(06-25-2020 03:13 PM)JMU Duke Dog Wrote:  Article in the northern Delaware newspaper about UD's spending on athletics.

https://www.delawareonline.com/story/spo...310993002/

Quote:Delaware’s expenditures on athletics are second-highest among schools in the NCAA Division I Football Championship Subdivision, data analysis reveals.

Only conference rival James Madison spends more, according to the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics’ financial information database.

James Madison has won a league-high 17 conference championships the last four years, 10 more than Delaware.

I wasn't aware UD spent so much. I'd like to see them and you guys make the jump to FBS and be apart of the often talked about East Coast G5.

Don’t say that to Thundercuck!

(06-29-2020 12:04 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  Don’t say that to Thundercuck!

I'm not sure what his opinion is.

I'm going to repeat myself a little here as I've mentioned this in the past. But I think any future conference additions should bring one or more of the following criteria:

1. Flagship Universities/State in the name of School (Example: Delaware, UConn, UMass, Ohio, Georgia State) To me this criteria of school offer name identity and legitimacy. Whether they're good or not it feels more legitimate than "directional state U". Especially when shopping for a TV deal. They also bring the potential of "T-Shirt fans" who didn't go to school there. People like to rep where they're from.

2. Military Schools (Army would be a home run add IMO. National Brand. Name Identity. Helps TV deal)

3. City Universities from Metro areas. (Example: Buffalo; Charlotte) The same premise of name identity applies here. So does the "T-Shirt fan" idea. People like to rep where they're from especially if they're winning. And casual fans are at least familiar with large U.S. cities. Potential for bigger fan bases lies with State and City named schools.

4. G5 Brands (Example: Marshall; App State). You want to add schools casual fans recognize. They also offer the next criteria...

5. Butts In Seats/Support (This is where JMU lies IMO). You want schools that look full and exciting on TV. I think this is something that hurts C-USA's TV deal. The stadiums are empty and it feels boring on TV.
Directional school vs. Directional school in an empty stadium just isn't exciting. It hurts the legitimacy of the league and the TV deal. IMO.

So if C-USA East breaks away or a whole new league is created. I think additions should be made with these 5 criteria in mind.

(06-29-2020 12:24 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 12:04 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  Don’t say that to Thundercuck!

I'm not sure what his opinion is.

I'm going to repeat myself a little here as I've mentioned this in the past. But I think any future conference additions should bring one or more of the following criteria:

1. Flagship Universities/State in the name of School (Example: Delaware, UConn, UMass, Ohio, Georgia State) To me this criteria of school offer name identity and legitimacy. Whether they're good or not it feels more legitimate than "directional state U". Especially when shopping for a TV deal. They also bring the potential of "T-Shirt fans" who didn't go to school there. People like to rep where they're from.

2. Military Schools (Army would be a home run add IMO. National Brand. Name Identity. Helps TV deal)

3. City Universities from Metro areas. (Example: Buffalo; Charlotte) The same premise of name identity applies here. So does the "T-Shirt fan" idea. People like to rep where they're from especially if they're winning. And casual fans are at least familiar with large U.S. cities. Potential for bigger fan bases lies with State and City named schools.

4. G5 Brands (Example: Marshall; App State). You want to add schools casual fans recognize. They also offer the next criteria...

5. Butts In Seats/Support (This is where JMU lies IMO). You want schools that look full and exciting on TV. I think this is something that hurts C-USA's TV deal. The stadiums are empty and it feels boring on TV.
Directional school vs. Directional school in an empty stadium just isn't exciting. It hurts the legitimacy of the league and the TV deal. IMO.

So if C-USA East breaks away or a whole new league is created. I think additions should be made with these 5 criteria in mind.

I agree with all of your points. I have felt that way since JMU first entertained thoughts of moving up. A flagship/ state name university, be it right or wrong, just gives a sense of legitimacy. When we were in the old Yankee Conference, I loved the fact that there were so many flagship schools.

The one thing I'd also consider would be any interested school that has a top 100 academic rep. I'm thinking Miami of Ohio if they ever wanted to leave the MAC. Or Stony Brook, should they be interested in elevating their football. And I'd be open to a couple (two) of schools being members for everything but FBS football (if they were interested). Getting a W&M, GW, Boston U or Northeastern would add further shine to a new conference due to their academics. It would largely depend on where the center of a mythical East Coast G5 conference would be.

