+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: SunBeltbbs (/forum-317.html)
+---- Forum: Sun Belt Conference Talk (/forum-296.html)
+---- Thread: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective (/thread-561440.html)
Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - ManzanoWolf - 03-15-2012 04:08 PM
Saw this on the CUSA Board . . it is a good read . .
While Holland reiterated his support for the merger, he echoed Ballard’s sentiment as well.
“We should be anxious about signing this agreement,” Holland said. “I don’t think there’s any question about that. We have zero details about what it will look like in the final stage, but we need to be in the room when the details are determined or we’re going to be on the outside looking in with no input.”
Ballard said he expected three to four months of “more important discussions” about laying the groundwork for the new conference after the agreements are signed by members, and the all-important discussions about TV revenue would follow.
“I think the real key details will depend upon what will happen with the TV contracts,” Ballard said, adding that he believes the league is committed to 24 total members in the long term. “There are certainly some areas of concern there, but the biggest single event is if and when we were to sign over our TV rights to a new conference because that would be more binding and probably much harder to exit from than the situation that we’re currently in.”
Holland largely put to rest the notion of ECU returning to independent status if the merger does not work for the university. He detailed the painful football scheduling process in the school’s previous run as an independent, and said he didn’t think it was possible to devise a 12-game schedule in today’s environment without conference affiliation.
Ballard and Holland stand in agreement that if the merger plans don’t suit ECU, the school can still opt out of the deal.
“If at any time this looks like it’s not for us or we have a better option or if some of the worst-case scenarios unfold, I’m very confident that we can extract ourself from this new conference with a fairly minimal cost to East Carolina University,” Ballard said.
http://www.reflector.com/sports/ecu/board-discusses-new-league-991067
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - Usajags - 03-15-2012 04:21 PM
The Sun Belt needs to take that, grab a telephone, and start punching those numbers. Sounds like they don't want to be left out, but that they aren't sold on the idea the Mega Mess Alliance is the best answer.
The SBC needs to get in a room with ECU, USM, UAB, Marshall and Tulane, you could even include Tulsa, let UTEP go to the MWC/WAC. Get them into that regional, conference, contact TV execs and get some numbers and make that presentation.
What could it hurt at this point???
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - Side Show Joe - 03-15-2012 04:58 PM
(03-15-2012 04:21 PM)Usajags Wrote: The Sun Belt needs to take that, grab a telephone, and start punching those numbers. Sounds like they don't want to be left out, but that they aren't sold on the idea the Mega Mess Alliance is the best answer.
The SBC needs to get in a room with ECU, USM, UAB, Marshall and Tulane, you could even include Tulsa, let UTEP go to the MWC/WAC. Get them into that regional, conference, contact TV execs and get some numbers and make that presentation.
What could it hurt at this point???
That's funny. At no point in the article did he say, "maybe we would look into the Sun Belt".
All the Sun Belt really need to focus on is, supporting USA's move up, and continuing to build the quality of our conference. Even if a few of our programs leave for the alliance, there are still enough strong programs to continue to improve the quality. And yes, if ECU was interested in the Sun Belt of course they would be added, but lets not pursue a policy of begging. It's bush-league.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - MTowho - 03-15-2012 05:31 PM
(03-15-2012 04:21 PM)Usajags Wrote: The SBC East needs to get in a room with ECU, USM, UAB, Marshall and Tulane,
Fixed that for you. Wish it worked that way.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - ark30inf - 03-15-2012 05:41 PM
(03-15-2012 04:21 PM)Usajags Wrote: The Sun Belt needs to take that, grab a telephone, and start punching those numbers. Sounds like they don't want to be left out, but that they aren't sold on the idea the Mega Mess Alliance is the best answer.
The SBC needs to get in a room with ECU, USM, UAB, Marshall and Tulane, you could even include Tulsa, let UTEP go to the MWC/WAC. Get them into that regional, conference, contact TV execs and get some numbers and make that presentation.
What could it hurt at this point???
I personally, as an ASU fan, see the need to be in a conference with LaTech, North Texas, Louisiana, Memphis, USM, Tulsa, Tulane, Rice, Troy, USA, among others.
But it ain't gonna happen because everyone is looking for the quickest buck and the quickest shortcut and every commissioner is looking for the quickest mega-deal so they can retire as a deal-maker or get a better job as AD at Minnesota or somewhere. It's all about short-term me....rather than what is good for football and what is good for the long-term.
