(03-19-2015 05:17 PM)dude_miner Wrote:  The dissertation thread.

this may be more to your liking

https://twitter.com/

lots of really intelligent and hard hitting factual and relevant discussions going on over there

Need the War and Peace emoticon.

(03-18-2015 08:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 08:41 AM)Art Vandelay Wrote:  How does Rice feel about this? We've been partners in crime for a long time now, it would be nice to keep it that way.

Speaking only for myself, I would rather have UTEP in CUSA than the MWC. I see some kinship for UTEP with the MWC - at least UTEP is in the Mountain time zone. But I think an analysis of travel would show that UTEP is better off in CUSA. Trips to Houston, SA and Denton are better than trips to Boise et al, and the NM rivalries can be continued as OOC. At least the letters behind El Paso are T and X.

I agree, I would rather stay in CUSA with the Texas schools than the MWC. I personally think CUSA is a better football and basketball conference than the MW.

(03-19-2015 05:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 04:33 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 03:16 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  See the bold section---never has happened and never will (and if it ever could happen, its FAR more likely to occur with all 12 in ONE single POWER CONFERENCE than it ever could with 4 in a P5 and the rest in various G5's).

I agree with the mathematics of the teams being in the same conference. Its the only thing you are correct about. Its a zero sum game---for every conference game won there is a loss borne by another conference team. That said---whats the definition of "good"? Bowl qualified?

If its bowl qualified, go 3-1 with a eazy-peezy OOC and the even crappy teams in a conference can get bowl qualified with a sad little 3-5 league record. They can be 2-6 in league play if they sweep an easy OOC and still get a bowl. Use the SEC as an example. They qualify several schools with losing league records for bowls every year.

UH fans are the masters of the strawman argument and masters of ignoring the obvious

1. it would be impossible to have more than a very few good Texas teams in a 12 team conference because as soon as some of those teams sift to the bottom they will lose recruits to top teams in conference and more importantly to top teams out of conference

and the more they sift to the bottom the less likely it is they will draw a recruit from out of state that is decent at any position

and "good" would be a top 25 team and again it is not just a discussion about conferences and good and bad teams it is specific to the number of teams from the same state in the conference in question

2. again you toss out a strawman of P5 VS G5.......and again no matter if you look at P5 or G5 conferences when you view the conference itself and what the 4 teams from the same state do relative to other teams in that conference and relative to each other and sometimes even relative to other teams in different conferences what I am saying holds true

answer this....from 1990 (25 seasons) what team had more success long term.....TCU, Texas Tech or Baylor.....one team in a G5 conference and two teams in a P5 conference.....two teams in a conference with 4 Texas teams and one team that had sustained success once they were in a conference with no other Texas teams

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

TCU was ranked 10 times in 25 seasons and they were ranked in the top 10 four times and 5 times if you average the 11/9 ranking and their highest rank was #2....outside of a P5 conference they were ranked 9 times in 25 seasons and the highest was still #2 and they were on the top 10 3 times or 4 if you average the 9/11 season and they played in two BCS games and won one of them when not in a P5 conference

Texas Tech

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

six times in the top 25, never in the top 10 and highest rank #12

Baylor

ranked 3 times in 25 seasons and one time in the top 10 and played in 1 BCS game and lost it

so when you compare TCU outside of a P5 conference they are better than both Texas Tech and Baylor COMBINED......because TCU was ranked 9 times just like Baylor and Tech COMBINED.....TCU had more top 10 finishes, a higher total finish and TCU had more BCS appearances and more BCS wins

lets compare TCU to Texas A&M as well

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

ranked 12 times, 4 times in the top 10, highest rank was #5 and they had a single BCS loss

so even using your G5 P5 strawman it is clear that TCU in a conference alone with no other Texas teams was able to have a much higher level of success than two P5 teams in a conference with 4 Texas teams and really TCU was as good or really better than A&M as well especially when you look at the later years and when you consider there is an advantage for getting ranked or a BCS game out of a P5 conference

so TCU easily surpassed and was even with (and really better) than 3 out of the 4 Texas teams all in a P5 conference when TCU was in a G5 conference.....not to mention that A&M was able to gain traction and improve WHEN THEY LEFT THE CONFERENCE WITH 4 TEXAS TEAMS

again compare UNC, NCState, Duke and WF to ECU

ECU ranked 2 times in 25 seasons

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

highest rank #9

WF and Duke

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

Duke ranked 1 time in 25 years and highest rank #22

WF

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

ranked 2 times in 25 years highest #17

so ECU in a G5 conference has accomplished basically as much as Duke and WF combined in a P5 conference

