(03-25-2013 08:36 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  Of course you are correct, but it won't happen. Cincy has had some excellent recent success in football. Orange Bowl, Sugar Bowl, numerous Big East championships. Yet we struggled to build capacity crowds vs. more relevant regional rivals like WVU, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville. We will not come close to capacity vs. SMU, Tulsa and Tulane. It just won't happen. In a pro football town, folks won't pay $45 for a college game against a "mid-major" when they can wait one more day and pay $70-75 to see the Ravens, Steelers, Giants, Bears, 49ers, etc.

I thought the Bengals WERE a mid-major.

I kid, I kid.

(03-25-2013 08:09 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:37 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  This is a great add in my opinion. Tulsa is competitive in all sports, and will challenge for championships in Conference TBA. The only thing Tulsa doesn't bring is a sexy name.

It doesn't matter if Tulsa is competitive or not. They bring a small media market, a small school profile, no following outside Oklahoma, mediocre attendance and no national cache. I recognize that Tulsa is an excellent academic institution and has enjoyed success in football and basketball on numerous occasions in its athletic history. But this is the kind of addition that does nothing to enhance the profile of Conference TBD. Tulsa at UCONN, Tulsa at Cincinnati or Tulsa at Temple, among others, is a recipe for fans saying "Lets stay home and watch the Patriots, Bengals, Ohio State, Eagles, or Penn State game". In Cincinnati, fans aren't going to pay $45 per ticket to watch Tulsa when they can stay home and watch Ohio State play Michigan State or Wisconsin or Penn State or Michigan for free. And to be fair, I don't expect Tulsa fans to pay $45 either to watch Cincy come to Tulsa when Tulsa fans can, and probably do, stay home and watch OU or OK State play Texas, Texas Tech, or Kansas State.

I don't doubt a lot of what you are saying. There are even some on our board who are scaling back on season tix due to an "unattractive schedule". That is why, although I am upset that other conferences are not calling, I am not over the deep end about it either. We pretty much deserve it if our "fans" come out more to see our opponent, than us.

So is this how 2015 will look?

UConn
Temple
Navy (football only)
East Carolina
Central Florida

Cincinnati
Memphis
Tulane
Tulsa
Southern Methodist
Houston

(03-26-2013 08:32 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  So is this how 2015 will look?

UConn
Temple
Navy (football only)
East Carolina
Central Florida

Cincinnati
Memphis
Tulane
Tulsa
Southern Methodist
Houston

Where'd USF go?

(03-25-2013 08:09 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:37 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  This is a great add in my opinion. Tulsa is competitive in all sports, and will challenge for championships in Conference TBA. The only thing Tulsa doesn't bring is a sexy name.

It doesn't matter if Tulsa is competitive or not. They bring a small media market, a small school profile, no following outside Oklahoma, mediocre attendance and no national cache. I recognize that Tulsa is an excellent academic institution and has enjoyed success in football and basketball on numerous occasions in its athletic history. But this is the kind of addition that does nothing to enhance the profile of Conference TBD. Tulsa at UCONN, Tulsa at Cincinnati or Tulsa at Temple, among others, is a recipe for fans saying "Lets stay home and watch the Patriots, Bengals, Ohio State, Eagles, or Penn State game". In Cincinnati, fans aren't going to pay $45 per ticket to watch Tulsa when they can stay home and watch Ohio State play Michigan State or Wisconsin or Penn State or Michigan for free. And to be fair, I don't expect Tulsa fans to pay $45 either to watch Cincy come to Tulsa when Tulsa fans can, and probably do, stay home and watch OU or OK State play Texas, Texas Tech, or Kansas State.

You're absolutely right, but that doesn't change the fact that Tulsa is the best option at the moment. If you're not going to bring TV viewers, you damn well better bring competitive programs and good academics. 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...a-new-name

According to Jeremy Fowler's source:

Quote:“The decision is on [commissioner] Mike [Aresco]'s desk,” the source said.

And some non-news on the name, but it's interesting:

Quote:As for the new name – which is necessary because the Catholic 7 took the “Big East” handle in the divorce -- the league recently presented membership officials with several possibilities to consider.

“The America, the Metro, Collegiate, the United – it covered everything,” said a source with knowledge of those discussions.

The source wasn't sure whether “Collegiate” or “United” Conferences were realistic names but said the above quote spoke to the wide-ranging nature of the brainstorming sessions among members. "America" and "Metro" have been reported as potential names.

(03-26-2013 08:32 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  So is this how 2015 will look?