Except maybe for the SEC and Big 10 who are thinking about 100 year plans.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - Usajags - 03-15-2012 08:07 PM
I never said we needed to beg, just need to present another option to these schools. If we, the SBC, can get a number from the almight TV people for a conference including the current SBC and those CUSA teams, we could present a package that the Mega Mess Conference could possibly equal, but they are looking at much more expenses there way.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - b0ndsj0ns - 03-15-2012 09:55 PM
I'm quite sure if you guys could put together a proposal that was worth 2-3 million per school we'd be quite interested. However that's not happening.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - chiefsfan - 03-15-2012 09:57 PM
East Carolina is a foolish idea unless the alliance bombed so bad that the remaining CUSA schools were forced to join the SBC,
My guess is that the other way around would actually happen, East Carolina in a league inviting several SBC schools to join them.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - Usajags - 03-16-2012 09:00 AM
(03-15-2012 09:55 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: I'm quite sure if you guys could put together a proposal that was worth 2-3 million per school we'd be quite interested. However that's not happening.
The thing is the "Alliance" hasn't presented any numbers yet, you guys have no idea how much money is actually coming, especially if it goes to that rediculous number of 24 teams.
If the SBC were to bring in those CUSA teams mentioned, it would most likely result in a renaming of the conference to keep those teams happy.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - Side Show Joe - 03-16-2012 09:10 AM
(03-15-2012 08:07 PM)Usajags Wrote: I never said we needed to beg, just need to present another option to these schools. If we, the SBC, can get a number from the almight TV people for a conference including the current SBC and those CUSA teams, we could present a package that the Mega Mess Conference could possibly equal, but they are looking at much more expenses there way.
I doubt they need help figuring out their options. If we ever want to lure quality programs into the Sun Belt the best thing we can do is focus on our current membership, and build quality in our product. We must build the conference into one that is viewed in a positive light by other universities, not viewed as a conference where FCS move ups can break into the FBS.
USA is a charter member of this conference, and I have no problem with them, but looking to add other FCS programs is a big mistake in my eyes. The conference needs to wait and see what the Sun Belt will look like after the alliance is done expanding. If the Sun Belt still has eight teams after the dust settles, I don't see any reason to expand with FCS programs.
Back to the topic. If we ever want to lure quality programs to the Sun Belt, we must focus on improving what we have, and that starts with not chasing after other programs. It just looks bad. Benson chased after UNT for years when he was with the WAC. It never help our perception of their conference.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - Usajags - 03-16-2012 10:01 AM
Of course it didn't help you perception of their conference, UNT kept turning the WAC down.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - b0ndsj0ns - 03-16-2012 02:26 PM
(03-16-2012 09:00 AM)Usajags Wrote:(03-15-2012 09:55 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: I'm quite sure if you guys could put together a proposal that was worth 2-3 million per school we'd be quite interested. However that's not happening.
The thing is the "Alliance" hasn't presented any numbers yet, you guys have no idea how much money is actually coming, especially if it goes to that rediculous number of 24 teams.
If the SBC were to bring in those CUSA teams mentioned, it would most likely result in a renaming of the conference to keep those teams happy.
The name of the league has nothing to do with it. If the money was going to be better in the Sun-Belt then we would join the Sun-Belt. The Sun-Belt is not really a regional league for ECU, so the talk of massive savings in travel doesn't really apply to us. Sure for USM, UAB, and Tulane it would, but we would still have to fly to every road game, and once you've gotten on a plane it's expensive. There's not a current Sun-Belt member as close to us as Marshall is, and we fly to games there. If we were located in Georgia then I could understand the appeal, but the MAC east would actually be a more regional league for our location if we had to make that choice.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - arkstfan - 03-17-2012 01:35 AM
(03-16-2012 02:26 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:(03-16-2012 09:00 AM)Usajags Wrote:(03-15-2012 09:55 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: I'm quite sure if you guys could put together a proposal that was worth 2-3 million per school we'd be quite interested. However that's not happening.
The thing is the "Alliance" hasn't presented any numbers yet, you guys have no idea how much money is actually coming, especially if it goes to that rediculous number of 24 teams.
If the SBC were to bring in those CUSA teams mentioned, it would most likely result in a renaming of the conference to keep those teams happy.
The name of the league has nothing to do with it. If the money was going to be better in the Sun-Belt then we would join the Sun-Belt. The Sun-Belt is not really a regional league for ECU, so the talk of massive savings in travel doesn't really apply to us. Sure for USM, UAB, and Tulane it would, but we would still have to fly to every road game, and once you've gotten on a plane it's expensive. There's not a current Sun-Belt member as close to us as Marshall is, and we fly to games there. If we were located in Georgia then I could understand the appeal, but the MAC east would actually be a more regional league for our location if we had to make that choice.
