made that say programs must have presences in Texas and Florida. So weigh the option of schools being near locations. Fan interest and rivalries are easier established. Attendance for an eastern footprint dramatically reduces cost. Unfortunately the western locales have much greater distance between them and they do have this option.

It seems that a regional conference, that's fan friendly for travel, that is a G5, would benefit more from regional affiliation and location rather then must have presence in FL or Texas. Wouldn't a strong G5 team in the east appeal to a recruit nationwide? Or must a G5 team play in the area to revelant?
04-01-2015 07:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MinerInWisconsin Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,685
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
Post: #8
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-01-2015 07:38 AM)Curtisc83 Wrote:  
(04-01-2015 07:19 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  The solution could be to create an 11th FBS conference and let the present G5 reorganize themselves in geographic lines. Of course I don't see that happening.

That might happen anyway if there are enough teams in the west without a home. The MWC is already full so existing teams and moveups have no where to go.

I could see the possibility of some of the western teams of both the SBC and C-USA deciding to create something new. Having too small of a footprint is bad for tv deals but a conference that covers the entire state of Texas plus New Mexico, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and maybe Missouri would be a nice sized footprint but not too far flung either.
(This post was last modified: 04-01-2015 07:47 AM by MinerInWisconsin.)
04-01-2015 07:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EigenEagle Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,216
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 643
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-01-2015 07:47 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  I could see the possibility of some of the western teams of both the SBC and C-USA deciding to create something new. Having too small of a footprint is bad for tv deals but a conference that covers the entire state of Texas plus New Mexico, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and maybe Missouri would be a nice sized footprint but not too far flung either.

Screw that. I'll take my chances putting priority of acquiring schools with good fan followings over geographic diversity.
04-01-2015 08:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Saint3333 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,412
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 854
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
Even a reallocated SBC and CUSA would cover these respective states:

NM, TX, LA, AR, MS, AL

TN, KY, WV, VA, NC, GA, FL
(This post was last modified: 04-01-2015 09:09 AM by Saint3333.)
04-01-2015 09:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMU2004 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,763
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 114
I Root For: DUKES
Location: the Commonwealth
Post: #11
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
Realignment can be summed up in one word, imo.

Hubris

It certainly isn't about common sense.
04-01-2015 09:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
Let's talk realistically about G5 television.

The AAC has the best G5 television deal. The 11 members receive less from ESPN than the SEC or Big 10 gives to a single member.

We aren't talking real money in the intercollegiate economy.

The median SEC/Big 10 school receives roughly 25% of its revenue from the conference. In AAC the number is around 16% in CUSA about 12%.

When you are in the Big XII and a move can change your budget by about double what what an AAC school makes in league revenue schools start considering a change.

TAMU and Mizzou moved to SEC for a greater percentage revenue increase (of total school athletic budget) than the increase enjoyed by the schools that defected CUSA for AAC or from Sun Belt to CUSA.

The G5 to G5 moves have made less economic sense than the P5 to P5 moves.

The idea of trying to construct an "ideal" TV conference in G5 based on markets is silliness.

The P5 make the money they make because they have large fan bases (ticket sales, donations, sponsorships) and those large fan bases lead to large TV viewership. They make market based moves because they either have or hope to have their own networks that generate carriage fee revenue. They don't care if a school is in a small market if they can command a high carriage fee within their state. Likewise for those without a network, ESPN and Fox have as their primary concern having desired content that permits them to charge large carriage fees.

The G5 desiring television relevance bases itself not on market but competive ability. Grouping regional to semi-regional schools that have success that drives viewership. MWC in splitting from WAC ignored several large market schools to create a league that was highly competitive and carried fan interest to drive their own sales. Until raided they were the financial success of the non-AQ.

This is the stupidity of G5 realignment. The artifical focus on potential markets has ignored pairing schools that fans can identify with driving sales and competitive ability that creates a positive brand for TV.

