(07-14-2019 07:37 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  With a nucleus of the five Texas schools (CUSA4 + Texas St), 3 Louisiana schools and USM, 5 in Georgia, Florida, or South Carolina, and Marshall/ODU/App/Charlotte/MTSU you can make two leagues of 2 tight geographic divisions each happen.

Gulf Coast League:

Texas St, UTEP, UTSA, Rice, UNT, and either ArkSt or La Tech in the West

The remaining one of LT/ArkSt along with ULL/ULM/USM/UAB/USA in the east.

Atlantic Conference
South division

Troy
FIU
FAU
Ga Southern
Ga State
Coastal Carolina


North division

App St
Charlotte
ODU
Marshall
WKU
MTSU

And if you wanted to get even crazier to protect rivalries and reduce travel costs further add NMSU in the West (travel partner with UTEP as they are very geographically close) and Liberty in the east near ODU and make one league 14 teams. Shifts a team or two into different divisions that can alter the divisional makeups slifhtly.

I have my doubts this would ever happen in mass like this but I do see some of those schools realigning some way to save cost. Travel cost has to be rivaling media payout right now.

I imagine the eastern schools would want the Florida schools. But I don't see the western schools giving up FIU and FAU for Troy and USA.

Now if the eastern gave up on Florida, then you could have 5 for 5 trade. Marshall, ODU, UNCC, WKU, MTSU for TX ST., ULL, ULM, UALR, UTA. Both conferences would have 12 football schools while CUSA would also have 2 non-fb members.

CUSA W (fb) UTEP, UTSA, UNT, Rice, TX. ST., La Tech
CUSA E (fb) ULL, ULM, USM, UAB, FIU, FAU

SB N Marshall, ODU, UNCC, WKU, MTSU, App. St.
SB S Ga. ST., Ga. Southern, Coastal Carolina, Troy, USA, Ark St.

Not sure the Florida and Arkansas schools would be real happy with that lineup.

Why would SB even consider this? At the moment, there doing better TV money wise than CUSA. Unlikely they bring in two more teams to split their earnings.

Well, if, say, a MWC type coup happens and this is the result:

ODU
Marshall
App
MTSU
WKU
stAte
———————-
GaSo
USM
UAB
Troy
FAU
FIU

I can’t imagine this not resulting in credits and couple of bowl tie-ins if not more. It still leaves two top football and basketball programs in LT and UNT (not to mention UTSA and Charlotte) from cusa and it leaves two top bball programs in GaSt and USA from the Belt and fb programs in ULL and USA and ULM who is on the upswing.

Whether or not you are an upper tier east team from either conference, that is appealing. Marshall, GaSo, and App are old rivals. USM,UAB, and Marshall would want to stay together IMHO. Marshall would lobby hard for the FL twins. Nobody goes further west than Hattiesburg.

Here is my $.02

App, Coastal, Ga St, and Ga Southern to CUSA
UTSA, UTEP, Rice, UNT to Sunbelt

The eastern CUSA schools hate going to TX and this is the easiest way to get rid of that but allow them to keep Florida.

If La Tech and/or USM wanted to keep the TX affiliation and La Tech wouldnt flip out about being with ULM, then you can add a La Tech and/or USM for Troy and/or as well.

This trade would make at worst Troy Alabama the farthest trip for the TX schools and they could have a whole TX division in the Sunbelt.

Sunbelt Texas
UTEP
UTSA
Texas St
N Texas
Rice

Sunbelt Gulf Coast
Ark St
ULM
ULL
Troy/La Tech
USA/USM

CUSA North
Marshall
ODU
Charlotte
App
WKU
MTSU
FIU

CUSA South
Coastal
Ga St
Ga Southern
UAB
La Tech/Troy
USM/USA
FAU

CUSA would guarantee only the App-Ga Southern and FAU-FIU interdivisional games

If I were the CUSA TX schools, who I assume would be a hard sell, i would take that deal. No more east coast travel and back on ESPN. Makes sense for everyone involved. Would be a lot easier if both conferences were ESPN conferences

(07-14-2019 08:38 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Here is my $.02

App, Coastal, Ga St, and Ga Southern to CUSA
UTSA, UTEP, Rice, UNT to Sunbelt

The eastern CUSA schools hate going to TX and this is the easiest way to get rid of that but allow them to keep Florida.

