Only 2 schools out of CUSA we should want - Southern Miss and UAB. Name recognition, prestige, great baseball at USM and Solid basketball at UAB.

(10-12-2016 03:27 PM)Usajags Wrote:  What's the possibility of ULM dropping back to FCS. They only have a 20 history of being FBS, have had minimal success, even with the big wins they have had. The enrollment is only around 9,000 and Louisiana is having a major financial crises with their education system.

I think when moves are made over the next couple years, more then Idaho will be dropping out of the FBS ranks. We have already seen UAb drop, then reinstate, football. We live in crazy times, and their will be more lost before it's over.

The possibility of that happening is never and not going to happen. So, try again.

(10-12-2016 05:55 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  Only 2 schools out of CUSA we should want - Southern Miss and UAB. Name recognition, prestige, great baseball at USM and Solid basketball at UAB.

Marshall should be welcome as well if we are going on name recognition and relative prestige.

(10-12-2016 02:04 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 02:02 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 01:51 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  North Texas has near the same attendance average in CUSA as it did in the SBC, despite the addition of three in-state schools to the conference slate. There is no increase in $ at the gate.

There is no school in CUSA that would lower travel costs. The only way to lower travel costs is to get rid of the outliers. With travel partners (TXST-UTA, LR-stAte, Cajuns-ULM, Troy-USA, GSU-GSU (haha), App-CCU) the SBC already has an advantage in that regard. At worst, it is a flight, then a bus trip and flight back. In the east, it is mostly bus trips all around. None of the CUSA schools would add that travel partners combo, save MTSU and WKU. USM could maybe be grouped with USA and UAB with Troy and accomplish the same thing. But if you add schools not in those two combos as I listed, then you would add to travel costs. Then there's the F_U's, but they bring a major downfall...

The schools have to bring value in football. If you bring in poor performers, then your G5 ranking is diluted, further diluting your take. If you bring teams that are going to be both rated high in the G5 as well as raise everyone else's ranking, then their presence could increase the G5 payout and be worth the extra split of the CFP payout. In 2012, the SBC would have been rated the highest G5, one year before the CFP. This year, there's no question they'll be ahead of CUSA and if bowl season is decent, then they could vault ahead of the MAC and MWC, all while having the least amount of teams. The two teams added better just about guarantee a top three finish minimum yearly to be worth the add.

From a macro viewpoint you are correct, however these moves are voted on by the universities themselves who will no doubt take a micro perspective. For example, App traveling to CCU, Southern, MTSU, WKU, Marshall, Troy, and GSU is far less expensive than traveling to ULM, ULL, Texas State, Idaho, NMSU and Arkansas State.

Adding Louisiana Tech and USM would also solve the issue befuddling the UL schools in regards to their travel costs. I'm not an expert on olympic sport travel or conference alignments however as the conference shifts further east with the release of NMSU and Idaho and the addition of CCU, travel costs for schools will decrease.

Tech would drop to FCS before sharing a league with ULM.

There in lies the problem with sensible realignment. People can't keep their egos in check. Sooner or later La Tech needs to come to the realization the CUSA they chased doesn't exist any longer. The Sunbelt they've been demeaning is equal to the CUSA they are a part of.

Sent from my XT1254 using CSNbbs mobile app

(10-12-2016 06:36 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 02:04 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 02:02 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 01:51 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  North Texas has near the same attendance average in CUSA as it did in the SBC, despite the addition of three in-state schools to the conference slate. There is no increase in $ at the gate.

There is no school in CUSA that would lower travel costs. The only way to lower travel costs is to get rid of the outliers. With travel partners (TXST-UTA, LR-stAte, Cajuns-ULM, Troy-USA, GSU-GSU (haha), App-CCU) the SBC already has an advantage in that regard. At worst, it is a flight, then a bus trip and flight back. In the east, it is mostly bus trips all around. None of the CUSA schools would add that travel partners combo, save MTSU and WKU. USM could maybe be grouped with USA and UAB with Troy and accomplish the same thing. But if you add schools not in those two combos as I listed, then you would add to travel costs. Then there's the F_U's, but they bring a major downfall...

