(01-27-2023 01:36 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 10:51 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 10:14 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 10:02 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 07:58 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  If they get to 12 it will be better especially for the next TV deal.

Why?

Going to 12 teams gives them more inventory for network partners. That would allow them to get more $$ in the next Deal. This where CUSA may have an advantage over MAC. They can still expand and while the new media deal will not be P5 level, the new inventory can help increase the next deal!

Per school?

I still don't understand the continued insistence that more inventory leads to more money. The conference is just the teams in it. Nobody cares about the total conference contract - it only matters per school.

If CUSA could get $100 for ten schools and $120 for twelve schools, that's "more money in the next deal" technically. But who is that better for? If you could get $100 for ten schools but $110 for 12 schools, that's also technically "more money in the next deal" but is actually worse for everyone (except maybe the 11th and 12th schools, depending on what they'd have made in their previous conference).


Y'all have heard of division right? That's still a thing in math?

Sorry if this comes across too strong.

It's just that I've been reading the argument forever and somehow it keeps coming up - Kennesaw State isn't USC. Tarrleton and SFA aren't OU and UT. You've got to remember the denominator.

I guess it's sort of message board culture to repeat the same conversations with different people (sometimes the same people) so it often seems more frustrating when our pet peeves get scratched than it really ought to.

I think if the WACSun thing works, that makes it easier for CUSA just to stick at 10 and see how the landscape shakes out. The FCS to FBS process is 2 years long and cumbersome. Having a group of schools already into or thru that transition takes the waiting period out and makes expansion easier if you need or want it..CUSA being part of the CFP is going to make it a step up for those WACSun schools.. But, if the WACSun move doesn't happen, that might prod CUSA into earlier invitations to start the transition if they see the AAC or MWC losing schools and eyeing their members again..

CUSA was in a tough spot during last year's expansion shake out..The MAC didn't have any schools the AAC wanted. The Sunbelt was seemingly protected by ESPN, and CUSA was unfortunate to have desirable schools and not be under the ESPN umbrella, along with having a terrible media deal. At least now, ESPN might not want to mess up their mid-week schedule so they might push back on more AAC raids..But, they probably can't stop the MWC.

(01-27-2023 02:23 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  that might prod CUSA into earlier invitations to start the transition if they see the AAC or MWC losing schools and eyeing their members again..

I remain adamantly opposed to expansion for the sake of defense.

You could potentially sell me on expansion to 12 (might be an uphill battle, but doable), but this wouldn't factor. Not one bit.

You should only expand if you want to expand (for good reasons). We might lose an outlying school or two (leaving us within the minimum number of teams for continued existence) just isn't worth pursuing.

If you can get more money, reduce travel, add good teams, get a better media deal (depending on what we mean by "better") - sure. Let's talk about it.

But "it just feels right" or "but what if this or that or a thousand other things happen" or "bigger overall media deal" or "building a bridge" or "one time they got an undeserved chance to play in a BCS bowl" or "it's fun to talk about" aren't really good reasons to expand to 12 (or 10).

(01-27-2023 02:34 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:23 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  that might prod CUSA into earlier invitations to start the transition if they see the AAC or MWC losing schools and eyeing their members again..

I remain adamantly opposed to expansion for the sake of defense.

You could potentially sell me on expansion to 12 (might be an uphill battle, but doable), but this wouldn't factor. Not one bit.

You should only expand if you want to expand (for good reasons). We might lose an outlying school or two (leaving us within the minimum number of teams for continued existence) just isn't worth pursuing.

If you can get more money, reduce travel, add good teams, get a better media deal (depending on what we mean by "better") - sure. Let's talk about it.

But "it just feels right" or "but what if this or that or a thousand other things happen" or "bigger overall media deal" or "building a bridge" or "one time they got an undeserved chance to play in a BCS bowl" or "it's fun to talk about" aren't really good reasons to expand to 12 (or 10).

Yeah yeah, I know you were fine at nine..But that's like the last 2 wolly mammoths being happy to have all the grass for themselves..Great for now, bad for later. At least 10 gives the conference a small cushion so they don't have to go into survival mode if they lose 2 schools..

