Oh, I thought something was actually happening.

(10-18-2016 11:11 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 11:01 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  I still support a 16 team model with four 4 team divisions. Wish we could get whichita state and one more out west. You schedule like the NFL and cut way down on travel costs. Yea two more moths to feed but with the paltry sun we are getting dor tv you are talking about dividing pennies.

Could you imagine what it would do for basketball adding WSU and Missu st? If you could attract them. Football is the attractant.

WSU would be very good to have but why MSU? I'd rather have WSU and NMSU.

Why did this thread get reborn?

I was looking through older threads with large number of replies and saw this one and decided to read it and found it still interesting

(10-18-2016 02:42 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  If you are worried about splitting tv money a wise man once told me 15% of nothing is nothing. It's pennies basically anyway. So lets minimize our travel cost. Getting rid of people makes that more difficult. Four team pods reduces travel for all sports so the savings is program wide, not just the two major sports.

Add two and force others to improve their programs by accessing penalties if they don't even try.

I would also be strict with scheduling and come up with a formula for teams to follow to raise basketball RPI.

I would cup the balls to get Wichita State and the other program must show a commitment to excellence in athletics but be within a reasonable distance to what would be their "pod".

NMSU would not be a bad choice. UTEP folks wont like it but no one team will make everyone happy. If 13 institutions are happy with the add and one is not, get over it.


FWIW I don't think we will be adding anyone soon but since the discussion came up again I gave my two cents.................

Wait, you want to expand to 16, dilute the playoff money even farther and invite another startup program in addition to a struggling FCS Program, which could severely hurt your football ranking as a league?

I get Wichita State basketball is huge, but most of their value comes in the terms of NCAA units, units that don't come with them. You would essentially be inviting a startup football program based on the hope that their basketball program continues to be productive.

It makes more sense to just geographically realign CUSA and the Sun Belt than it does for either to go probing the FCS ranks again. There's not enough good teams left.

(04-08-2013 12:48 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  I give up.

I concur with this guy^^

Well, at least we wouldn't be as hurt by adding Missouri State and/or Wichita State as we would be by adding Arkansas State. Talk about a dumpster fire of a program.

Kidding...

Just say no to Howl Yeah!

(10-18-2016 09:32 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  Well, at least we wouldn't be as hurt by adding Missouri State and/or Wichita State as we would be by adding Arkansas State. Talk about a dumpster fire of a program.

Kidding...

I think it's pretty well known by now that our two programs won't be sharing a league together again unless some strange things happen in the realignment world, and I think both our programs are happy with that.

Now if we could just convince Blake Anderson that when he's assistant coach shopping, there are other places to look than Murfreesboro.

Everyone is always looking at and thinking of today...

A conference should always be looking at the future and you can bet your life savings every AD and president in this conference believes CUSA will at some point turn it around. How many dollars that means would just be a guess. But lets not forget....

while the P5 makes their money in football

There is only one sure way for a G5 conference to earn meaningful dollars. That's getting 2 and 3 teams in the NCAA Tourney every year and winning a few games when you do. That is probably the goal of every school/AD/President in CUSA. Not adding schools to save 100k on travel cost

So long term it would be foolish to go to 16 teams unless they added something on the basketball side. Right now NO ONE in the SBC does that. Of course right now no one in CUSA is doing much in basketball either. BUT...yes, but. There are 5 or more schools in this conference that has a history...a few no too distant history of being a good basketball program.

So when you look at it in the point of view...lets save 100k on travel. You are someone that can't look long term and where this conference wants and needs to be.

Football might drive the bus in the P5...basketball is the only cash cow the G5 has any chance of tapping into. If five years from now we are not growing...not the number of schools but as a conference in one or both sports...then you look at stopping the bleeding.

It's way too early to call it today

(10-18-2016 10:40 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Everyone is always looking at and thinking of today...

A conference should always be looking at the future and you can bet your life savings every AD and president in this conference believes CUSA will at some point turn it around. How many dollars that means would just be a guess. But lets not forget....

while the P5 makes their money in football

There is only one sure way for a G5 conference to earn meaningful dollars. That's getting 2 and 3 teams in the NCAA Tourney every year and winning a few games when you do. That is probably the goal of every school/AD/President in CUSA. Not adding schools to save 100k on travel cost

So long term it would be foolish to go to 16 teams unless they added something on the basketball side. Right now NO ONE in the SBC does that. Of course right now no one in CUSA is doing much in basketball either. BUT...yes, but. There are 5 or more schools in this conference that has a history...a few no too distant history of being a good basketball program.

So when you look at it in the point of view...lets save 100k on travel. You are someone that can't look long term and where this conference wants and needs to be.

Football might drive the bus in the P5...basketball is the only cash cow the G5 has any chance of tapping into. If five years from now we are not growing...not the number of schools but as a conference in one or both sports...then you look at stopping the bleeding.

