Sun Belt Concludes Spring Meeting as Upward Rise Well-Displayed


POINT CLEAR, Ala. – Backed by record revenues, the best Group of Five bowl record this past season, and firm stability in membership, the Sun Belt Conference concluded its annual Spring Meeting on a high note Monday.

“This year’s meeting had on display a level of solidarity that was uplifting,” said Sun Belt Commissioner Karl Benson. “The coaches and administrators in attendance have developed bonds that unite the conference throughout its 12 member institutions and I firmly believe that the bonds that have united the Sun Belt are a product of the hard work and foresight of our universities. Our membership has come together to form something special at the Sun Belt Conference.”

Present at the meetings were each Sun Belt institution’s president/chancellor, faculty athletic representative, athletic director, senior woman administrator, head football coach, and head men’s and women’s basketball coach.

Over the course of the meetings Sun Belt coaches and administrators approved a number of items.

Among the items finalized was the establishment of the 2018 eight game football schedule format with two five team divisions, the criteria for determining the representatives in the Sun Belt Football Championship Game, and the determination of the host site for the game.

The two football divisions established beginning with the 2018 season are:

East: Appalachian State, Coastal Carolina, Georgia Southern, Georgia State, Troy

West: Arkansas State, Louisiana, ULM, South Alabama, Texas State

The winners of each division will meet in the championship game. The game will be played at the home stadium of the divisional winner that has the best ranking in the College Football Playoff (CFP) poll.

Championship sites for other sports were awarded for the 2018-2019 season:

Cross Country: South Alabama
Volleyball: Georgia State
Softball: Texas State
Outdoor Track and Field: Arkansas State
Baseball: Coastal Carolina

Sun Belt administrators also approved a collaborative instant replay system for football. This model, based on the Southeastern Conference’s setup, will allow officials in a central location to review replays and assist instant replay officials at each game.

The Sun Belt’s Executive Committee will see a change as Texas State University President Dr. Denise Trauth’s two-year term as Sun Belt President has come to an end. Georgia State President Dr. Mark Becker will replace her as Sun Belt President. Dr. Trauth will remain on the Executive Committee as the Past President. Louisiana President Dr. E. Joseph Savoie will take over as Vice President and South Alabama President Dr. Tony Waldrop will take over as Treasurer.

In regards to performance, evidence exists for claims of the Sun Belt’s success. Notably, a four-year average of football computer rankings using the established membership of the Group of Five presents that the Sun Belt trails the American Athletic (AAC) and Mountain West (MWC) Conferences in team rankings but outranks both the Mid-American Conference (MAC) and Conference USA (C-USA). The Sun Belt finished third in a ranking among the five conferences following this past season.

The Sun Belt Conference’s success in bowl games gave another bragging point for the league this year as the six bowl teams combined for the second best winning percentage in all of college football – trailing only the Atlantic Coast Conference.

In men’s basketball, the Sun Belt has shown marked improvement from the four years prior to realignment compared to the last four years post realignment. The Sun Belt’s average RPI finish has shifted towards the top an average of 3.25 spots. The MAC also saw positive gains with a 4.75 shift, while CUSA (+8.25) and the MWC (+5.75) both saw their average RPI numbers shift backwards.

Another number that is trending upward: revenue distribution. Sun Belt institutions have seen their annual distribution skyrocket by nearly 200% since 2013. Sun Belt revenue distribution has increased by 2,000% from a decade ago.

“Empirical evidence exists that clearly shows the Sun Belt’s upward trends,” said Benson. “Our on-field success can be documented, but it is also worth thinking about how much perception of the Sun Belt has changed. We’ve caught the attention of the nation on a number of occasions and that has helped shift public opinion. People recognize our conference and our member institutions – and most importantly they associate them with success.

“There is a universal sense that the Sun Belt is where it needs to be – strong and successful, but always willing to push the boundaries in order to find greater levels of achievement.”

http://sunbeltsports.org/news/2017/5/23/...72455.aspx

Someone needs to tell King Karl that all of that doesn't matter because travel costs are going to doom us all.

whether the future continues the upward mobility is TBD.

but what this does show is the SB had the far better strategy then CUSA did when the realignment wheel went spinning this last round.

