(04-02-2015 03:44 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 03:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Frankly, if the documents are altered--I'd add NMSU and Wichita as Olympic members and TxSt as a football-only member. That fixes football and gives basketball a nice shot in the arm.

Haha. Thanks for the laugh about Wichita St. Leaving the MVC for CUSA. The AAC, with Cincy, UConn and Memphis, would have a tough time pulling Wichita because each of those schools would leave in a heartbeat. The MVC is more likely to start poaching quality programs to stay with the A10 and challenge the big east.

lol...ok, maybe I got carried away with Wichita.

(04-02-2015 03:20 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 03:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 12:32 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 12:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 11:24 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Compared to some of the others, I would say they have a lot of potential. The East West thing is a problem. I don't know if we need another Texas or LA school. That give stAte a decent shot. I really hope we won't have to worry about it though. #FreeUAB

Yeah, the pick has to be from the west or you end up making someone shift from the east that doesn't want to. Texas St makes the most sense as it cuts travel costs for the east and the west (the eastern schools get a 2-for-one stop when heading to UTSA while the western schools get another easy trip). The question would be do the Texas teams feel it cannibalizes their audience/recruiting. If that's an issue, then Arky St or UL-L are the two next best choices.

You can get the same 2 for 1 trip by adding NMSU which is like 30 miles from UTEP...and the basketball dropoff isn't as bad.

Not the same. You are also adding a 800+ mile road trip for every west division football team. Texas St is the only one that gives the eastern teams an easy 2-for-1 AND is an easy travel destination for the western teams. UL-L and ArkSt are probably the most reasonable alternatives if TxSt was vetoed due to cannibalization issues. Now, if CUSA decides to alter the organizational documents to allow UAB to stay---you can make Texas State a football only member and not hurt basketball. Frankly, if the documents are altered--I'd add NMSU and Wichita as Olympic members and TxSt as a football-only member. That fixes football and gives basketball a nice shot in the arm.

That would be awful.

I very much hope the presidents don't change the "gotta have football" rule (past maybe giving UAB a quick shot at bringing their program back).

I don't think a SB school would have any interest in being a football only member of CUSA anyway. And the SB wouldn't stand for it, so where are Texas State's other sports going to play? The WAC?

The other sports could go to the WAC or more conveniently into the Southland. I think Texas St would do it because they are not crazy about being the only Texas program in their conference. The football synergies of playing UTSA, Rice, N Tx, and UTEP would be very attractive to them.

That said, if CUSA makes no changes to the rules, then Texas State is better add than NM St just because Bobcat football program is just a much better football program than NM St's. The travel advantages are just the icing on the cake. Yes, NM St's basketball is better, but that hasn't typically the primary focus of CUSA (at least not since CUSA 1.0).

(04-02-2015 07:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 03:20 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 03:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 12:32 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 12:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Yeah, the pick has to be from the west or you end up making someone shift from the east that doesn't want to. Texas St makes the most sense as it cuts travel costs for the east and the west (the eastern schools get a 2-for-one stop when heading to UTSA while the western schools get another easy trip). The question would be do the Texas teams feel it cannibalizes their audience/recruiting. If that's an issue, then Arky St or UL-L are the two next best choices.

You can get the same 2 for 1 trip by adding NMSU which is like 30 miles from UTEP...and the basketball dropoff isn't as bad.

Not the same. You are also adding a 800+ mile road trip for every west division football team. Texas St is the only one that gives the eastern teams an easy 2-for-1 AND is an easy travel destination for the western teams. UL-L and ArkSt are probably the most reasonable alternatives if TxSt was vetoed due to cannibalization issues. Now, if CUSA decides to alter the organizational documents to allow UAB to stay---you can make Texas State a football only member and not hurt basketball. Frankly, if the documents are altered--I'd add NMSU and Wichita as Olympic members and TxSt as a football-only member. That fixes football and gives basketball a nice shot in the arm.

That would be awful.

I very much hope the presidents don't change the "gotta have football" rule (past maybe giving UAB a quick shot at bringing their program back).

I don't think a SB school would have any interest in being a football only member of CUSA anyway. And the SB wouldn't stand for it, so where are Texas State's other sports going to play? The WAC?