If La Tech and/or USM wanted to keep the TX affiliation and La Tech wouldnt flip out about being with ULM, then you can add a La Tech and/or USM for Troy and/or as well.

This trade would make at worst Troy Alabama the farthest trip for the TX schools and they could have a whole TX division in the Sunbelt.

Sunbelt Texas
UTEP
UTSA
Texas St
N Texas
Rice

Sunbelt Gulf Coast
Ark St
ULM
ULL
Troy/La Tech
USA/USM

CUSA North
Marshall
ODU
Charlotte
App
WKU
MTSU
FIU

CUSA South
Coastal
Ga St
Ga Southern
UAB
La Tech/Troy
USM/USA
FAU

CUSA would guarantee only the App-Ga Southern and FAU-FIU interdivisional games

If I were the CUSA TX schools, who I assume would be a hard sell, i would take that deal. No more east coast travel and back on ESPN. Makes sense for everyone involved. Would be a lot easier if both conferences were ESPN conferences

If you were goi g to do that, then I would insist on havingLaTech and USM

(07-14-2019 06:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I guess most of us will just ignore this sentence in the article:

Quote:Those discussions have never progressed to the point where C-USA officially explored the possibility.

In other words, those CUSA ADs didn't even agree amongst themselves on who should be moved, or who would be willing to move, etc., etc. They didn't even get it as far as discussing it with all of the members of their own conference, let alone making a concrete proposal to the Sun Belt.

They just had the same kind of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone agreed to do what I think is best for MY school" talk that you can read on here or any other message board every day.

Too many moving parts for this to progress off of internet chit-chat and into real movement.

It's not internet chit-chat, it's AD's openly talking about it amongst themselves. Just because it's not at the point of it happening next month doesn't mean there is no smoke here. The fact AD's have brought it up amongst themselves says a whole lot more than the normal milquetoast "We're very happy where we are and who we are with.".

(07-14-2019 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I guess most of us will just ignore this sentence in the article:

Quote:Those discussions have never progressed to the point where C-USA officially explored the possibility.

In other words, those CUSA ADs didn't even agree amongst themselves on who should be moved, or who would be willing to move, etc., etc. They didn't even get it as far as discussing it with all of the members of their own conference, let alone making a concrete proposal to the Sun Belt.

They just had the same kind of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone agreed to do what I think is best for MY school" talk that you can read on here or any other message board every day.

Too many moving parts for this to progress off of internet chit-chat and into real movement.

Yes, too many moving parts for it to be done cooperatively. Its more likely to happen Airport Meeting style. However, when faced with an airport meeting---uncooperative schools might opt to become more cooperative when they see its going to happen anyway (with a result that might even be worse than the cooperative method might yield). Typically, the problem for those formally uncooperative schools at that point is it would typically be too late in the process. These schools would no longer have any real leverage. However, in this case---starting a totally new conference would have some significant drawbacks---so negotiating a more cooperative swap between conferences might still have some value to all parties involved. Trading schools back and forth between the two conferences might could still be a negotiated result that could work at that point.

This has been discussed before. The Texas block and LA Tech will never go for a realignment. We like C-USA West, and will not trade it away to play against ULL, ULM, and Texas State. The airport meeting won't happen either. The eastern programs that want a line-up shift are too cheap to pay their exit fees and try to start an new league. And, there is no reason to "fall in line", when the rest of us can just collect those fees and keep the C-USA bowl ties, NCAA credits, and playoff money. The only way those eastern program might get what they want is if one or more programs in the Texas block get called up to the AAC or MWC and there are not enough votes to stop them.

To put it in plan English, the C-USA programs that are building new facilities, investing in their athletics, growing their fan support, and developing new funding, are not going to willingly realign into an even less significant regional conference. In addition to the Texas block and LA Tech, I think the leadership at UAB, FIU, and FAU would also be against realigning into a small regional conference.

(07-14-2019 08:38 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Here is my $.02

App, Coastal, Ga St, and Ga Southern to CUSA
UTSA, UTEP, Rice, UNT to Sunbelt

The eastern CUSA schools hate going to TX and this is the easiest way to get rid of that but allow them to keep Florida.