CUSA went for markets over all else.
SB went for programs over all else.

looks like the SB is winning so far.

(05-23-2017 12:00 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Someone needs to tell King Karl that all of that doesn't matter because travel costs are going to doom us all.

I believe that's a fallacy. We will be cutting out travel to Idaho or NMSU every year and your football footprint shrinks even more when we hit divisions in 2018; with only 2 away games out of your shrunken divisional footprint every year. They've already cut the travel down for other sports by going to divisions.

(05-23-2017 11:55 AM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote:  Sun Belt Concludes Spring Meeting as Upward Rise Well-Displayed

“...but always willing to push the boundaries in order to find greater levels of achievement.”

Gosh after that stack of bull hockey, there is only one thing rising here.

as of now, it's tough to bash Karl for too much. The conference as a whole is making more money, and is performing better on the field as a whole.

Isn't that basically what every conference wants?

Now, will this continue? Who knows. But for now, I'll take it.

(05-23-2017 03:34 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  as of now, it's tough to bash Karl for too much. The conference as a whole is making more money, and is performing better on the field as a whole.

Isn't that basically what every conference wants?

Now, will this continue? Who knows. But for now, I'll take it.

I agree. This is the best shape the Sun Belt has been in, athletically and financially, since the conference began sponsoring football in 2001.

I can't remember a time the Sun Belt has ever fnished 3rd among the G5 in the football rankings, had a top 13 basketball RPI, and a top 10 baseball RPI all in one year. Plus softball is always one of the best in the nation...

I think it's fair to say that what was written in the article is accurate.

(05-23-2017 12:22 PM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  whether the future continues the upward mobility is TBD.

but what this does show is the SB had the far better strategy then CUSA did when the realignment wheel went spinning this last round.

CUSA went for markets over all else.
SB went for programs over all else.

looks like the SB is winning so far.

And to think the SB went after JMU while JMU was chasing or waiting at home alone by the phone for a call from the "dream boat" CUSA.

JMU turns down our invitation to the prom and winds up stood up.

SB is on the RISE. I seriously advocate for an optional 7 game conference schedule for two reasons.
1: To give us a better chance of not having a repeat game in the CCG.
2: To give members an extra weekend to schedule either another OOC game against the G5 and improve our wins over other G5 teams. (admitted could back fire - but I like our chances) or a P5 money game to pour more funds into building our facilities and holding on to our coaching staffs. Hopefully we could schedule some winnable games in the list as well and get some more wins over the P5.

If we leave it as an option - programs could always still schedule another cross conference game if they find a program that agrees but leave that door open for any program wanting to "take on the world" - almost giving us similar advantages of an independent with the security of a conference. Best of both worlds kind of thing.

When we get to 12 football members/ if ever/ we can go back to a mandatory 8 game conference schedule if we want, although I'm not sure that would be necessary even then.

(05-23-2017 03:34 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  as of now, it's tough to bash Karl for too much. The conference as a whole is making more money, and is performing better on the field as a whole.

Isn't that basically what every conference wants?

Now, will this continue? Who knows. But for now, I'll take it.

After he rode the WAC ship to a watery grave, I figured he'd do the same in the Belt, but he's really done a good job. He's had a clear vision and demonstrated how FCS heavyweights can be better additions, at least in the short term, than big schools in big markets with little tradition.

I still wonder if Coastal football will make it, but their other sports seem to be ready. As a fan of the underdogs, it's good to see the Sun Belt come out of the last round of realignment with some momentum.

(05-23-2017 11:34 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 12:22 PM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  whether the future continues the upward mobility is TBD.

but what this does show is the SB had the far better strategy then CUSA did when the realignment wheel went spinning this last round.

CUSA went for markets over all else.
SB went for programs over all else.

looks like the SB is winning so far.

And to think the SB went after JMU while JMU was chasing or waiting at home alone by the phone for a call from the "dream boat" CUSA.

JMU turns down our invitation to the prom and winds up stood up.

SB is on the RISE. I seriously advocate for an optional 7 game conference schedule for two reasons.
1: To give us a better chance of not having a repeat game in the CCG.
2: To give members an extra weekend to schedule either another OOC game against the G5 and improve our wins over other G5 teams. (admitted could back fire - but I like our chances) or a P5 money game to pour more funds into building our facilities and holding on to our coaching staffs. Hopefully we could schedule some winnable games in the list as well and get some more wins over the P5.