(06-29-2020 12:50 PM)olddawg Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 12:24 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 12:04 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  Don’t say that to Thundercuck!

I'm not sure what his opinion is.

I'm going to repeat myself a little here as I've mentioned this in the past. But I think any future conference additions should bring one or more of the following criteria:

1. Flagship Universities/State in the name of School (Example: Delaware, UConn, UMass, Ohio, Georgia State) To me this criteria of school offer name identity and legitimacy. Whether they're good or not it feels more legitimate than "directional state U". Especially when shopping for a TV deal. They also bring the potential of "T-Shirt fans" who didn't go to school there. People like to rep where they're from.

2. Military Schools (Army would be a home run add IMO. National Brand. Name Identity. Helps TV deal)

3. City Universities from Metro areas. (Example: Buffalo; Charlotte) The same premise of name identity applies here. So does the "T-Shirt fan" idea. People like to rep where they're from especially if they're winning. And casual fans are at least familiar with large U.S. cities. Potential for bigger fan bases lies with State and City named schools.

4. G5 Brands (Example: Marshall; App State). You want to add schools casual fans recognize. They also offer the next criteria...

5. Butts In Seats/Support (This is where JMU lies IMO). You want schools that look full and exciting on TV. I think this is something that hurts C-USA's TV deal. The stadiums are empty and it feels boring on TV.
Directional school vs. Directional school in an empty stadium just isn't exciting. It hurts the legitimacy of the league and the TV deal. IMO.

So if C-USA East breaks away or a whole new league is created. I think additions should be made with these 5 criteria in mind.

I agree with all of your points. I have felt that way since JMU first entertained thoughts of moving up. A flagship/ state name university, be it right or wrong, just gives a sense of legitimacy. When we were in the old Yankee Conference, I loved the fact that there were so many flagship schools.

The one thing I'd also consider would be any interested school that has a top 100 academic rep. I'm thinking Miami of Ohio if they ever wanted to leave the MAC. Or Stony Brook, should they be interested in elevating their football. And I'd be open to a couple (two) of schools being members for everything but FBS football (if they were interested). Getting a W&M, GW, Boston U or Northeastern would add further shine to a new conference due to their academics. It would largely depend on where the center of a mythical East Coast G5 conference would be.

I guess I'm a little ignorant here but I've never understood making academic additions when trying to form the best athletic conference.

(06-29-2020 01:01 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 12:50 PM)olddawg Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 12:24 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 12:04 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  Don’t say that to Thundercuck!

I'm not sure what his opinion is.

I'm going to repeat myself a little here as I've mentioned this in the past. But I think any future conference additions should bring one or more of the following criteria:

1. Flagship Universities/State in the name of School (Example: Delaware, UConn, UMass, Ohio, Georgia State) To me this criteria of school offer name identity and legitimacy. Whether they're good or not it feels more legitimate than "directional state U". Especially when shopping for a TV deal. They also bring the potential of "T-Shirt fans" who didn't go to school there. People like to rep where they're from.

2. Military Schools (Army would be a home run add IMO. National Brand. Name Identity. Helps TV deal)

3. City Universities from Metro areas. (Example: Buffalo; Charlotte) The same premise of name identity applies here. So does the "T-Shirt fan" idea. People like to rep where they're from especially if they're winning. And casual fans are at least familiar with large U.S. cities. Potential for bigger fan bases lies with State and City named schools.

4. G5 Brands (Example: Marshall; App State). You want to add schools casual fans recognize. They also offer the next criteria...

5. Butts In Seats/Support (This is where JMU lies IMO). You want schools that look full and exciting on TV. I think this is something that hurts C-USA's TV deal. The stadiums are empty and it feels boring on TV.
Directional school vs. Directional school in an empty stadium just isn't exciting. It hurts the legitimacy of the league and the TV deal. IMO.

So if C-USA East breaks away or a whole new league is created. I think additions should be made with these 5 criteria in mind.

I agree with all of your points. I have felt that way since JMU first entertained thoughts of moving up. A flagship/ state name university, be it right or wrong, just gives a sense of legitimacy. When we were in the old Yankee Conference, I loved the fact that there were so many flagship schools.

