(12-29-2014 05:32 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  Let's just drop the Sunbelt to two teams, the Cajuns and Ga Southern. They can duke it out every weekend once OOC is over. Last man standing in the series wins the conference.

But... who gets the asterisk for conference champion?

(12-29-2014 06:04 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 05:32 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  Let's just drop the Sunbelt to two teams, the Cajuns and Ga Southern. They can duke it out every weekend once OOC is over. Last man standing in the series wins the conference.

But... who gets the asterisk for conference champion?

Actually, both*

*did not play ASU (insert stAte or AppState, your preference)

(12-29-2014 04:49 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 04:42 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  NMSU has a leg up on most trying to go indy as long as UNM and UTEP continue to schedule. That leaves just four slots to fill at home and there is likely always going to be someone who would do a home/neutral site series. That would leave three home slots.

Not easy but not impossible.

The bigger burden is recruiting when everyone you recruit against is going to point out that no amount of winning guarantees a shot at a bowl.

Only BYU, Navy and Notre Dame can make it as Independents into bowls.

Yup... Troy was 7-5 in 2002 or 2003 as a independent... Do you think we went bowling? Nope.

Kicking out NMSU (along with Idaho) makes sense because Lafayette would be the Aggies' closest conference mate in 2018. Texas State will be in the MWC or CUSA by then. [/font]

I'm not dismissing this, but 2017 is a long way off.
While things have been kinda quiet regarding realignment,
I'm guessing that will change, especially with the Big12 getting shut out of the playoff and embarrassed this post season, CUSA losing UAB, schools in financial crisis, etc. Should the Belt lose a school, I suspect the advice might change.

I believe you heard this from a trusted source, but it's hard to put much validity in it until we hear it publicly.

Is it possible that a full invite has been extended to NMSU, but they haven't accepted because of their favorable western geographic footprint in the WAC for all other sports?

(12-29-2014 11:09 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote:  Is it possible that a full invite has been extended to NMSU, but they haven't accepted because of their favorable western geographic footprint in the WAC for all other sports?

Now there's an interesting thought . . . . . And if true, could explain Belt Ad's giving NMSU a deadline by which to be out. Any way to confirm any of this? You know something the rest of us don't?

(12-29-2014 11:13 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:09 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote:  Is it possible that a full invite has been extended to NMSU, but they haven't accepted because of their favorable western geographic footprint in the WAC for all other sports?

Now there's an interesting thought . . . . . And if true, could explain Belt Ad's giving NMSU a deadline by which to be out. Any way to confirm any of this? You know something the rest of us don't?

That would be contrary to what NMSU's AD said last year (I believe it was last year) when he said he wanted all sports in a single conference.

(12-29-2014 11:18 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:13 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:09 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote:  Is it possible that a full invite has been extended to NMSU, but they haven't accepted because of their favorable western geographic footprint in the WAC for all other sports?

Now there's an interesting thought . . . . . And if true, could explain Belt Ad's giving NMSU a deadline by which to be out. Any way to confirm any of this? You know something the rest of us don't?

That would be contrary to what NMSU's AD said last year (I believe it was last year) when he said he wanted all sports in a single conference.

That's what our outgoing AD said. Our new one starts next week. I know our president wants us out of the WAC. I would expect the AD to working on it. The WAC is no longer regional as some may think. Seattle WA (Seattle), Bakersfield CA (CSUB), Phoenix AZ (GCU), Orem Utah (UVU), Las Cruces NM (NMSU), Edinburg TX (UTPA), Kansas City MO (UMKC), Chicago IL (CST). 8 schools in 8 states. The conference is unstable, they can't agree on where to hold championships. Also from an academic perspective there are certain WAC schools NMSU does not want to be associated with. None of the schools are our peers Academically. I know the Academic issue is big with our president.

(12-30-2014 01:22 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:18 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:13 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:09 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote:  Is it possible that a full invite has been extended to NMSU, but they haven't accepted because of their favorable western geographic footprint in the WAC for all other sports?

