I agree with every point you just made Tennessee Eagle, rep points to you sir.

(08-28-2012 07:28 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  C-USA 2013:

S. Miss
Tulsa
ECU
Marshall
Rice
Tulane
UAB
FIU
UNT
UTSA
UTEP
La Tech

Sun Belt 2013:

Troy
ASU
WKU
MTSU
USA
FAU
Ga State
Tx. State
UL-L
UL-M

Maybe in 5 years we can have this discussion again.

FIU - 2 winning seasons ever. Finished fourth in the Belt last year.
UNT - Hasn't had a winning season in over 5 years. Finished 5th in the Belt last year.
UAB - Dumpster fire of a program. No fan support (9500 against UCF, 13k for a home game with a top 15 opponent, no institutional control, awful stadium.
Tulane - Would finish in the bottom of the Belt over the recent past. This year looks awful for their program too. Private school will little connection to its city.
Rice - Maxed out as a program at 'really bad'. Flatline as far as support here in Houston. Old dump of a stadium. Tiny private school will little local support
UTEP - Hasn't won much of anything recently.
UTSA - is still playing Div II and NAIA schools
UNCC - hasn't played a down.
ODU - isn't FBS yet.


La Tech - Had its first decent year in a while last year. We'll see if their gaudy expectations this year are met.
Marshall - Decent program, but not really head and shoulders above the belt recently.
ECU - Great fan support. Overall a really good program. But has been disappointing recently.
USM - Great program, fan support and recent record. You lose them, you're in real trouble.
Tulsa - An overachiever but likely maxed out due to private school status and size.

Here's some math:

Every single team that had the option to be in CUSA or the Belt chose CUSA.

Every damn one of them, as would any other school here.

(08-28-2012 03:16 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Here's some math:

Every single team that had the option to be in CUSA or the Belt chose CUSA.

Every damn one of them, as would any other school here.

Yes, but you went to the geographic margins for your picks. For UNT, CUSA made geographic sense. Jus' sayin'. How do you see the Troy game going down.

I always think we'll win until we don't. We lost in Troy last year by one, when we quite literally gave the game away.

(08-28-2012 03:16 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Here's some math:

Every single team that had the option to be in CUSA or the Belt chose CUSA.

Every damn one of them, as would any other school here.

That is correct. But here's the thing. I live in the Nashville Area. If Georgia Southern and App end up in the SBC, every year I can easily see them play at one or more of the following WKU, MTSU, Ga STate and App. Those schools are all closer to me than Southern. When teams fit from a regional perspective, that is one of the ways (along with having competitive teams) that rivalry's begin. When this happens, more and more fans go to the games (both home and away), which means more money for the schools, which means better recruiting, which means better teams, which means a stronger conference, which ultimately brings in increased TV revenue.

Just can't get that with teams spread out all over the place. So you are correct, right now schools will leave for CUSA. But if the SBC can have a one or two successful teams soon like I mentioned earlier, I think the gap closes or SBC even passes CUSA.

Not to put down your school, but honestly what has being in the CUSA done for UAB???

It gets back to a theme in this thread: UAB gets to share in the TV and bowl revenue, which is a huge deal.

As non-cartel schools, we're all scraping for money.

That, and until the latest fruitbasket turnover, CUSA was head and shoulders above the Belt in basketball.

Sun Belt has been nicer to us than C-USA. UAB is 17-12 against Belt teams since moving to FBS.

(08-28-2012 03:43 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I always think we'll win until we don't. We lost in Troy last year by one, when we quite literally gave the game away.

You gotta be f***ng kidding?? Maybe that makes up for the year before when the Ref gave your guy a TD on the last play when he was clearly down a few yards before the goal line??

Z

(08-28-2012 04:01 PM)zeebart21 Wrote:  

(08-28-2012 03:43 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I always think we'll win until we don't. We lost in Troy last year by one, when we quite literally gave the game away.

You gotta be f***ng kidding?? Maybe that makes up for the year before when the Ref gave your guy a TD on the last play when he was clearly down a few yards before the goal line??

Z

You mean the play where the guy never controlled the ball until he was clearly armpits up over the goal line?



Yeah, maybe.

I think a clarification of the rules would help, as far as knees, butts, and possession. I'm going to assume since nobody's mentioned it that it's perfectly legal to catch a football on your back (I use the word back loosely), when your knees and butt are down, even though you appear ineligible to catch the ball before you even make the catch. Tough call. I don't think either team can say for sure.