The one thing I'd also consider would be any interested school that has a top 100 academic rep. I'm thinking Miami of Ohio if they ever wanted to leave the MAC. Or Stony Brook, should they be interested in elevating their football. And I'd be open to a couple (two) of schools being members for everything but FBS football (if they were interested). Getting a W&M, GW, Boston U or Northeastern would add further shine to a new conference due to their academics. It would largely depend on where the center of a mythical East Coast G5 conference would be.

I guess I'm a little ignorant here but I've never understood making academic additions when trying to form the best athletic conference.

Blame it on the Ivy League.

But seriously, I do think the reason is to have schools with similar interests and backgrounds. Schools with similar academic standards are going to get similar students and therefore all have the same advantage/disadvantages. A school with higher academic standards isn't going to get the same athletes as a school that doesn't need to meet those same standards.
To the public, there is a reputation that exists within these schools. Schools in the same conference to some are viewed as having similar academics. Some schools don't want to be associated with other schools that may not have the same standards as it could hurt their reputation.
Those were just a few reasons I could think of. They may or may not be the main reasons, but they were ones that I'm sure are at least talked about in discussions.

(06-29-2020 01:06 PM)JMad03 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 01:01 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 12:50 PM)olddawg Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 12:24 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 12:04 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  Don’t say that to Thundercuck!

I'm not sure what his opinion is.

I'm going to repeat myself a little here as I've mentioned this in the past. But I think any future conference additions should bring one or more of the following criteria:

1. Flagship Universities/State in the name of School (Example: Delaware, UConn, UMass, Ohio, Georgia State) To me this criteria of school offer name identity and legitimacy. Whether they're good or not it feels more legitimate than "directional state U". Especially when shopping for a TV deal. They also bring the potential of "T-Shirt fans" who didn't go to school there. People like to rep where they're from.

2. Military Schools (Army would be a home run add IMO. National Brand. Name Identity. Helps TV deal)

3. City Universities from Metro areas. (Example: Buffalo; Charlotte) The same premise of name identity applies here. So does the "T-Shirt fan" idea. People like to rep where they're from especially if they're winning. And casual fans are at least familiar with large U.S. cities. Potential for bigger fan bases lies with State and City named schools.

4. G5 Brands (Example: Marshall; App State). You want to add schools casual fans recognize. They also offer the next criteria...

5. Butts In Seats/Support (This is where JMU lies IMO). You want schools that look full and exciting on TV. I think this is something that hurts C-USA's TV deal. The stadiums are empty and it feels boring on TV.
Directional school vs. Directional school in an empty stadium just isn't exciting. It hurts the legitimacy of the league and the TV deal. IMO.

So if C-USA East breaks away or a whole new league is created. I think additions should be made with these 5 criteria in mind.

I agree with all of your points. I have felt that way since JMU first entertained thoughts of moving up. A flagship/ state name university, be it right or wrong, just gives a sense of legitimacy. When we were in the old Yankee Conference, I loved the fact that there were so many flagship schools.

The one thing I'd also consider would be any interested school that has a top 100 academic rep. I'm thinking Miami of Ohio if they ever wanted to leave the MAC. Or Stony Brook, should they be interested in elevating their football. And I'd be open to a couple (two) of schools being members for everything but FBS football (if they were interested). Getting a W&M, GW, Boston U or Northeastern would add further shine to a new conference due to their academics. It would largely depend on where the center of a mythical East Coast G5 conference would be.

I guess I'm a little ignorant here but I've never understood making academic additions when trying to form the best athletic conference.

Blame it on the Ivy League.

But seriously, I do think the reason is to have schools with similar interests and backgrounds. Schools with similar academic standards are going to get similar students and therefore all have the same advantage/disadvantages. A school with higher academic standards isn't going to get the same athletes as a school that doesn't need to meet those same standards.
To the public, there is a reputation that exists within these schools. Schools in the same conference to some are viewed as having similar academics. Some schools don't want to be associated with other schools that may not have the same standards as it could hurt their reputation.
Those were just a few reasons I could think of. They may or may not be the main reasons, but they were ones that I'm sure are at least talked about in discussions.