What ECU needs and what it may get aren't the same thing. What ECU needs is a league that follows the Big East (pre-Westward Ho!) / ACC footprint. Right now that doesn't look possible unless there are some more FCS move-ups in the region (and with App, ODU, UNCC that's possible) or it needs the Big East to meltdown.
If that is off the table then the question is casting lot with a nation-wide effort that in reality is two conferences until championship time or saying screw it and starting from scratch.
C-USA was born with a vision of being an elite basketball conference that would also provide a football home. Considering that this year that five CUSA alums competed for the Big East hoops title and two competed for the A10 title, clearly it once was an elite hoops league. The focus shifted to football but now that has taken a hit. 18 squads have lifted the trophy as champ or co-champ of CUSA in football. Half of those titles or co-titles now belong to current entering Big East and Big XII members.
Since Louisville, USF, and Cincy left there have been 7 CUSA title games with 14 slots in those games and the departees represent half of those appearances. Houston, UCF, SMU represented only 1/4th of CUSA but half the title game appearances.
BUT Tulsa, ECU, and USM also represent 1/4th of CUSA and the other half of the title game appearances.
I would also suspect that USM and Tulsa have reservations similar to what ECU has expressed about the Alliance. I would further suspect that the three look around question the value of traveling to UTEP and further question whether Rice, Tulane, and UAB are committed enough to bring true value to their athletic departments. Last year in the BCS Rice was 82, UTEP was 94, UAB 106, and Tulane was 116.
Is the name of the game chasing markets? (all except UTEP are in large or medium markets) If it is a market chase then it doesn't really matter whether any school added is stronger than Rice or even weaker than Rice.
Is the name of the game building the strongest league? If that is the case then the question has to be asked if that can even be accomplished in the CUSA-Alliance framework given that the bottom is so weak.
In the end I think the real crux of the matter is whether ECU, USM, Tulsa are willing to walk away from some or all of UTEP, Rice, Tulane, UAB and start fresh. If the answer is NO, then the question becomes whether competing for auto bids as one of 8-12 is offset by projected revenues of being 16-24 and whether those projections are even realistic.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - b0ndsj0ns - 03-17-2012 08:07 AM
I mean what out there is left to really start over with? Mashall, USM, and ECU are similar and I would imagine we'd like to remain with those 2 and they feel the same. While Marshall and USM don't have our support level they are both near the 30k range which is pretty much the best of what's left in non-AQ in the east. For me to really want to start a new league you would have to find me 5 or 6 other programs who have that level or better of fan support. I know you'll tell me C-USA has a bunch of dogs in terms of fan support, and I am well aware of it and it bothers me to no end, but no way would I want us to leave our league behind unless we got with teams who support their programs financially and with butts in the seats. Not to mention a completely new league from scratch is not getting an auto-bid for several years, would struggle like you guys did to get bowl tie ins, and would probably cost us money in a TV deal compared to what the merger will probably get. Also Holland knows very well the angst of the fan base right now. He can't afford at this point to try to start up a league that will appear to ECU fans to be giving up or taking a step back, whether it's true or not. I think eventually you will see the east and west sides of the merger and BE reform back close to their original forms, and that we just have to kinda wait it out till that happens.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - arkstfan - 03-17-2012 08:53 AM
(03-17-2012 08:07 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: I mean what out there is left to really start over with? Mashall, USM, and ECU are similar and I would imagine we'd like to remain with those 2 and they feel the same. While Marshall and USM don't have our support level they are both near the 30k range which is pretty much the best of what's left in non-AQ in the east. For me to really want to start a new league you would have to find me 5 or 6 other programs who have that level or better of fan support. I know you'll tell me C-USA has a bunch of dogs in terms of fan support, and I am well aware of it and it bothers me to no end, but no way would I want us to leave our league behind unless we got with teams who support their programs financially and with butts in the seats. Not to mention a completely new league from scratch is not getting an auto-bid for several years, would struggle like you guys did to get bowl tie ins, and would probably cost us money in a TV deal compared to what the merger will probably get. Also Holland knows very well the angst of the fan base right now. He can't afford at this point to try to start up a league that will appear to ECU fans to be giving up or taking a step back, whether it's true or not. I think eventually you will see the east and west sides of the merger and BE reform back close to their original forms, and that we just have to kinda wait it out till that happens.
If the auto-bid were a concern the Alliance wouldn't be dissolving and starting from scratch. The Alliance is clearly banking on the NCAA interpreting that having enough schools that have been together for a long period is sufficient to get auto qualification. If that works for the "from scratch" Alliance, it works for any new conference.
