(12-27-2018 03:28 PM)BuzzLightyear Wrote:  Stop it !!! Stop IT!!!! I am the tallest Midget in the room and I don't care what others say!!!

The whole point of the thread is basically that. CUSA and SBC are on par with each other. There is no good reason for a team to swap places. Other than geography. There is zero benefit in exposure and finances for an SBC school to move to CUSA (it actually is a downgrade).

Personally I would love to regularly play a few CUSA schools, but as it stands GS should and will stay in the SBC.

I just checked and if you count the open air thing that UAB has, that makes two IPFs in all of CUSA. Marshall has the only true IPF at this moment.

(12-27-2018 03:23 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 11:57 AM)herdfan129 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 10:34 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 09:35 AM)herdfan129 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 12:06 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  in the last six years or so we have added probably $70 million in improvements to our football facilities. New press box and suites, an $11 million IPF, North endzone project with premium seating, concessions, WATERFALLS, football ops complex, new video board and a convention center and hotel adjacent to the stadium.

I will update costs if I am off.

It is all top notch that I would not have believed we would do if you asked me ten years ago.

I'm not trying to be mean, but your $11 million IPF is very average. Sure its nice to have and better than nothing, but I'm not sure how you can look at that and say "We have managed to build better facilities than virtually all of CUSA."

Your football stadium and IPF aren't even on par with Marshall's and we are part of CUSA. I don't know enough about the rest of the conference to comment on them.

No it is not. Your IPF is on par. A little less room vertically but nice. Your stadium is solid but certainly not as nice as ASU's with all of the recent renovations. We already have a quality football ops building that will be converted for use by other programs when the new $30 million project is complete in the fall. I was a little short on the overall renovations to the stadium which are $80 million not including the hotel and convention center.

I am not sure how you profess to compare if you don't know anything about the rest of the conference.

Dude, you can't be serious? Ours is much nicer. Yours is 78k square feet. Ours is 102k feet with a track around it

Yours is $11 million (according to you) and ours was $17 million back in 2013ish so at least 5 years ago.

Like I said, yours is nice and is much nicer than a lot of school's but to try and pretend you have just ran off and built better facilities than anyone in the Sun Belt or CUSA is just comical.

Dude, you don't have a clue. We did not build a track around it because we already have an indoor track. The exterior of ours is nicer and the roof is more suited for practicing than the one you have.

Do you even know how many CUSA programs have an indoor? USM and LT? Charlotte, ODU or FIU? That's just the indoor facilities. You might want to go do some investigating because you will be surprised.

Exactly! We already have very nice indoor facilities for track. No need to add a track for the heck of it. If we are just talking indoor football facilities then our indoor is definitely superior. We have actual goal posts and our endzone does not get cut off by a stupid track(see images below).

Marshall:




Arkansas State:

(12-27-2018 09:30 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  I prefer the Sun Belt bowls over what CUSA has and even though CUSA’s are perceived better, I think much like their media deal, they will be surprised at how many steps back they take when the new bowl contracts are written up.

I still don't understand why anyone would prefer the CUSA bowl lineup to ours. Who on earth wants their team to go play in the Bahamas or Hawaii for a bowl? The object for a bowl is a treat for fans that they can easily travel to. Not one thousands of miles away that's going to cost your school hundreds of thousands of dollars to play in.

(12-27-2018 04:04 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 09:30 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  I prefer the Sun Belt bowls over what CUSA has and even though CUSA’s are perceived better, I think much like their media deal, they will be surprised at how many steps back they take when the new bowl contracts are written up.

I still don't understand why anyone would prefer the CUSA bowl lineup to ours. Who on earth wants their team to go play in the Bahamas or Hawaii for a bowl? The object for a bowl is a treat for fans that they can easily travel to. Not one thousands of miles away that's going to cost your school hundreds of thousands of dollars to play in.

There's absolutely no reason to think that CUSA bowls on weekday nights and far flung places are better than the Sun Belt Bowls.

You guys should know if it's dogs ass it will be mostly nonsense. Even his own teams fans have no use for him.

(12-27-2018 04:07 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 04:04 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 09:30 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  I prefer the Sun Belt bowls over what CUSA has and even though CUSA’s are perceived better, I think much like their media deal, they will be surprised at how many steps back they take when the new bowl contracts are written up.

