(08-10-2014 12:55 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  There's a hole were the WAC used to be. I don't think the MWC will remain the only G5 conference in the west. There are 16 G5 teams on this side of the country (if you include UTEP), and several high caliber FCS teams. The following don't seem out of the realm of possibilities:

-3 or 4 FCS schools move up
-A rift grows between the weak and strong MWC teams
-Idaho, NMSU, the FCS moveups, and the weak MW teams end up in a conference
-BSU, BYU, and the other strong MW teams end up in a higher profile G5 conference

There is no hole where the WAC used to be. That is now taken over by a 12 team Moutain West conference. If there is going to be another football conference it will be another FCS conference with the split of the southern Big Sky schools.

If there is going to be any G5 movement it'll be from:
1. The expansion of the Big 12
or
2. After a few years, The CUSA and Sunbelt re-organize to more regional conferences. Both will have a 12 team conference and a CCG.

(08-11-2014 09:44 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(08-10-2014 12:55 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  There's a hole were the WAC used to be. I don't think the MWC will remain the only G5 conference in the west. There are 16 G5 teams on this side of the country (if you include UTEP), and several high caliber FCS teams. The following don't seem out of the realm of possibilities:

-3 or 4 FCS schools move up
-A rift grows between the weak and strong MWC teams
-Idaho, NMSU, the FCS moveups, and the weak MW teams end up in a conference
-BSU, BYU, and the other strong MW teams end up in a higher profile G5 conference

There is no hole where the WAC used to be. That is now taken over by a 12 team Moutain West conference. If there is going to be another football conference it will be another FCS conference with the split of the southern Big Sky schools.

If there is going to be any G5 movement it'll be from:
1. The expansion of the Big 12
or
2. After a few years, The CUSA and Sunbelt re-organize to more regional conferences. Both will have a 12 team conference and a CCG.

That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 09:44 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(08-10-2014 12:55 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  There's a hole were the WAC used to be. I don't think the MWC will remain the only G5 conference in the west. There are 16 G5 teams on this side of the country (if you include UTEP), and several high caliber FCS teams. The following don't seem out of the realm of possibilities:

-3 or 4 FCS schools move up
-A rift grows between the weak and strong MWC teams
-Idaho, NMSU, the FCS moveups, and the weak MW teams end up in a conference
-BSU, BYU, and the other strong MW teams end up in a higher profile G5 conference

There is no hole where the WAC used to be. That is now taken over by a 12 team Moutain West conference. If there is going to be another football conference it will be another FCS conference with the split of the southern Big Sky schools.

If there is going to be any G5 movement it'll be from:
1. The expansion of the Big 12
or
2. After a few years, The CUSA and Sunbelt re-organize to more regional conferences. Both will have a 12 team conference and a CCG.

That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

I know in reality it won't but that is the only G5 realignment scenario that would be monumental for this topic.

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 09:44 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(08-10-2014 12:55 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  There's a hole were the WAC used to be. I don't think the MWC will remain the only G5 conference in the west. There are 16 G5 teams on this side of the country (if you include UTEP), and several high caliber FCS teams. The following don't seem out of the realm of possibilities:

-3 or 4 FCS schools move up
-A rift grows between the weak and strong MWC teams
-Idaho, NMSU, the FCS moveups, and the weak MW teams end up in a conference
-BSU, BYU, and the other strong MW teams end up in a higher profile G5 conference

There is no hole where the WAC used to be. That is now taken over by a 12 team Moutain West conference. If there is going to be another football conference it will be another FCS conference with the split of the southern Big Sky schools.

If there is going to be any G5 movement it'll be from:
1. The expansion of the Big 12
or
2. After a few years, The CUSA and Sunbelt re-organize to more regional conferences. Both will have a 12 team conference and a CCG.

That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

And LaTech wanted nothing to do with FAU or FIU at one point. Things change, needs change. Its a dynamic environment.

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

Well CUSA Texas sure as hell isn't scheduling Sun Belt other than UTSA-NMSU and UTSA-TXST.

But in the end money matters and ego matters.

CUSA Texas isn't likely to be awarded the big conference events and CUSA Texas on most matters will find CUSA East plus UAB and USM and possibly La.Tech on the other side of the fence.

CUSA has Texas teams but isn't Texas centric nor even Texas leaning.

You will eventually see AD's at UNT, UTSA, and UTEP talk about the league being too eastern oriented. That's just going to happen.

