(07-25-2014 12:12 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:56 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:22 AM)DoubleAggie Wrote:  I understand that many of existing C-USA were former Sun Belt institutions.
But, honestly, I can't even begin to name the schools because most of them don't matter.

C-USA is largely irrelevant.

I know their fans would say the same thing about the Sun Belt,
but if it's a choice between watching a C-USA game and pet videos on YouTube,
I'm still goin' pet videos.

I suppose CUSA claims superiority over the SunBelt due to 4 of their schools (La Tech, Rice, S Miss & UTEP) being long time 1-A/ FBS programs. But when you look at the rest of the members the conference is made up of 1-AA move ups (UAB 1996, Marshall 1997, MTSU 1999, WKU 2010) and four schools who didn't have a program prior to the late 1990's (FAU FIU, ODU and UNCC). Hardly any difference from the SunBelt.

One has to think the fans at Rice have to be wondering what happened. In the mid 90's the Owls were in the Southwest Conference filling up a 70,000 seat stadium playing people like Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas.

FWIW La Tech has been D1 3 more years than stAte.
Both moved up in 75, back down in 82. Then Tech back up in 89 and stAte back up in 92.

Same for ULM, except ULM back in 94.

And Tech folks are going to have to face up to being behind the Red Wolves and the Cajuns in football soon enough. They already are, they just haven't come to terms with it yet! There is some serious denial happening on their board over the Cajuns' Ranking in the USA Today countdown!

Thanks for the clarification. It makes the point even more valid. I get a kick out of how La Tech expanded the upper decks of the stadium to meet 1-A's 30K seating mandate from the 80's. Now they are covered with banners and advertising. Looking back 10 years the closest the Bulldogs came to regularly filling up the stadium as just shy of 26K in 2012. Prior to that their best average was 21,500. Mostly they are in 18-19K range.

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:47 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:56 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:22 AM)DoubleAggie Wrote:  I understand that many of existing C-USA were former Sun Belt institutions.
But, honestly, I can't even begin to name the schools because most of them don't matter.

C-USA is largely irrelevant.

I know their fans would say the same thing about the Sun Belt,
but if it's a choice between watching a C-USA game and pet videos on YouTube,
I'm still goin' pet videos.

I suppose CUSA claims superiority over the SunBelt due to 4 of their schools (La Tech, Rice, S Miss & UTEP) being long time 1-A/ FBS programs. But when you look at the rest of the members the conference is made up of 1-AA move ups (UAB 1996, Marshall 1997, MTSU 1999, WKU 2010) and four schools who didn't have a program prior to the late 1990's (FAU FIU, ODU and UNCC). Hardly any difference from the SunBelt.

One has to think the fans at Rice have to be wondering what happened. In the mid 90's the Owls were in the Southwest Conference filling up a 70,000 seat stadium playing people like Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas.

They claim superiority because by most of the measurable we use to compare conferences, they are.

They chose to focus on factors other than football in determining who to select.

Problem going forward is under the new post season format those conferences that added good football teams, and lost bad ones may have an advantage, over them. That is all the other 4 G5 Conferences.

Most are now saying that the gap in measurable's between the SBC and CUSA will continue to close and close rapidly.

Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

I don't know about all that you said, but I do agree that for MTSU and WKU the deal works out fine because they'll get a couple years profit off of the original CUSA TV Contract.

For a comparison. Looking at how much those two spent to complete their move up, including MTSU's exit fee from the SBC, they'll be able to make that money up with just 2 years under the original CUSA TV Deal.

However, once that deal declines as expected in a couple years, a similar SBC team might need 5 or 6 years in CUSA to make up for the costs of moving. (Assuming no major donation increases)

UNT made sense because this whole weird Texas thing about playing other Texas school can correspond to an attendance increase. Again, the same cannot be assured for a future SBC team moving up.

Moving up to CUSA because of basketball is a cop out, because once all the Memphis NCAA money runs out, the league is going to end up making similar cash to the SBC off NCAA Units overall. Right now both leagues are 1 bid leagues with a chance at earning 2 bids. The only thing I guess I could see for WKU would be a slight attendance bump from getting some basketball savy schools to town...but the numbers would be far from significant enough to make a real difference overall.

(07-25-2014 01:49 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:47 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:56 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  I suppose CUSA claims superiority over the SunBelt due to 4 of their schools (La Tech, Rice, S Miss & UTEP) being long time 1-A/ FBS programs. But when you look at the rest of the members the conference is made up of 1-AA move ups (UAB 1996, Marshall 1997, MTSU 1999, WKU 2010) and four schools who didn't have a program prior to the late 1990's (FAU FIU, ODU and UNCC). Hardly any difference from the SunBelt.