UConn
Temple
Navy (football only)
East Carolina
Central Florida
USF

Cincinnati
Memphis
Tulane
Tulsa
Southern Methodist
Houston

Obviously,
the best outcome 4 this "New" conference
is 4 the Maryland/ACC resolution take several years to resolve
&/or for all court decisions to favor the ACC $50 million buyout
That would halt expansion/realignment rumors 4 awhile

(03-26-2013 09:04 AM)DonnyMost Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 08:09 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:37 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  This is a great add in my opinion. Tulsa is competitive in all sports, and will challenge for championships in Conference TBA. The only thing Tulsa doesn't bring is a sexy name.

It doesn't matter if Tulsa is competitive or not. They bring a small media market, a small school profile, no following outside Oklahoma, mediocre attendance and no national cache. I recognize that Tulsa is an excellent academic institution and has enjoyed success in football and basketball on numerous occasions in its athletic history. But this is the kind of addition that does nothing to enhance the profile of Conference TBD. Tulsa at UCONN, Tulsa at Cincinnati or Tulsa at Temple, among others, is a recipe for fans saying "Lets stay home and watch the Patriots, Bengals, Ohio State, Eagles, or Penn State game". In Cincinnati, fans aren't going to pay $45 per ticket to watch Tulsa when they can stay home and watch Ohio State play Michigan State or Wisconsin or Penn State or Michigan for free. And to be fair, I don't expect Tulsa fans to pay $45 either to watch Cincy come to Tulsa when Tulsa fans can, and probably do, stay home and watch OU or OK State play Texas, Texas Tech, or Kansas State.

You're absolutely right, but that doesn't change the fact that Tulsa is the best option at the moment. If you're not going to bring TV viewers, you damn well better bring competitive programs and good academics. 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

Tulsa is simply the best option available. The TV deal is done, we can worry about markets at the next negotiation. Taking a strong competitor and conference champion from the competition is never a bad move.

I understand Cincy's concern...What if this addition increases Tulsa's attendance by 5,000 and lowers Cincy's by 5,000? How will the conversation be spun if the small school in Tulsa averages 25k and Cincy only averages 24k? Also what if Tulsa remains strong and competes for football championships in this conference? Would they be worthy then?

(03-25-2013 10:39 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Would be nice if Tulsa, ECU and Tulane could join this year.

Finally a friendly face.........Thanks for the support ......... +2
Question.......how will our conference of 11 baskeball teams scheduled with Navy playing football only. Also don't forget to pull for ECU against Loyola tonight in 1/4 finals of CIT.

(03-26-2013 10:16 AM)nastar36 Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 09:04 AM)DonnyMost Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 08:09 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:37 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  This is a great add in my opinion. Tulsa is competitive in all sports, and will challenge for championships in Conference TBA. The only thing Tulsa doesn't bring is a sexy name.

It doesn't matter if Tulsa is competitive or not. They bring a small media market, a small school profile, no following outside Oklahoma, mediocre attendance and no national cache. I recognize that Tulsa is an excellent academic institution and has enjoyed success in football and basketball on numerous occasions in its athletic history. But this is the kind of addition that does nothing to enhance the profile of Conference TBD. Tulsa at UCONN, Tulsa at Cincinnati or Tulsa at Temple, among others, is a recipe for fans saying "Lets stay home and watch the Patriots, Bengals, Ohio State, Eagles, or Penn State game". In Cincinnati, fans aren't going to pay $45 per ticket to watch Tulsa when they can stay home and watch Ohio State play Michigan State or Wisconsin or Penn State or Michigan for free. And to be fair, I don't expect Tulsa fans to pay $45 either to watch Cincy come to Tulsa when Tulsa fans can, and probably do, stay home and watch OU or OK State play Texas, Texas Tech, or Kansas State.

You're absolutely right, but that doesn't change the fact that Tulsa is the best option at the moment. If you're not going to bring TV viewers, you damn well better bring competitive programs and good academics. 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

Tulsa is simply the best option available. The TV deal is done, we can worry about markets at the next negotiation. Taking a strong competitor and conference champion from the competition is never a bad move.

I understand Cincy's concern...What if this addition increases Tulsa's attendance by 5,000 and lowers Cincy's by 5,000? How will the conversation be spun if the small school in Tulsa averages 25k and Cincy only averages 24k? Also what if Tulsa remains strong and competes for football championships in this conference? Would they be worthy then?

