(06-17-2022 12:10 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 11:34 PM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 12:24 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 03:29 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 12:04 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Demographics and ambition. The MAC has neither. The MAC schools are reliant on talent from the South to fill key roles. Go scan their rosters, and you'll see plenty of guys from GA, AL, FL, TX. There's no MAC program that has any ambition to be anything more than a payday game for B1G teams. That has been made apparent time and again with their investment levels.

On the other hand, the CUSA teams are in solid football recruiting areas. Yes, there's limits even to the amount of talent that FL, GA, TX and the others produce. But you can find a lot more legit 2* guys with potential in those states than in the Midwestern states. Plus these CUSA programs have ambition. Liberty, of course, but these other schools moving up to D1 want to succeed. They're making investments, and they're going to expect success in football.

CUSA has a decent mix of proven, generally successful programs with new high ambition programs that the MAC doesn't. Buffalo is the only MAC program that seems to have any ambition whatsoever.

What does being in a "solid football recruiting area" do for you if all you are getting is 2 star players from that area? You can get those anywhere, including in the MAC footprint.

But D-I conferences appear to be immortal. You can't kill them if you tried.

Lots of Florida, Georgia, and Texas 2* guys would be 3* if they played in the Rust Belt. 2* players aren't all equal, and the Southern states have more of them and a deeper talent level even at that ranking.

(06-16-2022 11:23 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 11:38 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  CUSA will overtake the MAC again in a few years. People need to calm down and let it play out. Including leadership at WKU and MTSU.

Not sure the only G5 ahead of CUSA now is MWC. Will be hard to overtake one who you are ahead of.

Dude. CUSA is dead last right now until some of the FCS call-ups prove themselves. The remaining schools haven't been good enough to carry NMSU and all the FCS schools. You'll surpass the MAC, as I've argued, but I doubt CUSA even gets past the Sun Belt in performance or perception. Sun Belt has some dead weight like ULM, but adding Marshall and Southern Miss to the lineup is a huge boost. You'll need every CUSA school punching at or above their weight to get past the Sun Belt. There's a reason that Marshall, USM, and Old Dominion left CUSA for the Sun Belt.

And while the AAC overexpanded - Aresco is a moron for going to 14 - they still have several top tier G5 programs, plus UTSA is about to take off. If USF gets it together, they'd have 4-5 of the top 7 or 8 programs in the G5.

May need to get out from under your rock sometime. Your living in a dream world.

Could you provide data to your claim that C-USA is ahead of every G5 except the MWC?

Can you provide data they are not?

https://www.colleyrankings.com/curconf.html

C-USA is unfortunately the worst G5 in Colley's unbiased rankings. We are ahead of the PAC though.

(06-17-2022 06:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Nice photos, but that actually looks like a pretty good crowd for 42,000 out of 59,000 capacity. Sure, there weren't actually 42,000 butts in the seats, but tickets sold is what matters, and I bet if we had photos of other small bowls, or of other Independence Bowls, their "fans in the stands" wouldn't look equal to the official attendance either.

You've made the argument that the IBowl made the correct decision because of attendance when you said "it seemed to work pretty well - the best attended IB of the past decade-plus." and now you're saying attendance doesn't matter, but tickets sold is. You're changing your argument.

And it does not like a good crowd for 42,000. There was maybe 20,000 in the whole stadium and that's being nice.

(06-17-2022 06:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Also, your photos indicate a dreary day in north Louisiana. I looked up the weather for that day, and it says the temperature was 43 degrees at kickoff time, and it had been raining earlier in the morning. So weather that Ohio fans were familiar with, but for Louisiana, even Shreveport, that's cold. Not an ideal day for attracting people to the stadium.

The weather wasn't great. It was cold at the start of the game with no rain, but to assume the cold keeps Louisiana football fans away is wrong. The 2008 Independence Bowl had temperatures in the mid 40's at kickoff (comparable). It was LaTech vs NIU (both G5s with one from the midwest so comparable) and the announced attendance was basically the same (a difference of only 300 so I would say comparable) so all the variables were the same for the game (except for maybe rain earlier in the day) but look at the stands.


