Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit Fee.
Author Message
Tallgrass Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,396
Joined: Nov 2002
Reputation: 91
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #1
HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit Fee.
So, it appears TU will pay about $8.5M in exit and entry fees and then, after UConn, Cincy and Navy leave following B1G expansion, essentially end up where TU started in the first place. This is a business absurdity. It will take 15 years for TU to pay all those fees, given the low $1.8M Nbe/A12 tv contract.

ODU WILL BE PART OF CONFERENCE USA TV PACKAGE IN 2013
HamptonRoads.com, Feb. 27, 2013, By Harry Minium

"Banowsky said he sees no end to the conference alignment that has cost his league six members in two years."

"Big East members will make about $1.8M per year in TV revenue--less than what officials had hoped for. That's about $500,000 more per year than CUSA schools, but Tulsa must pay a $7M exit fee to leave CUSA and a $2.5M entrance fee to join the Big East."
03-11-2013 08:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


CalallenStang Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,056
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 446
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: The Midwest
Post: #2
HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
$7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.
03-11-2013 09:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
apex_pirate Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,820
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 95
I Root For: East Carolina
Location:
Post: #3
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming.
1) Doesn't sound like C-USA is a stable place to be and that Tulsa finds the A12 a better fit. Banowsky admits as much.
2) I wouldn't count on there being any entry fees to the A12. No proof, but I'd wager on it.
3) The ODU part was old news. That came out last week.
4) Nothing here states UCONN, Cincy and USF are leaving or that it is imminent or that it will only be those three or even just from the A12.
5) Even if the A12 loses just the three...yes, Tulsa is back where they were (C-USA of 2012) and had to pay to do it...but if they don't, they will be below where they used to be (C-USA of 2012) and that is significant for team recognition and conference SOS at the bottom of the Go5 (like C-USA 2014 will be)
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 09:57 AM by apex_pirate.)
03-11-2013 09:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
4x4hokies Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,972
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 164
I Root For: VT
Location:
Post: #4
Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit Fee.
Why would CUSA have a 7 million dollar exit fee?
03-11-2013 10:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,056
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 1016
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #5
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

I think C-USA believed there was no chance that their defecting members would ever consider coming back, while the MWC knew that if the money didn't materialize Boise and SDSU would have to come back. Hindsight being 20-20 they probably wouldn't have expanded so much, but it is what it is.
03-11-2013 10:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CalallenStang Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,056
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 446
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: The Midwest
Post: #6
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:04 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

I think C-USA believed there was no chance that their defecting members would ever consider coming back, while the MWC knew that if the money didn't materialize Boise and SDSU would have to come back. Hindsight being 20-20 they probably wouldn't have expanded so much, but it is what it is.

Of course. And the schools that stayed in CUSA acted in what they believed was their best interest. The way things evolved, though, made that strategy one that ultimately didn't provide optimal results in the end. That's all I'm saying.
03-11-2013 10:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #7
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

I believe that was to (theoretically) damage the SBC as much as possible. There was no good reason to expand to 14 schools otherwise. I think that strategy is going to backfire. They'll just water down their TV deal even more. The nBE TV deal proves there's very little TV value left beyond the Power 5. Large markets are essentially worthless if you don't have schools that deliver them. I wish ECU could cut it's own TV deal.
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 10:14 AM by blunderbuss.)
03-11-2013 10:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MinerInWisconsin Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,685
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
Post: #8
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

Its worth it for Tulsa apparently, if they do go and I expect they will. But in the world of conference realignment it is a gamble unlike getting an invite to a more secure and stable conference like the ACC or even the MWC.
03-11-2013 10:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,056
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 1016
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #9
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:13 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:04 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

I think C-USA believed there was no chance that their defecting members would ever consider coming back, while the MWC knew that if the money didn't materialize Boise and SDSU would have to come back. Hindsight being 20-20 they probably wouldn't have expanded so much, but it is what it is.

Of course. And the schools that stayed in CUSA acted in what they believed was their best interest. The way things evolved, though, made that strategy one that ultimately didn't provide optimal results in the end. That's all I'm saying.

No doubt, they did add some schools that have good long term potential, but the key word in there is long. C-USA basically decided that they are going to take a step back short term but 5-10 years from now they'll be much better for it. They very well could be right in that.
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 10:20 AM by b0ndsj0ns.)
03-11-2013 10:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
apex_pirate Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,820
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 95
I Root For: East Carolina
Location:
Post: #10
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:16 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

Its worth it for Tulsa apparently, if they do go and I expect they will. But in the world of conference realignment it is a gamble unlike getting an invite to a more secure and stable conference like the ACC or even the MWC.