If La Tech and/or USM wanted to keep the TX affiliation and La Tech wouldnt flip out about being with ULM, then you can add a La Tech and/or USM for Troy and/or as well.

This trade would make at worst Troy Alabama the farthest trip for the TX schools and they could have a whole TX division in the Sunbelt.

Sunbelt Texas
UTEP
UTSA
Texas St
N Texas
Rice

Sunbelt Gulf Coast
Ark St
ULM
ULL
Troy/La Tech
USA/USM

CUSA North
Marshall
ODU
Charlotte
App
WKU
MTSU
FIU

CUSA South
Coastal
Ga St
Ga Southern
UAB
La Tech/Troy
USM/USA
FAU

CUSA would guarantee only the App-Ga Southern and FAU-FIU interdivisional games

If I were the CUSA TX schools, who I assume would be a hard sell, i would take that deal. No more east coast travel and back on ESPN. Makes sense for everyone involved. Would be a lot easier if both conferences were ESPN conferences

Troy and utep would be horrible for each other to have to travel to

I hope this happens it just makes sense and cents.

CUSA becomes:

South- FIU, FAU, Georgia State, Georgia Southern, Troy, App State

North- Coastal, Charolette, ODU, Marshall, WKU, Middle Tenn

Sun Belt Becomes:

East: South Alabama, Southern Miss, La Tech, Monroe, Lafayette, Ark State

West: Rice, North Texas, UTSA, UTEP, Texas St, New Mexico St

Also if this happens then no room at the inn for UConn or Liberty moving forward with all G5 leagues at 12.

P.S. Oh and UAB is left off because they end up in the AAC.

(07-14-2019 09:07 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I guess most of us will just ignore this sentence in the article:

Quote:Those discussions have never progressed to the point where C-USA officially explored the possibility.

In other words, those CUSA ADs didn't even agree amongst themselves on who should be moved, or who would be willing to move, etc., etc. They didn't even get it as far as discussing it with all of the members of their own conference, let alone making a concrete proposal to the Sun Belt.

They just had the same kind of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone agreed to do what I think is best for MY school" talk that you can read on here or any other message board every day.

Too many moving parts for this to progress off of internet chit-chat and into real movement.

Yes, too many moving parts for it to be done cooperatively. Its more likely to happen Airport Meeting style. However, when faced with an airport meeting---uncooperative schools might opt to become more cooperative when they see its going to happen anyway (with a result that might even be worse than the cooperative method might yield). Typically, the problem for those formally uncooperative schools at that point is it would typically be too late in the process. These schools would no longer have any real leverage. However, in this case---starting a totally new conference would have some significant drawbacks---so negotiating a more cooperative swap between conferences might still have some value to all parties involved. Trading schools back and forth between the two conferences might could still be a negotiated result that could work at that point.

This has been discussed before. The Texas block and LA Tech will never go for a realignment. We like C-USA West, and will not trade it away to play against ULL, ULM, and Texas State. The airport meeting won't happen either. The eastern programs that want a line-up shift are too cheap to pay their exit fees and try to start an new league. And, there is no reason to "fall in line", when the rest of us can just collect those fees and keep the C-USA bowl ties, NCAA credits, and playoff money. The only way those eastern program might get what they want is if one or more programs in the Texas block get called up to the AAC or MWC and there are not enough votes to stop them.

To put it in plan English, the C-USA programs that are building new facilities, investing in their athletics, growing their fan support, and developing new funding, are not going to willingly realign into an even less insignificant regional conference. In addition to the Texas block and LA Tech, I think the leadership at UAB, FIU, and FAU would also be against realigning into a small regional conference.

You said it very well in regards to UNT's situation. You now understand why the Big 12 didn't expand with schools deemed inferior from the Big 12 POV.

The G5 payout of the CFP is limited to 1 million per school (up to 10 schools).

IMO the AAC with 11 and CUSA with 14 are waiting around for some more realignment to hit and reduce membership to a fiscally sound number of 10.

That to me seems like the G5 trend; replacing openings with less schools than you lost. The exception is the MWC which covets Texas expansion.