That's a true 40,000 in a 60,000 something stadium.

(06-17-2022 06:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  In the end, the numbers say it was the best-attended (or tickets sold) IB since 2009, and the best involving two non-power schools since 1980, which IMO is pretty good.

In the end, the numbers they released say one thing but the photos and video shows another. Tech fans will bring many more fans to the IBowl in comparable conditions. If the IBowl had waited, they would have had a much better attended game including tickets sold, not just handed out. I would say if the game had not sold out, it would have been close to it. It's clear the IBowl missed out on having a better game.

(06-17-2022 07:31 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 12:10 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 11:34 PM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 12:24 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 03:29 PM)ken d Wrote:  What does being in a "solid football recruiting area" do for you if all you are getting is 2 star players from that area? You can get those anywhere, including in the MAC footprint.

But D-I conferences appear to be immortal. You can't kill them if you tried.

Lots of Florida, Georgia, and Texas 2* guys would be 3* if they played in the Rust Belt. 2* players aren't all equal, and the Southern states have more of them and a deeper talent level even at that ranking.

(06-16-2022 11:23 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  Not sure the only G5 ahead of CUSA now is MWC. Will be hard to overtake one who you are ahead of.

Dude. CUSA is dead last right now until some of the FCS call-ups prove themselves. The remaining schools haven't been good enough to carry NMSU and all the FCS schools. You'll surpass the MAC, as I've argued, but I doubt CUSA even gets past the Sun Belt in performance or perception. Sun Belt has some dead weight like ULM, but adding Marshall and Southern Miss to the lineup is a huge boost. You'll need every CUSA school punching at or above their weight to get past the Sun Belt. There's a reason that Marshall, USM, and Old Dominion left CUSA for the Sun Belt.

And while the AAC overexpanded - Aresco is a moron for going to 14 - they still have several top tier G5 programs, plus UTSA is about to take off. If USF gets it together, they'd have 4-5 of the top 7 or 8 programs in the G5.

May need to get out from under your rock sometime. Your living in a dream world.

Could you provide data to your claim that C-USA is ahead of every G5 except the MWC?

Can you provide data they are not?

Those making the claim are tasked with defending it.

(06-17-2022 07:31 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 12:10 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 11:34 PM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 12:24 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 11:23 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  Not sure the only G5 ahead of CUSA now is MWC. Will be hard to overtake one who you are ahead of.

Dude. CUSA is dead last right now until some of the FCS call-ups prove themselves. The remaining schools haven't been good enough to carry NMSU and all the FCS schools. You'll surpass the MAC, as I've argued, but I doubt CUSA even gets past the Sun Belt in performance or perception. Sun Belt has some dead weight like ULM, but adding Marshall and Southern Miss to the lineup is a huge boost. You'll need every CUSA school punching at or above their weight to get past the Sun Belt. There's a reason that Marshall, USM, and Old Dominion left CUSA for the Sun Belt.

And while the AAC overexpanded - Aresco is a moron for going to 14 - they still have several top tier G5 programs, plus UTSA is about to take off. If USF gets it together, they'd have 4-5 of the top 7 or 8 programs in the G5.

May need to get out from under your rock sometime. Your living in a dream world.

Could you provide data to your claim that C-USA is ahead of every G5 except the MWC?

Can you provide data they are not?

Sagarin ratings, per Nerdlinger’s chart:

(06-17-2022 06:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  So IMO, it made sense for the IB to give Tech a deadline and not wait. Otherwise, instead of 8-4 Ohio, they might have had to take an even lesser team.

Also, the IB did give LT some time, it did wait. According to the link below, they invited LA Tech Friday night, was told by Tech that they were awaiting other opportunities, then called LT again Saturday afternoon for a decision, even told Tech look, if you don't give us a decision, we're going to invite Ohio.

So the IB did wait, from Friday night to Saturday afternoon. It just didn't wait as long as Tech wanted them too. Again, that's on Tech.