One has to think the fans at Rice have to be wondering what happened. In the mid 90's the Owls were in the Southwest Conference filling up a 70,000 seat stadium playing people like Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas.

They claim superiority because by most of the measurable we use to compare conferences, they are.

They chose to focus on factors other than football in determining who to select.

Problem going forward is under the new post season format those conferences that added good football teams, and lost bad ones may have an advantage, over them. That is all the other 4 G5 Conferences.

Most are now saying that the gap in measurable's between the SBC and CUSA will continue to close and close rapidly.

Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

I don't know about all that you said, but I do agree that for MTSU and WKU the deal works out fine because they'll get a couple years profit off of the original CUSA TV Contract.

For a comparison. Looking at how much those two spent to complete their move up, including MTSU's exit fee from the SBC, they'll be able to make that money up with just 2 years under the original CUSA TV Deal.

However, once that deal declines as expected in a couple years, a similar SBC team might need 5 or 6 years in CUSA to make up for the costs of moving. (Assuming no major donation increases)

UNT made sense because this whole weird Texas thing about playing other Texas school can correspond to an attendance increase. Again, the same cannot be assured for a future SBC team moving up.

Moving up to CUSA because of basketball is a cop out, because once all the Memphis NCAA money runs out, the league is going to end up making similar cash to the SBC off NCAA Units overall. Right now both leagues are 1 bid leagues with a chance at earning 2 bids. The only thing I guess I could see for WKU would be a slight attendance bump from getting some basketball savy schools to town...but the numbers would be far from significant enough to make a real difference overall.

I think CUSA has enough talent this year to be a 3 bid league, but it will ultimately come down to scheduling. Many CUSA schools do a piss poor job scheduling OOC games.

And I do agree with most of what you said. Moving to CUSA NOW would make 0 sense, but at the time it did for all involved and I don't think any that moved will regret the move.

UNT gets Texas schools to play. WKU and MT get to be with other programs that place a high value on basketball.

The only schools that will probably see no benefit from the move is FAU and FIU. CUSA schools are going to be no greater draw than SBC schools were and they're probably going to be near the bottom of the totem pole most years for national television exposure in the conference.

Moving conferences for all the other schools made sense for one reason or another.

(07-25-2014 02:26 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:49 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:47 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  They claim superiority because by most of the measurable we use to compare conferences, they are.

They chose to focus on factors other than football in determining who to select.

Problem going forward is under the new post season format those conferences that added good football teams, and lost bad ones may have an advantage, over them. That is all the other 4 G5 Conferences.

Most are now saying that the gap in measurable's between the SBC and CUSA will continue to close and close rapidly.

Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

I don't know about all that you said, but I do agree that for MTSU and WKU the deal works out fine because they'll get a couple years profit off of the original CUSA TV Contract.

For a comparison. Looking at how much those two spent to complete their move up, including MTSU's exit fee from the SBC, they'll be able to make that money up with just 2 years under the original CUSA TV Deal.

However, once that deal declines as expected in a couple years, a similar SBC team might need 5 or 6 years in CUSA to make up for the costs of moving. (Assuming no major donation increases)

UNT made sense because this whole weird Texas thing about playing other Texas school can correspond to an attendance increase. Again, the same cannot be assured for a future SBC team moving up.

Moving up to CUSA because of basketball is a cop out, because once all the Memphis NCAA money runs out, the league is going to end up making similar cash to the SBC off NCAA Units overall. Right now both leagues are 1 bid leagues with a chance at earning 2 bids. The only thing I guess I could see for WKU would be a slight attendance bump from getting some basketball savy schools to town...but the numbers would be far from significant enough to make a real difference overall.

I think CUSA has enough talent this year to be a 3 bid league, but it will ultimately come down to scheduling. Many CUSA schools do a piss poor job scheduling OOC games.

And I do agree with most of what you said. Moving to CUSA NOW would make 0 sense, but at the time it did for all involved and I don't think any that moved will regret the move.

UNT gets Texas schools to play. WKU and MT get to be with other programs that place a high value on basketball.

The only schools that will probably see no benefit from the move is FAU and FIU. CUSA schools are going to be no greater draw than SBC schools were and they're probably going to be near the bottom of the totem pole most years for national television exposure in the conference.

Moving conferences for all the other schools made sense for one reason or another.

Have you been officially exiled from the CUSA Board yet for using logic in your posts?

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:47 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:56 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:22 AM)DoubleAggie Wrote:  I understand that many of existing C-USA were former Sun Belt institutions.
But, honestly, I can't even begin to name the schools because most of them don't matter.