The other sports could go to the WAC or more conveniently into the Southland. I think Texas St would do it because they are not crazy about being the only Texas program in their conference. The football synergies of playing UTSA, Rice, N Tx, and UTEP would be very attractive to them.

That said, if CUSA makes no changes to the rules, then Texas State is better add than NM St just because Bobcat football program is just a much better football program than NM St's. The travel advantages are just the icing on the cake. Yes, NM St's basketball is better, but that hasn't typically the primary focus of CUSA (at least not since CUSA 1.0).

No way they go for that deal.

And hopefully we don't have to find out.

(04-02-2015 08:00 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 07:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 03:20 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 03:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 12:32 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  You can get the same 2 for 1 trip by adding NMSU which is like 30 miles from UTEP...and the basketball dropoff isn't as bad.

Not the same. You are also adding a 800+ mile road trip for every west division football team. Texas St is the only one that gives the eastern teams an easy 2-for-1 AND is an easy travel destination for the western teams. UL-L and ArkSt are probably the most reasonable alternatives if TxSt was vetoed due to cannibalization issues. Now, if CUSA decides to alter the organizational documents to allow UAB to stay---you can make Texas State a football only member and not hurt basketball. Frankly, if the documents are altered--I'd add NMSU and Wichita as Olympic members and TxSt as a football-only member. That fixes football and gives basketball a nice shot in the arm.

That would be awful.

I very much hope the presidents don't change the "gotta have football" rule (past maybe giving UAB a quick shot at bringing their program back).

I don't think a SB school would have any interest in being a football only member of CUSA anyway. And the SB wouldn't stand for it, so where are Texas State's other sports going to play? The WAC?

The other sports could go to the WAC or more conveniently into the Southland. I think Texas St would do it because they are not crazy about being the only Texas program in their conference. The football synergies of playing UTSA, Rice, N Tx, and UTEP would be very attractive to them.

That said, if CUSA makes no changes to the rules, then Texas State is better add than NM St just because Bobcat football program is just a much better football program than NM St's. The travel advantages are just the icing on the cake. Yes, NM St's basketball is better, but that hasn't typically the primary focus of CUSA (at least not since CUSA 1.0).

No way they go for that deal.

And hopefully we don't have to find out.

I bet they would. They get Texas rivals. They get a better TV exposure which pays nearly 1 million a team (they get virtually nothing now). They go to the Southland for Olympics and cut expenses dramatically. Texas State would probably be 3-4 million better off with 1 million dollar media deal and using buses in the Southland instead of flying Olympics from Texas to Georgia. I just think they would be a good add--but Im from Texas--so there is a bias. I find Texas St to be intriguing because they are a huge traditional school in a college town atmosphere---but located within a 20 to 40 minute drive of Austin and San Antonio. I just have the feeling that with 37K students, that when they finally start winning in a FBS conference with a Texas presence, they will roll up some nice attendance numbers because lots of alums can make the easy drive from Austin and SA. Much like UTSA, I see them as having a very high ceiling.

Seriously, it is not about the records of teams;

It is not about who deserves to be there;

It is not even about tickets sold (especially with C-USA's idea of pooling all bowl money and covering expenses for no worse than break even trip);

This is about ESPN programming. 43 bowls, and only two - the Sun Bowl on CBS and the Cotton Bowl on FOX - are not on the ESPN/ABC/Disney family of channels. Many or you who will not or cannot travel to games will watch many those same games, especially during the holiday period from Dec. 20-Jan. 2.

Even low rated bowl games usually do as well or better than non-conference basketball, especially for teams from the G5.

Of 86 teams, 42 of them will end the season with a win; coaches get bonuses; players get suites of gifts in the $500 range, plus warmups, game jerseys, etc; administrators get paid trips to usually sunny or historic destinations; leagues get more eyeballs on them with additional games; no one left home at 8-4, while 6-6 or 6-7 P5 team goes.

Bowl games are the CBI/CIT of college football, except there are many more winners. At end of basketball season, only 4-6 teams end year with win/championship and often teams are told they underachieved with as many as 25-26 wins, national ranking but a second round loss in NCAA or NIT, or any loss in CBI or CIT.