They did not need that deadline. That's on the IBowl. You could game this out at the time, not just in hindsight. Even those of us not paid stupid money to fly around and pretend to consider such things could do the math.

If Tech ULM was the best matchup, they could have had it. But of course Tech was being told by the Liberty we were going there. But if the IBowl waits to see, their options go from Ohio (for sure) to one of maybe Ohio, maybe Tech, maybe Iowa State, maybe WMU (I believe). The biggest risk is WMU, who was a worse draw than Ohio that year but probably not drastically in terms of tickets sold, butts in seats, or actual attendance.

They didn't wait because they didn't like being the second choice. It wasn't about maximizing their best possible game or protecting themselves. Like you, the IBowl would prefer for little ole Tech to know and be satisfied with its place in the pecking order forever more. Maybe we could bring back the State Fair Game so the stadium could get a little more use.

In the end we're the worst off so to that degree we chose wrong. Verbal agreements are only worth the paper they're printed on. But we were just trying to get to a better bowl.

(06-16-2022 11:34 PM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 12:24 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 03:29 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 12:04 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 11:40 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  How?

Demographics and ambition. The MAC has neither. The MAC schools are reliant on talent from the South to fill key roles. Go scan their rosters, and you'll see plenty of guys from GA, AL, FL, TX. There's no MAC program that has any ambition to be anything more than a payday game for B1G teams. That has been made apparent time and again with their investment levels.

On the other hand, the CUSA teams are in solid football recruiting areas. Yes, there's limits even to the amount of talent that FL, GA, TX and the others produce. But you can find a lot more legit 2* guys with potential in those states than in the Midwestern states. Plus these CUSA programs have ambition. Liberty, of course, but these other schools moving up to D1 want to succeed. They're making investments, and they're going to expect success in football.

CUSA has a decent mix of proven, generally successful programs with new high ambition programs that the MAC doesn't. Buffalo is the only MAC program that seems to have any ambition whatsoever.

What does being in a "solid football recruiting area" do for you if all you are getting is 2 star players from that area? You can get those anywhere, including in the MAC footprint.

But D-I conferences appear to be immortal. You can't kill them if you tried.

Lots of Florida, Georgia, and Texas 2* guys would be 3* if they played in the Rust Belt. 2* players aren't all equal, and the Southern states have more of them and a deeper talent level even at that ranking.

(06-16-2022 11:23 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 11:38 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  CUSA will overtake the MAC again in a few years. People need to calm down and let it play out. Including leadership at WKU and MTSU.

Not sure the only G5 ahead of CUSA now is MWC. Will be hard to overtake one who you are ahead of.

Dude. CUSA is dead last right now until some of the FCS call-ups prove themselves. The remaining schools haven't been good enough to carry NMSU and all the FCS schools. You'll surpass the MAC, as I've argued, but I doubt CUSA even gets past the Sun Belt in performance or perception. Sun Belt has some dead weight like ULM, but adding Marshall and Southern Miss to the lineup is a huge boost. You'll need every CUSA school punching at or above their weight to get past the Sun Belt. There's a reason that Marshall, USM, and Old Dominion left CUSA for the Sun Belt.

And while the AAC overexpanded - Aresco is a moron for going to 14 - they still have several top tier G5 programs, plus UTSA is about to take off. If USF gets it together, they'd have 4-5 of the top 7 or 8 programs in the G5.

May need to get out from under your rock sometime. Your living in a dream world.

Let's see how you do once you're playing a full FBS schedule. I've seen UCF go through all of this, and it's not nearly as easy to succeed in FBS as you seem to think.

(06-17-2022 10:19 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 11:34 PM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 12:24 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 03:29 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 12:04 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Demographics and ambition. The MAC has neither. The MAC schools are reliant on talent from the South to fill key roles. Go scan their rosters, and you'll see plenty of guys from GA, AL, FL, TX. There's no MAC program that has any ambition to be anything more than a payday game for B1G teams. That has been made apparent time and again with their investment levels.