C-USA is largely irrelevant.

I know their fans would say the same thing about the Sun Belt,
but if it's a choice between watching a C-USA game and pet videos on YouTube,
I'm still goin' pet videos.

I suppose CUSA claims superiority over the SunBelt due to 4 of their schools (La Tech, Rice, S Miss & UTEP) being long time 1-A/ FBS programs. But when you look at the rest of the members the conference is made up of 1-AA move ups (UAB 1996, Marshall 1997, MTSU 1999, WKU 2010) and four schools who didn't have a program prior to the late 1990's (FAU FIU, ODU and UNCC). Hardly any difference from the SunBelt.

One has to think the fans at Rice have to be wondering what happened. In the mid 90's the Owls were in the Southwest Conference filling up a 70,000 seat stadium playing people like Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas.

They claim superiority because by most of the measurable we use to compare conferences, they are.

They chose to focus on factors other than football in determining who to select.

Problem going forward is under the new post season format those conferences that added good football teams, and lost bad ones may have an advantage, over them. That is all the other 4 G5 Conferences.

Most are now saying that the gap in measurable's between the SBC and CUSA will continue to close and close rapidly.

Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

CUSA has 6 Bowl Game options (Bahamas, Boca Raton, Heart of Dallas, Hawaii, Independence & New Mexico), ditto for the SunBelt (Bahamas, Camelia, Cure, Go Daddy, Miami Beach, New Orleans).

The point is there won't be more TV exposure for CUSA when the next contract is announced. Easier travel? WKU is just as far from the Nashville airport as Boone is to Tri Cities (Hickory is only an hour away for charter flights) and Jonesboro to Memphis. Every place else is about a wash.

I'll grant you hoops is a tad better in CUSA, but realignment is driven by football. FAU, FIU (which I'm glad are no longer in the SB), WKU & MTSU jumped without looking down the road. Everyone with 1/2 a brain knew the landscape and the parameters were in the process of changing. It now appears to have been a very short sighted decision on their part.

Talk about travel for these fans to the five closest conf schools:
ODU:
Charlotte 5 hr, Marshall 7 hr, MTSU 11 hr, WKU 12 hr, FAU & FIU 14 hr.

App:
Ga State 5 hr, Ga Sou 5 hr, Troy 8 hr, S Ala 9 1/2 hr, Jonesboro 10 hr.

Both of these conferences have their advantages and disadvantages. CUSA retains a few advantages that they inherited from old CUSA...some of those do have a sell-by date some may have a sell-by date.

It is too early to tell how it will ultimately shake out. It could go either way...or we could end up with parity.

Either way both conferences have plenty to work on.

(07-25-2014 10:37 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:56 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:22 AM)DoubleAggie Wrote:  I understand that many of existing C-USA were former Sun Belt institutions.
But, honestly, I can't even begin to name the schools because most of them don't matter.

C-USA is largely irrelevant.

I know their fans would say the same thing about the Sun Belt,
but if it's a choice between watching a C-USA game and pet videos on YouTube,
I'm still goin' pet videos.

I suppose CUSA claims superiority over the SunBelt due to 4 of their schools (La Tech, Rice, S Miss & UTEP) being long time 1-A/ FBS programs. But when you look at the rest of the members the conference is made up of 1-AA move ups (UAB 1996, Marshall 1997, MTSU 1999, WKU 2010) and four schools who didn't have a program prior to the late 1990's (FAU FIU, ODU and UNCC). Hardly any difference from the SunBelt.

One has to think the fans at Rice have to be wondering what happened. In the mid 90's the Owls were in the Southwest Conference filling up a 70,000 seat stadium playing people like Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas.

This is why I don't worry too much about which conference my school is in when it comes ot our peers. I've been to the campuses of La. Tech and USM and they do not have superior facilities to my school or most of the SBC. We've found that the right coaches are out there as well. We can get the players and compete with those schools for recruits now. You can elevate your program equally in either conference. I don't really care about the patch on the sleeve and its former meaning.

For the longest time The biggest difference between cusa and SBC were facilities and coaches salaries. That gap is no longer there and if SBC schools keep upgrading facilities and improving salaries there will be a gap in our favor eventually.

(07-25-2014 02:38 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Both of these conferences have their advantages and disadvantages. CUSA retains a few advantages that they inherited from old CUSA...some of those do have a sell-by date some may have a sell-by date.

It is too early to tell how it will ultimately shake out. It could go either way...or we could end up with parity.

Either way both conferences have plenty to work on.