ECU ranked 2 times highest #9.....WF and Duke ranked 3 times combined highest #17

so again there is clearly no advantage to Duke and WF playing 3 other NC teams every year and also doing so in a P5 conference and ECU alone in their G5 conference is as good or better on a consistent basis

and NC and NC State are better than ECU overall, but again they are hardly examples of long term sustained success

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

ranked 5 times highest #5 and not ranked since the late 90s

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

NC State ranked 5 times and highest #11


so again even using the P5 G5 strawman what you are claiming does not hold water

only if you look at the California teams does it show where P5 and G5 makes a difference and still it is clear that Cal and Stanford have struggled to sustain long term success and even UCLA has struggled while only USC has done s consistently

cal ranked 4 times in 25 seasons highest #9

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act.../index.php

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

UCLA ranked 7 times highest #5

Stanford

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/act..._polls.php

8 times highest #4

so again from 3 of the 4 California schools in a P5 conference TCU was better than all of them and was better than UCLA and Cal combined

TCU as a G5 team finished higher ranked than any of them did.....had more BCS wins that UCLA and Cal combined and only 1 less BCS win than Stanford

so again there is ample evidence that having too many teams in the same conference in the same state hurts those teams and it clearly provides no benefit

(03-19-2015 03:23 PM)NTXCoog Wrote:  and here i was thinking that 3 > 2. How wrong I was.

But using your logic, the AAC and Sunbelt will become great conferences because they are geographically diverse while CUSA West will fail miserably because of 4 Texas teams. The Big 12 South was pretty bad too with too many TX Teams.

And why didn't UNT succeed more in the Sunbelt when there weren't a ton of TX schools there? Why did they want to join the SWC then CUSA with all of the other TX schools?

3 is not more than over 3.......that is where you are wring, but you knew that you just wanted to try and make a strawman......and again over 2-3 teams means 4 or more.....because 3 = 3......3 is not > 3

and just for your information north Texas state went to 4 bowl games in a row when they were the only team in the Sunbelt (2001 - 2012)from Texas that was more bowl games than the rest of their history combined and it was more bowl games than SMU went to in that same period and time (3)

and Rice went to 3 as well

UH went to 7

but again you are trying to frame an argument I am not making....I am not saying that when you are on your won in a conference that guarantees that you would do better than if you were in a conference with more Texas teams (and specifically 4 or more)....I am simply saying that there is ample evidence that having 4 teams in the same conference from the same state be it a G5 or a P5 and even when you compare some P5 to G5 teams can harm those programs with many teams from the same state in the same conference and there is very clearly no benefit to it

because TCU as a G5 (excluding last year as a P5) was clearly a better team over the last 25 years than Duke, WF, NC State, UNC, Cal, Texas Tech, Baylor and UCLA and they were at least equal to A&M and right there with Stanford.....and that is as a G5 program VS all those P5 teams in 3 different conferences

and ECU was as good or better than Duke and WF as a G5 Vs P5 and UNC and NC State are hardly showing any benefit from being in a P5 with WF and Duke as well

and even G5 to G5 north Texas state had their best years consistently in the Sunbelt as the only Texas team.....they had a good year last year (especially for them), but they quickly fell off the map and they look to continue to decline for the near term future now that they have the coveted "Many Texas Teams"

so only USC, Texas and UH out of those teams and conferences did overall much better than their fellow in state in conference teams

again being alone is not a guarantee if you have crappy facilities, a crappy budget and a crappy administration and fan support (ah la north Texas state) your success might be fleeting, but if you combine that with more Texas teams in the same conference you can look to fall even further even faster

so again your strawmwn fail and your attempts to break the discussion into little pieces that you feel you can "win" fails as well

there is simply nothing at all to suggest a benefit from having 4 or more teams from the same state in the same conference G5 or P5 and even sometimes comparing P5 to G5 and simple math says the more that teams in the same state and the same conference play each other the possibility and the inevitability of them dropping off increases

and while it is not a guarantee if you reduce those teams playing each other in the same conference it gives a much greater mathematical opportunity for many more of them to have success and that can even be G5 to P5 as TCU clearly shows and as ECU shows compared to WF and Duke

only in California can you really not find a G5 team that compares to the 4 P5 state teams and that is because Fresno and SJSU and SDSU are often in the same conference as well and thus hold each other back