(07-14-2019 09:23 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 09:07 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I guess most of us will just ignore this sentence in the article:

Quote:Those discussions have never progressed to the point where C-USA officially explored the possibility.

In other words, those CUSA ADs didn't even agree amongst themselves on who should be moved, or who would be willing to move, etc., etc. They didn't even get it as far as discussing it with all of the members of their own conference, let alone making a concrete proposal to the Sun Belt.

They just had the same kind of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone agreed to do what I think is best for MY school" talk that you can read on here or any other message board every day.

Too many moving parts for this to progress off of internet chit-chat and into real movement.

Yes, too many moving parts for it to be done cooperatively. Its more likely to happen Airport Meeting style. However, when faced with an airport meeting---uncooperative schools might opt to become more cooperative when they see its going to happen anyway (with a result that might even be worse than the cooperative method might yield). Typically, the problem for those formally uncooperative schools at that point is it would typically be too late in the process. These schools would no longer have any real leverage. However, in this case---starting a totally new conference would have some significant drawbacks---so negotiating a more cooperative swap between conferences might still have some value to all parties involved. Trading schools back and forth between the two conferences might could still be a negotiated result that could work at that point.

This has been discussed before. The Texas block and LA Tech will never go for a realignment. We like C-USA West, and will not trade it away to play against ULL, ULM, and Texas State. The airport meeting won't happen either. The eastern programs that want a line-up shift are too cheap to pay their exit fees and try to start an new league. And, there is no reason to "fall in line", when the rest of us can just collect those fees and keep the C-USA bowl ties, NCAA credits, and playoff money. The only way those eastern program might get what they want is if one or more programs in the Texas block get called up to the AAC or MWC and there are not enough votes to stop them.

To put it in plan English, the C-USA programs that are building new facilities, investing in their athletics, growing their fan support, and developing new funding, are not going to willingly realign into an even less insignificant regional conference. In addition to the Texas block and LA Tech, I think the leadership at UAB, FIU, and FAU would also be against realigning into a small regional conference.

You said it very well in regards to UNT's situation. You now understand why the Big 12 didn't expand with schools deemed inferior from the Big 12 POV.

Texas Tech, SMU and UNT will have great rivalries soon

(07-14-2019 07:09 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think ODU wants the Texas schools to leave. And the Texas schools aren't going to leave a better brand, CUSA, for the Sun Belt and leave the brand with a bunch of startups, most of whom came from the Sun Belt.

You wonder who in CUSA were just hoping the MWC had voted yes to take on UTEP and Rice a short time ago. Whether to constrict or to push back east. CUSA is stuck with two schools it knows would rather be further west.

I proposed this in the CUSA thread and I know that most people will not understand why it works or that the "all Texas" or "all Louisiana" or "all Florida" teams in the same conference is stupid and destroys a conference, but people love to cling to failure instead of trying something new

with 10 in the Sunbelt and 14 in the CUSA that is 24 teams

the smartest thing to do would be split that to 3 conferences of 8 and then each plays 7 conference games and 5 OOC games

I am sure most would prefer two conferences of 12, but that hardly helps anything

also most are looking at some type of stupid alignment that would consist on 5 Texas teams in a conference plus 7 others.....that conference would be a total disaster with probably 4 of those Texas teams dragging it way down most years and 3 of them dragging it down pretty much every year (just look at the Ohio schools in the MAC as an example and none of the CUSA or Sunbelt programs in Texas are any different than those Ohio MAC programs no matter what BS some of their fan bases might try and sell themselves)

that would also require a new conference to get NCAA playoff money and to get auto bids to make it work where some teams would go to that conference

the other idea would be to have the two highest ranked teams out of the three meet in a "CCG" and of course this would also require NCAA approval, but I think there is a chance it could happen