Now there's an interesting thought . . . . . And if true, could explain Belt Ad's giving NMSU a deadline by which to be out. Any way to confirm any of this? You know something the rest of us don't?

That would be contrary to what NMSU's AD said last year (I believe it was last year) when he said he wanted all sports in a single conference.

That's what our outgoing AD said. Our new one starts next week. I know our president wants us out of the WAC. I would expect the AD to working on it. The WAC is no longer regional as some may think. Seattle WA (Seattle), Bakersfield CA (CSUB), Phoenix AZ (GCU), Orem Utah (UVU), Las Cruces NM (NMSU), Edinburg TX (UTPA), Kansas City MO (UMKC), Chicago IL (CST). 8 schools in 8 states. The conference is unstable, they can't agree on where to hold championships. Also from an academic perspective there are certain WAC schools NMSU does not want to be associated with. None of the schools are our peers Academically. I know the Academic issue is big with our president.

Would you happen to know then, if NMSU is actively pursuing full membership in the Sun Belt? I know that many on this board, not that we have a say in anything, would love to have you in all sports . .

(12-30-2014 01:32 AM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(12-30-2014 01:22 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:18 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:13 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:09 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote:  Is it possible that a full invite has been extended to NMSU, but they haven't accepted because of their favorable western geographic footprint in the WAC for all other sports?

Now there's an interesting thought . . . . . And if true, could explain Belt Ad's giving NMSU a deadline by which to be out. Any way to confirm any of this? You know something the rest of us don't?

That would be contrary to what NMSU's AD said last year (I believe it was last year) when he said he wanted all sports in a single conference.

That's what our outgoing AD said. Our new one starts next week. I know our president wants us out of the WAC. I would expect the AD to working on it. The WAC is no longer regional as some may think. Seattle WA (Seattle), Bakersfield CA (CSUB), Phoenix AZ (GCU), Orem Utah (UVU), Las Cruces NM (NMSU), Edinburg TX (UTPA), Kansas City MO (UMKC), Chicago IL (CST). 8 schools in 8 states. The conference is unstable, they can't agree on where to hold championships. Also from an academic perspective there are certain WAC schools NMSU does not want to be associated with. None of the schools are our peers Academically. I know the Academic issue is big with our president.

Would you happen to know then, if NMSU is actively pursuing full membership in the Sun Belt? I know that many on this board, not that we have a say in anything, would love to have you in all sports . .

I really don't know. The last time anything really concrete was mentioned about pursuing membership into the SBC was over a year ago. Benson visited during a FB game and told NMSU it was not being looked at for full membership. It was my understanding that NMSU backed off the SBC. In an interview by Benson with the local paper in Las Cruces at the start of Football season this year, he said it was not ideal for the SBC to have football only members, he wants full members in the SBC. NMSU could be in discussions with other AD's in the SBC. I can say NMSU has had discussions with other conferences on behalf of it's oly sports. One of the objectives our new AD has been tasked with is finding NMSU a home for all sports, more specifically a stable conference for the oly sports. Right now NMSU is more worried about the WAC losing another member.

The end of the world may not have happened in 2012, but it sure felkt like that for NMSU athletically. Since the spring of 2012 I do not think anyone in NMSU's Athletic Department has slept well.

(12-30-2014 02:03 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(12-30-2014 01:32 AM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(12-30-2014 01:22 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:18 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 11:13 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  Now there's an interesting thought . . . . . And if true, could explain Belt Ad's giving NMSU a deadline by which to be out. Any way to confirm any of this? You know something the rest of us don't?

That would be contrary to what NMSU's AD said last year (I believe it was last year) when he said he wanted all sports in a single conference.