On the other hand, the CUSA teams are in solid football recruiting areas. Yes, there's limits even to the amount of talent that FL, GA, TX and the others produce. But you can find a lot more legit 2* guys with potential in those states than in the Midwestern states. Plus these CUSA programs have ambition. Liberty, of course, but these other schools moving up to D1 want to succeed. They're making investments, and they're going to expect success in football.

CUSA has a decent mix of proven, generally successful programs with new high ambition programs that the MAC doesn't. Buffalo is the only MAC program that seems to have any ambition whatsoever.

What does being in a "solid football recruiting area" do for you if all you are getting is 2 star players from that area? You can get those anywhere, including in the MAC footprint.

But D-I conferences appear to be immortal. You can't kill them if you tried.

Lots of Florida, Georgia, and Texas 2* guys would be 3* if they played in the Rust Belt. 2* players aren't all equal, and the Southern states have more of them and a deeper talent level even at that ranking.

(06-16-2022 11:23 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 11:38 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  CUSA will overtake the MAC again in a few years. People need to calm down and let it play out. Including leadership at WKU and MTSU.

Not sure the only G5 ahead of CUSA now is MWC. Will be hard to overtake one who you are ahead of.

Dude. CUSA is dead last right now until some of the FCS call-ups prove themselves. The remaining schools haven't been good enough to carry NMSU and all the FCS schools. You'll surpass the MAC, as I've argued, but I doubt CUSA even gets past the Sun Belt in performance or perception. Sun Belt has some dead weight like ULM, but adding Marshall and Southern Miss to the lineup is a huge boost. You'll need every CUSA school punching at or above their weight to get past the Sun Belt. There's a reason that Marshall, USM, and Old Dominion left CUSA for the Sun Belt.

And while the AAC overexpanded - Aresco is a moron for going to 14 - they still have several top tier G5 programs, plus UTSA is about to take off. If USF gets it together, they'd have 4-5 of the top 7 or 8 programs in the G5.

May need to get out from under your rock sometime. Your living in a dream world.

Let's see how you do once you're playing a full FBS schedule. I've seen UCF go through all of this, and it's not nearly as easy to succeed in FBS as you seem to think.

Right now he might be a little busy panhandling on the side of the road. Jacksonville U is being sued by the OVC for not paying their exit fees due to lack of funds

(06-17-2022 07:58 AM)dawgonit Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 06:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Nice photos, but that actually looks like a pretty good crowd for 42,000 out of 59,000 capacity. Sure, there weren't actually 42,000 butts in the seats, but tickets sold is what matters, and I bet if we had photos of other small bowls, or of other Independence Bowls, their "fans in the stands" wouldn't look equal to the official attendance either.

You've made the argument that the IBowl made the correct decision because of attendance when you said "it seemed to work pretty well - the best attended IB of the past decade-plus." and now you're saying attendance doesn't matter, but tickets sold is. You're changing your argument.

And it does not like a good crowd for 42,000. There was maybe 20,000 in the whole stadium and that's being nice.

(06-17-2022 06:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Also, your photos indicate a dreary day in north Louisiana. I looked up the weather for that day, and it says the temperature was 43 degrees at kickoff time, and it had been raining earlier in the morning. So weather that Ohio fans were familiar with, but for Louisiana, even Shreveport, that's cold. Not an ideal day for attracting people to the stadium.

The weather wasn't great. It was cold at the start of the game with no rain, but to assume the cold keeps Louisiana football fans away is wrong. The 2008 Independence Bowl had temperatures in the mid 40's at kickoff (comparable). It was LaTech vs NIU (both G5s with one from the midwest so comparable) and the announced attendance was basically the same (a difference of only 300 so I would say comparable) so all the variables were the same for the game (except for maybe rain earlier in the day) but look at the stands.


That's a true 40,000 in a 60,000 something stadium.

(06-17-2022 06:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  In the end, the numbers say it was the best-attended (or tickets sold) IB since 2009, and the best involving two non-power schools since 1980, which IMO is pretty good.