The better the individual programs are, the stronger the conference...the conference doesn't make the teams, the teams make the conference. Not mant cusa teams will make a concerted effort to schedule former SBC members...on the field is most telling when you talk about who's better. We'll just keep hammering uab since no other cusa team wants to play us.

(07-25-2014 02:36 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:47 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 08:56 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  I suppose CUSA claims superiority over the SunBelt due to 4 of their schools (La Tech, Rice, S Miss & UTEP) being long time 1-A/ FBS programs. But when you look at the rest of the members the conference is made up of 1-AA move ups (UAB 1996, Marshall 1997, MTSU 1999, WKU 2010) and four schools who didn't have a program prior to the late 1990's (FAU FIU, ODU and UNCC). Hardly any difference from the SunBelt.

One has to think the fans at Rice have to be wondering what happened. In the mid 90's the Owls were in the Southwest Conference filling up a 70,000 seat stadium playing people like Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas.

They claim superiority because by most of the measurable we use to compare conferences, they are.

They chose to focus on factors other than football in determining who to select.

Problem going forward is under the new post season format those conferences that added good football teams, and lost bad ones may have an advantage, over them. That is all the other 4 G5 Conferences.

Most are now saying that the gap in measurable's between the SBC and CUSA will continue to close and close rapidly.

Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

CUSA has 6 Bowl Game options (Bahamas, Boca Raton, Heart of Dallas, Hawaii, Independence & New Mexico), ditto for the SunBelt (Bahamas, Camelia, Cure, Go Daddy, Miami Beach, New Orleans).

The point is there won't be more TV exposure for CUSA when the next contract is announced. Easier travel? WKU is just as far from the Nashville airport as Boone is to Tri Cities (Hickory is only an hour away for charter flights) and Jonesboro to Memphis. Every place else is about a wash.

I'll grant you hoops is a tad better in CUSA, but realignment is driven by football. FAU, FIU (which I'm glad are no longer in the SB), WKU & MTSU jumped without looking down the road. Everyone with 1/2 a brain knew the landscape and the parameters were in the process of changing. It now appears to have been a very short sighted decision on their part.

Talk about travel for these fans to the five closest conf schools:
ODU:
Charlotte 5 hr, Marshall 7 hr, MTSU 11 hr, WKU 12 hr, FAU & FIU 14 hr.

App:
Ga State 5 hr, Ga Sou 5 hr, Troy 8 hr, S Ala 9 1/2 hr, Jonesboro 10 hr.

What are you talking about? You guys over here are still having this conversation? Why is an APp Fan who just move up to FBS a few days ago and jointed the conf. 25 days ago telling WKU fans why this was the wrong decision? Maybe you should write our president since you obviously know way more than our admin. does about conferences and what is good for WKU moving forward...25 days later and we are doomed :.... You don't have a clue and showed as much with your comment about Nashville and flights...Most of the time WKU has charter flights straight out of Bowling Green's airport and if they do go to Nashville for flights, its about a 50 min. drive....

I am glad 25 days after we left Sun Belt an App fan tells us we made the wrong move and decision.....This takes the cake on idiotic post of the off season, even more outlandish than Georgia Southern fans talk of 8 or 9 wins this season in football..

We are just fine in CUSA and the production of the media day already light years better than SB.....I think WKU will be ok, don't worry about us, instead worry about your play on the football field and basketball courts this year...

(07-25-2014 03:04 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 02:36 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:47 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  They claim superiority because by most of the measurable we use to compare conferences, they are.

They chose to focus on factors other than football in determining who to select.

Problem going forward is under the new post season format those conferences that added good football teams, and lost bad ones may have an advantage, over them. That is all the other 4 G5 Conferences.

Most are now saying that the gap in measurable's between the SBC and CUSA will continue to close and close rapidly.

Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

CUSA has 6 Bowl Game options (Bahamas, Boca Raton, Heart of Dallas, Hawaii, Independence & New Mexico), ditto for the SunBelt (Bahamas, Camelia, Cure, Go Daddy, Miami Beach, New Orleans).

The point is there won't be more TV exposure for CUSA when the next contract is announced. Easier travel? WKU is just as far from the Nashville airport as Boone is to Tri Cities (Hickory is only an hour away for charter flights) and Jonesboro to Memphis. Every place else is about a wash.

I'll grant you hoops is a tad better in CUSA, but realignment is driven by football. FAU, FIU (which I'm glad are no longer in the SB), WKU & MTSU jumped without looking down the road. Everyone with 1/2 a brain knew the landscape and the parameters were in the process of changing. It now appears to have been a very short sighted decision on their part.