What matters is whether the money remains sufficient to put up with that indignity.

(08-11-2014 11:01 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 09:44 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(08-10-2014 12:55 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  There's a hole were the WAC used to be. I don't think the MWC will remain the only G5 conference in the west. There are 16 G5 teams on this side of the country (if you include UTEP), and several high caliber FCS teams. The following don't seem out of the realm of possibilities:

-3 or 4 FCS schools move up
-A rift grows between the weak and strong MWC teams
-Idaho, NMSU, the FCS moveups, and the weak MW teams end up in a conference
-BSU, BYU, and the other strong MW teams end up in a higher profile G5 conference

There is no hole where the WAC used to be. That is now taken over by a 12 team Moutain West conference. If there is going to be another football conference it will be another FCS conference with the split of the southern Big Sky schools.

If there is going to be any G5 movement it'll be from:
1. The expansion of the Big 12
or
2. After a few years, The CUSA and Sunbelt re-organize to more regional conferences. Both will have a 12 team conference and a CCG.

That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

And LaTech wanted nothing to do with FAU or FIU at one point. Things change, needs change. Its a dynamic environment.

Putting up with FIU/FAU was the price of getting the patch.

(08-11-2014 11:12 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

Well CUSA Texas sure as hell isn't scheduling Sun Belt other than UTSA-NMSU and UTSA-TXST.

But in the end money matters and ego matters.

CUSA Texas isn't likely to be awarded the big conference events and CUSA Texas on most matters will find CUSA East plus UAB and USM and possibly La.Tech on the other side of the fence.

CUSA has Texas teams but isn't Texas centric nor even Texas leaning.

You will eventually see AD's at UNT, UTSA, and UTEP talk about the league being too eastern oriented. That's just going to happen.

What matters is whether the money remains sufficient to put up with that indignity.

Isn't the obstacle that there are just too many moving parts?

Switching several schools from one conference to the other, getting them "admitted" to their new leagues, etc. would require votes in both conferences and nearly every school in both leagues, whether moving or not, would have to vote yes to make it happen. It would (almost) be easier to start a new conference.

(08-11-2014 11:23 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:12 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

Well CUSA Texas sure as hell isn't scheduling Sun Belt other than UTSA-NMSU and UTSA-TXST.

But in the end money matters and ego matters.

CUSA Texas isn't likely to be awarded the big conference events and CUSA Texas on most matters will find CUSA East plus UAB and USM and possibly La.Tech on the other side of the fence.

CUSA has Texas teams but isn't Texas centric nor even Texas leaning.

You will eventually see AD's at UNT, UTSA, and UTEP talk about the league being too eastern oriented. That's just going to happen.

What matters is whether the money remains sufficient to put up with that indignity.

Isn't the obstacle that there are just too many moving parts?

Switching several schools from one conference to the other, getting them "admitted" to their new leagues, etc. would require votes in both conferences and nearly every school in both leagues, whether moving or not, would have to vote yes to make it happen. It would (almost) be easier to start a new conference.

I even thought of that, but it was mentioned in another thread that if you were to start a new conference(assuming fresh without a block of teams from one conference), would have no BB autobids at the start.

What I do see is Addition by Subtraction down the road.

Addition by subtraction is the most likely. 12/14 programs in CUSA for example vote in mandatory stipends and other costly benefits despite vehement disapproval from UAB and FIU. UAB and FIU then have to move down to Sun Belt or drop out altogether because they can't afford the mandatory stipends. Idaho, NMSU, Arkansas-Little Rock, EMU, could also feel this pressure.

This is just an example though so don't go all "UAB would never do that" type stuff, was just throwing out scenarios.

(08-11-2014 11:12 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

Well CUSA Texas sure as hell isn't scheduling Sun Belt other than UTSA-NMSU and UTSA-TXST.

But in the end money matters and ego matters.

CUSA Texas isn't likely to be awarded the big conference events and CUSA Texas on most matters will find CUSA East plus UAB and USM and possibly La.Tech on the other side of the fence.

CUSA has Texas teams but isn't Texas centric nor even Texas leaning.

You will eventually see AD's at UNT, UTSA, and UTEP talk about the league being too eastern oriented. That's just going to happen.

What matters is whether the money remains sufficient to put up with that indignity.

