Let me start this thread by stating that I don't want C-USA to split. I'm just asking how it might be done. With no decent media deal on the horizon, C-USA will appear to have little financial incentive to remain so spread out. Our new leadership hasn't given us any reason to believe we will get a new deal worth anything. Many on this board regularly complain about having to play some of the teams out of their division. If the new deal is worthless, do you think C-USA should split into two conferences? And who goes where?

I'm not asking if there should be a C-USA/Sun Belt merger. That would just be the reshuffling of the deck and lead to two bloated conferences that were more geographically friendly. I'm asking if the seven current members of C-USA East should split with UAB and form a new more regional conference? Should C-USA West, with its 6 members split and add 2 members from the Sun Belt or the FCS, and become more of a southwest/gulf coast based conference. These new conferences could always sign scheduling agreements that would maintain some football rivalries, including a few bowl ties, and hold an annual "basketball classic".

New C-USA East Conference
Marshall
MTSU
WKU
UAB
FIU
FAU
Charlotte
ODU

New C-USA West Conference
Rice
North Texas
LA Tech
Southern Miss
UTEP
UTSA
Arkansas State?
South Alabama?

Would these new conferences be able to sign respectable media deals? No, but it appears we can't do that now. Forming these new conferences would remove the crossover games, save on travel costs, and should increase attendance and interest in our games. Both conferences could still hold championship games if they wanted.

The pieces could be moved, and the additions could be different, but what are your thoughts about the overall idea? I know it's not perfect, but neither is our current situation.

the conference that kept the cusa name would get the 10 million a year from the playoff money the new conference would get zip.

This is why there will be no new conferences for the next 10 years.
only the 10 conferences listed in the playoff agreement get the money.
The agreement is in place for the next ten years.

And even after the 10 years is up, which of the 10 conferences would vote an 11th conference in to reduce shares going to the existing 10... None would !!!!!!!!!

Why do we get this split, merge and make a new conference thread once a week.
It is simply not going to happen..

It is not going to happen now, or 10 years from now... END OF STORY

(03-14-2016 10:47 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Let me start this thread by stating that I don't want C-USA to split. I'm just asking how it might be done. With no decent media deal on the horizon, C-USA will appear to have little financial incentive to remain so spread out. Our new leadership hasn't given us any reason to believe we will get a new deal worth anything. Many on this board regularly complain about having to play some of the teams out of their division. If the new deal is worthless, do you think C-USA should split into two conferences? And who goes where?

I'm not asking if there should be a C-USA/Sun Belt merger. That would just be the reshuffling of the deck and lead to two bloated conferences that were more geographically friendly. I'm asking if the seven current members of C-USA East should split with UAB and form a new more regional conference? Should C-USA West, with its 6 members split and add 2 members from the Sun Belt or the FCS, and become more of a southwest/gulf coast based conference. These new conferences could always sign scheduling agreements that would maintain some football rivalries, including a few bowl ties, and hold an annual "basketball classic".

New C-USA East Conference
Marshall
MTSU
WKU
UAB
FIU
FAU
Charlotte
ODU

New C-USA West Conference
Rice
North Texas
LA Tech
Southern Miss
UTEP
UTSA
Arkansas State?
South Alabama?

Would these new conferences be able to sign respectable media deals? No, but it appears we can't do that now. Forming these new conferences would remove the crossover games, save on travel costs, and should increase attendance and interest in our games. Both conferences could still hold championship games if they wanted.

The pieces could be moved, and the additions could be different, but what are your thoughts about the overall idea? I know it's not perfect, but neither is our current situation.

I like it. But we should have one football and two basketball crossover games per season, just to keep it a conference. Rotate those every year.

(03-14-2016 11:06 AM)Hilltop75 Wrote:  the conference that kept the cusa name would get the 10 million a year from the playoff money the new conference would get zip.

This is why there will be no new conferences for the next 10 years.
only the 10 conferences listed in the playoff agreement get the money.
The agreement is in place for the next ten years.

And even after the 10 years is up, which of the 10 conferences would vote an 11th conference in to reduce shares going to the existing 10... None would !!!!!!!!!

Why do we get this split, merge and make a new conference thread once a week.
It is simply not going to happen..

It is not going to happen now, or 10 years from now... END OF STORY

Or... the two conferences could agree to split the $10 million evenly until the current playoff agreement ends.

Our commissioner hasn't announced anything on our next media deal, and all the information coming out indicates no one wants our football games. That is why these threads keep getting started. If you are angry, be angry with our leadership.

I personally don't want to go into regional type of conferences. I like our eastern exposure. We are having a bad year but last season with the same lineup of teams we finished second in football and had some deep runs in the NIT. Everyone needs to chill and and be patient.

I would like to keep the conference as is. Maybe invite two more SB teams to force them into keeping NMSU and Idaho. We take two of the best programs in the belt and they will have to replace them with two of the worst schools in the country. Should keep them in catchup mode for a few more years.

I agree with Hilltop75.

I don't think the money loss in the negotiations would in be enough for presidents and conference officials to opt for a split. Half of the conference would effectively be kissing millions goodbye since they wouldn't have access to the CFP money. Even if they did have access, how would half of us be able to secure a better deal than all of us together?