I seriously doubt that ECU fans would feel any worse about aligning with 9 to 11 other southern region schools starting from scratch than they would feel about keeping the dead wood, adding a couple and seeing their team getting shipped to Fresno to play for the football title and to Las Vegas to play for the basketball tournament title.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - Usajags - 03-17-2012 11:18 AM
You guys are starting to scare me. You are actually putting thought and expectations, true expectations and common sense into your post about realignment.
I think the idea of ECU opting out and basically starting their own conference would be a good option for them. They could hand pick the teams they wanted to be
ECU
USM
Tulsa
Troy
App State
Jax State
Marshall
James Madison
There's eight. A few more potential would be
USA-Did you really think I was going to leave us out of this.
Tulane
UAB-For basketball reasons only.
The Twins=FIU&FAU
WKU-For basketball, football is still new and gaining speed
MT-Basketball, football has it's moments
That leaves Tulsa out on a major island all by itself, they may get left out of my example.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - b0ndsj0ns - 03-17-2012 11:38 AM
(03-17-2012 08:53 AM)arkstfan Wrote:(03-17-2012 08:07 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: I mean what out there is left to really start over with? Mashall, USM, and ECU are similar and I would imagine we'd like to remain with those 2 and they feel the same. While Marshall and USM don't have our support level they are both near the 30k range which is pretty much the best of what's left in non-AQ in the east. For me to really want to start a new league you would have to find me 5 or 6 other programs who have that level or better of fan support. I know you'll tell me C-USA has a bunch of dogs in terms of fan support, and I am well aware of it and it bothers me to no end, but no way would I want us to leave our league behind unless we got with teams who support their programs financially and with butts in the seats. Not to mention a completely new league from scratch is not getting an auto-bid for several years, would struggle like you guys did to get bowl tie ins, and would probably cost us money in a TV deal compared to what the merger will probably get. Also Holland knows very well the angst of the fan base right now. He can't afford at this point to try to start up a league that will appear to ECU fans to be giving up or taking a step back, whether it's true or not. I think eventually you will see the east and west sides of the merger and BE reform back close to their original forms, and that we just have to kinda wait it out till that happens.
If the auto-bid were a concern the Alliance wouldn't be dissolving and starting from scratch. The Alliance is clearly banking on the NCAA interpreting that having enough schools that have been together for a long period is sufficient to get auto qualification. If that works for the "from scratch" Alliance, it works for any new conference.
I seriously doubt that ECU fans would feel any worse about aligning with 9 to 11 other southern region schools starting from scratch than they would feel about keeping the dead wood, adding a couple and seeing their team getting shipped to Fresno to play for the football title and to Las Vegas to play for the basketball tournament title.
This will come off as insulting but the average ECU fan would view being in a conference with the southern region teams you are talking about, which obviously are Sun-Belt schools, as taking a step back and in some ways giving up. Being in a league with schools like UNLV, Fresno, New Mexico, Air Force, etc at least gives the appearance that we are aligning ourselves with the best brand names left in the non-AQ world. It will be a much easier sell to say we are going to be in a league with the MWC schools who have some nice history and name recognition. I'm sure Terry Holland has given your idea plenty of thought, but in the end he can't do something that he knows our fan base won't accept. There are already a lot of ECU fans quite upset with what we have been dealt, and it would be viewed far too negatively to start a league you are proposing.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - Side Show Joe - 03-17-2012 11:47 AM
(03-17-2012 11:18 AM)Usajags Wrote: You guys are starting to scare me. You are actually putting thought and expectations, true expectations and common sense into your post about realignment.
I think the idea of ECU opting out and basically starting their own conference would be a good option for them. They could hand pick the teams they wanted to be
ECU
USM
Tulsa
Troy
App State
Jax State
Marshall
James Madison
There's eight. A few more potential would be
USA-Did you really think I was going to leave us out of this.
Tulane
UAB-For basketball reasons only.
The Twins=FIU&FAU
WKU-For basketball, football is still new and gaining speed
MT-Basketball, football has it's moments
That leaves Tulsa out on a major island all by itself, they may get left out of my example.
In my opinion this alignment of programs would be suicide. I don't know if Troy would want to be in that conference. With the exception of Tulsa, I think that may be a little too regional. I think you might have a hard time getting most of those games on T.V. where anyone would see them play. Why Jax St. and James Madison? Do you really think Tulsa would join that?
I don't see that conference as a good alternative to the alliance, for the C-USA programs.
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - b0ndsj0ns - 03-17-2012 11:55 AM
(03-17-2012 11:18 AM)Usajags Wrote: You guys are starting to scare me. You are actually putting thought and expectations, true expectations and common sense into your post about realignment.