App State, FAU, ODU, GAState,
Troy, ULM, TxState, UTSA

GASouthern, FIU, Coastal, USA,
stAte, Louisiana, north Texas state, UTEP

LaTech, USM, Rice, UAB,
Middle Tennessee, Marshall, WKU, Charlotte

since the NCAA only requires 5 conference games the conferences could actually play fewer conference games if they played 5 then you would play 3 in your division and 2 from the other division and then 7 OOC games

many of those OOC games could be between teams from the same state in one of the other two conferences or from the same region or ones where there is a history between them

if you had 5 conference games and 2 from one of the other conferences and then one from the 3rd conference you are at 8 games already and then you need 4 more games just like if you were in the standard conference of 12 with two divisions and 8 conference games

if the 24 members were to try and negotiate a TV deal as a group that COULD work and that would lessen some of the hesitation if the money was right

then of course you need fans and stupid administrators to get past the idea of tying yourself to schools in the same state

the real barriers would be getting the CCG for the two best teams from the three conferences and getting auto bids to NCAA tournaments for a 3rd conference

the reason that conferences have failed in the past and continue to fail is because they get too caught up on having teams in the same geographic area and especially the same state or they get too large and there is too large of a disparity between program goals in that big of a group

getting conferences much smaller eliminates both of those issues because even if 1 or 2 teams are in give up mode you are not tied to anything other than 2 teams and you have your OOC games from the other conferences to schedule for bragging rights and regional/state history and bragging rights

lets be clear doing more of the same and trying the same things over and over has been a disaster especially for CUSA and the Sunbelt is actually doing better as a 10 team conference even if things are not great for them either

programs need to get in touch with the idea of having their program offer something different vs being one of the same 4 or 5 programs in a state (or 2 or 3) offering pretty much the exact same thing to potential recruits.....it never works well history has proven that time and again

(07-14-2019 09:07 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I guess most of us will just ignore this sentence in the article:

Quote:Those discussions have never progressed to the point where C-USA officially explored the possibility.

In other words, those CUSA ADs didn't even agree amongst themselves on who should be moved, or who would be willing to move, etc., etc. They didn't even get it as far as discussing it with all of the members of their own conference, let alone making a concrete proposal to the Sun Belt.

They just had the same kind of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone agreed to do what I think is best for MY school" talk that you can read on here or any other message board every day.

Too many moving parts for this to progress off of internet chit-chat and into real movement.

Yes, too many moving parts for it to be done cooperatively. Its more likely to happen Airport Meeting style. However, when faced with an airport meeting---uncooperative schools might opt to become more cooperative when they see its going to happen anyway (with a result that might even be worse than the cooperative method might yield). Typically, the problem for those formally uncooperative schools at that point is it would typically be too late in the process. These schools would no longer have any real leverage. However, in this case---starting a totally new conference would have some significant drawbacks---so negotiating a more cooperative swap between conferences might still have some value to all parties involved. Trading schools back and forth between the two conferences might could still be a negotiated result that could work at that point.

This has been discussed before. The Texas block and LA Tech will never go for a realignment. We like C-USA West, and will not trade it away to play against ULL, ULM, and Texas State. The airport meeting won't happen either. The eastern programs that want a line-up shift are too cheap to pay their exit fees and try to start an new league. And, there is no reason to "fall in line", when the rest of us can just collect those fees and keep the C-USA bowl ties, NCAA credits, and playoff money. The only way those eastern program might get what they want is if one or more programs in the Texas block get called up to the AAC or MWC and there are not enough votes to stop them.

To put it in plan English, the C-USA programs that are building new facilities, investing in their athletics, growing their fan support, and developing new funding, are not going to willingly realign into an even less insignificant regional conference. In addition to the Texas block and LA Tech, I think the leadership at UAB, FIU, and FAU would also be against realigning into a small regional conference.

This is a very good point you are making here about the Texas 4 and LT considering TxSt/ULM/ULL lessor product not worth dissolving the conference over.

CUSA East (most importantly WKU, MTSU, Charlotte, ODU, MU) feel incomplete without UAB or USM and wouldn't mind a Georgia presence.

If a little realignment did happen it could keep that contingent quiet.

AAC (ODU)
CUSA (Louisiana)

The TX/LA block grows to 6 members while taking in one of the stronger members of the SBC.

UAB would have to shift to CUSA East. It becomes more compact without ODU and everyone is reasonably satisfied.

If you were the CUSA Texas 4, would you rather play CUSA east or Sunbelt West.