Talk about travel for these fans to the five closest conf schools:
ODU:
Charlotte 5 hr, Marshall 7 hr, MTSU 11 hr, WKU 12 hr, FAU & FIU 14 hr.

App:
Ga State 5 hr, Ga Sou 5 hr, Troy 8 hr, S Ala 9 1/2 hr, Jonesboro 10 hr.

What are you talking about? You guys over here are still having this conversation?

Haha. You guys are on your board comparing our media day backdrop to our media day backdrop.

You should get back to that.

(07-25-2014 03:04 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 02:36 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:47 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  They claim superiority because by most of the measurable we use to compare conferences, they are.

They chose to focus on factors other than football in determining who to select.

Problem going forward is under the new post season format those conferences that added good football teams, and lost bad ones may have an advantage, over them. That is all the other 4 G5 Conferences.

Most are now saying that the gap in measurable's between the SBC and CUSA will continue to close and close rapidly.

Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

CUSA has 6 Bowl Game options (Bahamas, Boca Raton, Heart of Dallas, Hawaii, Independence & New Mexico), ditto for the SunBelt (Bahamas, Camelia, Cure, Go Daddy, Miami Beach, New Orleans).

The point is there won't be more TV exposure for CUSA when the next contract is announced. Easier travel? WKU is just as far from the Nashville airport as Boone is to Tri Cities (Hickory is only an hour away for charter flights) and Jonesboro to Memphis. Every place else is about a wash.

I'll grant you hoops is a tad better in CUSA, but realignment is driven by football. FAU, FIU (which I'm glad are no longer in the SB), WKU & MTSU jumped without looking down the road. Everyone with 1/2 a brain knew the landscape and the parameters were in the process of changing. It now appears to have been a very short sighted decision on their part.

Talk about travel for these fans to the five closest conf schools:
ODU:
Charlotte 5 hr, Marshall 7 hr, MTSU 11 hr, WKU 12 hr, FAU & FIU 14 hr.

App:
Ga State 5 hr, Ga Sou 5 hr, Troy 8 hr, S Ala 9 1/2 hr, Jonesboro 10 hr.

What are you talking about? You guys over here are still having this conversation? Why is an APp Fan who just move up to FBS a few days ago and jointed the conf. 25 days ago telling WKU fans why this was the wrong decision? Maybe you should write our president since you obviously know way more than our admin. does about conferences and what is good for WKU moving forward...25 days later and we are doomed :.... You don't have a clue and showed as much with your comment about Nashville and flights...Most of the time WKU has charter flights straight out of Bowling Green's airport and if they do go to Nashville for flights, its about a 50 min. drive....

I am glad 25 days after we left Sun Belt an App fan tells us we made the wrong move and decision.....This takes the cake on idiotic post of the off season, even more outlandish than Georgia Southern fans talk of 8 or 9 wins this season in football..

We are just fine in CUSA and the production of the media day already light years better than SB.....I think WKU will be ok, don't worry about us, instead worry about your play on the football field and basketball courts this year...

Hey Einstein, provide quotes on this or shut the hell up about it. There may have been 1 or 2 that mentioned a 9 win season, but most everyone is of the mindset 4-8 is our floor, and 8-4 is the ceiling. We even have a survey on our site, and every single serious response (outside of 1) was between 4-8 and 8-4, with most everyone 5-7 - 7-5).

This is our conference now. We won't embarrass the league like the Hilltoppers did upon their entry.

(07-25-2014 03:04 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 02:36 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:47 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  They claim superiority because by most of the measurable we use to compare conferences, they are.

They chose to focus on factors other than football in determining who to select.

Problem going forward is under the new post season format those conferences that added good football teams, and lost bad ones may have an advantage, over them. That is all the other 4 G5 Conferences.

Most are now saying that the gap in measurable's between the SBC and CUSA will continue to close and close rapidly.

Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

CUSA has 6 Bowl Game options (Bahamas, Boca Raton, Heart of Dallas, Hawaii, Independence & New Mexico), ditto for the SunBelt (Bahamas, Camelia, Cure, Go Daddy, Miami Beach, New Orleans).

The point is there won't be more TV exposure for CUSA when the next contract is announced. Easier travel? WKU is just as far from the Nashville airport as Boone is to Tri Cities (Hickory is only an hour away for charter flights) and Jonesboro to Memphis. Every place else is about a wash.

I'll grant you hoops is a tad better in CUSA, but realignment is driven by football. FAU, FIU (which I'm glad are no longer in the SB), WKU & MTSU jumped without looking down the road. Everyone with 1/2 a brain knew the landscape and the parameters were in the process of changing. It now appears to have been a very short sighted decision on their part.