The schools have to bring value in football. If you bring in poor performers, then your G5 ranking is diluted, further diluting your take. If you bring teams that are going to be both rated high in the G5 as well as raise everyone else's ranking, then their presence could increase the G5 payout and be worth the extra split of the CFP payout. In 2012, the SBC would have been rated the highest G5, one year before the CFP. This year, there's no question they'll be ahead of CUSA and if bowl season is decent, then they could vault ahead of the MAC and MWC, all while having the least amount of teams. The two teams added better just about guarantee a top three finish minimum yearly to be worth the add.

From a macro viewpoint you are correct, however these moves are voted on by the universities themselves who will no doubt take a micro perspective. For example, App traveling to CCU, Southern, MTSU, WKU, Marshall, Troy, and GSU is far less expensive than traveling to ULM, ULL, Texas State, Idaho, NMSU and Arkansas State.

Adding Louisiana Tech and USM would also solve the issue befuddling the UL schools in regards to their travel costs. I'm not an expert on olympic sport travel or conference alignments however as the conference shifts further east with the release of NMSU and Idaho and the addition of CCU, travel costs for schools will decrease.

Tech would drop to FCS before sharing a league with ULM.

Therein lies the problem with sensible realignment. People can't keep their egos in check. Sooner or later La Tech needs to come to the realization the CUSA they chased doesn't exist any longer. The Sunbelt they've been demeaning is equal to the CUSA they are a part of.

Sent from my XT1254 using CSNbbs mobile app

FIFY

If we add any team it better bring in an extra 5,000 fans per game that team attends, if not what's the point? If we are already ahead of them with the alignment we have now then why add teams?

(10-12-2016 05:35 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 02:50 PM)airtroop Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 02:04 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 02:02 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 01:51 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  North Texas has near the same attendance average in CUSA as it did in the SBC, despite the addition of three in-state schools to the conference slate. There is no increase in $ at the gate.

There is no school in CUSA that would lower travel costs. The only way to lower travel costs is to get rid of the outliers. With travel partners (TXST-UTA, LR-stAte, Cajuns-ULM, Troy-USA, GSU-GSU (haha), App-CCU) the SBC already has an advantage in that regard. At worst, it is a flight, then a bus trip and flight back. In the east, it is mostly bus trips all around. None of the CUSA schools would add that travel partners combo, save MTSU and WKU. USM could maybe be grouped with USA and UAB with Troy and accomplish the same thing. But if you add schools not in those two combos as I listed, then you would add to travel costs. Then there's the F_U's, but they bring a major downfall...

The schools have to bring value in football. If you bring in poor performers, then your G5 ranking is diluted, further diluting your take. If you bring teams that are going to be both rated high in the G5 as well as raise everyone else's ranking, then their presence could increase the G5 payout and be worth the extra split of the CFP payout. In 2012, the SBC would have been rated the highest G5, one year before the CFP. This year, there's no question they'll be ahead of CUSA and if bowl season is decent, then they could vault ahead of the MAC and MWC, all while having the least amount of teams. The two teams added better just about guarantee a top three finish minimum yearly to be worth the add.

From a macro viewpoint you are correct, however these moves are voted on by the universities themselves who will no doubt take a micro perspective. For example, App traveling to CCU, Southern, MTSU, WKU, Marshall, Troy, and GSU is far less expensive than traveling to ULM, ULL, Texas State, Idaho, NMSU and Arkansas State.

Adding Louisiana Tech and USM would also solve the issue befuddling the UL schools in regards to their travel costs. I'm not an expert on olympic sport travel or conference alignments however as the conference shifts further east with the release of NMSU and Idaho and the addition of CCU, travel costs for schools will decrease.

Tech would drop to FCS before sharing a league with ULM.

Not true. The SBC told them NO when the WAC broke up. No way would the current SBC agree to take them in now either.

You don't know what you're talking about. La Tech was never told NO by the SBC because La Tech NEVER asked for anything from the SBC. We were always about getting into CUSA.

Oh, ok... thank you so very much for correcting me on that one. I wouldn't know WTF I was talking about after all. You just keep on believing what you believe and keep on teaching me about these things I'm "oh-so-wrong" about so I may quit making such a fool of myself. CHEERS!!!