Since, by and large, it doesn't really matter, why not save on travel and play Sunbelt West

(07-14-2019 09:30 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 09:23 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 09:07 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I guess most of us will just ignore this sentence in the article:


In other words, those CUSA ADs didn't even agree amongst themselves on who should be moved, or who would be willing to move, etc., etc. They didn't even get it as far as discussing it with all of the members of their own conference, let alone making a concrete proposal to the Sun Belt.

They just had the same kind of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone agreed to do what I think is best for MY school" talk that you can read on here or any other message board every day.

Too many moving parts for this to progress off of internet chit-chat and into real movement.

Yes, too many moving parts for it to be done cooperatively. Its more likely to happen Airport Meeting style. However, when faced with an airport meeting---uncooperative schools might opt to become more cooperative when they see its going to happen anyway (with a result that might even be worse than the cooperative method might yield). Typically, the problem for those formally uncooperative schools at that point is it would typically be too late in the process. These schools would no longer have any real leverage. However, in this case---starting a totally new conference would have some significant drawbacks---so negotiating a more cooperative swap between conferences might still have some value to all parties involved. Trading schools back and forth between the two conferences might could still be a negotiated result that could work at that point.

This has been discussed before. The Texas block and LA Tech will never go for a realignment. We like C-USA West, and will not trade it away to play against ULL, ULM, and Texas State. The airport meeting won't happen either. The eastern programs that want a line-up shift are too cheap to pay their exit fees and try to start an new league. And, there is no reason to "fall in line", when the rest of us can just collect those fees and keep the C-USA bowl ties, NCAA credits, and playoff money. The only way those eastern program might get what they want is if one or more programs in the Texas block get called up to the AAC or MWC and there are not enough votes to stop them.

To put it in plan English, the C-USA programs that are building new facilities, investing in their athletics, growing their fan support, and developing new funding, are not going to willingly realign into an even less insignificant regional conference. In addition to the Texas block and LA Tech, I think the leadership at UAB, FIU, and FAU would also be against realigning into a small regional conference.

You said it very well in regards to UNT's situation. You now understand why the Big 12 didn't expand with schools deemed inferior from the Big 12 POV.

Texas Tech, SMU and UNT will have great rivalries soon

I agree in OOC games.

(07-14-2019 09:47 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 09:07 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I guess most of us will just ignore this sentence in the article:

Quote:Those discussions have never progressed to the point where C-USA officially explored the possibility.

In other words, those CUSA ADs didn't even agree amongst themselves on who should be moved, or who would be willing to move, etc., etc. They didn't even get it as far as discussing it with all of the members of their own conference, let alone making a concrete proposal to the Sun Belt.

They just had the same kind of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone agreed to do what I think is best for MY school" talk that you can read on here or any other message board every day.

Too many moving parts for this to progress off of internet chit-chat and into real movement.

Yes, too many moving parts for it to be done cooperatively. Its more likely to happen Airport Meeting style. However, when faced with an airport meeting---uncooperative schools might opt to become more cooperative when they see its going to happen anyway (with a result that might even be worse than the cooperative method might yield). Typically, the problem for those formally uncooperative schools at that point is it would typically be too late in the process. These schools would no longer have any real leverage. However, in this case---starting a totally new conference would have some significant drawbacks---so negotiating a more cooperative swap between conferences might still have some value to all parties involved. Trading schools back and forth between the two conferences might could still be a negotiated result that could work at that point.

This has been discussed before. The Texas block and LA Tech will never go for a realignment. We like C-USA West, and will not trade it away to play against ULL, ULM, and Texas State. The airport meeting won't happen either. The eastern programs that want a line-up shift are too cheap to pay their exit fees and try to start an new league. And, there is no reason to "fall in line", when the rest of us can just collect those fees and keep the C-USA bowl ties, NCAA credits, and playoff money. The only way those eastern program might get what they want is if one or more programs in the Texas block get called up to the AAC or MWC and there are not enough votes to stop them.

To put it in plan English, the C-USA programs that are building new facilities, investing in their athletics, growing their fan support, and developing new funding, are not going to willingly realign into an even less insignificant regional conference. In addition to the Texas block and LA Tech, I think the leadership at UAB, FIU, and FAU would also be against realigning into a small regional conference.

