CSNbbs

When evaluating the future strength of these conferences, let's say looking at least 5 years ahead, the TRUTH IS NOBODY KNOWS. Different conferences have advantages and disadvantages in different areas.

I believe that in the last decade, TV exposure more than anything else has changed the face of college sports, and this will probably be true for the forseeable future.

My view, and I'm looking primarily at football, is as follows.

The most important factors in evaluating the future prospects of these "non-BCS" conferences are:

1-TV exposure--and exposure is more important at this point than TV revenue.

2-Having a number of good teams in the conference each year, hopefully with 1-2 being ranked in the Top 25.

3-Having GOOD Bowl contracts, at least 3.

4-Adequate budgets. And total budget is not the only consideration. Other factors, e.g., expenses need to be considered.

After these 4, I think everything else is less significant. But, let's list a few factors, not necessarily in order of importance.

5-Good out of conference schedules

6-Good overall attendance within the conference.

7-Stability.

As I said at the beginning, I think TV exposure is far and above the most important factor.

A point mentioned by some posters is the size of markets. I believe this can help but also can be considerably overrated. The reason is that regional or national TV exposure can outweigh the importance of the local market size. If you look at last season's Top 25 ESPN/Coaches Poll, only 5-6 teams were located in major markets and at least 8 were located in areas that could hardly be called metropolitan. Add to this the fact that teams located in major markets are almost always competing against professional franchises that garner most of the attention.

So, let me repeat. At this time NOBODY KNOWS what the future prospects of these conferences are. The most important factor, though, is regional and national TV exposure, probably followed up by Poll Rankings, good bowl contract, and budgets.

Fans can hype up other factors, and they certainly have been on forums like this one, but these other factors are far less important.

That's how I see it. How do you see it?

All I know is both MAC football and basketball had a record number of teams in bowl games and post-season tourneys. Hopefully that bodes well for the conference in the future.

I would add or vary a bit.

TV exposure is important. Outside the BCS the revenue isn't going to be substantial. The schools outside those six leagues have to make their money at the gate and with donations.

Geographic sensibility is important it can be achieved by being reasonably compact or utilizing divisions to limit long trips. Dollars spent on travel are dollars that can't be used to advance the program.

Bowl contracts, that really varies depending on the league and the bowl. First a larger league needs more than a smaller. Three for a 14 team league isn't as helpful as three for an 8 or 9 member league. The contracts also have to make sense. A bowl 1,000 miles from the membership is probably going to cost so much in travel and marketing "agreements" while being hard to sell tickets for making them a strong financial drain. A bowl 1,000 miles away in a popular travel destination located in or near a competitive air fare market is better than one 750 miles away that doesn't have a strong discount air carrier presence.

Budget is vital. The only significant growth potential is in ticket sales and donations. That means you have to grow them and keep overhead down. As mentioned above travel is a big issue. If Toledo, Arkansas State, and Louisiana Tech all spend the same on athletics, Toledo is going to have more money available for salaries, recruiting evaluation, facility upgrades, and marketing because of lower travel costs. Louisiana Tech at the other end of the spectrum will be stretched in that area because their shortest trip conference trip of 935 miles is longer than Toledo's longest trip.

Stability isn't that big of a deal except that rivalries can help drive ticket sales.

SF-Falcon ... you speak the truth - this is all just pure speculation on everyone's part. Your points are valid, and I think the MAC is positioned pretty well in terms of both TV exposure (via EPSN and Fox Sports Ohio) and the sheer number of people who live in the geographic region encompassed by the conference.

When you look at the mid to large-size cities and the amount of media coverage those give to the MAC - you just can't overlook the PR boost that gives to the conference. There's no MAC school within 1.5 hours of Columbus, but The Dispatch and/or the local TV/radio stations have at least one MAC story every single day. That's 1.5 MILLION people that are routinely exposed to the conference just in central Ohio alone. Now add in all the other areas - Akron, Cleveland, Dayton, Cincy, Toledo, Bowling Green, lower Michigan - covered by the conference, and that is just an incredible number of people ... the number is well into the millions.

If the MAC were to pursue WKU and possibly MTSU, that would introduce the MAC to Kentucky and northern Tennessee - and give them 2 schools situated on either side of Nashville. WKU has drawn students & athletes from the Nashville metro area for years, and even had an "in-state tuition" deal set up for the northern suburbs ... not sure if it's still that way or not. I'm sure MTSU benefits from having high school players not ebing able to get into UT or Vandy, and then having to either go to Memphis (historically not a strong football program) or MTSU - so they choose MTSU, which is about an hour south.

Even without MTSU joining in, WKU's program moving to 1A could take advantage of this and also tap more into the Nashville market - only 45 minutes south. And while it is a smaller market, Bowling Green is the fastest-growing city in KY - and shows no signs of slowing down anytime soon. A move to the MAC would definitely help WKU as a recruiting tool.