I say that because we could easily do the same thing with expansion instead of making sacrifices with a split. 16 teams is a lot, but splitting the money doesn't make that much a difference when we're fighting of scraps to begin with.

One thing I do agree with you on is action from the conference.

(03-14-2016 11:06 AM)Hilltop75 Wrote:  the conference that kept the cusa name would get the 10 million a year from the playoff money the new conference would get zip.

Nope. There is an amount set aside for non-power conferences and they have to agree on an equitable way to split that money. A new league would get a share.

(03-14-2016 12:47 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 11:06 AM)Hilltop75 Wrote:  the conference that kept the cusa name would get the 10 million a year from the playoff money the new conference would get zip.

Nope. There is an amount set aside for non-power conferences and they have to agree on an equitable way to split that money. A new league would get a share.

I don't think so. It's a contract among the power conferences, bowls, TV and the 5 other conferences. A new conference can't just pop up and enter into that contract.

The WAC was included at first before it dissolved. Their share of the money was simply given to the remaining G5 leagues.

As much as a split seems logistically sound, the P5 Conferences have insured that we will not divide up their money for at least 10 more years. Its not just a piece of the Tv contract that they would be giving up. Its adding another auto bid to the NCAA tourney and I guarantee you they aren't going for that.

Contraction, not expansion. If we get poached....ADD NO ONE, FOR F**K'S SAKE!!!!!

(03-14-2016 12:47 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 11:06 AM)Hilltop75 Wrote:  the conference that kept the cusa name would get the 10 million a year from the playoff money the new conference would get zip.

Nope. There is an amount set aside for non-power conferences and they have to agree on an equitable way to split that money. A new league would get a share.

For the sake of an example (The p-5 conferences agreed to give the g-5 conferences 60 million a year from the playoff money) The g-5 conferences can split the money anyway they want to. Do you really think in 10 years from now they are going to vote to add another conference to share in the pot.

60 million divided by 5 is more than divided by 6.

Even less likely in an era of decreasing tv revenue and decreasing funds to
colleges from state governments...

So I again say no way this happens. Both the P5 and G5 would not vote for anything to decrease revenue.

No

(03-14-2016 11:42 AM)JCMiner Wrote:  I personally don't want to go into regional type of conferences. I like our eastern exposure. We are having a bad year but last season with the same lineup of teams we finished second in football and had some deep runs in the NIT. Everyone needs to chill and and be patient.

I would like to keep the conference as is. Maybe invite two more SB teams to force them into keeping NMSU and Idaho. We take two of the best programs in the belt and they will have to replace them with two of the worst schools in the country. Should keep them in catchup mode for a few more years.

I would even be ok with this. 14 is the most ridiculous number to have imo.

I would be ok with adding Arkansas State to the West and either App State or Ga Southern to the East. This would take us to 16 teams. We could basically operate like 2 separate conferences. I would even be ok with going to 18.

(03-14-2016 12:47 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 11:06 AM)Hilltop75 Wrote:  the conference that kept the cusa name would get the 10 million a year from the playoff money the new conference would get zip.

Nope. There is an amount set aside for non-power conferences and they have to agree on an equitable way to split that money. A new league would get a share.

Its not like the P5 couldn't get off an extra 10 million easy. They have so much cash rolling in it would be like a drop in the bucket. $200,000 per school would do it. In fact, I'm surprised the P5 haven't suggested they pony up $20 million per conference if we agree to split and leave them alone.

(03-14-2016 03:30 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 11:42 AM)JCMiner Wrote:  I personally don't want to go into regional type of conferences. I like our eastern exposure. We are having a bad year but last season with the same lineup of teams we finished second in football and had some deep runs in the NIT. Everyone needs to chill and and be patient.

I would like to keep the conference as is. Maybe invite two more SB teams to force them into keeping NMSU and Idaho. We take two of the best programs in the belt and they will have to replace them with two of the worst schools in the country. Should keep them in catchup mode for a few more years.

I would even be ok with this. 14 is the most ridiculous number to have imo.

I would be ok with adding Arkansas State to the West and either App State or Ga Southern to the East. This would take us to 16 teams. We could basically operate like 2 separate conferences. I would even be ok with going to 18.

I like GaSo and GaSt, but yeah if 18 is the number then arkst and app too; hell let's invite 'em all, the MAC can come too!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Splitting conferences would also be an issue with automatic-bid to the NCAA Basketball Tournament.

Contraction not Division. If we lose two or four along the way then lets not add any more mouths to feed because we aren't getting any more revenue from it.

(03-14-2016 04:49 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Contraction not Division. If we lose two or four along the way then lets not add any more mouths to feed because we aren't getting any more revenue from it.

I agree. Contraction is the best solution. I never thought C-USA should have expanded past 12. But, here we are... and no one is going to volunteer to leave for the Sun Belt or MAC.

MTSU, WKU, and FAU were the last programs added, but I don't think any of us would want one of them to leave.

Eight team conference? No thanks, nine at an absolute minimum.

Also, just no.