There are really only a few teams that set themselves apart from the Sun Belt, ECU, and (gulp) Southern Miss, even though they have fallen on hard times. You could maybe make an argument for Tulsa but the rest are all fairly even.

(11-05-2013 05:45 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  There are really only a few teams that set themselves apart from the Sun Belt, ECU, and (gulp) Southern Miss, even though they have fallen on hard times. You could maybe make an argument for Tulsa but the rest are all fairly even.

And 2 of the 3 you mentioned are leaving for the AAC.

(11-05-2013 05:47 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 05:45 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  There are really only a few teams that set themselves apart from the Sun Belt, ECU, and (gulp) Southern Miss, even though they have fallen on hard times. You could maybe make an argument for Tulsa but the rest are all fairly even.

And 2 of the 3 you mentioned are leaving for the AAC.

Which will only serve to more closely equalize the conferences in the near future.

For all the Sun Belt and CUSA fighting its very obvious the two conferences must have one another in order to survive.

(11-05-2013 04:42 PM)The Black Flag Wrote:  If you live in the south football is the only sport that matters. The others just pass the time until spring practices start, and until fall kickoff.

You can ignore it all you want (I do), but basketball = Money for those not in the P5.

That means more money for football, which can help build a better product on field.

(11-05-2013 05:40 PM)geauxcajuns Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 05:36 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:02 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 02:32 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 02:15 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  I don't think they benefitted. I don't think anyone is proclaiming that their conference improved with its losses. I know this will piss of some of the lurkers but UNT and Tulane becoming bowl teams in one year just isn't a coincidence. The standard bearers that remain in CUSA like Tulsa and USM are terrible, leaving or both. La. Tech is down. Half the league entered last weekend with 2 or fewer wins.

On the flipside, I don't think the SBC benefitted from the defections in the present sense. We do have a much higher percentage of decent teams this year but we have to consider struggling Idaho and NMSU when assessing the impact.

Latest BCS rankings Sun Belt current & departed teams.

#37 ULL
#49 North Texas
#69 ULM
#70 Middle Tennessee
#77 Texas State
#81 Arkansas State
#85 Troy
#86 WKU
#90 FAU
#93 USA
#115 FIU
999 Georgia State

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/bcs

Ecatly what I am talking about. UNT has benefitted greatly from the move to a conference with a lot of "easy outs". UNT doesn't get to 6 wins as easily against the top 7 SBC teams. Remember how far La. Tech shot up the rankings playing in the last year of the WAC? Heck, NIU made a BCS bowl playing one of the easiest schedules in the country.

Ball State is rated above every team in the Sun Belt at #35 and Rice at #51 is only exceeded by ULL at #37. Those two are not exactly easy outs along with Middle Tennessee that is ahead of everyone in the Sun Belt with the exception of ULL and ULM. Compare who NT has beaten against who you have beaten and NT comes out with the tougher schedule. You always try to downplay teams that have left the Sun Belt for another conference.

I'll say this right now, if we win on Thursday there is not a single team in CUSA that wants to play the Cajuns in NOLA. Not Tulane, UNT, Rice, Marshall or ECU.

You're right for sure about NT. We're much more interested in the HOD Bowl. That said, don't believe you strike fear in heart of Marshall, NT, Rice or ECU. Maybe Tulane. Who have you really beaten ? The highest BCS rated team you have a W over is at #77. Not really that impressive. Continue to huff & puff.

(11-05-2013 04:42 PM)The Black Flag Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 04:26 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:55 PM)joshdude182 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:51 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Reality will set in when CUSA has to renegotiate it's contract...less money, more mouths to feed.

Just like it set in for the AAC? You don't really believe the Sun Belt is a better conference than CUSA. You're just putting down CUSA to assert your superiority over your former conference. I'd love to hear your thoughts on things had Memphis not been invited to the AAC.

This year in football? I'd say we are the better conference.

But really... What is a "better" conference? You can't really just look at football, because there's so many other components. Basketball, baseball... even women's sports.