In a similar vein, I have a friend who works at UNC-CH, and she's really unhappy about the academic compromises they make to have a high-profile athletics program. To her (and she has a point), it's one thing for Va Tech, Clemson, FSU, et al have minor-league NFL and NBA teams, but places that pride themselves on academics (UNC, UVA, W&M) should be in a lower tier. I know there are institutional roadblocks to ever implementing anything to that effect, but it's a valid point. There's no sense in anyone trying to compete with Alabama except for other mega-schools who don't care about the education that their football players are getting.

Sorry, but “t shirt guy” in Georgia and Ohio are not going to be interested in Ohio u. or Georgia state. Not when they have the Buckeyes and bulldogs to grab a shirt of.

(06-29-2020 02:14 PM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  Sorry, but “t shirt guy” in Georgia and Ohio are not going to be interested in Ohio u. or Georgia state. Not when they have the Buckeyes and bulldogs to grab a shirt of.

I agree. But on the whole it feels more legitimate to me. Kind of like an East Coast version of the MWC with their 6 state named schools, a military school, a few city schools sprinkled in and one of the biggest G5 brands in football.

It worked for their TV deal. Granted you still have to produce on the court/field.

(06-29-2020 12:04 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  Don’t say that to Thundercuck!

ThunderCuck? Cute. What are you, twelve? How long did it take you to think of that?

I have never mentioned anything derogatory about JMU moving up. I think you have me confused with HerdZoned. I don’t believe I have even said anything here that could even remotely be taken as inflammatory or degrading. And yet you continue to try and insult with petty name calling. You’re a real peach.

I have said, however, that FBS is better than FCS (which many of your fellow Dukes agree with). I was around for all of our 1-AA years, so I have a comparison.

Nah, you suck and deserve the terrible nickname. You came here recently condescending left and right about how JMU has no FBS options anymore. You’re a dummy.

Also thundercuck, you did the most Thundercuck thing ever by assuming I’m anti-FBS for JMU. You’re wrong and your Thundercuckness shows through, AJ.

(06-29-2020 03:08 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 02:14 PM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  Sorry, but “t shirt guy” in Georgia and Ohio are not going to be interested in Ohio u. or Georgia state. Not when they have the Buckeyes and bulldogs to grab a shirt of.

I agree. But on the whole it feels more legitimate to me. Kind of like an East Coast version of the MWC with their 6 state named schools, a military school, a few city schools sprinkled in and one of the biggest G5 brands in football.

It worked for their TV deal. Granted you still have to produce on the court/field.

What seems legitimate to me is turning on a game and seeeing a near full house of fans. Something you’ll never see with georgia state. No thanks to them.

JMU should be in a conference with peer schools; not the lowly CAA

(06-29-2020 07:49 PM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 03:08 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 02:14 PM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  Sorry, but “t shirt guy” in Georgia and Ohio are not going to be interested in Ohio u. or Georgia state. Not when they have the Buckeyes and bulldogs to grab a shirt of.

I agree. But on the whole it feels more legitimate to me. Kind of like an East Coast version of the MWC with their 6 state named schools, a military school, a few city schools sprinkled in and one of the biggest G5 brands in football.

It worked for their TV deal. Granted you still have to produce on the court/field.

What seems legitimate to me is turning on a game and seeeing a near full house of fans. Something you’ll never see with georgia state. No thanks to them.

You’re not going to get that with every school in a mid-major or G5 league.

This is the game our anti-FBS fans play. Ignore the poor crowds at UNH, Maine & URI. Georgia State isn’t up to our standards.

(06-29-2020 08:24 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  This is the game our anti-FBS fans play. Ignore the poor crowds at UNH, Maine & URI. Georgia State isn’t up to our standards.

Duke Dog is not anti-FBS. He likely remembers like I do that Georgia State not being able to compete with other CAA football teams. They were 1-7 in the conference the one year they played in the CAA. In 10 years of football, their best seasons were 7-5, 7-6 and 6-5. Hardly stellar.

Georgia State is not a school on my radar as a desirable conference partner nor do I see them offering any “branding” opportunity as a conference member either. Charlotte and Georgia State are a lot alike to me. Both located in large cities with little fan following. Between pro football and the allegiance of college fans to P5 schools in their state, there is very little interest in these schools athletics programs and their ceiling is very low.