If we leave it as an option - programs could always still schedule another cross conference game if they find a program that agrees but leave that door open for any program wanting to "take on the world" - almost giving us similar advantages of an independent with the security of a conference. Best of both worlds kind of thing.

When we get to 12 football members/ if ever/ we can go back to a mandatory 8 game conference schedule if we want, although I'm not sure that would be necessary even then.

not quite. there were plenty of valid reasons why JMU said no to the SB which have been put on here hundreds of times before but which just continue to be glossed over and why CUSA was a better fit.

i get why JMU said no. Not that I, or many JMU fans, agreed or wanted that decision. But we are just that, fans. Not administrators in charge who have many more issues to deal with then simply donating and buying tickets.

regardless, from your all's perspective, there is reason to be excited. SB is trending up. CUSA is not. Good on you !

(05-24-2017 06:36 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 03:34 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  as of now, it's tough to bash Karl for too much. The conference as a whole is making more money, and is performing better on the field as a whole.

Isn't that basically what every conference wants?

Now, will this continue? Who knows. But for now, I'll take it.

After he rode the WAC ship to a watery grave, I figured he'd do the same in the Belt, but he's really done a good job. He's had a clear vision and demonstrated how FCS heavyweights can be better additions, at least in the short term, than big schools in big markets with little tradition.

I still wonder if Coastal football will make it, but their other sports seem to be ready. As a fan of the underdogs, it's good to see the Sun Belt come out of the last round of realignment with some momentum.

WAC blew up because of the conference commissioner? Or was it because the way they expanded made it impossible for a core group of schools to play each other annually and they figured out they could make more per team? Was it leadership or the fact that MWC and CUSA offered better deals for their members?

Not like that MAC went to hell when Benson was their commissioner. Bankowsky lost as many schools from CUSA as Benson lost from WAC.

(05-24-2017 08:27 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  WAC blew up because of the conference commissioner? Or was it because the way they expanded made it impossible for a core group of schools to play each other annually and they figured out they could make more per team? Was it leadership or the fact that MWC and CUSA offered better deals for their members?

Not like that MAC went to hell when Benson was their commissioner. Bankowsky lost as many schools from CUSA as Benson lost from WAC.

The WAC folded because there was no one to backfill when many of its membership left for the MWC.

The Sun Belt probably would've had to fold up the tents for all sports if it weren't for a large wave of eastern schools ready and willing to move to FBS.

(05-24-2017 08:27 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 06:36 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 03:34 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  as of now, it's tough to bash Karl for too much. The conference as a whole is making more money, and is performing better on the field as a whole.

Isn't that basically what every conference wants?

Now, will this continue? Who knows. But for now, I'll take it.

After he rode the WAC ship to a watery grave, I figured he'd do the same in the Belt, but he's really done a good job. He's had a clear vision and demonstrated how FCS heavyweights can be better additions, at least in the short term, than big schools in big markets with little tradition.

I still wonder if Coastal football will make it, but their other sports seem to be ready. As a fan of the underdogs, it's good to see the Sun Belt come out of the last round of realignment with some momentum.

WAC blew up because of the conference commissioner? Or was it because the way they expanded made it impossible for a core group of schools to play each other annually and they figured out they could make more per team? Was it leadership or the fact that MWC and CUSA offered better deals for their members?

Not like that MAC went to hell when Benson was their commissioner. Bankowsky lost as many schools from CUSA as Benson lost from WAC.

Benson had actually put together a deal that would've saved the WAC by bringing in BYU as an associate member in all sports but football as they were about to embark on the independent path. The WAC members at that time had made promises to BYU that they would stay together and therefore offer the other BYU sports a stable home, but Craig Thompson managed to convince the administrators at Fresno State and UNLV to break their word by offering MWC membership and the deal fell apart, killing the WAC. It wasn't Benson, but Thompson that killed the WAC.

Also, when UTA was in the WAC, or at least about to, Boise State was offered and accepted all-sports/non-football membership when their football was headed to the AAC/Big East along with San Diego State.