I still don't understand why anyone would prefer the CUSA bowl lineup to ours. Who on earth wants their team to go play in the Bahamas or Hawaii for a bowl? The object for a bowl is a treat for fans that they can easily travel to. Not one thousands of miles away that's going to cost your school hundreds of thousands of dollars to play in.

There's absolutely no reason to think that CUSA bowls on weekday nights and far flung places are better than the Sun Belt Bowls.

It's even really silly to consider. La Tech probably spent 350-400K sending most of their athletic department and the football team to Hawaii. They may have sold 50-100K in tickets at best for such a game.

That means the school starts with a net loss of 250K, and has to hope CUSA has a sensible revenue sharing method to allow them to take the profits that other schools might have made for a far closer game. And that's no guarantee considering North Texas, Marshall, and UAB all had to play bowl games that are most likely flights for fans, and FIU, despite technically being only 188 miles from their game, had to hope that their fan base who wanted to attend had passports, while also getting passports for all of their players and Athletic staff.

(12-27-2018 02:40 PM)APPdiesel Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 11:30 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 11:06 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 10:45 AM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 09:47 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  He said “composite rankings” Well guess what, the massey is by far the most respected composite ranking. And the Sunbelt has ranked behind CUSA 3 out of 5 years. So quit spouting total baseless BS

I think its pretty obvious where each conference is trending. If all CUSA folks can talk about is La Techs signature victory over Ark St back in 2015, I think we're in pretty good shape.

I'm happy with the direction of this conference, as i'm sure almost all App fans are. I know most CUSA fans think any SB school would jump at moving, but as things stand now, I doubt any school moves with the exception of Texas State, without there being a sea change in conference realignment.

The only poll/ranking that matters is CFP conference rankings for the money split.

Yeah that is true, this is last year


AAC: $25,623,896
mwc: $18,219,621
MAC: $16,815,366
CUSA: $15,411,101
SunBelt:$14,006,835

Do you have the other years?

So all this stick measuring comes down to $1.4 million more money for CUSA when the Sunbelt's per school payout is still higher? Sheesh. Way to miss the forest for the trees.

Sherlock, Im not the one who said the “Sunbelt is firmly ahead of CUSA in the composite rankings” Which is total BS and has been disproven

The only thing this thread is missing is nonsensical drivel from btr-herpes and stoogedog.

(12-27-2018 04:39 PM)BamaCajun Wrote:  The only thing this thread is missing is nonsensical drivel from btr-herpes and stoogedog.

I'm surprised no one has brought up the ladder analogy that CUSA is the next step on the ladder and all the Sun Belt schools with aspirations of moving up have to go through CUSA first. That was a really popular narrative from the SBC sellouts a few seasons ago.

(12-27-2018 04:20 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 02:40 PM)APPdiesel Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 11:30 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 11:06 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 10:45 AM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  I think its pretty obvious where each conference is trending. If all CUSA folks can talk about is La Techs signature victory over Ark St back in 2015, I think we're in pretty good shape.

I'm happy with the direction of this conference, as i'm sure almost all App fans are. I know most CUSA fans think any SB school would jump at moving, but as things stand now, I doubt any school moves with the exception of Texas State, without there being a sea change in conference realignment.

The only poll/ranking that matters is CFP conference rankings for the money split.

Yeah that is true, this is last year


AAC: $25,623,896
mwc: $18,219,621
MAC: $16,815,366
CUSA: $15,411,101
SunBelt:$14,006,835

Do you have the other years?

So all this stick measuring comes down to $1.4 million more money for CUSA when the Sunbelt's per school payout is still higher? Sheesh. Way to miss the forest for the trees.

Sherlock, Im not the one who said the “Sunbelt is firmly ahead of CUSA in the composite rankings” Which is total BS and has been disproven

i was going to stay out of this, but Dawx keeps missing the point. you posted the results of the last 5 years of composite rankings, including this year. AND the results are the Sun Belt is firmly ahead of CUSA in 2 of the last 3 years. now if you keep going back in history CUSA is ahead in 3 of the last 5 years. so, it comes down to what time frame is more important. the last 3 years or the last 5 years.