App and ECU offer infinitely more than Charlotte can with a much larger upside. Georgia Southern is > Georgia State too.

I like Marshall as a conference partner. UD has potential. They are spending money but their programs have had limited success over the last decade. This has led to a deteriorating fan base which at one time was more supportive than JMU’s.

(06-29-2020 07:23 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  Nah, you suck and deserve the terrible nickname. You came here recently condescending left and right about how JMU has no FBS options anymore. You’re a dummy.

No Hyper, what I said was you would be in FBS if the powers that be would have worked with the Belt. But your administration held out and the window for the time being closed. What did I say that was inaccurate?

If JMU wants to move up, then do it. You have the budget and the attendance. Dont get sore at me for your administration’s decisions. If you don’t have an invite, then go the Liberty route. Point to me where there is a spot right now for JMU to go other than Indy. For now.

I’ve followed you all for a long time.. since Mickey left Marshall. I know him and Kay and CM and MM. I wanted you all over ODU. Sorry it didn’t work out that way. Man, you are a bitter guy.

Do you honestly think the MEAC is going to lure a bunch of FBS teams to some fantasy conference with no MBB autobid and no cfp money? No. Not going to happen.

Let’s try having a civil conversation, shall we? Where is your window to get into FBS for now? AAC? Indy? Genuinely asking here.

(06-29-2020 11:26 PM)JMUNation Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 08:24 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  This is the game our anti-FBS fans play. Ignore the poor crowds at UNH, Maine & URI. Georgia State isn’t up to our standards.

Duke Dog is not anti-FBS. He likely remembers like I do that Georgia State not being able to compete with other CAA football teams. They were 1-7 in the conference the one year they played in the CAA. In 10 years of football, their best seasons were 7-5, 7-6 and 6-5. Hardly stellar.

Georgia State is not a school on my radar as a desirable conference partner nor do I see them offering any “branding” opportunity as a conference member either. Charlotte and Georgia State are a lot alike to me. Both located in large cities with little fan following. Between pro football and the allegiance of college fans to P5 schools in their state, there is very little interest in these schools athletics programs and their ceiling is very low.

App and ECU offer infinitely more than Charlotte can with a much larger upside. Georgia Southern is > Georgia State too.

I like Marshall as a conference partner. UD has potential. They are spending money but their programs have had limited success over the last decade. This has led to a deteriorating fan base which at one time was more supportive than JMU’s.

You didn’t say anything I disagree with. I also remember them stinking up the CAA. (It wasn't very long ago. I suspect most JMU fans remember.) But the point is we ignore the horrible football attendance numbers for schools in the CAA, while attempting to hold potential future conference mates to a higher standard. It lacks logic.

(06-30-2020 05:56 AM)HyperDuke Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 11:26 PM)JMUNation Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 08:24 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  This is the game our anti-FBS fans play. Ignore the poor crowds at UNH, Maine & URI. Georgia State isn’t up to our standards.

Duke Dog is not anti-FBS. He likely remembers like I do that Georgia State not being able to compete with other CAA football teams. They were 1-7 in the conference the one year they played in the CAA. In 10 years of football, their best seasons were 7-5, 7-6 and 6-5. Hardly stellar.

Georgia State is not a school on my radar as a desirable conference partner nor do I see them offering any “branding” opportunity as a conference member either. Charlotte and Georgia State are a lot alike to me. Both located in large cities with little fan following. Between pro football and the allegiance of college fans to P5 schools in their state, there is very little interest in these schools athletics programs and their ceiling is very low.

App and ECU offer infinitely more than Charlotte can with a much larger upside. Georgia Southern is > Georgia State too.

I like Marshall as a conference partner. UD has potential. They are spending money but their programs have had limited success over the last decade. This has led to a deteriorating fan base which at one time was more supportive than JMU’s.

You didn’t say anything I disagree with. I also remember them stinking up the CAA. (It wasn't very long ago. I suspect most JMU fans remember.) But the point is we ignore the horrible football attendance numbers for schools in the CAA, while attempting to hold potential future conference mates to a higher standard. It lacks logic.

They were also just 1 example of 5 potential flagship or state named schools. There's no need to get hung up on one example. No school is going to bring a name, attendance, and national brand. If they did they'd be in a P5 or at least the AAC.