In the end, the numbers they released say one thing but the photos and video shows another. Tech fans will bring many more fans to the IBowl in comparable conditions. If the IBowl had waited, they would have had a much better attended game including tickets sold, not just handed out. I would say if the game had not sold out, it would have been close to it. It's clear the IBowl missed out on having a better game.

To be clear, by "attendance", I meant the announced attendance for the bowl, which I believe is based on "tickets sold". So I don't see a difference between "attendance" and "tickets sold". If I'm wrong, and they actually are defined differently, then I'll stick with the announced attendance figures as reported in the link below. IIRC, "attendance" as reported by the NCAA doesn't refer to "butts in seats", so I just don't find that meaningful. We can quibble all day about "tickets sold", "butts in seats", "tickets distributed", etc. I guess (and believe me, as a USF fan I've been involved in that over our football attendance), but unless there is reason to believe the IB changed its method of reporting announced attendance from year to year, these figures are comparable, and they say the 2012 game is the "best attended" since 2009, and better than the LT appearances in 2008 and 2019.

I agree that the IB likely could have had a better game had LT chosen to accept the invitation when it was on the table, but they didn't, and the IB ended up a lot better off than LT did, I think.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/bow...-bowl.html

(06-17-2022 08:29 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 07:31 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 12:10 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 11:34 PM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 12:24 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Dude. CUSA is dead last right now until some of the FCS call-ups prove themselves. The remaining schools haven't been good enough to carry NMSU and all the FCS schools. You'll surpass the MAC, as I've argued, but I doubt CUSA even gets past the Sun Belt in performance or perception. Sun Belt has some dead weight like ULM, but adding Marshall and Southern Miss to the lineup is a huge boost. You'll need every CUSA school punching at or above their weight to get past the Sun Belt. There's a reason that Marshall, USM, and Old Dominion left CUSA for the Sun Belt.

And while the AAC overexpanded - Aresco is a moron for going to 14 - they still have several top tier G5 programs, plus UTSA is about to take off. If USF gets it together, they'd have 4-5 of the top 7 or 8 programs in the G5.

May need to get out from under your rock sometime. Your living in a dream world.

Could you provide data to your claim that C-USA is ahead of every G5 except the MWC?

Can you provide data they are not?

Sagarin ratings, per Nerdlinger’s chart:

My unweighted 10 year MSR tells the same story. I exclude 2020 because of COVID, but still have 10 years of data.

63.9 MWC
61.3 AAC
59.8 MAC
59.4 SBC
57.6 USA

That also screams "no P6".

(06-17-2022 10:23 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  the IB likely could have had a better game



and the IB ended up a lot better off than LT did, I think.

These two statements are true. The first is due to IBowl committee putting their pride ahead of their best interests.

You'll likely say the second is due to Tech doing the same, but we actually had a shot for a better bowl, whereas they had very little risk in waiting longer.

You're wrong about who is at fault here, but the fact that you've had so many responses arguing about it kind of makes your other point that Tech fans aren't great at knowing and accepting the lowly spot on the ladder you've assigned us. Won't apologize for that.

(06-17-2022 09:52 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 06:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  So IMO, it made sense for the IB to give Tech a deadline and not wait. Otherwise, instead of 8-4 Ohio, they might have had to take an even lesser team.

Also, the IB did give LT some time, it did wait. According to the link below, they invited LA Tech Friday night, was told by Tech that they were awaiting other opportunities, then called LT again Saturday afternoon for a decision, even told Tech look, if you don't give us a decision, we're going to invite Ohio.

So the IB did wait, from Friday night to Saturday afternoon. It just didn't wait as long as Tech wanted them too. Again, that's on Tech.

They did not need that deadline. That's on the IBowl. You could game this out at the time, not just in hindsight. Even those of us not paid stupid money to fly around and pretend to consider such things could do the math.

If Tech ULM was the best matchup, they could have had it. But of course Tech was being told by the Liberty we were going there. But if the IBowl waits to see, their options go from Ohio (for sure) to one of maybe Ohio, maybe Tech, maybe Iowa State, maybe WMU (I believe). The biggest risk is WMU, who was a worse draw than Ohio that year but probably not drastically in terms of tickets sold, butts in seats, or actual attendance.