Next year it will be 3 of the last 4 and 3 of the last five, what timeframe will you pick then?

(12-27-2018 04:39 PM)BamaCajun Wrote:  The only thing this thread is missing is nonsensical drivel from btr-herpes and stoogedog.

Keep in mind a few Tech trolls are forum banned. Much like a few of our trolls are forum banned across the street.

For the record we do have goal posts, they are retractable up and down.

Sure, if you like smaller and cheaper then Arkansas State's is better I suppose.

Either way, the fact that so few schools in CUSA/MAC/Sun Belt have them is even more surprising. I just assumed most teams in both conferences had them.

(12-27-2018 05:27 PM)herdfan129 Wrote:  For the record we do have goal posts, they are retractable up and down.

Sure, if you like smaller and cheaper then Arkansas State's is better I suppose.

Either way, the fact that so few schools in CUSA/MAC/Sun Belt have them is even more surprising. I just assumed most teams in both conferences had them.

Cheaper is really a mixed debate because construction costs very place to place. Plus, you guys had to go bigger, so you can put an indoor track in. We have a track around our basketball court, so there was no need to build as large of a facility.

It's honestly 6 in one and half dozen in the other.

The EZ expansion is going to be awesome once you all get it finished.

(12-27-2018 05:31 PM)herdfan129 Wrote:  It's honestly 6 in one and half dozen in the other.

The EZ expansion is going to be awesome once you all get it finished.

I also don't like facility arguments because they can often hinge on specific sports. Yes, we have a nice football stadium, and our IPF is something few G5 have, but our basketball stadium needs to be remodeled and our baseball stadium needs to be sacrificed to some Pagan God while everyone dances around the ashes before its rebuilt again.

(12-27-2018 04:42 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 04:39 PM)BamaCajun Wrote:  The only thing this thread is missing is nonsensical drivel from btr-herpes and stoogedog.

I'm surprised no one has brought up the ladder analogy that CUSA is the next step on the ladder and all the Sun Belt schools with aspirations of moving up have to go through CUSA first. That was a really popular narrative from the SBC sellouts a few seasons ago.

That’s an interesting “take.” I don’t know that there’s an actual “ladder analogy,” nor am I aware that Sun Belt schools have to “go through” CUSA first. But for awhile, I did see that when teams left the Belt it was for CUSA. Are you aware of any Belt members that left for a different conference?

Sun Belt schools have also had to “back fill” openings with schools from the FCS . . . again, I’m not aware of any D1 programs coming from other D1 conferences to the Belt.

It just seems to be “the pecking order” given our place in the system.

Now, I’ll readily acknowledge that performance in the Belt has improved the past few seasons

I think what may be interesting moving forward is has that (pecking order) changed? Because IF that’s changed, then The Belt has made real progress. (In terms of perception, in addition to performance)

(12-27-2018 05:44 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 04:42 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 04:39 PM)BamaCajun Wrote:  The only thing this thread is missing is nonsensical drivel from btr-herpes and stoogedog.

I'm surprised no one has brought up the ladder analogy that CUSA is the next step on the ladder and all the Sun Belt schools with aspirations of moving up have to go through CUSA first. That was a really popular narrative from the SBC sellouts a few seasons ago.

That’s an interesting “take.” I don’t know that there’s an actual “ladder analogy,” nor am I aware that Sun Belt schools have to “go through” CUSA first. But for awhile, I did see that when teams left the Belt it was for CUSA. Are you aware of any Belt members that left for a different conference?

Sun Belt schools have also had to “back fill” openings with schools from the FCS . . . again, I’m not aware of any D1 programs coming from other D1 conferences to the Belt.

It just seems to be “the pecking order” given our place in the system.

Now, I’ll readily acknowledge that performance in the Belt has improved the past few seasons

I think what may be interesting moving forward is has that (pecking order) changed? Because IF that’s changed, then The Belt has made real progress. (In terms of perception, in addition to performance)

Great post.


Until a team actually leaves CUSA for the Sun Belt then one would have to assume the current pecking order is still in order.

It's ok little brother. You hit a nice little growth spurt and you are starting to catch up but we are still the big brother