I know UTSA will fight for Texas St. Not sure where UTEP, UNT, and Rice would be on that though. LA Tech may fight for UL. NMSU basketball is a good add, and stAte adds Arkansas and have been improving across the board.
(04-08-2013 12:17 PM)slycat Wrote: LA Tech fans seem anti UL
LTU cannot be anti UL even if they are. Louisiana is an LSU vs everyone else state, and both UL and LTU have too many issues more important than sports to create a schism. They will support us publicly and privately.
But it makes perfect sense to invite a bad GSU program, they have a huge television market, and JMS has a huge budget, yet an FCS program. So there you go.
(This post was last modified: 04-08-2013 12:31 PM by CajunExpress.)
“We've modeled it at 16, and it does kind of create some divisions that are a little more geographically connected,” Banowsky said.
Currently the debate had been the block of USM, UAB, MT and WKU, who goes east, who goes west. It would currently appear that USM and UAB will be headed west. So under that set up the west division stretches seven schools from El Paso to Birmingham. If two east schools were added, one of MT/WKU pushes west also, not only breaking up that rivalry, but making the west division expand it's footprint. If two west schools were added, instead of seven schools stretching from El Paso to Birmingham, you end up with eight schools stretching from El Paso to Hattiesburg and UAB gets to be in the east, where they make more sense.
If C-USA does go to 16, I'll be surprised if either addition is in the east, I'd be shocked if they both were. I think it would most definitely be two out of the three of Louisiana, stAte, and Texas State.
(04-08-2013 12:25 PM)slycat Wrote: If they want western schools then its probably between UL, stAte, TXST, and NMSU.
NMSU would be nuts. The only reason to take them would be as a travel partner to UTEP. A travel partner that UTEP doesn't necessarily want. And if UTEP ever did go to the MWC then CUSA would be stuck with another outlier of questionable benefit instead of being free and clear after UTEP left.
The issue with TXST is too many Texas teams in that voting bloc already.
The issue with UL is whether Tech really wants to share their toys in-state.
The issue with stAte is whether they can convince the others that they actually on the path to increasing the budget to the right level.
TROY, ULM, App State, Ga Southern will be in the belt forever. too small a market. only way we get out is if one of us Bust the BCS a few times and grows the brand.
(04-08-2013 12:47 PM)Atlanta Trojan Wrote: TROY, ULM, App State, Ga Southern will be in the belt forever. too small a market. only way we get out is if one of us Bust the BCS a few times and grows the brand.
(04-08-2013 12:38 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote: USA will never get in C-USA as long as USM is in the league. They want the perceived advantage over USA since they recruit Mobile heavily.
They sorta need two in the West right now. UL and stAte make the most sense. Both tie east and west together and are flexible to go east or west as needed in the future. stAte fills in the map with a new state and UL has a very strong built-in regional appeal.
Makes too much sense for it to happen.
The word was that they promised NMSU after the last round like they did WKU. Why I have absolutely no clue. But you have to figure NMSU has a leg up there regardless.