In other words, are you kind of getting the feeling I don't GAF about what you believe or don't believe? If so, you're RED HOT. I know what I know and I also know what YOU DON'T know apparently. <WINK!!!!!!>

(10-12-2016 05:57 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 03:27 PM)Usajags Wrote:  What's the possibility of ULM dropping back to FCS. They only have a 20 history of being FBS, have had minimal success, even with the big wins they have had. The enrollment is only around 9,000 and Louisiana is having a major financial crises with their education system.

I think when moves are made over the next couple years, more then Idaho will be dropping out of the FBS ranks. We have already seen UAb drop, then reinstate, football. We live in crazy times, and their will be more lost before it's over.

The possibility of that happening is never and not going to happen. So, try again.

I got a real question, what is the local ramblings in Monroe on local sports talk radio and such??? Are there phone calls about moving the program down or shutting it down completely??? The only reason I ask is that 3 years ago in Birmingham there were phone calls about shutting that program down, but UAb fan was saying it would never happen. Guess what happened.... Just didn't know if there is any ground swell locally or not. It's not a hit on your program, just wanting to know about local feelings in Monroe.

Local feeling is for us to get ready for the next game. We are FBS and that is that.

This whole thread is just hysterical (MO). . .

Based on 1 bad TV contract (by CUSA), and a half season of slightly better on the field performance (by the Belt), Some here now think we can just "pluck" whomever we want from CUSA . . .

HELLO, Reality Knocking on your Door. . . .

There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until that happens, schools ain't leaving CUSA for The Belt . . . .

But if ya ain't got nothin' else to talk about, well carry on . . . .

(10-13-2016 11:34 AM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  This whole thread is just hysterical (MO). . .

Based on 1 bad TV contract (by CUSA), and a half season of slightly better on the field performance (by the Belt), Some here now think we can just "pluck" whomever we want from CUSA . . .

HELLO, Reality Knocking on your Door. . . .

There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until that happens, schools ain't leaving CUSA for The Belt . . . .

But if ya ain't got nothin' else to talk about, well carry on . . . .

Different schools and fan bases have their own opinions. For TxSt, I see that CUSA would be better with multiple Texas schools. I think everyone east of the Mississippi River is happy with what we currently have.

I think it should be pilfer or plunder. Purge would be if they started kicking folks out on their own.

(10-13-2016 11:43 AM)Usajags Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 11:34 AM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  This whole thread is just hysterical (MO). . .

Based on 1 bad TV contract (by CUSA), and a half season of slightly better on the field performance (by the Belt), Some here now think we can just "pluck" whomever we want from CUSA . . .

HELLO, Reality Knocking on your Door. . . .

There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until that happens, schools ain't leaving CUSA for The Belt . . . .

But if ya ain't got nothin' else to talk about, well carry on . . . .

Different schools and fan bases have their own opinions. For TxSt, I see that CUSA would be better with multiple Texas schools. I think everyone east of the Mississippi River is happy with what we currently have.

Geography is the only reason to move at this point unless its the AAC right now. That can all change if as little as one team leaves the AAC and almost certain if two of the top teams get stolen.

File 13. Please.

(10-13-2016 11:34 AM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  This whole thread is just hysterical (MO). . .

Based on 1 bad TV contract (by CUSA), and a half season of slightly better on the field performance (by the Belt), Some here now think we can just "pluck" whomever we want from CUSA . . .

HELLO, Reality Knocking on your Door. . . .

There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until that happens, schools ain't leaving CUSA for The Belt . . . .

But if ya ain't got nothin' else to talk about, well carry on . . . .

So I guess the networks got it wrong?

SBC has been ahead of CUSA before as well.

I'm not saying a CUSA team is coming to the Belt. For the same reason an SBC team isn't going to C-USA, it doesn't make sense financially for a C-USa team to come here. I'm just saying through shrewd maneuvering and luck, the SBC is now the better overall conference.

(10-13-2016 12:32 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 11:34 AM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  This whole thread is just hysterical (MO). . .

Based on 1 bad TV contract (by CUSA), and a half season of slightly better on the field performance (by the Belt), Some here now think we can just "pluck" whomever we want from CUSA . . .