It's way too early to call it today

I think the real question with Wichita State is could they manage to fund an FBS football program to get it off the ground, AND maintain a thriving basketball program. As a basketball fan, even you must understand the delicate balance that schools have trying to keep both sports thriving. There are several G5 schools that tried that for years, and eventually gave up and threw all their money at one sport. My own school falls into that category.

Financially, does Wichita State have enough money to not only field a competitive football program, but still have enough on the basketball side that they can maintain their NCAA units.

I think the best solution if you guys really wanted to go this route would be drop the by law that a school must sponsor football, but doing that could cost you football at UAB and other schools too.

(10-18-2016 10:40 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Everyone is always looking at and thinking of today...

A conference should always be looking at the future and you can bet your life savings every AD and president in this conference believes CUSA will at some point turn it around. How many dollars that means would just be a guess. But lets not forget....

while the P5 makes their money in football

There is only one sure way for a G5 conference to earn meaningful dollars. That's getting 2 and 3 teams in the NCAA Tourney every year and winning a few games when you do. That is probably the goal of every school/AD/President in CUSA. Not adding schools to save 100k on travel cost

So long term it would be foolish to go to 16 teams unless they added something on the basketball side. Right now NO ONE in the SBC does that. Of course right now no one in CUSA is doing much in basketball either. BUT...yes, but. There are 5 or more schools in this conference that has a history...a few no too distant history of being a good basketball program.

So when you look at it in the point of view...lets save 100k on travel. You are someone that can't look long term and where this conference wants and needs to be.

Football might drive the bus in the P5...basketball is the only cash cow the G5 has any chance of tapping into. If five years from now we are not growing...not the number of schools but as a conference in one or both sports...then you look at stopping the bleeding.

It's way too early to call it today

MBB should be a focus for C-USA. I believe that MT, WKU, UAB, ODU, LT, Marshall, Rice, UTEP, Charlotte and USM have been and still are, committed to being quality MBB programs. That's 10 of 14 and leaves UNT, which has a fine arena and can likely be good soon, UTSA, FIU and FAU needing to commit to MBB.

Adding one or two schools as basketball only's would be fine since they would not share conference income outside of MBB.

WSU could be one and if they later want to join in FB as well, give them a long lead time as indy in fcs FB so that they won't weigh the conference down (like my school is now). Who else would want a basketball only invite that the conference would see as a beneficial add?

(10-19-2016 08:19 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 10:40 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Everyone is always looking at and thinking of today...

A conference should always be looking at the future and you can bet your life savings every AD and president in this conference believes CUSA will at some point turn it around. How many dollars that means would just be a guess. But lets not forget....

while the P5 makes their money in football

There is only one sure way for a G5 conference to earn meaningful dollars. That's getting 2 and 3 teams in the NCAA Tourney every year and winning a few games when you do. That is probably the goal of every school/AD/President in CUSA. Not adding schools to save 100k on travel cost

So long term it would be foolish to go to 16 teams unless they added something on the basketball side. Right now NO ONE in the SBC does that. Of course right now no one in CUSA is doing much in basketball either. BUT...yes, but. There are 5 or more schools in this conference that has a history...a few no too distant history of being a good basketball program.

So when you look at it in the point of view...lets save 100k on travel. You are someone that can't look long term and where this conference wants and needs to be.

Football might drive the bus in the P5...basketball is the only cash cow the G5 has any chance of tapping into. If five years from now we are not growing...not the number of schools but as a conference in one or both sports...then you look at stopping the bleeding.

It's way too early to call it today

MBB should be a focus for C-USA. I believe that MT, WKU, UAB, ODU, LT, Marshall, Rice, UTEP, Charlotte and USM have been and still are, committed to being quality MBB programs. That's 10 of 14 and leaves UNT, which has a fine arena and can likely be good soon, UTSA, FIU and FAU needing to commit to MBB.

Adding one or two schools as basketball only's would be fine since they would not share conference income outside of MBB.

WSU could be one and if they later want to join in FB as well, give them a long lead time as indy in fcs FB so that they won't weigh the conference down (like my school is now). Who else would want a basketball only invite that the conference would see as a beneficial add?

Wichita would likely have little motivation to join, unless they had immediate plans for FB.

(10-18-2016 06:44 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 11:11 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 11:01 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  I still support a 16 team model with four 4 team divisions. Wish we could get whichita state and one more out west. You schedule like the NFL and cut way down on travel costs. Yea two more moths to feed but with the paltry sun we are getting dor tv you are talking about dividing pennies.

Could you imagine what it would do for basketball adding WSU and Missu st? If you could attract them. Football is the attractant.

WSU would be very good to have but why MSU? I'd rather have WSU and NMSU.

Why did this thread get reborn?

I was looking through older threads with large number of replies and saw this one and decided to read it and found it still interesting

I'm glad you did. It is filling the void since the Big 12 closed down it's expansion fiasco.

I'm not a big fan of basketball-without-football schools in a conference.

They can throw all of their money at hoops, and leave the rest of us sitting at home while they go Dancing.

I figured it out.

Great Midwest Conference

North Division

Charlotte
Marshall
ODU
WKU

South Division

UAB
La. Tech
MTSU
USM