I agree, even with the conferences you mentioned. However, the MWC is stable because no one wants any of their members. At best, their members are a long shot into a Power 5 conference. That is the only thing that has achieved stability for them. The A12 is unstable because there are quite few members, more than just UCONN and Cincy, that are legitimate contenders to be called up. Almost all of the A12 is in that group. If you are looking to move up, that is the conference to be in. If you are looking not to move down, it is also the conference to be in because Tulsa has no MWC option. Tulsa staying in C-USA 2014 would be a definite move down from C-USA 2012.
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 10:24 AM by apex_pirate.)
03-11-2013 10:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tallgrass Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,396
Joined: Nov 2002
Reputation: 91
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #11
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:16 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

Its worth it for Tulsa apparently, if they do go and I expect they will. But in the world of conference realignment it is a gamble unlike getting an invite to a more secure and stable conference like the ACC or even the MWC.

This Nbe realignment circus has caused nothing but hardship and financial loss for Tulsa--and the realignment circus won't end with TU's acceptance of Nbe/A12 invitation. Tulsa will be simply occupying a $8.5M chair to sit on while the earthquake continues. Tulsa experienced one of the very best times athletically within CUSA, only exceeded by the decade of the 1940s. CUSA was and remains a great confernce.

The reason CUSA has expanded so much is it is in preparation for the next go round of realignment starting with B1g and finished off by SEC and B12. UConn, Cincy, USF will be gone and maybe UCF too. I am hopeful that Nbe/A12 can then recover our old friends from CUSA and be in the same conference all together again. Then go to a CUSA-24 model with four divisions and a four team playoff. This is more of a "branding" and catching of public attention than a Liberty bowl matchup of two NonAQ conferences.

Ending behind where you started was self-inflicted and a bad business method of conducting business. It started with falsely held assumptions of grandeur of what some school thought they were/are....but will never be. That train left the station a long, long time ago.
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 10:37 AM by Tallgrass.)
03-11-2013 10:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


apex_pirate Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,820
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 95
I Root For: East Carolina
Location:
Post: #12
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:25 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:16 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

Its worth it for Tulsa apparently, if they do go and I expect they will. But in the world of conference realignment it is a gamble unlike getting an invite to a more secure and stable conference like the ACC or even the MWC.

This Nbe realignment circus has caused nothing but hardship and financial loss for Tulsa--and the realignment circus won't end with TU's acceptance of Nbe/A12 invitation. Tulsa will be simply occupying a $8.5M chair to sit on while the earthquake continues. Tulsa experienced one of the very best times athletically within CUSA, only exceeded by the decade of the 1940s. CUSA was and remains a great confernce.

Where did you come up with $8.5M? None of the numbers, even with the articles you've posted add up to that amount.
03-11-2013 10:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wolfman Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,459
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 181
I Root For: The Cartel
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #13
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:13 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:04 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

I think C-USA believed there was no chance that their defecting members would ever consider coming back, while the MWC knew that if the money didn't materialize Boise and SDSU would have to come back. Hindsight being 20-20 they probably wouldn't have expanded so much, but it is what it is.

Of course. And the schools that stayed in CUSA acted in what they believed was their best interest. The way things evolved, though, made that strategy one that ultimately didn't provide optimal results in the end. That's all I'm saying.

Agreed. CUSA had 2 options.
A - move forward. B - Try and get the 6 departing teams back.

CUSA would have to know the nBE would collapse or give special deals to the 6 departing teams to get them to stay. Either way, they would have had 6 teams that didn't want to be there and had already left once. How long would that have lasted?
03-11-2013 10:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,056
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 1016
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #14
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:33 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:13 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:04 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

I think C-USA believed there was no chance that their defecting members would ever consider coming back, while the MWC knew that if the money didn't materialize Boise and SDSU would have to come back. Hindsight being 20-20 they probably wouldn't have expanded so much, but it is what it is.

Of course. And the schools that stayed in CUSA acted in what they believed was their best interest. The way things evolved, though, made that strategy one that ultimately didn't provide optimal results in the end. That's all I'm saying.

Agreed. CUSA had 2 options.
A - move forward. B - Try and get the 6 departing teams back.

CUSA would have to know the nBE would collapse or give special deals to the 6 departing teams to get them to stay. Either way, they would have had 6 teams that didn't want to be there and had already left once. How long would that have lasted?

It would have lasted every bit as long as any gang of 5 league is going to last, which is until a better option comes available. No gang of 5 leagues are truly happy marriages and never will be.
03-11-2013 10:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
indydoug Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 403
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 15
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #15
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:25 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:16 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

Its worth it for Tulsa apparently, if they do go and I expect they will. But in the world of conference realignment it is a gamble unlike getting an invite to a more secure and stable conference like the ACC or even the MWC.
CUSA was and remains a great confernce

Uhmnn....NOT.
03-11-2013 10:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tallgrass Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,396
Joined: Nov 2002
Reputation: 91
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #16
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:33 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:13 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:04 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

I think C-USA believed there was no chance that their defecting members would ever consider coming back, while the MWC knew that if the money didn't materialize Boise and SDSU would have to come back. Hindsight being 20-20 they probably wouldn't have expanded so much, but it is what it is.

Of course. And the schools that stayed in CUSA acted in what they believed was their best interest. The way things evolved, though, made that strategy one that ultimately didn't provide optimal results in the end. That's all I'm saying.

