(11-29-2014 10:20 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 10:02 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  We have 4 bowls for 11 teams next year and CUSA has 5 for 14. Not a big difference. WKU is guaranteed a spot this year because most of CUSA is ineligible.

We also have two ineligible this year. Next year will be more painful.

Three technically, Idaho wasn't eligible either because of APR. It just never was going to be an issue.

We're limited in bowls because we're not to the point that we've averaged 5 bowl eligible teams over a long enough period to sign an extra bowl.

(11-29-2014 11:49 AM)OsageJ Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 11:45 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 11:29 AM)Tiguar Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 10:50 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 10:18 AM)DrGonzo Wrote:  WK did more for the Belt yesterday than they ever did as a member. I'm grateful.

sure....if you ignore all the basketball credits from western wins in the ncaa tourney. our last sweet 16 alone will have brought in more MONEY....actual money....than you'll bring to the sunbelt in the next 5 years of football.

edit: i forgot you'll be in one of the big bowls next year. i take it back.

How many of these were from at-large bids and not just the autobid anyone would have gotten? Just curious.

they weren't at-large. but they were actual wins in the tourney. you're gonna get the same amount every year for your appearance. but we won 2 games one year making it to the sweet 16 and one game the next losing to gonzaga at the buzzer to keep from going to another sweet 16. those payouts are better. and last for awhile. i'm not sure if the payout from winning the pig game was more than just losing in the first round or not. but it was a win.

not sure who has actually won a game in the ncaa tourney other than us for awhile. those are real dollars made. and paid out.

you can't convince me that any of the schools make money from the big lots bowls. yeah....it's a reward.....we all love them. but actual money made. i don't believe it.

i just reacted to a very common and flippant attitude.

and beating uk twice while we were in belt in football never hurt the sunbelt. western had some decent out of conference wins the last few year even though we stumbled some in conference play.

You are right about the bowls. About the best you can do is break even. I think that's what we did the first two years...not sure about last year.

but we still like them. lol. i couldn't go to our first bowl in detroit because of work.

i retire on 12/26 of this year. i think i'll be able to make this one if we get picked.

(11-29-2014 10:20 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 10:02 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  We have 4 bowls for 11 teams next year and CUSA has 5 for 14. Not a big difference. WKU is guaranteed a spot this year because most of CUSA is ineligible.

We also have two ineligible this year. Next year will be more painful.

This year a larger number teams of bowl were eligible than would normally be the case because of huge problems at the lower end of the conference.

We had 5 teams that lost every single game they played versus the other 6. Last year, we had no dominant teams and one awful team resulting in a lot of bowl eligible teams.

There's no guarantee that next year will be the same. There are more bowl games now. There will be even more of them next year. We will probably have this worry again next year, but only for 6-6 qualifiers.

(11-29-2014 09:45 AM)zeebart21 Wrote:  WKU got jobbed last year. I pull for them in everything that they do. I have made some really solid WKU friends over the years and I wish them well. UL will bolt in a heartbeat if asked.

Not because we dislike the Belt, but because perception is reality. Unfortunately, even though a few Belt teams have athletic programs that are much better than most in CUSA, we are still looked down upon.

Z

Wish we we would have had the opportunity as well.

Man, I miss that WKU - UL basketball rivalry, every other series in the Belt now is just a second rate knock off.

I really think going forward to next year the Belt will have at least 5 bowl eligible teams every year and 6 in some years. This year if App and Ga. Southern were eligible we would have 6.

My goal for the conference is to make sure every 7-5 team or better goes bowling. If we can get 6-6 teams to bowls that is icing. So I guess this year worked as we likely will have 3 7-5 or better teams and we have 3 bowls.

If the 7-5 standard was used and GS and App were part of it I think we will end up with 5 7-5 or better teams this year plus USA at 6-6.

(11-29-2014 12:12 PM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 11:49 AM)OsageJ Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 11:45 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 11:29 AM)Tiguar Wrote:  

(11-29-2014 10:50 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  sure....if you ignore all the basketball credits from western wins in the ncaa tourney. our last sweet 16 alone will have brought in more MONEY....actual money....than you'll bring to the sunbelt in the next 5 years of football.

edit: i forgot you'll be in one of the big bowls next year. i take it back.