Talk about travel for these fans to the five closest conf schools:
ODU:
Charlotte 5 hr, Marshall 7 hr, MTSU 11 hr, WKU 12 hr, FAU & FIU 14 hr.

App:
Ga State 5 hr, Ga Sou 5 hr, Troy 8 hr, S Ala 9 1/2 hr, Jonesboro 10 hr.

What are you talking about? You guys over here are still having this conversation? Why is an APp Fan who just move up to FBS a few days ago and jointed the conf. 25 days ago telling WKU fans why this was the wrong decision? Maybe you should write our president since you obviously know way more than our admin. does about conferences and what is good for WKU moving forward...25 days later and we are doomed :.... You don't have a clue and showed as much with your comment about Nashville and flights...Most of the time WKU has charter flights straight out of Bowling Green's airport and if they do go to Nashville for flights, its about a 50 min. drive....

I am glad 25 days after we left Sun Belt an App fan tells us we made the wrong move and decision.....This takes the cake on idiotic post of the off season, even more outlandish than Georgia Southern fans talk of 8 or 9 wins this season in football..

We are just fine in CUSA and the production of the media day already light years better than SB.....I think WKU will be ok, don't worry about us, instead worry about your play on the football field and basketball courts this year...

Has zero to do with on-field winning. That said, congrats and enjoy cusa

Its just really amusing hearing from a fan that has been in the conference 25 days saying WKU has made a mistake and list reasons that do not make any sense and have nothing to do with the 50 other reasons WKU Joined a new conf. after 32 years....

Will for sure keep my entertainment value up reading countless threads about this I am sure the next 5 years....

(07-25-2014 01:49 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  UNT made sense because this whole weird Texas thing about playing other Texas school can correspond to an attendance increase. Again, the same cannot be assured for a future SBC team moving up.

Weird? WEIRD????

It's smart. Most of our students have friends that went to other Texas schools. It creates interest in the games when you can talk to your friends about it.

It reduces travel, and let's be real... Texas travel might as well be to another state. While a 3 hour drive for most (not all, but most) schools in the Sun Belt mean a new state, to us, it means Dallas or Houston. It's as far from El Paso to Houston as it is from Houston to Florida.

Plus... Well, we think we're better than everyone else because we're Texans. It's ingrained in us since birth.

After reflecting on it some and doing some logical thinking, I wouldn't want to be in CUSA because then basically half the state is Texas teams. That limits exposure, which is the whole purpose of moving up... To gain additional exposure for the university.

But I'd 100 times over rather have at least ONE other Texas team in the conference (no offense UTA, you guys don't count cause of no football).

(07-25-2014 03:23 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  Its just really amusing hearing from a fan that has been in the conference 25 days saying WKU has made a mistake and list reasons that do not make any sense and have nothing to do with the 50 other reasons WKU Joined a new conf. after 32 years....

Will for sure keep my entertainment value up reading countless threads about this I am sure the next 5 years....

Ok...your school made the best decision for you guys...got it.

(07-25-2014 02:26 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:49 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:47 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  They claim superiority because by most of the measurable we use to compare conferences, they are.

They chose to focus on factors other than football in determining who to select.

Problem going forward is under the new post season format those conferences that added good football teams, and lost bad ones may have an advantage, over them. That is all the other 4 G5 Conferences.

Most are now saying that the gap in measurable's between the SBC and CUSA will continue to close and close rapidly.

Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

I don't know about all that you said, but I do agree that for MTSU and WKU the deal works out fine because they'll get a couple years profit off of the original CUSA TV Contract.

For a comparison. Looking at how much those two spent to complete their move up, including MTSU's exit fee from the SBC, they'll be able to make that money up with just 2 years under the original CUSA TV Deal.

However, once that deal declines as expected in a couple years, a similar SBC team might need 5 or 6 years in CUSA to make up for the costs of moving. (Assuming no major donation increases)

UNT made sense because this whole weird Texas thing about playing other Texas school can correspond to an attendance increase. Again, the same cannot be assured for a future SBC team moving up.

Moving up to CUSA because of basketball is a cop out, because once all the Memphis NCAA money runs out, the league is going to end up making similar cash to the SBC off NCAA Units overall. Right now both leagues are 1 bid leagues with a chance at earning 2 bids. The only thing I guess I could see for WKU would be a slight attendance bump from getting some basketball savy schools to town...but the numbers would be far from significant enough to make a real difference overall.