That's what our outgoing AD said. Our new one starts next week. I know our president wants us out of the WAC. I would expect the AD to working on it. The WAC is no longer regional as some may think. Seattle WA (Seattle), Bakersfield CA (CSUB), Phoenix AZ (GCU), Orem Utah (UVU), Las Cruces NM (NMSU), Edinburg TX (UTPA), Kansas City MO (UMKC), Chicago IL (CST). 8 schools in 8 states. The conference is unstable, they can't agree on where to hold championships. Also from an academic perspective there are certain WAC schools NMSU does not want to be associated with. None of the schools are our peers Academically. I know the Academic issue is big with our president.

Would you happen to know then, if NMSU is actively pursuing full membership in the Sun Belt? I know that many on this board, not that we have a say in anything, would love to have you in all sports . .

I really don't know. The last time anything really concrete was mentioned about pursuing membership into the SBC was over a year ago. Benson visited during a FB game and told NMSU it was not being looked at for full membership. It was my understanding that NMSU backed off the SBC. In an interview by Benson with the local paper in Las Cruces at the start of Football season this year, he said it was not ideal for the SBC to have football only members, he wants full members in the SBC. NMSU could be in discussions with other AD's in the SBC. I can say NMSU has had discussions with other conferences on behalf of it's oly sports. One of the objectives our new AD has been tasked with is finding NMSU a home for all sports, more specifically a stable conference for the oly sports. Right now NMSU is more worried about the WAC losing another member.

The end of the world may not have happened in 2012, but it sure felkt like that for NMSU athletically. Since the spring of 2012 I do not think anyone in NMSU's Athletic Department has slept well.

I hope that things work out for you in the Belt (all sports). And if NOT the Belt, then I hope you find a conference for all sports. I understand your feelings about the WAC .. Still remember when the conference imploded for Football. Sucks to be in a sort of "athletic limbo." GO AGGIES!

(12-29-2014 02:57 PM)AceEagle Wrote:  

(12-29-2014 02:52 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  NMSU DC is retiring and the OC is expected to take a HC job at a D2 school. The revolving door of assistants continues at NMSU.

On a side note its been mentioned that some of the SBC ADs have already informed our new AD that NMSU will need to look elsewhere after 2017. At least we have plenty of time to put together a Indy schedule for 2018.

Interesting... If NMSU & Idaho supposedly getting the boot that will leave us with 9 schools. Are we going into the direction of MO State, EKU & Liberty by 2018?

I hope not, hopefully you all can turn things around and stay in the belt.

That would such a weak move. NMSU for all sports is a no brainer.

Mr. Peanut must have convinced the ADs that since App St and GS have competed so fast (and TXST and USA) that adding FCS or new programs is the way to quick success.

Sure NMSU and Idaho have been pretty bad but dropping them to add more FCS schools is a really stupid idea.

Pretty sure Benson is in favor of NMSU all sports.

What happens if the SBC has a team leave .

I thought I read somewhere that C-USA could invite USA,UL and ARKANSAS ST and kill the conference.
Because of the amount of time required for seven members to be in the conference.

(12-30-2014 06:49 PM)MJG Wrote:  What happens if the SBC has a team leave .

I thought I read somewhere that C-USA could invite USA,UL and ARKANSAS ST and kill the conference.
Because of the amount of time required for seven members to be in the conference.

You get a grace period that would allow the SBC to catch up

SBC would need to add a full member or three to replace them, but those are not hard to find if the league was desperate enough.

That being said, there is little chance CUSA takes those teams. They are far more likely to take a Texas State or Georgia State.

(12-30-2014 12:11 PM)slycat Wrote:  Sure NMSU and Idaho have been pretty bad but dropping them to add more FCS schools is a really stupid idea.

Ya - this doesn't quite make sense.

Over a year ago the outgoing NMSU AD (Boston) told me we were trying to get an all sports invite to the Sun Belt, but there were just a few presidents we hadn't been able to win over.

I'm sure NMSU would have taken an all-sports invite if it had been offered.

2018 is still a ways off, so a lot can happen, but from a scheduling slant, it is right around the corner.