Question for fans of C-USA and/or C-TBA schools that are more familiar with the programs involved than I am. Why is Tulsa being chosen over a host of what would appear to be more attractive options?

From this vantage point any one of Massachusetts, Old Dominion, Charlotte, James Madison, Florida Atlantic, Appalachian State and Liberty would each appear to be more logical/better choices than the Golden Hurricanes.

Hell, I think that Delaware might have been the best choice of them all. They consistently draw 20K+ for 1-AA games, are a state school in a state that has no pro teams, are a good school, are centrally located in the new league and have a history of success (albeit at lower levels). I sincerely see Delaware as a PERFECT fit for that league that with some fostering, could blossom into another UConn (which is a compliment to both).

So why go all the way out to Oklahoma? Was it part of a quid pro quo for Houston and SMU agreeing to stick with C-TBA? If so, why Tulsa and not UT-San Antonio or Southern Mississippi?

I don't say this to disrespect Tulsa or anyone else. I'm told that TU is a great school in its own right. However, it is a tiny, private school that doesn't draw well in football or men's basketball and plays in a small television market that I would guess is already saturated with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State fans.

Someone please enlighten me as to why Tulsa was chosen as they seem to this outsider to be a really, REALLY strange choice.

Football. Aresco has already said the new conference will emphasize football, and is tring to position itself for the non-power major bowl slot as much as possible. Tulsa is by far the best remaining football choice, based on on-field performance. Also weakens CUSA's shot at the bowl slot.

Tulsa prior to this year had the best combo of football BCS ranking and 5 year average RPI in hoops of all CUSA targets. They also regionally fit with UH, SMU, Memphis, and Tulane as part of a west division.

(03-27-2013 10:58 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Question for fans of C-USA and/or C-TBA schools that are more familiar with the programs involved than I am. Why is Tulsa being chosen over a host of what would appear to be more attractive options?

From this vantage point any one of Massachusetts, Old Dominion, Charlotte, James Madison, Florida Atlantic, Appalachian State and Liberty would each appear to be more logical/better choices than the Golden Hurricanes.

Hell, I think that Delaware might have been the best choice of them all. They consistently draw 20K+ for 1-AA games, are a state school in a state that has no pro teams, are a good school, are centrally located in the new league and have a history of success (albeit at lower levels). I sincerely see Delaware as a PERFECT fit for that league that with some fostering, could blossom into another UConn (which is a compliment to both).

So why go all the way out to Oklahoma? Was it part of a quid pro quo for Houston and SMU agreeing to stick with C-TBA? If so, why Tulsa and not UT-San Antonio or Southern Mississippi?

I don't say this to disrespect Tulsa or anyone else. I'm told that TU is a great school in its own right. However, it is a tiny, private school that doesn't draw well in football or men's basketball and plays in a small television market that I would guess is already saturated with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State fans.

Someone please enlighten me as to why Tulsa was chosen as they seem to this outsider to be a really, REALLY strange choice.

Regarding Delaware, they would have to be interested in moving to FBS. They aren't currently. Given the available options, Tulsa was the best choice.

Tulsa's success on the field and in all CUSA sports, along with their academic reputation, probably tilted the process in their favor. To your point, it is probably a bigger loss to CUSA than it is a gain for CTBA.

(03-27-2013 11:04 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Football. Aresco has already said the new conference will emphasize football, and is tring to position itself for the non-power major bowl slot as much as possible. Tulsa is by far the best remaining football choice, based on on-field performance. Also weakens CUSA's shot at the bowl slot.

+1. See C-USA and Louisiana Tech. At some point it stops being about the television markets and starts being about the actual strength of the program.

Tulsa is a painful hit for C-USA. The Golden Hurricane were a much stronger football program than some of the other C-USA football programs heading to the nBE.

Tulsa is very solid in football, and has been for a long time now, and has very solid basketball history. I think they made a very good hire with Danny Manning, and getting into the new league could be the catalyst to getting their basketball program back where it was in the late 90's early 00's.

Re: OP

I was wondering the same thing, Doc. Although Tulsa has been better at football in the past, one thing we have learned is that past performance is a worse predictor of future results than other variables.

Particularly, the size of the fan base is the best predictor of future results. Since we can't directly measure it, we proxie for it by number of living alumni, number of current students, football and basketball attendance (taking into account opponent quality and stadium size), market size (for potential growth of fanbase), and endowment size.

By most measures, it would seem that Tulsa is not the best option. IMO it would be Delaware or ODU, but I understand the reluctance to take a school that's new to D-1a.

1. Consistency. Tulsa is one of the better teams in the Go5 market across the board in basketball _and_ football.

2. The C-TBA has shown they have no desire in giving a start-up program access to their system (thus no Delaware, ODU, UTSA)

3. They're getting themselves into the Oklahoma footprint now (and probably a bit of a grouping with SMU/Houston as noted), where as USM for instance, they're hoping they've "covered" the MS region with the Tulane/Memphis pickups

4. Academia side. They've taken Tulane and given Tulane a "private university" partner (something that SMU and Tulane both would like), so getting Tulsa at least raises your APR numbers.

There are some negatives of course.. as Bearcat noted. Fan Base size, endowments, markets... but it's just a case of how well do the positives weigh against the negatives.

(03-27-2013 12:31 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  By most measures, it would seem that Tulsa is not the best option. IMO it would be Delaware or ODU, but I understand the reluctance to take a school that's new to D-1a.

And remember, the Big TBA already has six Eastern schools, with one more on the way in 2015 when Navy joins and they go to divisions. So they were also looking for a school that would be a comfortable fit in a division with Houston, SMU, Tulane and Memphis. UC in particular would not want to add a school to its east, because if its still stuck in the Big TBA in 2015, it is going to be doing all it can to end up in the division with the Florida schools, which is its main recruiting grounds after Ohio.

(03-27-2013 11:14 AM)S11 Wrote:  Tulsa prior to this year had the best combo of football BCS ranking and 5 year average RPI in hoops of all CUSA targets. They also regionally fit with UH, SMU, Memphis, and Tulane as part of a west division.

This