I think CUSA has enough talent this year to be a 3 bid league, but it will ultimately come down to scheduling. Many CUSA schools do a piss poor job scheduling OOC games.

And I do agree with most of what you said. Moving to CUSA NOW would make 0 sense, but at the time it did for all involved and I don't think any that moved will regret the move.

UNT gets Texas schools to play. WKU and MT get to be with other programs that place a high value on basketball.

The only schools that will probably see no benefit from the move is FAU and FIU. CUSA schools are going to be no greater draw than SBC schools were and they're probably going to be near the bottom of the totem pole most years for national television exposure in the conference.

Moving conferences for all the other schools made sense for one reason or another.

Agree, and most appear to be very good fits for CUSA, and it helped the SBC be the top non-aq last year so they made money to boot.

(07-25-2014 03:27 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 02:26 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:49 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

I don't know about all that you said, but I do agree that for MTSU and WKU the deal works out fine because they'll get a couple years profit off of the original CUSA TV Contract.

For a comparison. Looking at how much those two spent to complete their move up, including MTSU's exit fee from the SBC, they'll be able to make that money up with just 2 years under the original CUSA TV Deal.

However, once that deal declines as expected in a couple years, a similar SBC team might need 5 or 6 years in CUSA to make up for the costs of moving. (Assuming no major donation increases)

UNT made sense because this whole weird Texas thing about playing other Texas school can correspond to an attendance increase. Again, the same cannot be assured for a future SBC team moving up.

Moving up to CUSA because of basketball is a cop out, because once all the Memphis NCAA money runs out, the league is going to end up making similar cash to the SBC off NCAA Units overall. Right now both leagues are 1 bid leagues with a chance at earning 2 bids. The only thing I guess I could see for WKU would be a slight attendance bump from getting some basketball savy schools to town...but the numbers would be far from significant enough to make a real difference overall.

I think CUSA has enough talent this year to be a 3 bid league, but it will ultimately come down to scheduling. Many CUSA schools do a piss poor job scheduling OOC games.

And I do agree with most of what you said. Moving to CUSA NOW would make 0 sense, but at the time it did for all involved and I don't think any that moved will regret the move.

UNT gets Texas schools to play. WKU and MT get to be with other programs that place a high value on basketball.

The only schools that will probably see no benefit from the move is FAU and FIU. CUSA schools are going to be no greater draw than SBC schools were and they're probably going to be near the bottom of the totem pole most years for national television exposure in the conference.

Moving conferences for all the other schools made sense for one reason or another.

Agree, and most appear to be very good fits for CUSA, and it helped the SBC be the top non-aq last year so they made money to boot.

Also resulted in SBC taking Idaho and NMSU along with 2 move ups

(07-25-2014 03:27 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 02:26 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:49 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:22 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Please enlighten us on what are those measurables and factors are. While you're at it, who exactly is "we"? I seriously doubt YOU have anything to do with determining who candidates are.

If one of your measurables is market you can toss that out the window because it has been clearly shown not to be a factor in determining the success of a program or how many fans it draws to games. When the next TV contracts come out CUSA members are in for a shock. I'm willing to bet more than a few will wish they had stayed right where they were.

Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

I don't know about all that you said, but I do agree that for MTSU and WKU the deal works out fine because they'll get a couple years profit off of the original CUSA TV Contract.

For a comparison. Looking at how much those two spent to complete their move up, including MTSU's exit fee from the SBC, they'll be able to make that money up with just 2 years under the original CUSA TV Deal.

However, once that deal declines as expected in a couple years, a similar SBC team might need 5 or 6 years in CUSA to make up for the costs of moving. (Assuming no major donation increases)

UNT made sense because this whole weird Texas thing about playing other Texas school can correspond to an attendance increase. Again, the same cannot be assured for a future SBC team moving up.

Moving up to CUSA because of basketball is a cop out, because once all the Memphis NCAA money runs out, the league is going to end up making similar cash to the SBC off NCAA Units overall. Right now both leagues are 1 bid leagues with a chance at earning 2 bids. The only thing I guess I could see for WKU would be a slight attendance bump from getting some basketball savy schools to town...but the numbers would be far from significant enough to make a real difference overall.

I think CUSA has enough talent this year to be a 3 bid league, but it will ultimately come down to scheduling. Many CUSA schools do a piss poor job scheduling OOC games.

And I do agree with most of what you said. Moving to CUSA NOW would make 0 sense, but at the time it did for all involved and I don't think any that moved will regret the move.

UNT gets Texas schools to play. WKU and MT get to be with other programs that place a high value on basketball.