He raises a legitimate point. Tulsa is more of an addition by necessity at this point. They don't really add anything (other than academic reputation), they merely weaken your competition and make for the convenience of an even 12 members. They don't increase TV viewership or attendance numbers, yet they may win division and conference titles. If you're a program like Cinci, that is the exact opposite of the kind of member you want in your new league. Of course, you can forget everything I just said if somehow Tulsa ends up winning so much they earn money for the conference through whatever new playoff system is implemented. But, that requires all kinds of speculation.

(03-25-2013 04:39 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  Tulsa is another bullet in our stock of auto-bid competitors and one less bullet for our competition is the way I look at it. I see it as TBD Conference vs. Boise for the top bid yearly. We effectively took CUSA out of the running with this pick up aside from some magic season by one of their teams (ala the MAC this year).

Exactly.

Blows my mind that some wanted UMass or someone of the like over Tulsa. This add both helps us, and cripples CUSA.

(03-26-2013 09:41 AM)HHOOTter Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 08:32 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  So is this how 2015 will look?

UConn
Temple
Navy (football only)
East Carolina
Central Florida
USF

Cincinnati
Memphis
Tulane
Tulsa
Southern Methodist
Houston

Obviously,
the best outcome 4 this "New" conference
is 4 the Maryland/ACC resolution take several years to resolve
&/or for all court decisions to favor the ACC $50 million buyout
That would halt expansion/realignment rumors 4 awhile

IMHO, it doesn't halt anything. It may cause parties to step back and take a more careful look, but the $50 million exit fee for Maryland is in reality chump change (and I say that lightly) when it comes to the Power conferences. Most of those conferences are making between 17 and 25 million a year per team in just TV revenue. When you factor other sources of revenue, they're making gobs of money. You also have to consider the B1G and its subsidy that it's giving to Maryland for what it calls "travel". Bottomline, if a school/s can make a Power conference more money, $50 million isn't even gonna stop it from happening. Realignment is far from over.

(03-26-2013 10:16 AM)nastar36 Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 09:04 AM)DonnyMost Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 08:09 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:37 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  This is a great add in my opinion. Tulsa is competitive in all sports, and will challenge for championships in Conference TBA. The only thing Tulsa doesn't bring is a sexy name.

It doesn't matter if Tulsa is competitive or not. They bring a small media market, a small school profile, no following outside Oklahoma, mediocre attendance and no national cache. I recognize that Tulsa is an excellent academic institution and has enjoyed success in football and basketball on numerous occasions in its athletic history. But this is the kind of addition that does nothing to enhance the profile of Conference TBD. Tulsa at UCONN, Tulsa at Cincinnati or Tulsa at Temple, among others, is a recipe for fans saying "Lets stay home and watch the Patriots, Bengals, Ohio State, Eagles, or Penn State game". In Cincinnati, fans aren't going to pay $45 per ticket to watch Tulsa when they can stay home and watch Ohio State play Michigan State or Wisconsin or Penn State or Michigan for free. And to be fair, I don't expect Tulsa fans to pay $45 either to watch Cincy come to Tulsa when Tulsa fans can, and probably do, stay home and watch OU or OK State play Texas, Texas Tech, or Kansas State.

You're absolutely right, but that doesn't change the fact that Tulsa is the best option at the moment. If you're not going to bring TV viewers, you damn well better bring competitive programs and good academics. 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

Tulsa is simply the best option available. The TV deal is done, we can worry about markets at the next negotiation. Taking a strong competitor and conference champion from the competition is never a bad move.

I understand Cincy's concern...What if this addition increases Tulsa's attendance by 5,000 and lowers Cincy's by 5,000? How will the conversation be spun if the small school in Tulsa averages 25k and Cincy only averages 24k? Also what if Tulsa remains strong and competes for football championships in this conference? Would they be worthy then?

Quite simply, there's no spin. Cincinnati is a pro-sports town. Our college football program has to compete with the Bengals and even Reds for part of the season. If you don't put a compelling product on the field, then entertainment dollars go elsewhere. It's that simple. No slight to places like ECU or Tulsa, but what other options do you have?

(03-26-2013 10:28 AM)Kronke Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:39 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  Tulsa is another bullet in our stock of auto-bid competitors and one less bullet for our competition is the way I look at it. I see it as TBD Conference vs. Boise for the top bid yearly. We effectively took CUSA out of the running with this pick up aside from some magic season by one of their teams (ala the MAC this year).

Exactly.

Blows my mind that some wanted UMass or someone of the like over Tulsa. This add both helps us, and cripples CUSA.

Wow. You truly are full of greed and delight in the misfortune of others. That's pretty cruel. Do you enjoy kicking people when they stumble and fall?