I see no reason why a Texas program in C-USA wouldn't be awarded a big conference event. None of us have done anything wrong, and C-USA won't become an eastern oriented conference. How is C-USA going to become eastern oriented if we don't expand and C-USA's headquarters are in Dallas?

This isn't a C-USA Texas verses the rest of the conference issue. I'm sure LA Tech has no interest in conferencing with ULL or ULM. I think C-USA West is very happy with the current line-up. I'm sure UAB and Marshall have no interest in conferencing with Troy or even some of the other eastern Sun Belt programs.

Any change in the organization of C-USA will occur out of an opportunity to earn more money, add important markets, or gain access to more and better bowls. None of those things would result from a split and reorganization. C-USA will move forward and grow our conference. I think the Sun Belt should focus on doing the same.

(08-11-2014 11:23 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:12 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

Well CUSA Texas sure as hell isn't scheduling Sun Belt other than UTSA-NMSU and UTSA-TXST.

But in the end money matters and ego matters.

CUSA Texas isn't likely to be awarded the big conference events and CUSA Texas on most matters will find CUSA East plus UAB and USM and possibly La.Tech on the other side of the fence.

CUSA has Texas teams but isn't Texas centric nor even Texas leaning.

You will eventually see AD's at UNT, UTSA, and UTEP talk about the league being too eastern oriented. That's just going to happen.

What matters is whether the money remains sufficient to put up with that indignity.

Isn't the obstacle that there are just too many moving parts?

Switching several schools from one conference to the other, getting them "admitted" to their new leagues, etc. would require votes in both conferences and nearly every school in both leagues, whether moving or not, would have to vote yes to make it happen. It would (almost) be easier to start a new conference.

There is no obstacle. There is absolutely no will on the part of C-USA to do any of this... because it would be a bad idea. C-USA is happy with its current line-up.

(08-11-2014 11:44 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Addition by subtraction is the most likely. 12/14 programs in CUSA for example vote in mandatory stipends and other costly benefits despite vehement disapproval from UAB and FIU. UAB and FIU then have to move down to Sun Belt or drop out altogether because they can't afford the mandatory stipends. Idaho, NMSU, Arkansas-Little Rock, EMU, could also feel this pressure.

This is just an example though so don't go all "UAB would never do that" type stuff, was just throwing out scenarios.

All members of C-USA have agreed to fund the "total coat of attendance" scholarship increase. There will be no reorganization of C-USA.

(08-11-2014 11:50 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:12 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

Well CUSA Texas sure as hell isn't scheduling Sun Belt other than UTSA-NMSU and UTSA-TXST.

But in the end money matters and ego matters.

CUSA Texas isn't likely to be awarded the big conference events and CUSA Texas on most matters will find CUSA East plus UAB and USM and possibly La.Tech on the other side of the fence.

CUSA has Texas teams but isn't Texas centric nor even Texas leaning.

You will eventually see AD's at UNT, UTSA, and UTEP talk about the league being too eastern oriented. That's just going to happen.

What matters is whether the money remains sufficient to put up with that indignity.

I see no reason why a Texas program in C-USA wouldn't be awarded a big conference event. None of us have done anything wrong, and C-USA won't become an eastern oriented conference. How is C-USA going to become eastern oriented if we don't expand and C-USA's headquarters are in Dallas?

This isn't a C-USA Texas verses the rest of the conference issue. I'm sure LA Tech has no interest in conferencing with ULL or ULM. I think C-USA West is very happy with the current line-up. I'm sure UAB and Marshall have no interest in conferencing with Troy or even some of the other eastern Sun Belt programs.

Any change in the organization of C-USA will occur out of an opportunity to earn more money, add important markets, or gain access to more and better bowls. None of those things would result from a split and reorganization. C-USA will move forward and grow our conference. I think the Sun Belt should focus on doing the same.

We are focusing on growing our conference. That doesn't prevent us from not agreeing with your post.

(08-11-2014 11:57 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:23 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:12 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

Well CUSA Texas sure as hell isn't scheduling Sun Belt other than UTSA-NMSU and UTSA-TXST.

But in the end money matters and ego matters.

CUSA Texas isn't likely to be awarded the big conference events and CUSA Texas on most matters will find CUSA East plus UAB and USM and possibly La.Tech on the other side of the fence.

CUSA has Texas teams but isn't Texas centric nor even Texas leaning.

You will eventually see AD's at UNT, UTSA, and UTEP talk about the league being too eastern oriented. That's just going to happen.

