Trade FAU and FIU for ALR and UTA.
I don't think either league would want this.
The Sun Belt needs UTA and LR to be better at basketball but their membership makes great travel partners for travelling teams and helps save on costs.
There’s actually an easier first step for the Sun Belt: do nothing. It’s not our place to “fix” CUSA.
Is it better for both to thrive or both to die?
Perhaps from an outsiders standpoint I have oversimplified.
Lol that's a little extreme.
(03-06-2021 11:01 AM)SMUstang Wrote: [ -> ]Is it better for both to thrive or both to die?
Perhaps from an outsiders standpoint I have oversimplified.
The Belt seems to be doing pretty well. They aren't the conference with the problem, and I can't see why they'd be motivated to try to bail out the conference that didn't seem all that concerned about their future when they raided them a few years ago.
(03-06-2021 12:24 PM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (03-06-2021 11:01 AM)SMUstang Wrote: [ -> ]Is it better for both to thrive or both to die?
Perhaps from an outsiders standpoint I have oversimplified.
The Belt seems to be doing pretty well. They aren't the conference with the problem, and I can't see why they'd be motivated to try to bail out the conference that didn't seem all that concerned about their future when they raided them a few years ago.
I can't see how it would even help CUSA. Or the Sun Belt. Or any of the 4 teams that would be moving. What's the logic here? Is there a next step?
Nothing that anyone proposes about "saving travel costs" for CUSA or SBC schools is worth it unless every school would be replacing a substantial number of its teams' plane flights with bus trips.
Let nature take it’s course then. With few fans in the stands and small TV payouts during the pandemic, how long will either conference last? At some point the schools will have to drop some sports. When they do, they will have to have an NCAA waiver to stay in a conference. We could see some forced restructuring at that point.
The Sun Belt is a better conference today, in football. In basketball, CUSA is the better conference today. Football pays (most of) the bills making the Sun Belt the better conference.
Dropping the non-football schools doesn’t help the conference. Adding the Florida schools doesn’t help the conference.
If the Sun Belt were dead set on raiding CUSA and dropping schools, it would go about something like IMO (which is still not going to happen):
Drop: Texas St, UL Monroe
Add: North Texas, Marshall, Southern Miss, UAB
CUSA adds Texas St and UL Monroe
I like the potential Texas St has but they aren’t capitalizing on it. If they did show signs of life, I’d want to keep them in the Sun Belt.
Sun Belt
East: Appalachian St, Coastal Carolina, Georgia Southern, Georgia St, Marshall, Troy
West: Arkansas St, North Texas, South Alabama, Southern Miss, UAB, UL Lafayette
Non-Football: UALR, UT Arlington
CUSA
East: Charlotte, Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Middle Tennessee St, Old Dominion, Western Kentucky
West: Louisiana Tech, Rice, Texas St, UL Monroe, UTEP, UTSA
No thanks. The last thing C-USA needs is more Sun Belt teams.
Let’s start with fixing what we have and not worry about schools from other conferences.
(03-06-2021 05:36 PM)BePcr07 Wrote: [ -> ]The Sun Belt is a better conference today, in football. In basketball, CUSA is the better conference today. Football pays (most of) the bills making the Sun Belt the better conference.
Dropping the non-football schools doesn’t help the conference. Adding the Florida schools doesn’t help the conference.
If the Sun Belt were dead set on raiding CUSA and dropping schools, it would go about something like IMO (which is still not going to happen):
Drop: Texas St, UL Monroe
Add: North Texas, Marshall, Southern Miss, UAB
CUSA adds Texas St and UL Monroe
I like the potential Texas St has but they aren’t capitalizing on it. If they did show signs of life, I’d want to keep them in the Sun Belt.
Sun Belt
East: Appalachian St, Coastal Carolina, Georgia Southern, Georgia St, Marshall, Troy
West: Arkansas St, North Texas, South Alabama, Southern Miss, UAB, UL Lafayette
Non-Football: UALR, UT Arlington
CUSA
East: Charlotte, Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Middle Tennessee St, Old Dominion, Western Kentucky
West: Louisiana Tech, Rice, Texas St, UL Monroe, UTEP, UTSA
Define signs of life regarding TXST. Id argue that we're competitive.
(03-06-2021 05:36 PM)BePcr07 Wrote: [ -> ]The Sun Belt is a better conference today, in football. In basketball, CUSA is the better conference today. Football pays (most of) the bills making the Sun Belt the better conference.