Let me get this straight--TCU is the poster child for your theory. Yet TCU's run of success began in the WAC (which had 4 Texas teams at the time), continued in in CUSA (which they shared with Houston), then extended into the MW years (no other Texas teams), and has resurfaced after some rookie struggles after stepping up in a class in the B-12 (which has 4 Texas teams). Thanks for making my point. It hasn't mattered how many Texas teams are in the conference TCU is in. They have done well regardless.

It seems to me that the TCU success is more about having a good coach and the consistency of excellence that can spring from keeping that coach for a long period of time. I think the fortunes of CUSA's 4 Texas teams ride on the quality of their coaching and will have little to do with number of Texas schools in their conference. Don't bother with another novelette, we are not debating the equal rights amendment. I agree you can have too many Texas schools in a conference and that having all the Texas schools in one conference does create winners and losers---though their identities will change from year to year. I think 4-6 Texas teams in a single conference makes a lot of sense as it spurs rivalries, eases travel costs, and allows for visiting fans to bolster attendance numbers.
[/quote]

tcu's success in the mwc and wac was probably due to the fact that they were a swc level program competing against teams of lesser abilities..

(03-19-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  After thinking about this for a while, I think this could lead to 3 scenarios.
1. NMSU and UTEP as a package and see if can get into the MW.
2. If denied by MW. Use NMSU as a partner for CUSA #14 or going to 16 teams.
3. If all else fails, UTEP joins the WAC and stay fb-only in CUSA.

Here is why #3 may work out more.
a. Both the WAC and CUSA are 1 bid leagues. The TV segment was very revealing about that.
b. With CUSA at 14 or 16 teams, that 1 bid $$ get pretty diluted and with the WAC having less teams to split it mean more $$.
c. Now there is where my thoughts may seem a bit crazy. UTEP fits the metro model of the WAC. In addition, I think there is some appeal for UTEP to play in conference where it can travel pretty easy to Seattle, Phoenix, K.C. SLC and Chicago. UTEP going to the WAC will bring more teams in there and could see schools like Long Beach St wanting to join and leave the LA conference (aka Big West). The WAC could then get to 9-10 teams as a conference. With NMSU, UTEP and a couple of other schools (GCU, Seattle) really developing that can open the opportunity for 2 bid in a 10 team conference much like the WCC.
If able to stay in football with CUSA, UTEP still gets the CFP $$ and TV revenue because the TV contact is for football and basketball does nothing to add to it.

UTEP will still be able to schedule OOC games with Texas CUSA schools also.

And if you think UTEP would agree on any of this then it just proves you know nothing about UTEP. There's no way UTEP would want nos. 1,2, or 3, no way, no how.

Todge Rodge, are you a politician? Because you sure are long winded.

(03-19-2015 04:36 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 04:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  A 12 team G5 league represents 19% of the G5 television inventory. A 14 team league represents 22% of the TV inventory, and a 16 team league represents slightly over 25% of the TV inventory.
...
A larger G5 league has greater inventory share and thus more value by holding a greater supply of the resource. But when it comes to Fox and NBC there is only one place to get G5 content. The larger the swath of the country CUSA has presence, the better value.

All well and good in a zero-sum game, but every school added is another school getting a cut of that revenue. It's not just about volume, it's about income vs. expenditure. If it were only about sheer numbers, the whole G5 would just unite and negotiate TV rights as one entity. I doubt anybody at BYU or in the AAC is interested in splitting the money evenly 61 ways right now.

Egos are what gets in the way of the G5 simply dividing itself along geographical lines. What we should be working toward in CUSA is a model that increasees gameday revenue so much that the slight decrease in TV payout is marginalized. It's a balancing act. The TV payout is a little smaller, but the increased ticket sales a less travel hopefully makes up for it. With all this being said, I hope UTEP always stays and UAB brings back football. We can build whatever from there.