They didn't wait because they didn't like being the second choice. It wasn't about maximizing their best possible game or protecting themselves. Like you, the IBowl would prefer for little ole Tech to know and be satisfied with its place in the pecking order forever more. Maybe we could bring back the State Fair Game so the stadium could get a little more use.

In the end we're the worst off so to that degree we chose wrong. Verbal agreements are only worth the paper they're printed on. But we were just trying to get to a better bowl.

To me, if someone LT is bargaining with tells LT there is a deadline for deciding whether to take their offer, and even tells LT (as the link I posted said) what they will do if the deadline passes, in that case invite a specific other school, and if LT then choose to ignore that deadline, they have absolutely zero ground to then later throw your hands up and say "why did they give us a deadline to begin with? Why didn't they wait"?

To me, that makes no sense, as it implies that LT knows better than the IB knows what is best for it. The reports say the IB told LT what was going to happen, and LT decided to wait anyway. That's on LT, to me.

LT simply miscalculated. IMO, it seems to have thought it was worth more in the bowl market than it actually was - or really, should have been. It thought it had multiple opportunities, when as it turned out there was one, and they let that get away.

I mean, let's face it. For all the talk about the 9-3 record, this is a team that had lost its last two games and fallen out of the rankings. In the end, they were the 3rd-place team from the WAC. Not the B1G, the WAC.

IMO, if you are the 3rd place team from the WAC, are unranked coming off two losses, and do not have a guaranteed bowl bid, you take the first actual invite that comes your way. If you don't, that's on you.

(06-17-2022 10:58 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 10:23 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  the IB likely could have had a better game



and the IB ended up a lot better off than LT did, I think.

These two statements are true. The first is due to IBowl committee putting their pride ahead of their best interests.

About my first statement, maybe, but to me, the IB did just fine in 2012.

The second statement you say is true is IMO because LT just messed up. They blew a breakaway layup.

(06-17-2022 06:52 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 06:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Nice photos, but that actually looks like a pretty good crowd for 42,000 out of 59,000 capacity. Sure, there weren't actually 42,000 butts in the seats, but tickets sold is what matters

That announced crowd of 42,000 was almost certainly tickets distributed (as opposed to actually bought and paid for).

Bowls — particularly mid- and lower-tier ones like the Weedeater — give away tickets like Halloween candy. Need as many butts in the seats as possible for TV and sponsorship purposes, which produces most of the funds to keep these "events" going from year-to-year

A lot of make believe numbers in the world of bowl game attendance, local economic impact and so on.

I agree. But unless there is reason to believe that the IB's method of accounting for "attendance" differed in 2012 compared to other years, then the numbers are comparable across years.

(06-17-2022 10:59 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  LT simply miscalculated.

This is a true statement.

But it wasn't based on nothing. The miscalculation was at least partly based on communication from the Liberty. That's still ultimately on us but it's not blind arrogance or pure ignorance. We had good reason to believe we'd have another option.

As to "knowing what's best for the IBowl" that's pretty clear too. They had a first preference. They could have had their first preference. They decided other factors overruled getting their first preference. It's their game, that's their right. Doesn't mean they acted solely rationally. Just means they were willing to settle (to some degree) to make a point.

And again, we kissed and made up by 2019.

(06-17-2022 11:20 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 10:59 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  LT simply miscalculated.

This is a true statement.

But it wasn't based on nothing. The miscalculation was at least partly based on communication from the Liberty. That's still ultimately on us but it's not blind arrogance or pure ignorance. We had good reason to believe we'd have another option.

As to "knowing what's best for the IBowl" that's pretty clear too. They had a first preference. They could have had their first preference. They decided other factors overruled getting their first preference. It's their game, that's their right. Doesn't mean they acted solely rationally. Just means they were willing to settle (to some degree) to make a point.

And again, we kissed and made up by 2019.

What exactly happened with the Liberty Bowl?