(03-26-2013 10:35 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 10:28 AM)Kronke Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:39 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  Tulsa is another bullet in our stock of auto-bid competitors and one less bullet for our competition is the way I look at it. I see it as TBD Conference vs. Boise for the top bid yearly. We effectively took CUSA out of the running with this pick up aside from some magic season by one of their teams (ala the MAC this year).

Exactly.

Blows my mind that some wanted UMass or someone of the like over Tulsa. This add both helps us, and cripples CUSA.

Wow. You truly are full of greed and delight in the misfortune of others. That's pretty cruel. Do you enjoy kicking people when they stumble and fall?

No one fall for it.

(03-25-2013 05:26 PM)dirtydanchez Wrote:  I like the clowns on the C-USA board saying that WKU is a upgrade over Tulsa.

I won't say they are an upgrade, but they are a much better program than you may be giving them credit for. They actually have a very strong football and basketball history, but only recently decided to move up to 1A. They were regularly a top 1AA school, and are still the winningest football team in Kentucky. And their basketball program will by far be the best one historically in CUSA, with NO ONE remotely close to them. UTEP migth be the closest since they do have a title and are the subject of many a movie and coumentary.

(03-25-2013 05:30 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:45 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:42 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Good add.

I find it hilarious that after Tulsa apparently leaving CUSA, that a vast majority of CUSA posters on their board STILL think that nCUSA = nBE(TBD).

They are the most ridiculous group of people on these boards. I saw a post the other day saying how they "upgraded" with all the teams replacing outgoing members. I mean, how can they honestly say this stuff.

LOL. Posters on this board say the same things all the time about the Aresco conf...

Miko has a point...

(03-25-2013 10:26 PM)r2pirate Wrote:  ECU, Tulane, and now Tulsa will have a long year of attacks on Cusa board. Every Cusa school left behind plus newbies (Marshall posters seem to be leading the negatives) will be pulling against us three so any support from those schools leaving this year will be most appreciated. Lets support new conference and each other:)

Must be a state of West Virginia thing...

(03-26-2013 10:37 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 10:35 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-26-2013 10:28 AM)Kronke Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:39 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  Tulsa is another bullet in our stock of auto-bid competitors and one less bullet for our competition is the way I look at it. I see it as TBD Conference vs. Boise for the top bid yearly. We effectively took CUSA out of the running with this pick up aside from some magic season by one of their teams (ala the MAC this year).

Exactly.

Blows my mind that some wanted UMass or someone of the like over Tulsa. This add both helps us, and cripples CUSA.

Wow. You truly are full of greed and delight in the misfortune of others. That's pretty cruel. Do you enjoy kicking people when they stumble and fall?

No one fall for it.

The sad part is, he's not even good at it.

(03-26-2013 10:44 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 05:26 PM)dirtydanchez Wrote:  I like the clowns on the C-USA board saying that WKU is a upgrade over Tulsa.

I won't say they are an upgrade, but they are a much better program than you may be giving them credit for. They actually have a very strong football and basketball history, but only recently decided to move up to 1A. They were regularly a top 1AA school, and are still the winningest football team in Kentucky. And their basketball program will by far be the best one historically in CUSA, with NO ONE remotely close to them. UTEP migth be the closest since they do have a title and are the subject of many a movie and coumentary.

(03-25-2013 05:30 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:45 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 04:42 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Good add.

I find it hilarious that after Tulsa apparently leaving CUSA, that a vast majority of CUSA posters on their board STILL think that nCUSA = nBE(TBD).

They are the most ridiculous group of people on these boards. I saw a post the other day saying how they "upgraded" with all the teams replacing outgoing members. I mean, how can they honestly say this stuff.

LOL. Posters on this board say the same things all the time about the Aresco conf...

Miko has a point...

I'd love to see some evidence of that.

(03-26-2013 06:42 AM)HHOOTter Wrote:  Look @ NIU last year in 2012
They opened the season & lost to Iowa
then ran the table,
beat Army by one & beat a crappy Kansas team
Won the MAC conference Championship
got a BcS invitation

In 2013,
TU’s OOC schedule is way better than NIU’s last year
If TU loses only to OU but runs the table the rest of the way
They will have an excellent shot at a BcS Bowl
Voters will put a 12-1 Tulsa team in the Top 15

The MAC was a much stronger conference last year than CUSA was at the top, much less than it will be this year. It was stronger at the top than than even the BE was. They had four different teams who were not only ranked, but on track for a BCS bid had they not lost. Thus they had a lot of quality games in conference that helped their SOS. They were strong enough at the top to help their champion get to the BCS. Remember it was the "other" team in their championship game was the one that was supposed to go to the BCS, not NIU.