What matters is whether the money remains sufficient to put up with that indignity.

Isn't the obstacle that there are just too many moving parts?

Switching several schools from one conference to the other, getting them "admitted" to their new leagues, etc. would require votes in both conferences and nearly every school in both leagues, whether moving or not, would have to vote yes to make it happen. It would (almost) be easier to start a new conference.

There is no obstacle. There is absolutely no will on the part of C-USA to do any of this... because it would be a bad idea. C-USA is happy with its current line-up.

There was no will 3 years ago for CUSA to add Western Kentucky or SBC to add Idaho.

Crap changes quick sometimes man. Drawing lines in the sand haven't worked well in this sandstorm.

(08-11-2014 11:59 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:50 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:12 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

Well CUSA Texas sure as hell isn't scheduling Sun Belt other than UTSA-NMSU and UTSA-TXST.

But in the end money matters and ego matters.

CUSA Texas isn't likely to be awarded the big conference events and CUSA Texas on most matters will find CUSA East plus UAB and USM and possibly La.Tech on the other side of the fence.

CUSA has Texas teams but isn't Texas centric nor even Texas leaning.

You will eventually see AD's at UNT, UTSA, and UTEP talk about the league being too eastern oriented. That's just going to happen.

What matters is whether the money remains sufficient to put up with that indignity.

I see no reason why a Texas program in C-USA wouldn't be awarded a big conference event. None of us have done anything wrong, and C-USA won't become an eastern oriented conference. How is C-USA going to become eastern oriented if we don't expand and C-USA's headquarters are in Dallas?

This isn't a C-USA Texas verses the rest of the conference issue. I'm sure LA Tech has no interest in conferencing with ULL or ULM. I think C-USA West is very happy with the current line-up. I'm sure UAB and Marshall have no interest in conferencing with Troy or even some of the other eastern Sun Belt programs.

Any change in the organization of C-USA will occur out of an opportunity to earn more money, add important markets, or gain access to more and better bowls. None of those things would result from a split and reorganization. C-USA will move forward and grow our conference. I think the Sun Belt should focus on doing the same.

We are focusing on growing our conference. That doesn't prevent us from not agreeing with your post.

Now, you know there is no way we can ever hope to compete with North Texas. That is just silly.

(08-11-2014 11:44 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Addition by subtraction is the most likely. 12/14 programs in CUSA for example vote in mandatory stipends and other costly benefits despite vehement disapproval from UAB and FIU. UAB and FIU then have to move down to Sun Belt or drop out altogether because they can't afford the mandatory stipends. Idaho, NMSU, Arkansas-Little Rock, EMU, could also feel this pressure.

This is just an example though so don't go all "UAB would never do that" type stuff, was just throwing out scenarios.

Down? We don't want them and they are not "above" us.

(08-11-2014 11:59 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:50 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:12 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 10:40 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  That isn't going to happen. C-USA West doesn't want to conference with the Sun Belt programs west of the Mississippi (ULL, ULM, ASU, Idaho, NMSU, or TSU). C-USA East doesn't want to conference with Troy, USA, the GSUs, or Appy State. There will be no reorganization of the two conferences.

Well CUSA Texas sure as hell isn't scheduling Sun Belt other than UTSA-NMSU and UTSA-TXST.

But in the end money matters and ego matters.

CUSA Texas isn't likely to be awarded the big conference events and CUSA Texas on most matters will find CUSA East plus UAB and USM and possibly La.Tech on the other side of the fence.

CUSA has Texas teams but isn't Texas centric nor even Texas leaning.

You will eventually see AD's at UNT, UTSA, and UTEP talk about the league being too eastern oriented. That's just going to happen.

What matters is whether the money remains sufficient to put up with that indignity.

I see no reason why a Texas program in C-USA wouldn't be awarded a big conference event. None of us have done anything wrong, and C-USA won't become an eastern oriented conference. How is C-USA going to become eastern oriented if we don't expand and C-USA's headquarters are in Dallas?

This isn't a C-USA Texas verses the rest of the conference issue. I'm sure LA Tech has no interest in conferencing with ULL or ULM. I think C-USA West is very happy with the current line-up. I'm sure UAB and Marshall have no interest in conferencing with Troy or even some of the other eastern Sun Belt programs.