(06-17-2022 11:23 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 11:20 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 10:59 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  LT simply miscalculated.

This is a true statement.

But it wasn't based on nothing. The miscalculation was at least partly based on communication from the Liberty. That's still ultimately on us but it's not blind arrogance or pure ignorance. We had good reason to believe we'd have another option.

As to "knowing what's best for the IBowl" that's pretty clear too. They had a first preference. They could have had their first preference. They decided other factors overruled getting their first preference. It's their game, that's their right. Doesn't mean they acted solely rationally. Just means they were willing to settle (to some degree) to make a point.

And again, we kissed and made up by 2019.

What exactly happened with the Liberty Bowl?

They took Iowa State instead. They obviously have a vested interest in keeping their options open as well. If ISU didn't come available, we were clearly the backup plan. So they strung us along.

Worked out bad, I'm not denying that.

(06-17-2022 10:21 AM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(06-17-2022 10:19 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 11:34 PM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(06-16-2022 12:24 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(06-15-2022 03:29 PM)ken d Wrote:  What does being in a "solid football recruiting area" do for you if all you are getting is 2 star players from that area? You can get those anywhere, including in the MAC footprint.

But D-I conferences appear to be immortal. You can't kill them if you tried.

Lots of Florida, Georgia, and Texas 2* guys would be 3* if they played in the Rust Belt. 2* players aren't all equal, and the Southern states have more of them and a deeper talent level even at that ranking.

(06-16-2022 11:23 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  Not sure the only G5 ahead of CUSA now is MWC. Will be hard to overtake one who you are ahead of.

Dude. CUSA is dead last right now until some of the FCS call-ups prove themselves. The remaining schools haven't been good enough to carry NMSU and all the FCS schools. You'll surpass the MAC, as I've argued, but I doubt CUSA even gets past the Sun Belt in performance or perception. Sun Belt has some dead weight like ULM, but adding Marshall and Southern Miss to the lineup is a huge boost. You'll need every CUSA school punching at or above their weight to get past the Sun Belt. There's a reason that Marshall, USM, and Old Dominion left CUSA for the Sun Belt.

And while the AAC overexpanded - Aresco is a moron for going to 14 - they still have several top tier G5 programs, plus UTSA is about to take off. If USF gets it together, they'd have 4-5 of the top 7 or 8 programs in the G5.

May need to get out from under your rock sometime. Your living in a dream world.

Let's see how you do once you're playing a full FBS schedule. I've seen UCF go through all of this, and it's not nearly as easy to succeed in FBS as you seem to think.

Right now he might be a little busy panhandling on the side of the road. Jacksonville U is being sued by the OVC for not paying their exit fees due to lack of funds

Oh no!!! Does Judy know that they are contract breakers?????

(06-17-2022 12:01 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  Oh no!!! Does Judy know that they are contract breakers?????

The safe answer, as always, is "probably not"

It would be really for CUSA to fold now as they have a group of schools who really don't have anywhere else to go when looking at the AAC, SunBelt, MWC and MAC

It all depends on what the Big 12 does and what the new "Magic number" is.

The magic number for G5 used to be 12, but now its 14 with the AAC and Sunbelt going to 14, the MAC trying to go to 14 and MWC being open to it if they could have gotten the right Texas schools.

If the Big 12 goes to back to 14 or pushes up to 16 after Texas and Oklahoma leave, depending on who is chosen, the MWC and/or AAC will need replacements.

If the Big 12 goes to 16 does the AAC and/or Sunbelt go to 16?

The AAC could takes MTSU and Louisiana Tech to replace Memphis and SMU. There is also the possibility that a post Boise-SDSU MWC might not work for Colorado St and Air Force and they would reconsider the AAC offer. If that happens the MWC would have to take UTEP and NMSU, especially if the Big 12 took Boise and/or SDSU.

If everyone goes to 16, it would be tough on CUSA, but I think they have a core group of schools now as well as a willing and able upgrade pool to chose from that they will be able to survive. Had MTSU and WKU left it would have been very interesting but now in this present moment I just don't see it