Look at NIU. Two years of being a buster contender, they drew audiences in excess of a million on TV several times. Last year their numbers were down significantly because they were less relevant. The key is pairing relevant schools not chasing the empty market dream.
04-01-2015 10:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NewTimes Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,107
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 95
I Root For: Flames & Canes
Location: Rome, GA
Post: #13
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-01-2015 10:01 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Let's talk realistically about G5 television.

The AAC has the best G5 television deal. The 11 members receive less from ESPN than the SEC or Big 10 gives to a single member.

We aren't talking real money in the intercollegiate economy.

The median SEC/Big 10 school receives roughly 25% of its revenue from the conference. In AAC the number is around 16% in CUSA about 12%.

When you are in the Big XII and a move can change your budget by about double what what an AAC school makes in league revenue schools start considering a change.

TAMU and Mizzou moved to SEC for a greater percentage revenue increase (of total school athletic budget) than the increase enjoyed by the schools that defected CUSA for AAC or from Sun Belt to CUSA.

The G5 to G5 moves have made less economic sense than the P5 to P5 moves.

The idea of trying to construct an "ideal" TV conference in G5 based on markets is silliness.

The P5 make the money they make because they have large fan bases (ticket sales, donations, sponsorships) and those large fan bases lead to large TV viewership. They make market based moves because they either have or hope to have their own networks that generate carriage fee revenue. They don't care if a school is in a small market if they can command a high carriage fee within their state. Likewise for those without a network, ESPN and Fox have as their primary concern having desired content that permits them to charge large carriage fees.

The G5 desiring television relevance bases itself not on market but competive ability. Grouping regional to semi-regional schools that have success that drives viewership. MWC in splitting from WAC ignored several large market schools to create a league that was highly competitive and carried fan interest to drive their own sales. Until raided they were the financial success of the non-AQ.

This is the stupidity of G5 realignment. The artifical focus on potential markets has ignored pairing schools that fans can identify with driving sales and competitive ability that creates a positive brand for TV.

Look at NIU. Two years of being a buster contender, they drew audiences in excess of a million on TV several times. Last year their numbers were down significantly because they were less relevant. The key is pairing relevant schools not chasing the empty market dream.
True the pairing is the logical, wise action. But the tail (ESPN, et al) wags the dog. Only when $ollars are lessening will there be any sort of change. When the pig is at the trough, he keeps eating until his belly is full. If the swine becomes lean, then the farmer will take note.
(This post was last modified: 04-01-2015 11:58 AM by NewTimes.)
04-01-2015 11:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-01-2015 11:56 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  
(04-01-2015 10:01 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Let's talk realistically about G5 television.

The AAC has the best G5 television deal. The 11 members receive less from ESPN than the SEC or Big 10 gives to a single member.

We aren't talking real money in the intercollegiate economy.

The median SEC/Big 10 school receives roughly 25% of its revenue from the conference. In AAC the number is around 16% in CUSA about 12%.

When you are in the Big XII and a move can change your budget by about double what what an AAC school makes in league revenue schools start considering a change.

TAMU and Mizzou moved to SEC for a greater percentage revenue increase (of total school athletic budget) than the increase enjoyed by the schools that defected CUSA for AAC or from Sun Belt to CUSA.

The G5 to G5 moves have made less economic sense than the P5 to P5 moves.

The idea of trying to construct an "ideal" TV conference in G5 based on markets is silliness.

The P5 make the money they make because they have large fan bases (ticket sales, donations, sponsorships) and those large fan bases lead to large TV viewership. They make market based moves because they either have or hope to have their own networks that generate carriage fee revenue. They don't care if a school is in a small market if they can command a high carriage fee within their state. Likewise for those without a network, ESPN and Fox have as their primary concern having desired content that permits them to charge large carriage fees.

The G5 desiring television relevance bases itself not on market but competive ability. Grouping regional to semi-regional schools that have success that drives viewership. MWC in splitting from WAC ignored several large market schools to create a league that was highly competitive and carried fan interest to drive their own sales. Until raided they were the financial success of the non-AQ.