Any change in the organization of C-USA will occur out of an opportunity to earn more money, add important markets, or gain access to more and better bowls. None of those things would result from a split and reorganization. C-USA will move forward and grow our conference. I think the Sun Belt should focus on doing the same.

We are focusing on growing our conference. That doesn't prevent us from not agreeing with your post.

Are you disagreeing with my post, or are you hoping a situation will be created that will allow Arkansas State to get out of the Belt? There is a difference.

I can understand you wanting a better situation for Arkansas State, but hoping C-USA and the Sun Belt reorganize isn't realistic. It isn't going to happen.

(08-11-2014 11:58 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:44 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Addition by subtraction is the most likely. 12/14 programs in CUSA for example vote in mandatory stipends and other costly benefits despite vehement disapproval from UAB and FIU. UAB and FIU then have to move down to Sun Belt or drop out altogether because they can't afford the mandatory stipends. Idaho, NMSU, Arkansas-Little Rock, EMU, could also feel this pressure.

This is just an example though so don't go all "UAB would never do that" type stuff, was just throwing out scenarios.

All members of C-USA have agreed to fund the "total coat of attendance" scholarship increase. There will be no reorganization of C-USA.

While true now, I wonder after 4-6 years later if a few G5 schools rethink that if they are getting under too much debt.
There will be quite a few issues that will be part of the equation.
1. CUSA's TV contract.
2. Autonomy rules the P5 passes.
3. Next bowl cycle starting in 2020
4. Playoff expansion in 2020.
I don't think anybody here is talking of any CUSA/Sunbelt..etc reorganization happening next year or even after that. I think after 4 years have passed with the CFP in full swing and automony rules passed by the P5 will give a few of the G/S5 schools some data to analyze their place in FBS football.

(08-11-2014 11:58 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:44 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Addition by subtraction is the most likely. 12/14 programs in CUSA for example vote in mandatory stipends and other costly benefits despite vehement disapproval from UAB and FIU. UAB and FIU then have to move down to Sun Belt or drop out altogether because they can't afford the mandatory stipends. Idaho, NMSU, Arkansas-Little Rock, EMU, could also feel this pressure.

This is just an example though so don't go all "UAB would never do that" type stuff, was just throwing out scenarios.

All members of C-USA have agreed to fund the "total coat of attendance" scholarship increase. There will be no reorganization of C-USA.

You wouldn't see it coming anyway. Its too early to know how these new rules will affect the landscape. At this point, everyone is going to be sitting tight and seeing how things play out.


It could be everything works out fine. It could be that the P5 use this as a spring board to separate from the G5, in which case everyone left behind will be looking to cut costs and go more regional (this would probably apply to ALL G5s left behind--not just CUSA and the Sunbelt). Id see the MAC being least affected. Nationwide or half-continent conferences in a lower division virtually devoid of TV income would no longer be viable. If the AAC is left behind--its schools would be looking to go more regional as well.

(08-11-2014 12:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:58 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(08-11-2014 11:44 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Addition by subtraction is the most likely. 12/14 programs in CUSA for example vote in mandatory stipends and other costly benefits despite vehement disapproval from UAB and FIU. UAB and FIU then have to move down to Sun Belt or drop out altogether because they can't afford the mandatory stipends. Idaho, NMSU, Arkansas-Little Rock, EMU, could also feel this pressure.

This is just an example though so don't go all "UAB would never do that" type stuff, was just throwing out scenarios.

All members of C-USA have agreed to fund the "total coat of attendance" scholarship increase. There will be no reorganization of C-USA.

You wouldn't see it coming anyway. Its too early to know how these new rules will affect the landscape. At this point, everyone is going to be sitting tight and seeing how things play out.


It could be everything works out fine. It could be that the P5 use this as a spring board to separate from the G5, in which case everyone left behind will be looking to cut costs and go more regional (this would probably apply to ALL G5s left behind--not just CUSA and the Sunbelt). Id see the MAC being least affected. Nationwide or half-continent conferences in a lower division virtually devoid of TV income would no longer be viable. If the AAC is left behind--its schools would be looking to go more regional as well.

I agree. We don't even know what new rules might come as a result of the autonomy ruling. I'm sure we will have stability within the G5 for at least a few years. But even if programs in the G5 did move towards more regional alignment, it would change the fact that LA Tech would not want to be with ULL or ULM. And, Texas has 13 FBS programs. If those outside of the P5 moved to align (create an new SWC), some might still be left out in the cold. Regional conflicts will always be there.