You can absolutely catch a ball while flat on your back, assuming the ball hasn't touched the ground.

And note in your photo, that as Williams' momentum is carrying him to the ground, his clearly splayed fingers are not wrapped around the ball.

(08-28-2012 04:44 PM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  I think a clarification of the rules would help, as far as knees, butts, and possession. I'm going to assume since nobody's mentioned it that it's perfectly legal to catch a football on your back (I use the word back loosely), when your knees and butt are down, even though you appear ineligible to catch the ball before you even make the catch. Tough call. I don't think either team can say for sure.

You can catch the ball flat on your back all you want. Play is dead as soon as you catch it however.

(08-28-2012 03:16 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Here's some math:

Every single team that had the option to be in CUSA or the Belt chose CUSA.

Every damn one of them, as would any other school here.

Let's be clear, those teams left solely for the current value of CUSA's tv deal. Unfortunately for you guys, about 2/3 of the value of that deal is tied to USM, ECU and Tulsa. Of those three, ECU wants out and into the Big East and the MWC is wanting UTEP and Tulsa. I have a feeling that Tulsa and UTEP will be in play once ECU finally leaves for the Big East.

(08-28-2012 07:04 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  

(08-28-2012 03:16 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Here's some math:

Every single team that had the option to be in CUSA or the Belt chose CUSA.

Every damn one of them, as would any other school here.

Let's be clear, those teams left solely for the current value of CUSA's tv deal. Unfortunately for you guys, about 2/3 of the value of that deal is tied to USM, ECU and Tulsa. Of those three, ECU wants out and into the Big East and the MWC is wanting UTEP and Tulsa. I have a feeling that Tulsa and UTEP will be in play once ECU finally leaves for the Big East.

TBH - if the "major players" were even MORE so poached by other conferences, I don't think it would be logistical to move from SBC to CUSA. Lateral, at best, if that were to happen.

(08-28-2012 03:16 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Here's some math:

Every single team that had the option to be in CUSA or the Belt chose CUSA.

Every damn one of them, as would any other school here.

Right now yes because you have more bowl games and more revenue. Within 5 years these things will be almost equal between the Sun Belt and Conf USA. If you are going to take 'em, you better do it now.

(08-28-2012 03:59 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Sun Belt has been nicer to us than C-USA. UAB is 17-12 against Belt teams since moving to FBS.

Congrats on racking up those wins against transitioning Sun Belt teams.

(08-28-2012 07:26 PM)BlueRaiderFan. Wrote:  Congrats on racking up those wins against transitioning Sun Belt teams.

2-0 against the Red Wolves. Haven't they been playing for over 100 years?
MTSU went 1-A the same time as us. Those wins in '98 and 2000 mean less because of it?

(08-28-2012 03:56 PM)Smaug Wrote:  It gets back to a theme in this thread: UAB gets to share in the TV and bowl revenue, which is a huge deal.

As non-cartel schools, we're all scraping for money.

That, and until the latest fruitbasket turnover, CUSA was head and shoulders above the Belt in basketball.

CUSA was very lucky until the last conference turn. The Belt had to ruin its basketball product to persue football. It was painful. Now UAB and the CUSA will see some of that. But you wont fall as the Belt did.

But I'm not sure CUSA will be a two bid league after this. FIU is awful. They may be the worst team in NCAA Division I this year. Instead of fixing the issues with their program, they went with another flash hire as a coach. UNCC was good in CUSA - they were utterly awful in the A-10 - even against the bottom of the league. ODU and UNT are okay programs that are capable of competing with UAB. Obviously, losing Memphis hurts - a lot. But then again, you don't have to have them drag your football down.

(08-28-2012 07:11 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  

(08-28-2012 07:04 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  

(08-28-2012 03:16 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Here's some math:

Every single team that had the option to be in CUSA or the Belt chose CUSA.

Every damn one of them, as would any other school here.

Let's be clear, those teams left solely for the current value of CUSA's tv deal. Unfortunately for you guys, about 2/3 of the value of that deal is tied to USM, ECU and Tulsa. Of those three, ECU wants out and into the Big East and the MWC is wanting UTEP and Tulsa. I have a feeling that Tulsa and UTEP will be in play once ECU finally leaves for the Big East.

TBH - if the "major players" were even MORE so poached by other conferences, I don't think it would be logistical to move from SBC to CUSA. Lateral, at best, if that were to happen.

MT would jump at the chance to make that so called "lateral" move you speak of. Only an idiot would think differently.