How many of these were from at-large bids and not just the autobid anyone would have gotten? Just curious.

they weren't at-large. but they were actual wins in the tourney. you're gonna get the same amount every year for your appearance. but we won 2 games one year making it to the sweet 16 and one game the next losing to gonzaga at the buzzer to keep from going to another sweet 16. those payouts are better. and last for awhile. i'm not sure if the payout from winning the pig game was more than just losing in the first round or not. but it was a win.

not sure who has actually won a game in the ncaa tourney other than us for awhile. those are real dollars made. and paid out.

you can't convince me that any of the schools make money from the big lots bowls. yeah....it's a reward.....we all love them. but actual money made. i don't believe it.

i just reacted to a very common and flippant attitude.

and beating uk twice while we were in belt in football never hurt the sunbelt. western had some decent out of conference wins the last few year even though we stumbled some in conference play.

You are right about the bowls. About the best you can do is break even. I think that's what we did the first two years...not sure about last year.

but we still like them. lol. i couldn't go to our first bowl in detroit because of work.

i retire on 12/26 of this year. i think i'll be able to make this one if we get picked.

We sure do miss other member schools that actually contribute to the financial success of the conference as well (ex. WKU's NCAA tourney credits that mean a serious annuity payout to the conference).

Wish we could get NMSU in basketball and get the other SBC members serious about being successful in all sports. Ughh - SBC member life problems suck!

(11-29-2014 11:45 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  they weren't at-large. but they were actual wins in the tourney. you're gonna get the same amount every year for your appearance. but we won 2 games one year making it to the sweet 16 and one game the next losing to gonzaga at the buzzer to keep from going to another sweet 16. those payouts are better. and last for awhile. i'm not sure if the payout from winning the pig game was more than just losing in the first round or not. but it was a win.

not sure who has actually won a game in the ncaa tourney other than us for awhile. those are real dollars made. and paid out.

you can't convince me that any of the schools make money from the big lots bowls. yeah....it's a reward.....we all love them. but actual money made. i don't believe it.

i just reacted to a very common and flippant attitude.

and beating uk twice while we were in belt in football never hurt the sunbelt. western had some decent out of conference wins the last few year even though we stumbled some in conference play.

Thanks. Was just wondering.

Anyway, schools may not make money from bowls but they help the program and exposure tremendously. Better than paying to go to some CBI tourney no one GAS about in basketball, which is probably what it's comparable to.

both conferences will have teams setting home this season, but CUSA does reward the better percentage team in front of a 6-6

(11-29-2014 07:07 AM)galojah Wrote:  I Hope you all know me well enough to know I'm not trolling. But as a Topper fan this season's ending is much different now that we are in CUSA.

This time last year we were 8-4 and watching every scenario of games to find our path to a bowl game only to be left out. At 8-4! Three years ago at 7-5 we sat home.

Today, at 7-5 we are insured a bowl game. No list of scenarios and rooting for this team and that team hoping the math will go in our favor.

I hope the SBC gets more bowl contracts. I also hope the conference will write some rules to reward your top teams.

http://m.bgdailynews.com/sports/wku/tops...l?mode=jqm

(11-29-2014 09:45 AM)zeebart21 Wrote:  WKU got jobbed last year. I pull for them in everything that they do. I have made some really solid WKU friends over the years and I wish them well. UL will bolt in a heartbeat if asked.

Not because we dislike the Belt, but because perception is reality. Unfortunately, even though a few Belt teams have athletic programs that are much better than most in CUSA, we are still looked down upon.

Z

It has been proven that the core members of the Sun Belt will not stay together long enough to allow the conference to rise above bottom feeder status. It's discouraging to build relationships over a period of many years, only to find them suddenly off the schedule.

(11-29-2014 02:47 PM)wkuhilltopperfan Wrote:  both conferences will have teams setting home this season, but CUSA does reward the better percentage team in front of a 6-6

Not sure that is the case this year for the Sun Belt.

Now, I'm not counting Georgia Southern nor App State, as they aren't eligible... But if they were, then yes, we would have folks sitting home.

I wish WKU had stayed.... GS owes you for 2002. ;-)