HELLO, Reality Knocking on your Door. . . .

There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until that happens, schools ain't leaving CUSA for The Belt . . . .

But if ya ain't got nothin' else to talk about, well carry on . . . .

So I guess the networks got it wrong?

SBC has been ahead of CUSA before as well.

I'm not saying a CUSA team is coming to the Belt. For the same reason an SBC team isn't going to C-USA, it doesn't make sense financially for a C-USa team to come here. I'm just saying through shrewd maneuvering and luck, the SBC is now the better overall conference.

What was that 2 , 3 years ago, and the very next season they were right back on top of us. . . . . .

As to your assertion that we're the better overall conference, According to whom?

Again, There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until THAT happens, well we are who we are . . . and all the puffed up bluster in the world to the contrary won't change that . . . . JMO

(10-12-2016 12:15 AM)Tha1nOnly Wrote:  The time is now to kick the door in on CUSA. The SunBelt is definitely the more stable conference now. It makes alot of sense to at least explore the option with purging CUSA to gauge interest from other schools. I would love to take LA Tech, UAB, MTSU, & WKU. The two Florida schools would work also, but these four school are stuck right in the middle on the SunBelt footprint.

I believe there is a strong likelihood that at sometime before the 12 year CFP deal expires that there will be a big shuffle in the southern G5's.

That said it will not be kicked off by the Sun Belt "raiding" CUSA. Not very likely that someone gets everyone in a room and it happens logically.

If it happens, it happens because a couple or several disgruntled schools initiate it by wanting to start their own league. There will be a conference that holds the Sun Belt's spot from the point of view of the NCAA and CFP but it will not have the name and it will be sold to the public as a new regional league created fresh.

(10-13-2016 01:37 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 12:32 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 11:34 AM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  This whole thread is just hysterical (MO). . .

Based on 1 bad TV contract (by CUSA), and a half season of slightly better on the field performance (by the Belt), Some here now think we can just "pluck" whomever we want from CUSA . . .

HELLO, Reality Knocking on your Door. . . .

There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until that happens, schools ain't leaving CUSA for The Belt . . . .

But if ya ain't got nothin' else to talk about, well carry on . . . .

So I guess the networks got it wrong?

SBC has been ahead of CUSA before as well.

I'm not saying a CUSA team is coming to the Belt. For the same reason an SBC team isn't going to C-USA, it doesn't make sense financially for a C-USa team to come here. I'm just saying through shrewd maneuvering and luck, the SBC is now the better overall conference.

What was that 2 , 3 years ago, and the very next season they were right back on top of us. . . . . .

As to your assertion that we're the better overall conference, According to whom?

Again, There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until THAT happens, well we are who we are . . . and all the puffed up bluster in the world to the contrary won't change that . . . . JMO

The only pecking order after the last CUSA TV deal is P5, AAC and insert conference here ______. We are a worst even with CUSA.

(10-13-2016 01:37 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 12:32 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 11:34 AM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  This whole thread is just hysterical (MO). . .

Based on 1 bad TV contract (by CUSA), and a half season of slightly better on the field performance (by the Belt), Some here now think we can just "pluck" whomever we want from CUSA . . .

HELLO, Reality Knocking on your Door. . . .

There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until that happens, schools ain't leaving CUSA for The Belt . . . .

But if ya ain't got nothin' else to talk about, well carry on . . . .

So I guess the networks got it wrong?

SBC has been ahead of CUSA before as well.

I'm not saying a CUSA team is coming to the Belt. For the same reason an SBC team isn't going to C-USA, it doesn't make sense financially for a C-USa team to come here. I'm just saying through shrewd maneuvering and luck, the SBC is now the better overall conference.

What was that 2 , 3 years ago, and the very next season they were right back on top of us. . . . . .

As to your assertion that we're the better overall conference, According to whom?

Again, There's been no real shift in the pecking order, and until THAT happens, well we are who we are . . . and all the puffed up bluster in the world to the contrary won't change that . . . . JMO

Difficult to understand when those we would theoretically be pursuing would only push Texas State further down the totem pole.