(03-28-2013 02:32 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 12:05 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Like MWC, CUSA is held to its current contract.

And the MWC renegotiated its contract anyway, which allowed it to get terms that allowed it to make more money.

Quote: IMO, CUSA renegotiating its contract in three years is probably the best thing. It gives CUSA a couple years to play a round or two and establish themselves. Then, in the third year of the new CUSA reconfiguration, it is a better situation with less unknowns to tv.

Which is another way of saying that the TV value that exists right now needs to improve in order to hit the levels you imagine it reaching in three year's time.

And in BBall, over 70 of Conference USA's historical tournament bids are walking out the door by 2014, and I'm thinking under 30 are walking in. C-USA has been a 1-2 bid conference, and will be fighting to hold that status rather than dropping down to being just another 1 bid conference.

Hmmm -- C-USA's 70 historical bids walking out the door? At 17 years old I'm not sure C-USA has averaged slightly over 4 bids per year. However - at least per the internet (yeah, I know....)....

memphis = 19 bids
tulane = 3
smu = 10
houston = 19
ucf = 4
ecu = 2
TOTAL = 57

WKU = 23 bids
Charlotte = 11
ODU = 12
MTSU = 7
UTSA = 0
UNT = 3
FAU = 1
FIU = 1
TOTAL = 58

But don't let facts get in the way of making a point.

This thread is unbelievable...

(03-30-2013 07:30 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  Hmmm -- C-USA's 70 historical bids walking out the door?

For NCAA appearances of outgoing members, I get Memphis 23, Houston 19, Tulsa 14, SMU 10, UCF 4, Tulane 3, ECU 2 = 75.

Counting Western Kentucky's appearances is begging the question on the argument, which is that the reason that CUSA is not just picking the best football program available, ignoring everything else, is not just worrying about the media market size, but is also an interest in shoring up the quality of the conference basketball competition.

When SMU joined, the Big East still had ND, Georgetown, Louisville, Syracuse, and Pitt. That's a no-brainer over UAB, Marshall, USM, etc.

(03-30-2013 07:44 PM)TigerLogic Wrote:  This thread is unbelievable...

Yep - they usually are these days.

(03-30-2013 08:14 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  When SMU joined, the Big East still had ND, Georgetown, Louisville, Syracuse, and Pitt. That's a no-brainer over UAB, Marshall, USM, etc.

No doubt that's a better choice than C-USA...zero comparison. I feel sorry for the defectors who left headed to a high end conference - one that could have competed with the acc to at least 3/4 of the way to the bottom of the conference......I laugh at those who are leaving going forward or who had not officially notified C-USA and still chose to go.

(03-30-2013 08:24 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  No doubt that's a better choice than C-USA...zero comparison. I feel sorry for the defectors who left headed to a high end conference - one that could have competed with the acc to at least 3/4 of the way to the bottom of the conference......I laugh at those who are leaving going forward or who had not officially notified C-USA and still chose to go.

No sense crying over spilled milk. They are still going to a better conference than the one they are leaving, even if they did not hit the jackpot that they had hoped.

If/when Connecticut leaves, it can actually make the conference make more sense geographically. Cincinnati isn't so much of an outlier with Temple and possibly Navy lurking around. Right now you have 5 southwest schools in a bundle (SMU, Houston, Tulane, Memphis, Tulsa), two in Florida (UCF, USF), one in North Carolina, one in Pennsylvania, one in Ohio, one in Connecticut and one in Maryland for football.

A least travel should be easy as all are located in major cities except East Carolina, UConn, and Navy (which isn't far from BWI airport). But it would seem easy to drop UConn and find a 6th school to go with the others in the Southwest (Southern Mississippi?).

I don't know about you guys, but from an accounting/finance/athletics standpoint, I find the decision Tulsa has to make very interesting.

(03-30-2013 11:50 PM)Jericho Wrote:  If/when Connecticut leaves, it can actually make the conference make more sense geographically. Cincinnati isn't so much of an outlier with Temple and possibly Navy lurking around. Right now you have 5 southwest schools in a bundle (SMU, Houston, Tulane, Memphis, Tulsa), two in Florida (UCF, USF), one in North Carolina, one in Pennsylvania, one in Ohio, one in Connecticut and one in Maryland for football.

A least travel should be easy as all are located in major cities except East Carolina, UConn, and Navy (which isn't far from BWI airport). But it would seem easy to drop UConn and find a 6th school to go with the others in the Southwest (Southern Mississippi?).

**** DUMB POST ALERT ****

Yes, this conference needs to "drop" UConn. Just like the ACC needs to "drop" UNC.

UConn will leave, not be dropped. Hilarious stuff.

The new metro will more CUSA than CUSA.

UConn has to be pissed, I would. Good luck Huskies.

(03-30-2013 11:50 PM)Jericho Wrote:  But it would seem easy to drop UConn and find a 6th school to go with the others in the Southwest (Southern Mississippi?).

Ah, I see your confusion there. You seem to be trying to drive the conference "rank" up to a higher number and drive the conference "rating" down to a lower number in BBall.

But in BBall, a smaller "rank" is better ~ 1 is best of all ~ and a higher "rating" is better. So the Big TBA doesn't really want to "drop" UConn.