Dropping the non-football schools doesn’t help the conference. Adding the Florida schools doesn’t help the conference.
If the Sun Belt were dead set on raiding CUSA and dropping schools, it would go about something like IMO (which is still not going to happen):
Drop: Texas St, UL Monroe
Add: North Texas, Marshall, Southern Miss, UAB
CUSA adds Texas St and UL Monroe
I like the potential Texas St has but they aren’t capitalizing on it. If they did show signs of life, I’d want to keep them in the Sun Belt.
Sun Belt
East: Appalachian St, Coastal Carolina, Georgia Southern, Georgia St, Marshall, Troy
West: Arkansas St, North Texas, South Alabama, Southern Miss, UAB, UL Lafayette
Non-Football: UALR, UT Arlington
CUSA
East: Charlotte, Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Middle Tennessee St, Old Dominion, Western Kentucky
West: Louisiana Tech, Rice, Texas St, UL Monroe, UTEP, UTSA
I mean this with no offense, but these conferences show a little lack of understanding of the problems of the current CUSA, according to its fans.
I can think of a couple reasons why that setup you described probably wouldn't happen.
For starters it understates the importance of basketball to a lot of the CUSA and, say, Georgia State.
Any movement the basketball schools make would need to strengthen both sports, not just one. Or at the very least a move would have to improve basketball.
These conferences also ignore both historic and
new rivalries.
Also, based on all the talk on theses boards about CUSA members being disgruntled, why would a new CUSA have an "East" division? The conference is based in DFW. Seems like the East would just go do something else.
Why not let the Gulf and Texas teams do their thing and the Atlantic and Appalachian teams do theirs? Like, just split it up that way?
BUT the first conference you listed looks GREAT! Very strong grouping.
The second conference could be improved with a geographic shift. So could the other one!
A different layout that's more evenly distributed is a win-win
How many G5 schools will decide football is too expensive per the UAB model? When will this happen? Will this trigger smaller more regional conferences?
(03-09-2021 07:35 PM)SMUstang Wrote: [ -> ]How many G5 schools will decide football is too expensive per the UAB model? When will this happen? Will this trigger smaller more regional conferences?
The UAB model? Alabama tried to kill them in a purely political maneuver and it didn't stick. There wasn't anybody at UAB promoting dropping football.
(03-09-2021 07:44 PM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021 07:35 PM)SMUstang Wrote: [ -> ]How many G5 schools will decide football is too expensive per the UAB model? When will this happen? Will this trigger smaller more regional conferences?
The UAB model? Alabama tried to kill them in a purely political maneuver and it didn't stick. There wasn't anybody at UAB promoting dropping football.
As far as the ACTUAL UAB model, the G5 school getting jumped in a dark alley and forced to decide to leave ... it definitely won't happen in Ohio. Reducing the number of Ohio MAC FBS schools would strengthen the remaining ones, and OSU is not happy having ONE program like UC ... potentially having three or four would be even worse in their eyes. MAC parity spreading the available talent around is better for the Buckeyes.
(03-09-2021 07:44 PM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021 07:35 PM)SMUstang Wrote: [ -> ]How many G5 schools will decide football is too expensive per the UAB model? When will this happen? Will this trigger smaller more regional conferences?
The UAB model? Alabama tried to kill them in a purely political maneuver and it didn't stick. There wasn't anybody at UAB promoting dropping football.
UAB fans can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe their president was in bed with the Alabama board and decided to end football after the team had a decent season. An uproar form UAB fans and the Birmingham community raised hell and money to get football back. They overcame the administration powers so major kudos to them.
If the stunt had been pulled the year before when the season was awful along with attendance, it might have succeeded. Now UAB could be the school added to the AAC down the road. Quite the turnaround.
(03-06-2021 11:01 AM)SMUstang Wrote: [ -> ]Is it better for both to thrive or both to die?
Perhaps from an outsiders standpoint I have oversimplified.
Many in C-USA may be wanting it to die, thinking what comes next for their school has to be better.
(03-10-2021 08:33 AM)ESE84 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-06-2021 11:01 AM)SMUstang Wrote: [ -> ]Is it better for both to thrive or both to die?
Perhaps from an outsiders standpoint I have oversimplified.
Many in C-USA may be wanting it to die, thinking what comes next for their school has to be better.
Thing is, it probably isn't. CUSA, bad as it is, is as good as it gets for the current CUSA schools.