I think 12 or 14 are the sweet spots, but I'm not sure who the 2 or 4 are at this moment..So, I think you sit back, let the conferences above us make their moves, then see who has risen to the top among the WACSun, independents, or maybe the Dakota's for football only..

I think the 5 CUSA schools that remained blame to much of getting raided on having 14 members, when in reality it was always the bad media deal that put stability in peril.. I also think 1 school in particular that was part of the old group was the equivalent of marrying someone with 7 previously failed marriages who is in honeymoon mode the 1st year, then starts ripping the family apart on a daily basis..lol

(01-27-2023 03:31 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:34 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:23 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  that might prod CUSA into earlier invitations to start the transition if they see the AAC or MWC losing schools and eyeing their members again..

I remain adamantly opposed to expansion for the sake of defense.

You could potentially sell me on expansion to 12 (might be an uphill battle, but doable), but this wouldn't factor. Not one bit.

You should only expand if you want to expand (for good reasons). We might lose an outlying school or two (leaving us within the minimum number of teams for continued existence) just isn't worth pursuing.

If you can get more money, reduce travel, add good teams, get a better media deal (depending on what we mean by "better") - sure. Let's talk about it.

But "it just feels right" or "but what if this or that or a thousand other things happen" or "bigger overall media deal" or "building a bridge" or "one time they got an undeserved chance to play in a BCS bowl" or "it's fun to talk about" aren't really good reasons to expand to 12 (or 10).

Yeah yeah, I know you were fine at nine..But that's like the last 2 wolly mammoths being happy to have all the grass for themselves..Great for now, bad for later. At least 10 gives the conference a small cushion so they don't have to go into survival mode if they lose 2 schools..

I think 12 or 14 are the sweet spots, but I'm not sure who the 2 or 4 are at this moment..So, I think you sit back, let the conferences above us make their moves, then see who has risen to the top among the WACSun, independents, or maybe the Dakota's for football only..

I think the 5 CUSA schools that remained blame to much of getting raided on having 14 members, when in reality it was always the bad media deal that put stability in peril.. I also think 1 school in particular that was part of the old group was the equivalent of marrying someone with 7 previously failed marriages who is in honeymoon mode the 1st year, then starts ripping the family apart on a daily basis..lol

What INUTECH is saying is why bring them up now when they will be available IF you need them in a couple of years. Where else are they going to go? Talk to them, tell them to be ready if the need arises. CUSA is fine at 10.

(01-27-2023 04:33 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 03:31 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:34 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:23 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  that might prod CUSA into earlier invitations to start the transition if they see the AAC or MWC losing schools and eyeing their members again..

I remain adamantly opposed to expansion for the sake of defense.

You could potentially sell me on expansion to 12 (might be an uphill battle, but doable), but this wouldn't factor. Not one bit.

You should only expand if you want to expand (for good reasons). We might lose an outlying school or two (leaving us within the minimum number of teams for continued existence) just isn't worth pursuing.

If you can get more money, reduce travel, add good teams, get a better media deal (depending on what we mean by "better") - sure. Let's talk about it.

But "it just feels right" or "but what if this or that or a thousand other things happen" or "bigger overall media deal" or "building a bridge" or "one time they got an undeserved chance to play in a BCS bowl" or "it's fun to talk about" aren't really good reasons to expand to 12 (or 10).

Yeah yeah, I know you were fine at nine..But that's like the last 2 wolly mammoths being happy to have all the grass for themselves..Great for now, bad for later. At least 10 gives the conference a small cushion so they don't have to go into survival mode if they lose 2 schools..

I think 12 or 14 are the sweet spots, but I'm not sure who the 2 or 4 are at this moment..So, I think you sit back, let the conferences above us make their moves, then see who has risen to the top among the WACSun, independents, or maybe the Dakota's for football only..

I think the 5 CUSA schools that remained blame to much of getting raided on having 14 members, when in reality it was always the bad media deal that put stability in peril.. I also think 1 school in particular that was part of the old group was the equivalent of marrying someone with 7 previously failed marriages who is in honeymoon mode the 1st year, then starts ripping the family apart on a daily basis..lol

What INUTECH is saying is why bring them up now when they will be available IF you need them in a couple of years. Where else are they going to go? Talk to them, tell them to be ready if the need arises. CUSA is fine at 10.