This is a very good point you are making here about the Texas 4 and LT considering TxSt/ULM/ULL lessor product not worth dissolving the conference over.

CUSA East (most importantly WKU, MTSU, Charlotte, ODU, MU) feel incomplete without UAB or USM and wouldn't mind a Georgia presence.

If a little realignment did happen it could keep that contingent quiet.

AAC (ODU)
CUSA (Louisiana)

The TX/LA block grows to 6 members while taking in one of the stronger members of the SBC.

UAB would have to shift to CUSA East. It becomes more compact without ODU and everyone is reasonably satisfied.

The only Sun Belt program I'd be interested in is Arkansas State, but not at the cost of losing UAB to the east. I think UAB is one of the few C-USA programs that is actually moving in the right direction. Yes, they are 2 season removed from the death penalty, but they seem to be on solid footing now. They are building a new stadium, growing their attendance, and winning on the field. I want them to stay in C-USA West.

ODU can move to the Sun Belt if it makes them happy. I don't see the AAC giving them a serious look at this point.

(07-14-2019 09:47 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 09:07 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-14-2019 06:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I guess most of us will just ignore this sentence in the article:

Quote:Those discussions have never progressed to the point where C-USA officially explored the possibility.

In other words, those CUSA ADs didn't even agree amongst themselves on who should be moved, or who would be willing to move, etc., etc. They didn't even get it as far as discussing it with all of the members of their own conference, let alone making a concrete proposal to the Sun Belt.

They just had the same kind of "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone agreed to do what I think is best for MY school" talk that you can read on here or any other message board every day.

Too many moving parts for this to progress off of internet chit-chat and into real movement.

Yes, too many moving parts for it to be done cooperatively. Its more likely to happen Airport Meeting style. However, when faced with an airport meeting---uncooperative schools might opt to become more cooperative when they see its going to happen anyway (with a result that might even be worse than the cooperative method might yield). Typically, the problem for those formally uncooperative schools at that point is it would typically be too late in the process. These schools would no longer have any real leverage. However, in this case---starting a totally new conference would have some significant drawbacks---so negotiating a more cooperative swap between conferences might still have some value to all parties involved. Trading schools back and forth between the two conferences might could still be a negotiated result that could work at that point.

This has been discussed before. The Texas block and LA Tech will never go for a realignment. We like C-USA West, and will not trade it away to play against ULL, ULM, and Texas State. The airport meeting won't happen either. The eastern programs that want a line-up shift are too cheap to pay their exit fees and try to start an new league. And, there is no reason to "fall in line", when the rest of us can just collect those fees and keep the C-USA bowl ties, NCAA credits, and playoff money. The only way those eastern program might get what they want is if one or more programs in the Texas block get called up to the AAC or MWC and there are not enough votes to stop them.

To put it in plan English, the C-USA programs that are building new facilities, investing in their athletics, growing their fan support, and developing new funding, are not going to willingly realign into an even less insignificant regional conference. In addition to the Texas block and LA Tech, I think the leadership at UAB, FIU, and FAU would also be against realigning into a small regional conference.

This is a very good point you are making here about the Texas 4 and LT considering TxSt/ULM/ULL lessor product not worth dissolving the conference over.

CUSA East (most importantly WKU, MTSU, Charlotte, ODU, MU) feel incomplete without UAB or USM and wouldn't mind a Georgia presence.

If a little realignment did happen it could keep that contingent quiet.

AAC (ODU)
CUSA (Louisiana)

The TX/LA block grows to 6 members while taking in one of the stronger members of the SBC.

UAB would have to shift to CUSA East. It becomes more compact without ODU and everyone is reasonably satisfied.

with the exception of ULM it is nonsense for any Texas school un CUSA or LaTech to consider Texas State or Louisiana a lesser program

Louisiana has about as much on the field success than the Texas CUSA schools combined and their budget is very similar minus about $9 million in academic subsidies (which would place the Louisiana budget well over any Texas CUSA program)

and Texas State has a bigger budget than any of them(but with an unimpressive massive subsidy), plays baseball, will soon have a nicer basketball facility and easily has just as nice of a stajium