In the West, Texas State would be the ideal addition for UTEP and UTSA, while ULL would be better for LTU, USM, and a football-playing UAB. I think either schools would travel

Afflicted,how can you be a fan of RICE AND UH.Seems like a conflict.Just asking.

travel cost are often not a product of the distance traveled rather they are a factor of access and facilities dedicated to travel and the utilization rate of those facilities and how close the university is to those facilities

and if a program is relying on the ticket sales of the fans of the team they are playing they might as well drop down to D1-AA and they should for sure give up on the dream of ever being in a P5 conference or a candidate to be in a P5 conference member

same goes for those that say "their fans" will show up to see "their team" as soon as "their team" is playing a team "their fans" actually want to see play

looking at travel cost and the ease of travel for opposing fans is small time ever more mid major thinking at its finest

(03-19-2015 11:27 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Afflicted,how can you be a fan of RICE AND UH.Seems like a conflict.Just asking.

Grew up at Rice football games, but too smart to be accepted, so I went to UH.

(03-19-2015 06:01 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 05:17 PM)dude_miner Wrote:  The dissertation thread.

this may be more to your liking

https://twitter.com/

lots of really intelligent and hard hitting factual and relevant discussions going on over there

Wow...touchy. This might help with the cramping.



Don't worry, sweetheart. The bitchy feelings should subside.

(03-19-2015 11:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  travel cost are often not a product of the distance traveled rather they are a factor of access and facilities dedicated to travel and the utilization rate of those facilities and how close the university is to those facilities

and if a program is relying on the ticket sales of the fans of the team they are playing they might as well drop down to D1-AA and they should for sure give up on the dream of ever being in a P5 conference or a candidate to be in a P5 conference member

same goes for those that say "their fans" will show up to see "their team" as soon as "their team" is playing a team "their fans" actually want to see play

looking at travel cost and the ease of travel for opposing fans is small time ever more mid major thinking at its finest

So, where's the confusion? We're G5for a reason and it's because we don't have the numbers of P5 programs. Why is it immasculating that we need to depend on visiting fans? G5 programs don't fit the P5 mold. The sooner we can get over that fact, the better off we'll be. We can't depend on fans we don't have to magically appear.

(03-19-2015 11:27 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Afflicted,how can you be a fan of RICE AND UH.Seems like a conflict.Just asking.

Quite a few of us have "double-dipped". While in the Rice engineering program, I took two classes at UH that counted toward my Rice degree. It was an easy bike ride on the Braes Bayou trail between classes.

When it came time for my MBA, UH offered the night program that my employer agreed to fully reimburse.

It is easier when Rice and UH are in separate conferences!

(03-20-2015 03:57 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 11:45 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  travel cost are often not a product of the distance traveled rather they are a factor of access and facilities dedicated to travel and the utilization rate of those facilities and how close the university is to those facilities

and if a program is relying on the ticket sales of the fans of the team they are playing they might as well drop down to D1-AA and they should for sure give up on the dream of ever being in a P5 conference or a candidate to be in a P5 conference member

same goes for those that say "their fans" will show up to see "their team" as soon as "their team" is playing a team "their fans" actually want to see play

looking at travel cost and the ease of travel for opposing fans is small time ever more mid major thinking at its finest

So, where's the confusion? We're G5for a reason and it's because we don't have the numbers of P5 programs. Why is it immasculating that we need to depend on visiting fans? G5 programs don't fit the P5 mold. The sooner we can get over that fact, the better off we'll be. We can't depend on fans we don't have to magically appear.

the confusion is where some thought that others were interested in actually still trying to better their program instead of tossing in the towel and hoping that if D1-A ever splits it will be 80 teams and that a team you cheer for might be one of the 80

the confusion is also where some believe that teams not in the P5 can still accomplish things like going to an access bowl regularly or perhaps getting into the playoffs or an expanded 8 team playoff instead of going ahead and giving up one season in

it will not be easy for sure, but it would be better than just tossing in with the closest 15 other teams and hoping that all the other G5 programs give up as well (highly unlikely) and make very similar stupid conference moves and affiliations and then all waiting to be left behind or if not left behind simply used as buy in home game win fodder

have some balls and lose the fat

toss in with 7 or 8 at (the most) other teams across 3 time zones and schedule 7 conference games and 5 OOC games and go out there and generate wins and bowl appearances at all cost and build on that until schedules can be improved and strengthened as winning against anything with a pulse attracts better recruits and better fan support

stop thinking that the crap around the corner that barely attracts fans to their own games will bring major fans to your games and quit trying to save a dollar or two on travel while playing losers from around the way

(03-19-2015 03:54 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  The 16-team WAC should be a cautionary tale to all those in favor of a 16 team conference. I don't even like the 14 team model.