(04-02-2015 03:44 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 03:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Frankly, if the documents are altered--I'd add NMSU and Wichita as Olympic members and TxSt as a football-only member. That fixes football and gives basketball a nice shot in the arm.

Haha. Thanks for the laugh about Wichita St. Leaving the MVC for CUSA. The AAC, with Cincy, UConn and Memphis, would have a tough time pulling Wichita because each of those schools would leave in a heartbeat. The MVC is more likely to start poaching quality programs to stay with the A10 and challenge the big east.

I agree that Wichita wouldn't come to CUSA, but the MVC is a 1-AA football league. It's going to have hard time poaching anyone. Wichita to the A-10 makes a ton of sense.

(04-01-2015 07:47 PM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 07:35 PM)wh49er Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 06:16 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:12 PM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:06 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  I like it!! We would have a shot to play UH, SMU, Tulane or another western school in TX!

Good for the western schools but still waiting on that rumored eastern bowl. Im hoping its in Charlotte.

Maybe Myrtle Beach? I think they were trying to get one last year.

That was Charleston, which would be great.

Charleston would be great. Hopefully that comes to fruition.

There will never be a NCAA sanctioned Bowl in Charleston (or anywhere in SC) until the Confederate Flag comes down on the SC Capitol). And Charleston is a beautiful City and would be a nice place for a bowl!

(04-03-2015 02:07 PM)BlueRaiderBoy Wrote:  There will never be a NCAA sanctioned Bowl in Charleston (or anywhere in SC) until the Confederate Flag comes down on the SC Capitol). And Charleston is a beautiful City and would be a nice place for a bowl!

I love Charleston. But where would the game be played?

Johnson-Hagood (The Citadel's stadium) is a bit small for a bowl. It seats about 22,500, and is FCS quality.



Blackbuad stadium (Charleston Battery) is a soccer specific stadium, and only seats 18,500.

22,500 could work. Montgomery's Cramton Bowl seats a little less than 25K.

(04-01-2015 03:35 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Even 25-30K would look like a tiny crowd in that stadium.

The only way that would not look awful on TV would be to close off the seats on the press box side and make everyone from both teams sit on the same side opposite the cameras.

(04-02-2015 08:42 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  The system seems rigged sometimes.

You're being very generous with that statement.

(04-01-2015 05:05 PM)wh49er Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:12 PM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:06 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  I like it!! We would have a shot to play UH, SMU, Tulane or another western school in TX!

Good for the western schools but still waiting on that rumored eastern bowl. Im hoping its in Charlotte.

Unless it is at our stadium, it won't happen with the Belk Bowl and ACC Championship in town.

I wouldn't rule out a game at Memorial once the renovations are through.

(04-03-2015 02:19 PM)Artifice Wrote:  

(04-03-2015 02:07 PM)BlueRaiderBoy Wrote:  There will never be a NCAA sanctioned Bowl in Charleston (or anywhere in SC) until the Confederate Flag comes down on the SC Capitol). And Charleston is a beautiful City and would be a nice place for a bowl!

I love Charleston. But where would the game be played?

Johnson-Hagood (The Citadel's stadium) is a bit small for a bowl. It seats about 22,500, and is FCS quality.



Blackbuad stadium (Charleston Battery) is a soccer specific stadium, and only seats 18,500.

If we are going to be forced into G5 vs. G5 matchups for our bowl games, then these are the types of stadiums we need to be booking.

Give us a place we can pack over a place that will look empty any day.

The Citadel's stadium looks plenty big enough. Sell it out. It's a G5 bowl game, so your probably not going to sell but 25k tickets anyway.

I would absolutely LOVE a bowl game in Charleston. Its a great city with a lot of fun things to do for lots of different demographics. Young, old, rich, poor. Museums, history sites, beach, golf, arts, great restaurants, drinking, football... get it done.

(04-06-2015 04:33 PM)monarx Wrote:  I would absolutely LOVE a bowl game in Charleston. Its a great city with a lot of fun things to do for lots of different demographics. Young, old, rich, poor. Museums, history sites, beach, golf, arts, great restaurants, drinking, football... get it done.

All this plus I could easily convince the wife to go to Charleston for a Bowl game over somewhere in Florida. The travel would be a lot more affordable too.