Agreed. CUSA had 2 options.
A - move forward. B - Try and get the 6 departing teams back.

CUSA would have to know the nBE would collapse or give special deals to the 6 departing teams to get them to stay. Either way, they would have had 6 teams that didn't want to be there and had already left once. How long would that have lasted?

Somehow, someway, it is always seems that CUSA at fault for whatever the issue at hand.
03-11-2013 10:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


MinerInWisconsin Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,685
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
Post: #17
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:22 AM)apex_pirate Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:16 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

Its worth it for Tulsa apparently, if they do go and I expect they will. But in the world of conference realignment it is a gamble unlike getting an invite to a more secure and stable conference like the ACC or even the MWC.

I agree, even with the conferences you mentioned. However, the MWC is stable because no one wants any of their members. At best, their members are a long shot into a Power 5 conference. That is the only thing that has achieved stability for them. The A12 is unstable because there are quite few members, more than just UCONN and Cincy, that are legitimate contenders to be called up. Almost all of the A12 is in that group. If you are looking to move up, that is the conference to be in. If you are looking not to move down, it is also the conference to be in because Tulsa has no MWC option. Tulsa staying in C-USA 2014 would be a definite move down from C-USA 2012.

Location is why I consider the MWC to be currently stable. But while location helps them now, it isn't going to make them secure forever. Right now Hawaii is getting somewhat of the short end of the stick regarding membership. An article in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser explains the situation. Hawaii also has to subsidize travel for both the leagues it belongs to. Not sure that is a recipe for long term contentment. Some Hawaii fans believe that their future may be in the PAC 12 but that will take time to work out, if ever. There are still attractive schools in the MWC for expansion elsewhere but their location along with a very decent current media deal makes them stable for a while.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/s?action=l...=196672901
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 10:42 AM by MinerInWisconsin.)
03-11-2013 10:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,056
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 1016
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #18
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:37 AM)indydoug Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:25 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:16 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

Its worth it for Tulsa apparently, if they do go and I expect they will. But in the world of conference realignment it is a gamble unlike getting an invite to a more secure and stable conference like the ACC or even the MWC.
CUSA was and remains a great confernce

Uhmnn....NOT.

Great, no, but it was a very solid conference from 1996-2004. If the new Big Whatever has the on the field and court success of the original C-USA that wouldn't be a bad thing in the least.
03-11-2013 10:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,357
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #19
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
http://hamptonroads.com/2013/02/odu-will...ckage-2013

The $7M number is NOT a quote from Banowsky. Unless the ODU football beat writer/blogger has been as obsessed as we are with conference bylaws, I'd guess that the $7M number was based on a quick google search and not something Banowsky said.
03-11-2013 10:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tallgrass Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,396
Joined: Nov 2002
Reputation: 91
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #20
RE: HamptonRoads.com: Banowsky states more realignment coming. Confirms CUSA Exit F
(03-11-2013 10:41 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:22 AM)apex_pirate Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:16 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:50 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  $7M + $2.5M does not equal $8.5M.

But that is worth it for Tulsa (and the "CUSA defectors"), because ending up where you started is better than ending up behind where you started.

I firmly believe that if CUSA had not aggressively back filled and expanded like they did, the CHSA "defectors" would just go back and things would continue as they were. However, in CUSA's expansion, they have taken steps back that will take a few years of program development to make up for.

Its worth it for Tulsa apparently, if they do go and I expect they will. But in the world of conference realignment it is a gamble unlike getting an invite to a more secure and stable conference like the ACC or even the MWC.

I agree, even with the conferences you mentioned. However, the MWC is stable because no one wants any of their members. At best, their members are a long shot into a Power 5 conference. That is the only thing that has achieved stability for them. The A12 is unstable because there are quite few members, more than just UCONN and Cincy, that are legitimate contenders to be called up. Almost all of the A12 is in that group. If you are looking to move up, that is the conference to be in. If you are looking not to move down, it is also the conference to be in because Tulsa has no MWC option. Tulsa staying in C-USA 2014 would be a definite move down from C-USA 2012.

Location is why I consider the MWC to be currently stable. But while location helps them now, it isn't going to make them secure forever. Right now Hawaii is getting somewhat of the short end of the stick regarding membership. An article in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser explains the situation. Hawaii also has to subsidize travel for both the leagues it belongs to. Not sure that is a recipe for long term contentment. Some Hawaii fans believe that their future may be in the PAC 12 but that will take time to work out, if ever. There are still attractive schools in the MWC for expansion elsewhere but their location along with a very decent current media deal makes them stable for a while.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/s?action=l...=196672901

MWC does not work for Tulsa. This is not a putdown or flame of MWC, a very good confernece. But Tulsa's audience is in Oklahoma and Texas. THis is where our alumni live, our recruiting base, and very driveable or to fly to. These same conditions do not exist for Tulsa in NM, Colorado, and Wy. TU has scheduled Fresno, NM, and CSU and that's good enough.
03-11-2013 10:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.