I think the idea of ECU opting out and basically starting their own conference would be a good option for them. They could hand pick the teams they wanted to be
ECU
USM
Tulsa
Troy
App State
Jax State
Marshall
James Madison
There's eight. A few more potential would be
USA-Did you really think I was going to leave us out of this.
Tulane
UAB-For basketball reasons only.
The Twins=FIU&FAU
WKU-For basketball, football is still new and gaining speed
MT-Basketball, football has it's moments
That leaves Tulsa out on a major island all by itself, they may get left out of my example.
Do you really think that's who ECU would pick if we were out hand picking a start up league?
RE: Update on the Alliance from ECU Perspective - arkstfan - 03-17-2012 04:33 PM
(03-17-2012 11:38 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:(03-17-2012 08:53 AM)arkstfan Wrote:(03-17-2012 08:07 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: I mean what out there is left to really start over with? Mashall, USM, and ECU are similar and I would imagine we'd like to remain with those 2 and they feel the same. While Marshall and USM don't have our support level they are both near the 30k range which is pretty much the best of what's left in non-AQ in the east. For me to really want to start a new league you would have to find me 5 or 6 other programs who have that level or better of fan support. I know you'll tell me C-USA has a bunch of dogs in terms of fan support, and I am well aware of it and it bothers me to no end, but no way would I want us to leave our league behind unless we got with teams who support their programs financially and with butts in the seats. Not to mention a completely new league from scratch is not getting an auto-bid for several years, would struggle like you guys did to get bowl tie ins, and would probably cost us money in a TV deal compared to what the merger will probably get. Also Holland knows very well the angst of the fan base right now. He can't afford at this point to try to start up a league that will appear to ECU fans to be giving up or taking a step back, whether it's true or not. I think eventually you will see the east and west sides of the merger and BE reform back close to their original forms, and that we just have to kinda wait it out till that happens.
If the auto-bid were a concern the Alliance wouldn't be dissolving and starting from scratch. The Alliance is clearly banking on the NCAA interpreting that having enough schools that have been together for a long period is sufficient to get auto qualification. If that works for the "from scratch" Alliance, it works for any new conference.
I seriously doubt that ECU fans would feel any worse about aligning with 9 to 11 other southern region schools starting from scratch than they would feel about keeping the dead wood, adding a couple and seeing their team getting shipped to Fresno to play for the football title and to Las Vegas to play for the basketball tournament title.
This will come off as insulting but the average ECU fan would view being in a conference with the southern region teams you are talking about, which obviously are Sun-Belt schools, as taking a step back and in some ways giving up. Being in a league with schools like UNLV, Fresno, New Mexico, Air Force, etc at least gives the appearance that we are aligning ourselves with the best brand names left in the non-AQ world. It will be a much easier sell to say we are going to be in a league with the MWC schools who have some nice history and name recognition. I'm sure Terry Holland has given your idea plenty of thought, but in the end he can't do something that he knows our fan base won't accept. There are already a lot of ECU fans quite upset with what we have been dealt, and it would be viewed far too negatively to start a league you are proposing.
Works for me.
CUSA aligns with a group that averages out on par with the Sun Belt, gets reduced access to post-season, plays half its championship events each year in the Mountain or Pacific time zone.
You aren't "aligning" with UNLV, Fresno, New Mexico, Air Force in the sense that those same fans you worry about will recognize. They will see Air Force in Greenville ZERO times in regular season which is the same number of times they will see Fresno, New Mexico and UNLV.
Those best remaining brand names? Let's take a gander at MWC history. Colorado State is the only remaining member of MWC that has ever won a MWC title. That was in 2002, 2000 and a share in 1999. In the same time frame: Brand name Nevada took a share of the WAC title in 2010 and 2005. Brand name Fresno took a share of the WAC in 1999. Hawaii too a share in 1999 and 2010 and outright in 2007.
Basically the western group was owned by Utah BYU, TCU, and Boise State who dominated them far more completely than the teams that CUSA lost.
UNLV never ranked in football, New Mexico 1964, Nevada last ranked in 1991, Wyoming 1996, AFA 1998, Colorado State 2000, Fresno 2004, Hawaii 06 and 07.
A high school junior (those making up next year's recruiting class) was in 7th grade when Hawaii was ranked. They were 4 years old last time AFA posted double digit wins, in second grade when Fresno did it, 10 when CSU did it, had just been born (maybe) when Wyoming posted 10 or more wins, parents were in junior high when UNLV did it, parents were in grade school when New Mexico did it. Nevada is the most recent of the bunch and they draw the worst crowds.
If you fan base thinks these are great brands, your fan base is dumb.
Opens the door for Sun Belt to gain some recruiting advantage.