100%

Where else is Tarrleton State or SFA going to go? If you need them, invite them. If you don't need them, don't (for now, until you do).

I don't necessarily blame having 14 members for CUSA falling apart (although it wasn't really a good number to have - despite some travel savings). I will say that having 14 members didn't do any of the things that people always point to as far as the benefits of having more members.

Didn't get us a good media deal.

Didn't really protect us from losing teams (I know that in theory, if we only had 12 and still lost 9 we'd have been worse off with 3 left than the 5 we had, but my response is that if we only have 12 maybe we only lose 7, the counter-factual game works both ways).

It isn't a great number for anyone (in my opinion) but clearly wasn't the right 14 for us. I don't think there is a right 12 (much less 14) to be had right now for CUSA, so 10 is preferable. To the extent that there might be a "right" 12, the reasoning for that isn't "what if two leave" it's all the other stuff that makes those the right two schools to add. And for that matter, I don't think you can get a "right" 12 out of this group, we're not the "right" 10 for each other as it stands. But it's possible that you could one day find 2 schools that would be worth adding.

(01-27-2023 05:07 PM)inutech Wrote:  ... I don't necessarily blame having 14 members for CUSA falling apart (although it wasn't really a good number to have - despite some travel savings). I will say that having 14 members didn't do any of the things that people always point to as far as the benefits of having more members. ...

Quite. There seems to be a "sweet spot" for conference size at different levels of the football hierarchy and under different revenue opportunities in different eras. There was a time when eight was a great size, but ten was also OK. There was a time when 12 was ideal ... big enough to have two six team divisions and be allowed to have a CCG, but not sharing up the extra revenue any more than necessary. It seems that at the top of the ladder, the sweet spot has moved to 14, but for the right schools it can be worthwhile to be "a little too big" at 16.

But the idea that "more is always better" just doesn't seem plausible. If CUSA can satisfy their media partners with ten schools, and with so much of their revenue coming from the Go5 share of the CFP money, it just might not make any sense to expand any further than the 10 school cap on the per-school Go5 payout.

(01-27-2023 05:56 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 05:07 PM)inutech Wrote:  ... I don't necessarily blame having 14 members for CUSA falling apart (although it wasn't really a good number to have - despite some travel savings). I will say that having 14 members didn't do any of the things that people always point to as far as the benefits of having more members. ...

Quite. There seems to be a "sweet spot" for conference size at different sets of the football hierarchy and under different revenue opportunities in different eras. There was a time when eight was a great size, but ten was also OK. There was a time when 12 was ideal ... big enough to have two six team divisions and be allowed to have a CCG, but not sharing up the extra revenue any more than necessary. It seems that at the top of the ladder, the sweet spot has moved to 14, but for the right schools it can be worthwhile to be "a little too big" at 16.

But the idea that "more is always better" just doesn't seem plausible. If CUSA can satisfy their media partner with ten school, and with so much of their revenue coming from the Go5 share of the CFP money, it just might not make any sense to expand any further than the 10 school cap on the per-school Go5 payout.

... but but but where will the other 50 schools that DavidSt wants to join fbs go? Somebody think of the children!

(01-22-2023 04:06 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 03:18 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 03:04 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  The thread's premise was already invalid when the first word in the title was factually mistaken.

Go back a little bit in the thread. There's an article I posted that lays out their plan to move up, with or without the ASUNWAC.

Their plan is garbage. You can't just declare yourself FBS.

That's a matter of NCAA Division I rules, and a matter of real world politics. It's very doubtful that the G5 schools and FCS schools would stand idly by and watch the ASUN / WAC group jump to FBS status without investing the resources that other G5 schools have, and further decimate FCS. And the P5 isn't going to lift a finger to help, because it doesn't benefit them in any way.

Liberty is that rarity among FCSs that was granted FBS status (indy waiver) only because they threatened to sue the NCAA's archaic conference invite rules when LU meet all the FBS requirements without receiving an invite. I believe the same rules still apply today for individual schools wanting to move up. A school gets an invite or has to receive a waiver. Then there is the ASun/WAC conference wanna bees.

(01-27-2023 02:34 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:23 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  that might prod CUSA into earlier invitations to start the transition if they see the AAC or MWC losing schools and eyeing their members again..