I do think that CUSA's television contract will take a hit when it is renegotiated. By how much? I dunno. It's also entirely possible that teams that are currently dragging could pick up in the next year or so and the hit won't be significant.

Now basketball is where I think CUSA will make their money. They have a pretty decent conference there. I know diddly about basketball, so I'll just leave it at that.

If you live in the south football is the only sport that matters. The others just pass the time until spring practices start, and until fall kickoff.

I live in the south...and I love hoops (Tigers or Grizz)...much more than football.

(11-05-2013 06:06 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 04:42 PM)The Black Flag Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 04:26 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:55 PM)joshdude182 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:51 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Reality will set in when CUSA has to renegotiate it's contract...less money, more mouths to feed.

Just like it set in for the AAC? You don't really believe the Sun Belt is a better conference than CUSA. You're just putting down CUSA to assert your superiority over your former conference. I'd love to hear your thoughts on things had Memphis not been invited to the AAC.

This year in football? I'd say we are the better conference.

But really... What is a "better" conference? You can't really just look at football, because there's so many other components. Basketball, baseball... even women's sports.

I do think that CUSA's television contract will take a hit when it is renegotiated. By how much? I dunno. It's also entirely possible that teams that are currently dragging could pick up in the next year or so and the hit won't be significant.

Now basketball is where I think CUSA will make their money. They have a pretty decent conference there. I know diddly about basketball, so I'll just leave it at that.

If you live in the south football is the only sport that matters. The others just pass the time until spring practices start, and until fall kickoff.

I live in the south...and I love hoops (Tigers or Grizz)...much more than football.

That's because Memphis is a big basketball area. I highly doubt it is as important in San Marcos, TX.

(11-05-2013 06:09 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  That's because Memphis is a big basketball area. I highly doubt it is as important in San Marcos, TX.

You are correct. But part of that is because we have spent... forever toiling in craptitude.

But seriously... The order of sports in the South (for the most part, there are pockets who have yet to "catch up") is as follows:

1. Football















2. Everything else.

Rather than ask if they benefitted ask if they had a choice.

Based on that, and considering that they still exist unlike some other conferences, I'd say they benefitted.

(11-05-2013 06:04 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 05:40 PM)geauxcajuns Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 05:36 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:02 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 02:32 PM)MG61 Wrote:  Latest BCS rankings Sun Belt current & departed teams.

#37 ULL
#49 North Texas
#69 ULM
#70 Middle Tennessee
#77 Texas State
#81 Arkansas State
#85 Troy
#86 WKU
#90 FAU
#93 USA
#115 FIU
999 Georgia State

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/bcs

Ecatly what I am talking about. UNT has benefitted greatly from the move to a conference with a lot of "easy outs". UNT doesn't get to 6 wins as easily against the top 7 SBC teams. Remember how far La. Tech shot up the rankings playing in the last year of the WAC? Heck, NIU made a BCS bowl playing one of the easiest schedules in the country.

Ball State is rated above every team in the Sun Belt at #35 and Rice at #51 is only exceeded by ULL at #37. Those two are not exactly easy outs along with Middle Tennessee that is ahead of everyone in the Sun Belt with the exception of ULL and ULM. Compare who NT has beaten against who you have beaten and NT comes out with the tougher schedule. You always try to downplay teams that have left the Sun Belt for another conference.

I'll say this right now, if we win on Thursday there is not a single team in CUSA that wants to play the Cajuns in NOLA. Not Tulane, UNT, Rice, Marshall or ECU.

You're right for sure about NT. We're much more interested in the HOD Bowl. That said, don't believe you strike fear in heart of Marshall, NT, Rice or ECU. Maybe Tulane. Who have you really beaten ? The highest BCS rated team you have a W over is at #77. Not really that impressive. Continue to huff & puff.

You know SDSU and ECU all said the same thing. You get Louisiana in the Super Dome for the RL Carrier Bowl and it is a different atmosphere. Can't be beat in the dome.

(11-05-2013 04:42 PM)The Black Flag Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 04:26 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:55 PM)joshdude182 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:51 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Reality will set in when CUSA has to renegotiate it's contract...less money, more mouths to feed.