(05-24-2017 06:36 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 03:34 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  as of now, it's tough to bash Karl for too much. The conference as a whole is making more money, and is performing better on the field as a whole.

Isn't that basically what every conference wants?

Now, will this continue? Who knows. But for now, I'll take it.

After he rode the WAC ship to a watery grave, I figured he'd do the same in the Belt, but he's really done a good job. He's had a clear vision and demonstrated how FCS heavyweights can be better additions, at least in the short term, than big schools in big markets with little tradition.

I still wonder if Coastal football will make it, but their other sports seem to be ready. As a fan of the underdogs, it's good to see the Sun Belt come out of the last round of realignment with some momentum.

Myrtle Beach is a recruiters heaven. Have no doubts, CCU will be a big factor pretty quickly. Their success in other sports should give you a clue.

(05-24-2017 08:47 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 08:27 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  WAC blew up because of the conference commissioner? Or was it because the way they expanded made it impossible for a core group of schools to play each other annually and they figured out they could make more per team? Was it leadership or the fact that MWC and CUSA offered better deals for their members?

Not like that MAC went to hell when Benson was their commissioner. Bankowsky lost as many schools from CUSA as Benson lost from WAC.

The WAC folded because there was no one to backfill when many of its membership left for the MWC.

The Sun Belt probably would've had to fold up the tents for all sports if it weren't for a large wave of eastern schools ready and willing to move to FBS.

Granted Ga. Southern and App were the best available but plenty of FCS southern schools would have loved a shot at becoming members, something the WAC didn't have.

(05-24-2017 10:09 PM)Florida RedWolf Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 08:47 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 08:27 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  WAC blew up because of the conference commissioner? Or was it because the way they expanded made it impossible for a core group of schools to play each other annually and they figured out they could make more per team? Was it leadership or the fact that MWC and CUSA offered better deals for their members?

Not like that MAC went to hell when Benson was their commissioner. Bankowsky lost as many schools from CUSA as Benson lost from WAC.

The WAC folded because there was no one to backfill when many of its membership left for the MWC.

The Sun Belt probably would've had to fold up the tents for all sports if it weren't for a large wave of eastern schools ready and willing to move to FBS.

Granted Ga. Southern and App were the best available but plenty of FCS southern schools would have loved a shot at becoming members, something the WAC didn't have.

Agreed. There's no shortage of schools in the South East. Even those not qualified to jump could be convinced to take the leap if the Sunbelt was in a bad crunch.

(05-24-2017 06:36 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 03:34 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  as of now, it's tough to bash Karl for too much. The conference as a whole is making more money, and is performing better on the field as a whole.

Isn't that basically what every conference wants?

Now, will this continue? Who knows. But for now, I'll take it.

After he rode the WAC ship to a watery grave, I figured he'd do the same in the Belt, but he's really done a good job. He's had a clear vision and demonstrated how FCS heavyweights can be better additions, at least in the short term, than big schools in big markets with little tradition.

I still wonder if Coastal football will make it, but their other sports seem to be ready. As a fan of the underdogs, it's good to see the Sun Belt come out of the last round of realignment with some momentum.

Makes you wonder how much of it was him and how much of it was member institutions?

Bing!

(05-25-2017 06:44 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 06:36 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 03:34 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  as of now, it's tough to bash Karl for too much. The conference as a whole is making more money, and is performing better on the field as a whole.

Isn't that basically what every conference wants?

Now, will this continue? Who knows. But for now, I'll take it.

After he rode the WAC ship to a watery grave, I figured he'd do the same in the Belt, but he's really done a good job. He's had a clear vision and demonstrated how FCS heavyweights can be better additions, at least in the short term, than big schools in big markets with little tradition.

I still wonder if Coastal football will make it, but their other sports seem to be ready. As a fan of the underdogs, it's good to see the Sun Belt come out of the last round of realignment with some momentum.

Makes you wonder how much of it was him and how much of it was member institutions?

I am not a fan of Benson, but he is the face of the conference, the messenger, and it is easy to blame him for anything and everything. The Conference Commissioner can advise, suggest, coax, etc., but at the end of the day the Presidents/Chancellors and ADs of the various member institutions cast the deciding votes not the Commissioner.