http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=612...pid8820439

Quote:My MWC folks have gotten quite . . . UH isn't much better, but here is what I was told this morning by the only one at UH still providing specifics:

* SDSU told the Big East that SDSU is going back to the MWC, pending a vote by the MWC presidents. They came to Dallas only because technically the MWC has not voted yet to invite them. SDSU is "respected by everyone in the room;"

* BYU told the MWC no. BYU remained "inflexible" in its demands to control all of its media rights. It offered to not take any national TV bonuses on other games. "Thompson promised what he couldn't deliver." BYU never wanted anything more than an "affiliation" to gain access to the BCS Bowl, which they proposed to split with the conference, nothing more. The MWC presidents were split over BYU. I do not know who supported what.

* The MWC offered BYU and UH (and they think everyone in the conference) that the MWC would waive exit fees if they left to join a Power 5 Conference;

* UH and SMU is staying in the Big East;

* Every one in the Big East has "resigned themselves" that new additions will come from Conference USA for now. Aresco has said the TV numbers don't work for MAC schools. UMass lacks internal administration, big donor, and alumni support to commit long-term at the level it is being asked to commit. Average attendance levels at Gillette was the deciding factor because UMass could offer no explanation of how it plans to increase attendance "dramatically;"

* Aresco is telling conference presidents that adding new FBS schools with "growth potential" like ODU, James Madison, UTSA, etc. despite expected attendance over 30,000 at some is not well-received at this time by TV partners;

* Tulsa is a certainty even if SDSU flips. Tulsa is favored because of its academic reputation and success on the field, but mostly because it completes a "western division" of Tulsa, UH, SMU, Tulane, Memphis, and Cincinnati. Tulsa comes in 2014. Tulsa also completes the core of schools that the remaining conference leaders USF, UCF, UH, SMU, and ECU want to move forward on their own if UConn, Cinncinnati, Navy, leave. . . Southern Mississippi has no support by existing Big East presidents or Areasco at this time . . .

* Navy is still committed, but can not come before 2015;

* The conference will be a 12-team conference;

* A key discussion point is whether to bolster the basketball strength by adding 2-4 schools like St. Louis, VCU, Wichita State, Belmont, etc. There is no consensus on who to invite if this is done;

And for what it's worth . . . the PAC-12's Larry Scott told Dr. Khator this week that for now, UH is first on his list if they expand because of the "enormous potential" at Houston . . . SMU is not a consideration at this time . . . if this happens, "it happens in the next two years, or it never happens" . . .

Likely UC and USF blocking us

and as I said before.. the "existing" BE presidents and Areasco (and it was the same for Meatball when he was the commissioner) can go fly a kite...

And that's been my opinion since TCU pulled their out-in-out act.. that was the first warning flag, and I've had no interest in even pursuing the BE since then.

Quote:A key discussion point is whether to bolster the basketball strength by adding 2-4 schools like St. Louis, VCU, Wichita State, Belmont, etc. There is no consensus on who to invite if this is done

LOL.. they don't learn anything do they? HYBRIDS do not work... that's why' they're in the mess they're in now.

btw..

Quote: Every one in the Big East has "resigned themselves" that new additions will come from Conference USA for now.

I just have to ask the Departees: "Do you feel the love"????? We don't want you, but because we have to...

It's the darndest thing. You think your sisters schools with long time contemporaries, just to find out they didn't like you after all. It'ss really is us against the world. #crazy

(01-12-2013 05:31 PM)USM Wrote:  the PAC-12's Larry Scott told Dr. Khator this week that for now, UH is first on his list if they expand because of the "enormous potential" at Houston

I lean towards never happens with the PAC and Houston. If USM wasn't in such financial dire and hadn't tanked last year's season the lack of support would be flipped imo. Sad because I like USM Tulane games. I hope we develop an OOC relationship then. Everything else makes sense.

So OCUSA is reunited as NBE. Hopefully that translates to a bigger $ bump. With inflation and UCONN/Cinci I'm hopeful the $ bump is bigger than just 1-2 mill more but I'm not holding my breath.

(01-12-2013 05:39 PM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  It's the darndest thing. You think your sisters schools with long time contemporaries, just to find out they didn't like you after all. It'ss really is us against the world. #crazy

Eitg.. I think the difference is.. this only includes (thus the word "existing" was added)..