The WAC 16 would have worked if it was able to split into 8 team divisions naturally. That wasn't going to happen and hence the whole heartburn about the conference and the split.

(03-20-2015 08:50 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 03:54 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  The 16-team WAC should be a cautionary tale to all those in favor of a 16 team conference. I don't even like the 14 team model.

The WAC 16 would have worked if it was able to split into 8 team divisions naturally. That wasn't going to happen and hence the whole heartburn about the conference and the split.

Define naturally? The Pod system didn't appear to work.

(03-19-2015 08:24 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  After thinking about this for a while, I think this could lead to 3 scenarios.
1. NMSU and UTEP as a package and see if can get into the MW.
2. If denied by MW. Use NMSU as a partner for CUSA #14 or going to 16 teams.
3. If all else fails, UTEP joins the WAC and stay fb-only in CUSA.

Here is why #3 may work out more.
a. Both the WAC and CUSA are 1 bid leagues. The TV segment was very revealing about that.
b. With CUSA at 14 or 16 teams, that 1 bid $$ get pretty diluted and with the WAC having less teams to split it mean more $$.
c. Now there is where my thoughts may seem a bit crazy. UTEP fits the metro model of the WAC. In addition, I think there is some appeal for UTEP to play in conference where it can travel pretty easy to Seattle, Phoenix, K.C. SLC and Chicago. UTEP going to the WAC will bring more teams in there and could see schools like Long Beach St wanting to join and leave the LA conference (aka Big West). The WAC could then get to 9-10 teams as a conference. With NMSU, UTEP and a couple of other schools (GCU, Seattle) really developing that can open the opportunity for 2 bid in a 10 team conference much like the WCC.
If able to stay in football with CUSA, UTEP still gets the CFP $$ and TV revenue because the TV contact is for football and basketball does nothing to add to it.

UTEP will still be able to schedule OOC games with Texas CUSA schools also.

And if you think UTEP would agree on any of this then it just proves you know nothing about UTEP. There's no way UTEP would want nos. 1,2, or 3, no way, no how.

Todge Rodge, are you a politician? Because you sure are long winded.

I'm not say that I know anything about UTEP. The only thing we really know is the UTEP will always choose the Texas core over the MW as has been now twice over the past 15 or so years.
However, the points are my opinion only.
The economics have change in CUSA and in the CFP era. When its it easier and more economic to fly to Phoenix, KC, Chicago, Seattle, SLC, Rio Grand Valley....than to marshall, FAU/FIU, S. Miss...etc there are other things to consider. Students time on the road is a factor.

Once they are together long enough, I'd like to see ODU, Charlotte, Marshall, MTSU, and WKU split off and form a new conference, adding App State and 2 others that make geographic sense. Hopefully by then UConn, Memphis and Cincy will be out of the AAC so ECU, Navy, and Temple would be up for joining along with UAB for basketball. You'd have 8-9 football schools so you could play everyone every season and only 9-10 basketball schools for one NCAA autobid. No more trips across the country. No more high school gyms. Less dead weight dragging everyone down.

(03-20-2015 08:54 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(03-20-2015 08:50 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(03-19-2015 03:54 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  The 16-team WAC should be a cautionary tale to all those in favor of a 16 team conference. I don't even like the 14 team model.

The WAC 16 would have worked if it was able to split into 8 team divisions naturally. That wasn't going to happen and hence the whole heartburn about the conference and the split.

Define naturally? The Pod system didn't appear to work.

geographically of course. The teams involved at the time would have either AF or NM in the West division. The front range schools must all be together.
Pods are stupid. If you can't break into 2 8 team divisions that work, then don't go to 16 teams.

I loved the WAC when we first came there. After the Texas schools left it got complicated. It is my hope that we continue to maintain a relationship with the current Texas schools, plus UH, and SMU for as long as possible. UTEP and Tech have been in two conferences together and I feel both have benefited from it.