CSNbbs

Good info here:

"Five-year history is the single best way to gauge a program's overall health at a glance, and even a weighted five-year history is typically a better predictor of the future than a simple look at last year."

http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2012/2/...gs-2007-11

The future Mountain-USA arrangement:
(including some expansion candidates)

1. Southern Miss (No. 48)
2. Tulsa (No. 50)
3. Nevada (No. 60)
4. East Carolina (No. 64)
TROY (No. 68)
TEMPLE (No. 70)
5. Fresno State (No. 71)
6. Hawaii (No. 72)
LOUISIANA TECH (No. 80)
ARKANSAS STATE (No.86)
7. Marshall (No. 89)
8. UTEP (No. 93)
FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL (No. 95)
UTAH STATE (No. 100)
9. Colorado State (No. 101)
10. Rice (No. 103)
11. Wyoming (No. 104)
12. UAB (No. 105)
SAN JOSE STATE (No. 109)
NORTH TEXAS (No. 111)
13. UNLV (No. 112)
14. Memphis (No. 117)
15. New Mexico (No. 118)
16. Tulane (No. 119)

They flubbed up. Air Force was put in Big East. They're #54(#3 on this list). Memphis removed.

(02-22-2012 10:08 AM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ]They flubbed up. Air Force was put in Big East. They're #54(#3 on this list). Memphis removed.

Alliance wins big on that trade.

(02-22-2012 10:08 AM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ]They flubbed up. Air Force was put in Big East. They're #54(#3 on this list). Memphis removed.

Article was written before Memphis moved to the Big East. Air Force was put in the Big East purely on speculation.

you can't gauge program health solely on w/l. yeah its important, but capital investment and coaching changes need to be included.

true, but then again, if you say that, you have to account for flash in the pan years such as Hawaii(their BCS year included), and Nevada's #15 year. And, I'm sorry, but there's no way in my mind that USM is only the 48th best team in the country the last 5 years.

The averages from that site are:

Pre expansion:
SEC 30
BE 40.5
ACC 42.25
B10 44.09
P10 45.2
B12 46
MWC (2012) 78.7
CUSA 80.83
MAC 89.77
Sun 97.22
WAC (2012) 104

Future configuration:
SEC 30.78
B12 38.4
B10 42.75
ACC 44.21
P12 47.08
BE 54.17
CUSA/MWC16 85.19
MAC 89.77
Sun 97.22
WAC 104

I didn't include the FCS moveups in the MAC, Sun, or WAC

This is overall football rankings over a 5 yr period, not overall health of an athletic program. Which is fine if that's all you look at when considering who to add to a conference.

Overall athletic program health should include won/lost for the major revenue sports, basketball and football as well as attendance for both and athletic budgets. How were the budgets achieved? Mostly student fees plus insititutional support or was there a good deal of income from ticket sales plus donations plus conference distributions? Very important info for the real health of a program.

This^^^^^

I can believe where Troy is because were doing a campus wide renovation athletic facilities/student facilities and the city is building apartment complexes left and right to help raise the enrollment at Troy. And we spend our money as well as any team in the nation.