USF, Temple, UConn, Cincy (and maybe the C7?) (And rumour has it Uconn wasn't even at the meeting?)

If it were up to me, USM would have my vote for the BE. I think most UH fans feel the same way.

F*** it. Seriously just f*** it. I'll be at The Rock and The Yurt and The Pete just the same whether we are playing ECU and Memphis or ODU and MTSU. We are all on the same level after 2014 anyway might as well nut up and beat everyone who gets in our way.

(01-12-2013 05:41 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  I lean towards never happens with the PAC and Houston. If USM wasn't in such financial dire and hadn't tanked last year's season the lack of support would be flipped imo. Sad because I like USM Tulane games. I hope we develop an OOC relationship then. Everything else makes sense.

How are we supposed to schedule out-of-conference games with every team that says they want to play us (but at the same time refuses to be in a conference with us)?

Per OP, I've been told just the opposite is the feeling among those on the athletic dept side. They want to bring you along, but the Presidents are being influenced by the TV executives.

(01-12-2013 05:45 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Per OP, I've been told just the opposite is the feeling among those on the athletic dept side. They want to bring you along, but the Presidents are being influenced by the TV executives.

Honestly, 3? I have my doubts about this.. I know the USF administrations has had an issue with us (supposedly because we didn't want to vote them into C-USA in the first place?). And the Cincy administration (or maybe it was a former coach/AD?) had issues when he was bitching, publicly (which was why it was a big hullabaloo) about having to travel to Hattiesburg for games?

(01-12-2013 05:39 PM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  It'ss really is us against the world. #crazy

Not just you, by brother.

(01-12-2013 05:44 PM)SouthGAEagle Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 05:41 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  I lean towards never happens with the PAC and Houston. If USM wasn't in such financial dire and hadn't tanked last year's season the lack of support would be flipped imo. Sad because I like USM Tulane games. I hope we develop an OOC relationship then. Everything else makes sense.

How are we supposed to schedule out-of-conference games with every team that says they want to play us (but at the same time refuses to be in a conference with us)?

Whelp >.< If I had a good answer for you I'd give it. Looks like yall just get to be the mistress not the mate

(01-12-2013 05:39 PM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  It's the darndest thing. You think your sisters schools with long time contemporaries, just to find out they didn't like you after all. It'ss really is us against the world. #crazy

Hmm. It seems the only CUSA schools they are pulling for are teams they've had an easier time beating than Southern Miss.

Uh, are any of you surprised?

(01-12-2013 05:51 PM)EagleProf Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 05:39 PM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  It's the darndest thing. You think your sisters schools with long time contemporaries, just to find out they didn't like you after all. It'ss really is us against the world. #crazy

Hmm. It seems the only CUSA schools they are pulling for are teams they've had an easier time beating than Southern Miss.

Tulane wouldn't pull for anyone

(01-12-2013 05:47 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 05:45 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Per OP, I've been told just the opposite is the feeling among those on the athletic dept side. They want to bring you along, but the Presidents are being influenced by the TV executives.

Honestly, 3? I have my doubts about this.. I know the USF administrations has had an issue with us (supposedly because we didn't want to vote them into C-USA in the first place?). And the Cincy administration (or maybe it was a former coach/AD?) had issues when he was bitching, publicly (which was why it was a big hullabaloo) about having to travel to Hattiesburg for games?

Understood. Just been hearing there is a desire by some of your conference mate AD's that feel an obligation to bring you guys with them. It may not be unanimous but is at least a majority. But as we know it's not an AD's call and the Presidents have different agendas.

For selfish reasons I hope you guys stay but understand you wanting to go with them.

(01-12-2013 05:49 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  Looks like yall just get to be the mistress not the mate

Why should they play any of you at all? For old times' sake?

This entire process has been quite educational to watch. personally, I am more than willing to stay right where we are if it would mean that this floating horror show ends. I'm just aghast at watching the conference soon to be formerly known as the big east shake its microscopic dork at our former fierce rivals, and convincing them to pay millions of dollars for a ticket on the titanic.

the situation is absolutely surreal.

we will be successful wherever we are. I am certain of that.