This is the stupidity of G5 realignment. The artifical focus on potential markets has ignored pairing schools that fans can identify with driving sales and competitive ability that creates a positive brand for TV.

Look at NIU. Two years of being a buster contender, they drew audiences in excess of a million on TV several times. Last year their numbers were down significantly because they were less relevant. The key is pairing relevant schools not chasing the empty market dream.
True the pairing is the logical, wise action. But the tail (ESPN, et al) wags the dog. Only when $ollars are lessening will there be any sort of change. When the pig is at the trough, he keeps eating until his belly is full. If the swine becomes lean, then the farmer will take note.

The tail wags the dog in G5 land because the leaders are trying to "me too" what the P5 are doing. That is the real tail wagging the dog. The P5 built to where they are because they paid attention to hiring good coaches and giving them the best facilities they could afford, they scheduled smart, sold winning and built fan bases.

I don't believe Texas really wanted to be in a league where most of the members are on the other side of the Rocky Mountains, but the threat of doing so (and losing access to Texas third tier games) caused ESPN and Fox to throw money at Texas to "bribe" Texas to do what Texas wanted to do. That's wagging the tail.

Big Ten wanted to move further south. Maryland wanted out of their debt problem. Big Ten explains the situation and suddenly there was money available to make a $30 million lump sum payment to Maryland. The tail got wagged.

This is where the G5 are just totally freaking lost. The moves in the G5 are mostly pathetic twerking to get the attention of TV. The TV folks aren't buying G5 for any reason other than to keep another TV outfit from having the content or to fill space on nights the P5 refuse to play on or to fill space on channels that the P5 refuse to appear on because they lack adequate reach.

When MWC had BYU, TCU, and Utah they signed what was then a blockbuster deal for the non-AQ not because of markets (one of their biggest markets lacked a competitive program) but because they had relevant programs.

AAC took generally irrelevant Tulane while NIU who draws bigger audiences in a down year was seen as a rural school not fitting the model. The old MWC showed us the model. Put together a group of schools that are a threat to win most every game they play.
04-01-2015 12:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EigenEagle Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,216
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 643
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
If TV money was everything the P5 would've banned the scheduling of G5 and FCS teams long ago to make TV deals more valuable. ESPN is practically the only party that would win in that scenario, though.

Even if TV money was everything, it's tomfoolery to think that markets or a big footprint will improve TV contracts very much.
(This post was last modified: 04-01-2015 12:59 PM by EigenEagle.)
04-01-2015 12:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gsu95 Offline
Fifth Estate
*

Posts: 2,182
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 87
I Root For: USC, GS
Location: Coastal Georgia
Post: #16
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-01-2015 09:07 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  Realignment can be summed up in one word, imo.

Hubris

It certainly isn't about common sense.

04-cheers
04-02-2015 01:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Bobcat87 Offline
San Marvelous Cat
*

Posts: 10,509
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 358
I Root For: TXST, A&M, UNT
Location: Texas
Post: #17
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-01-2015 09:07 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  Realignment can be summed up in one word, imo.

Hubris

It certainly isn't about common sense.

That "HUBRIS" of which you speak, would that be your Administration holding out for a CUSA invite (or whatever they perceive as better)?

I only ask because I get the impression from your posters/fans that y'all would be OK with a SBC invite . . .

Or am I reading that all wrong?
04-02-2015 01:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NewTimes Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,107
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 95
I Root For: Flames & Canes
Location: Rome, GA
Post: #18
RE: Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-01-2015 12:24 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(04-01-2015 11:56 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  
(04-01-2015 10:01 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Let's talk realistically about G5 television.

The AAC has the best G5 television deal. The 11 members receive less from ESPN than the SEC or Big 10 gives to a single member.

We aren't talking real money in the intercollegiate economy.

The median SEC/Big 10 school receives roughly 25% of its revenue from the conference. In AAC the number is around 16% in CUSA about 12%.