Just like it set in for the AAC? You don't really believe the Sun Belt is a better conference than CUSA. You're just putting down CUSA to assert your superiority over your former conference. I'd love to hear your thoughts on things had Memphis not been invited to the AAC.

This year in football? I'd say we are the better conference.

But really... What is a "better" conference? You can't really just look at football, because there's so many other components. Basketball, baseball... even women's sports.

I do think that CUSA's television contract will take a hit when it is renegotiated. By how much? I dunno. It's also entirely possible that teams that are currently dragging could pick up in the next year or so and the hit won't be significant.

Now basketball is where I think CUSA will make their money. They have a pretty decent conference there. I know diddly about basketball, so I'll just leave it at that.

If you live in the south football is the only sport that matters. The others just pass the time until spring practices start, and until fall kickoff.

I hate that kind of statement. You are literally saying 100's of athletes in your own school don't matter. You are also saying that either I am an idiot or an outlier.

It may not matter to you, but it does to tons of others.

(11-05-2013 06:04 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 05:40 PM)geauxcajuns Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 05:36 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:02 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 02:32 PM)MG61 Wrote:  Latest BCS rankings Sun Belt current & departed teams.

#37 ULL
#49 North Texas
#69 ULM
#70 Middle Tennessee
#77 Texas State
#81 Arkansas State
#85 Troy
#86 WKU
#90 FAU
#93 USA
#115 FIU
999 Georgia State

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/bcs

Ecatly what I am talking about. UNT has benefitted greatly from the move to a conference with a lot of "easy outs". UNT doesn't get to 6 wins as easily against the top 7 SBC teams. Remember how far La. Tech shot up the rankings playing in the last year of the WAC? Heck, NIU made a BCS bowl playing one of the easiest schedules in the country.

Ball State is rated above every team in the Sun Belt at #35 and Rice at #51 is only exceeded by ULL at #37. Those two are not exactly easy outs along with Middle Tennessee that is ahead of everyone in the Sun Belt with the exception of ULL and ULM. Compare who NT has beaten against who you have beaten and NT comes out with the tougher schedule. You always try to downplay teams that have left the Sun Belt for another conference.

I'll say this right now, if we win on Thursday there is not a single team in CUSA that wants to play the Cajuns in NOLA. Not Tulane, UNT, Rice, Marshall or ECU.

You're right for sure about NT. We're much more interested in the HOD Bowl. That said, don't believe you strike fear in heart of Marshall, NT, Rice or ECU. Maybe Tulane. Who have you really beaten ? The highest BCS rated team you have a W over is at #77. Not really that impressive. Continue to huff & puff.

"Hey Pot? It's Kettle" - Come on man. I'm glad to see UNT have a good year but don't come to the Sun Belt board talking about how great you are. We all know exactly who you are. You are 6-3 with one decent win over Rice. No one would be afraid to play that schedule. It's pathetic

I think UNT will probably win the rest of your games. If you win out, you will easily have the worst strength of schedule for any team with 9 wins.

And yes, stAte has lost 4 games. And yes, we could do better with that weak UNT schedule. Any yes, if we played, we would whip UNT just like we have the last 7 years.

(11-05-2013 08:14 PM)Rik Flair Wrote:  Any yes, if we played, we would whip UNT just like we have the last 7 years.

For clarification, that should be 'the last 8 years'......8 straight.

(11-05-2013 08:17 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 08:14 PM)Rik Flair Wrote:  Any yes, if we played, we would whip UNT just like we have the last 7 years.

For clarification, that should be 'the last 8 years'......8 straight.

Ba da boom!

T he whole P5 G5 bull is making these conferences equal .
Maybe the AAC is a little different and a conference champion will get respect.

The other four if not all five you have to knock off some P5 teams.
The only other way is to string a bunch of winning seasons together .
The best team out of the two historically is Southern Miss and they have lost 20 in a row.

(11-05-2013 01:54 PM)mbrunner Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 01:49 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 12:56 PM)mbrunner Wrote:  ...by having FAU, MTSU, FIU & UNT join.......OR?