The only schools that will probably see no benefit from the move is FAU and FIU. CUSA schools are going to be no greater draw than SBC schools were and they're probably going to be near the bottom of the totem pole most years for national television exposure in the conference.

Moving conferences for all the other schools made sense for one reason or another.

Agree, and most appear to be very good fits for CUSA, and it helped the SBC be the top non-aq last year so they made money to boot.

SBC won't be sniffing best G5 conference again. Neither will CUSA just so I'm being fair.

That will go to the AAC or MWC 90% of the time.

SBC benefited from having lost some anchors last year with the Florida schools gone and being a very small conference, but it added three more and two moveups that I don't think will be anchors, but could be.

(07-25-2014 03:24 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:49 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  UNT made sense because this whole weird Texas thing about playing other Texas school can correspond to an attendance increase. Again, the same cannot be assured for a future SBC team moving up.

Weird? WEIRD????

It's smart. Most of our students have friends that went to other Texas schools. It creates interest in the games when you can talk to your friends about it.

It reduces travel, and let's be real... Texas travel might as well be to another state. While a 3 hour drive for most (not all, but most) schools in the Sun Belt mean a new state, to us, it means Dallas or Houston. It's as far from El Paso to Houston as it is from Houston to Florida.

Plus... Well, we think we're better than everyone else because we're Texans. It's ingrained in us since birth.

After reflecting on it some and doing some logical thinking, I wouldn't want to be in CUSA because then basically half the state is Texas teams. That limits exposure, which is the whole purpose of moving up... To gain additional exposure for the university.

But I'd 100 times over rather have at least ONE other Texas team in the conference (no offense UTA, you guys don't count cause of no football).

Its weird to us. In Arkansas it is a completely foreign concept for schools to play each other.

I enjoy playing UCA and UALR OOC because it provides with close games that I can attend and saves cost. But I'd never want to share a conference with UCA...we're superior.

(07-25-2014 03:36 PM)GeauxUL Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 03:27 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 02:26 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:49 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:40 PM)Niner National Wrote:  Why? At worst, CUSA's new television contract will be the same as the SBC's.

Throw in the fact that the schools that joined CUSA first from the latest round of realignment get 5 years of $1 million per year media payments (AAC schools that left have to pay the conference for 2 years after current Fox Sports/CBS contract is up if the new contract is for less).

Throw in more bowl options, easier/cheaper travel (most schools in CUSA are very close to major airports), more exposure on television, and better basketball and I can't imagine any school would want to go back.

Schools like MT and WKU care about more than just football, so CUSA is a far better fit for them.

I don't know about all that you said, but I do agree that for MTSU and WKU the deal works out fine because they'll get a couple years profit off of the original CUSA TV Contract.

For a comparison. Looking at how much those two spent to complete their move up, including MTSU's exit fee from the SBC, they'll be able to make that money up with just 2 years under the original CUSA TV Deal.

However, once that deal declines as expected in a couple years, a similar SBC team might need 5 or 6 years in CUSA to make up for the costs of moving. (Assuming no major donation increases)

UNT made sense because this whole weird Texas thing about playing other Texas school can correspond to an attendance increase. Again, the same cannot be assured for a future SBC team moving up.

Moving up to CUSA because of basketball is a cop out, because once all the Memphis NCAA money runs out, the league is going to end up making similar cash to the SBC off NCAA Units overall. Right now both leagues are 1 bid leagues with a chance at earning 2 bids. The only thing I guess I could see for WKU would be a slight attendance bump from getting some basketball savy schools to town...but the numbers would be far from significant enough to make a real difference overall.

I think CUSA has enough talent this year to be a 3 bid league, but it will ultimately come down to scheduling. Many CUSA schools do a piss poor job scheduling OOC games.

And I do agree with most of what you said. Moving to CUSA NOW would make 0 sense, but at the time it did for all involved and I don't think any that moved will regret the move.

UNT gets Texas schools to play. WKU and MT get to be with other programs that place a high value on basketball.

The only schools that will probably see no benefit from the move is FAU and FIU. CUSA schools are going to be no greater draw than SBC schools were and they're probably going to be near the bottom of the totem pole most years for national television exposure in the conference.

Moving conferences for all the other schools made sense for one reason or another.

Agree, and most appear to be very good fits for CUSA, and it helped the SBC be the top non-aq last year so they made money to boot.

Also resulted in SBC taking Idaho and NMSU along with 2 move ups

App and GSU were smart moves that will help us a ton in the future. NMSU would be smart in All Sports because it improves the basketball quality of the league.

Idaho is a means to an end whose membership will probably ultimately be dependent on whether or not Missouri State is interested in FBS.