I remain adamantly opposed to expansion for the sake of defense.

You could potentially sell me on expansion to 12 (might be an uphill battle, but doable), but this wouldn't factor. Not one bit.

You should only expand if you want to expand (for good reasons). We might lose an outlying school or two (leaving us within the minimum number of teams for continued existence) just isn't worth pursuing.

If you can get more money, reduce travel, add good teams, get a better media deal (depending on what we mean by "better") - sure. Let's talk about it.

But "it just feels right" or "but what if this or that or a thousand other things happen" or "bigger overall media deal" or "building a bridge" or "one time they got an undeserved chance to play in a BCS bowl" or "it's fun to talk about" aren't really good reasons to expand to 12 (or 10).

What if you don't have the minimum number of teams?? Would LaTech try to rebuild C-USA again or would LaTech say "The heck with it, " and abandon C-USA for another conference??

(01-28-2023 01:56 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:34 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:23 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  that might prod CUSA into earlier invitations to start the transition if they see the AAC or MWC losing schools and eyeing their members again..

I remain adamantly opposed to expansion for the sake of defense.

You could potentially sell me on expansion to 12 (might be an uphill battle, but doable), but this wouldn't factor. Not one bit.

You should only expand if you want to expand (for good reasons). We might lose an outlying school or two (leaving us within the minimum number of teams for continued existence) just isn't worth pursuing.

If you can get more money, reduce travel, add good teams, get a better media deal (depending on what we mean by "better") - sure. Let's talk about it.

But "it just feels right" or "but what if this or that or a thousand other things happen" or "bigger overall media deal" or "building a bridge" or "one time they got an undeserved chance to play in a BCS bowl" or "it's fun to talk about" aren't really good reasons to expand to 12 (or 10).

What if you don't have the minimum number of teams?? Would LaTech try to rebuild C-USA again or would LaTech say "The heck with it, " and abandon C-USA for another conference??

if they have an invite, they'll leave.
if not, they'll invite fcs schools to get back up to 8-9-10

(01-28-2023 02:08 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-28-2023 01:56 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:34 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 02:23 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  that might prod CUSA into earlier invitations to start the transition if they see the AAC or MWC losing schools and eyeing their members again..

I remain adamantly opposed to expansion for the sake of defense.

You could potentially sell me on expansion to 12 (might be an uphill battle, but doable), but this wouldn't factor. Not one bit.

You should only expand if you want to expand (for good reasons). We might lose an outlying school or two (leaving us within the minimum number of teams for continued existence) just isn't worth pursuing.

If you can get more money, reduce travel, add good teams, get a better media deal (depending on what we mean by "better") - sure. Let's talk about it.

But "it just feels right" or "but what if this or that or a thousand other things happen" or "bigger overall media deal" or "building a bridge" or "one time they got an undeserved chance to play in a BCS bowl" or "it's fun to talk about" aren't really good reasons to expand to 12 (or 10).

What if you don't have the minimum number of teams?? Would LaTech try to rebuild C-USA again or would LaTech say "The heck with it, " and abandon C-USA for another conference??

if they have an invite, they'll leave.
if not, they'll invite fcs schools to get back up to 8-9-10

Given the option, obviously we'd take something else. Without that option, we bring in enough FCS teams to make a conference.

I dont think Peay is actually moving up in 2024.

It seems Austin Peay's goal for FBS status is 2025

https://www.theleafchronicle.com/story/s...696103007/

(01-29-2023 10:37 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  It seems Austin Peay's goal for FBS status is 2025

https://www.theleafchronicle.com/story/s...696103007/

Tennessee's goal is to win a national championship by 2025. Doesn't mean it's going to happen, or is a realistic aspiration.

(01-29-2023 10:37 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  It seems Austin Peay's goal for FBS status is 2025

https://www.theleafchronicle.com/story/s...696103007/

Quote:Once our facilities plan is done, we'll start getting recommendations and get an idea of what these changes will cost and at that point we'll go through all the approvals," Harrison said. "We have to work with the state so we still have a lot of steps. It's not like we're trying to do this by tomorrow. It's going to take a few years to put this plan into place from a facilities standpoint."

They may be saying 2025 to create some excitement, but reading the article it feels like more of a 5-10 year path that relies on either a CUSA invite or the ASun/WAC move succeeding.