I say YES because those teams fair better against other C-USA opponents. The SBC is so tightly close/competitive that the cream-of-the-crop (ULL) is not THAT much better than the middle of the pack.

Or maybe I'm still high.

I say C-USA and the Sun Belt have both benefited and lost from these moves.

C-USA has gained some solid programs like UNT & MTSU (and soon WKU) while the Sun Belt has shed two programs that appear to be struggling in FAU and FIU. However because of C-USA's overall weakened state the Sun Belt has benefited by keeping a solid core of teams which has moved the Sun Belt from dead last to ahead of C-USA and on par with the MAC. The down side for the Sun Belt besides losing those solid programs I mentioned is the perception that the conference had to rush expansion or die which probably wasn't true. With the addition of Georgia Southern and App St I expect the Sun Belt to continue to be competitive.

"The down side for the Sun Belt besides losing those solid programs I mentioned is the perception that the conference had to rush expansion or die which probably wasn't true."

As long as stAte & ULL don't bolt, we'll be juuuuust fine.

ASU and UL will bolt at the first chance.

(11-05-2013 04:16 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:55 PM)joshdude182 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:51 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Reality will set in when CUSA has to renegotiate it's contract...less money, more mouths to feed.

Just like it set in for the AAC? You don't really believe the Sun Belt is a better conference than CUSA. You're just putting down CUSA to assert your superiority over your former conference. I'd love to hear your thoughts on things had Memphis not been invited to the AAC.

He doesn't have to think it. Statistics say that the Sun Belt is indeed a better conference than CUSA this year.

It seems that many here can't make the distinction between fielding better FOOTBALL teams and being the better conference. Everything seems to indicate that the SB has been stronger in football (slightly) these passed two years. That does not make it a better conference than CUSA. If you look at what each conference offers their members, there's no doubt that CUSA is the better conference. Better exposure, bowls, TV contract and easier travel( from a financial stand point) since most of the teams are in major metropolitan areas with easy access to major airports.

(11-05-2013 09:32 PM)CivilEng Wrote:  It seems that many here can't make the distinction between fielding better FOOTBALL teams and being the better conference. Everything seems to indicate that the SB has been stronger in football (slightly) these passed two years. That does not make it a better conference than CUSA. If you look at what each conference offers their members, there's no doubt that CUSA is the better conference. Better exposure, bowls, TV contract and easier travel( from a financial stand point) since most of the teams are in major metropolitan areas with easy access to major airports.

While I agree with your overall point, your statement of "slightly" better in football is flat out false.

I love how it's a crime to talk about conference USA yet they talk about the AAC like it's the devil. Face the facts conference USA is not even on the same level as the AAC. The question was did conference USA benefited and the obvious answer is no. You can say the same thing about the Sun Belt (no offense new members) but losing MTSU and WKU hurts. But MTSU is no Memphis and UNT is no Houston. It would be like the Sun Belt adding Sam Houston State and ETSU.

I can't wait until next year when the last of the AAC teams leave conference USA.

(11-05-2013 09:32 PM)CivilEng Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 04:16 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:55 PM)joshdude182 Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 03:51 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Reality will set in when CUSA has to renegotiate it's contract...less money, more mouths to feed.

Just like it set in for the AAC? You don't really believe the Sun Belt is a better conference than CUSA. You're just putting down CUSA to assert your superiority over your former conference. I'd love to hear your thoughts on things had Memphis not been invited to the AAC.

He doesn't have to think it. Statistics say that the Sun Belt is indeed a better conference than CUSA this year.

It seems that many here can't make the distinction between fielding better FOOTBALL teams and being the better conference. Everything seems to indicate that the SB has been stronger in football (slightly) these passed two years. That does not make it a better conference than CUSA. If you look at what each conference offers their members, there's no doubt that CUSA is the better conference. Better exposure, bowls, TV contract and easier travel( from a financial stand point) since most of the teams are in major metropolitan areas with easy access to major airports.

CUSA gets that because of PERCEPTION. It means they were pretty good once, and despite the fact that none of those teams are left, they still get the same access because they are still perceived as a better league.

It does not actually mean it is a better league.