When you are in the Big XII and a move can change your budget by about double what what an AAC school makes in league revenue schools start considering a change.

TAMU and Mizzou moved to SEC for a greater percentage revenue increase (of total school athletic budget) than the increase enjoyed by the schools that defected CUSA for AAC or from Sun Belt to CUSA.

The G5 to G5 moves have made less economic sense than the P5 to P5 moves.

The idea of trying to construct an "ideal" TV conference in G5 based on markets is silliness.

The P5 make the money they make because they have large fan bases (ticket sales, donations, sponsorships) and those large fan bases lead to large TV viewership. They make market based moves because they either have or hope to have their own networks that generate carriage fee revenue. They don't care if a school is in a small market if they can command a high carriage fee within their state. Likewise for those without a network, ESPN and Fox have as their primary concern having desired content that permits them to charge large carriage fees.

The G5 desiring television relevance bases itself not on market but competive ability. Grouping regional to semi-regional schools that have success that drives viewership. MWC in splitting from WAC ignored several large market schools to create a league that was highly competitive and carried fan interest to drive their own sales. Until raided they were the financial success of the non-AQ.

This is the stupidity of G5 realignment. The artifical focus on potential markets has ignored pairing schools that fans can identify with driving sales and competitive ability that creates a positive brand for TV.

Look at NIU. Two years of being a buster contender, they drew audiences in excess of a million on TV several times. Last year their numbers were down significantly because they were less relevant. The key is pairing relevant schools not chasing the empty market dream.
True the pairing is the logical, wise action. But the tail (ESPN, et al) wags the dog. Only when $ollars are lessening will there be any sort of change. When the pig is at the trough, he keeps eating until his belly is full. If the swine becomes lean, then the farmer will take note.

The tail wags the dog in G5 land because the leaders are trying to "me too" what the P5 are doing. That is the real tail wagging the dog. The P5 built to where they are because they paid attention to hiring good coaches and giving them the best facilities they could afford, they scheduled smart, sold winning and built fan bases.

I don't believe Texas really wanted to be in a league where most of the members are on the other side of the Rocky Mountains, but the threat of doing so (and losing access to Texas third tier games) caused ESPN and Fox to throw money at Texas to "bribe" Texas to do what Texas wanted to do. That's wagging the tail.

Big Ten wanted to move further south. Maryland wanted out of their debt problem. Big Ten explains the situation and suddenly there was money available to make a $30 million lump sum payment to Maryland. The tail got wagged.

This is where the G5 are just totally freaking lost. The moves in the G5 are mostly pathetic twerking to get the attention of TV. The TV folks aren't buying G5 for any reason other than to keep another TV outfit from having the content or to fill space on nights the P5 refuse to play on or to fill space on channels that the P5 refuse to appear on because they lack adequate reach.

When MWC had BYU, TCU, and Utah they signed what was then a blockbuster deal for the non-AQ not because of markets (one of their biggest markets lacked a competitive program) but because they had relevant programs.

AAC took generally irrelevant Tulane while NIU who draws bigger audiences in a down year was seen as a rural school not fitting the model. The old MWC showed us the model. Put together a group of schools that are a threat to win most every game they play.
Can anybody here give me an amen brother..........................That dog must have one tired tail after all that wagging.
04-02-2015 05:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
army56mike Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 11,994
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 380
I Root For: Liberty & UofL
Location: Shepherdsville, KY
Post: #19
Realignment is Silly part 127
I thought the hot rumor was UTEP and NMSU to the MWC. That would shake some things up in C-USA and SBC quite a bit would it not?
04-02-2015 05:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #20
Realignment is Silly part 127
(04-02-2015 05:40 PM)army56mike Wrote:  I thought the hot rumor was UTEP and NMSU to the MWC. That would shake some things up in C-USA and SBC quite a bit would it not?

Not really a rumor. UTEP AD said they'd look at MWC if opportunity presented. Reporter then called NMSU who said they'd be happy to team up with UTEP.
04-02-2015 06:55 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.