(01-29-2023 10:53 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 10:37 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  It seems Austin Peay's goal for FBS status is 2025

https://www.theleafchronicle.com/story/s...696103007/

Tennessee's goal is to win a national championship by 2025. Doesn't mean it's going to happen, or is a realistic aspiration.

Agree. Austin Peay is facing a huge climb if it truly seeks FBS football status. The schools' annual athletics budget seemingly is only $15 million. And the football stadium seats a mere 10,000.

(01-29-2023 10:55 AM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 10:37 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  It seems Austin Peay's goal for FBS status is 2025

https://www.theleafchronicle.com/story/s...696103007/

Quote:Once our facilities plan is done, we'll start getting recommendations and get an idea of what these changes will cost and at that point we'll go through all the approvals," Harrison said. "We have to work with the state so we still have a lot of steps. It's not like we're trying to do this by tomorrow. It's going to take a few years to put this plan into place from a facilities standpoint."

They may be saying 2025 to create some excitement, but reading the article it feels like more of a 5-10 year path that relies on either a CUSA invite or the ASun/WAC move succeeding.

Well put.

(01-27-2023 09:42 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 08:59 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 04:40 AM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-25-2023 08:52 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 02:11 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  Will the Sunbelt take them and EKU as the 15th and 16th members? I doubt MTSU is going to allow another school close to Nashville to be in the same conference as them, but I could be wrong. They may have a better relationship with each other than WKU has with EKU.

I think it may be CUSA that invites Austin Peay

The only way Austin Peay and or Eastern Kentucky would join the Conference USA is if Middle Tennessee and Western Kentucky left. The latter is going to block the former from joining while they're in the conference.

That’s not how it works. The conference will expand with the best candidates and the “school with a grudge” will always acquiesce and vote them in. You think A&M wanted UT and OU in the SEC? No, but they did what's best for the conference.

Tell that to ECU, who was blocked by Louisville from becoming a founding member of Conference USA. Louisville said they would leave the conference if ECU was allowed to join.

And Louisville would have gone where???

(01-29-2023 02:53 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 09:42 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 08:59 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 04:40 AM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-25-2023 08:52 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  I think it may be CUSA that invites Austin Peay

The only way Austin Peay and or Eastern Kentucky would join the Conference USA is if Middle Tennessee and Western Kentucky left. The latter is going to block the former from joining while they're in the conference.

That’s not how it works. The conference will expand with the best candidates and the “school with a grudge” will always acquiesce and vote them in. You think A&M wanted UT and OU in the SEC? No, but they did what's best for the conference.

Tell that to ECU, who was blocked by Louisville from becoming a founding member of Conference USA. Louisville said they would leave the conference if ECU was allowed to join.

And Louisville would have gone where???

I have no idea. Their threat worked though, as ECU wasn't admitted for the start of CUSA.

https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/VA-news/VA-Pi...090161.htm

(01-30-2023 08:48 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(01-29-2023 02:53 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 09:42 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(01-27-2023 08:59 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 04:40 AM)andybible1995 Wrote:  The only way Austin Peay and or Eastern Kentucky would join the Conference USA is if Middle Tennessee and Western Kentucky left. The latter is going to block the former from joining while they're in the conference.

That’s not how it works. The conference will expand with the best candidates and the “school with a grudge” will always acquiesce and vote them in. You think A&M wanted UT and OU in the SEC? No, but they did what's best for the conference.

Tell that to ECU, who was blocked by Louisville from becoming a founding member of Conference USA. Louisville said they would leave the conference if ECU was allowed to join.

And Louisville would have gone where???

I have no idea. Their threat worked though, as ECU wasn't admitted for the start of CUSA.

https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/VA-news/VA-Pi...090161.htm

Louisville loves playing that role. Kept WKU from the Metro and combination of Metro/Great Midwest (C-USA 1.0) in the 90's.

Ironically, in C-USA 3.0 some of those lost rivalries would be rekindled (UAB and ODU). Now they are lost again (UAB to AAC, ODU back to the SBC).

I can't complain too much though. C-USA 4.0 looks to be a solid hoops league on paper. Maybe the best we have been in since the pre 91 SBC.