It probably takes 20 years to see what a FCS to FBS upgrade is capable of.

A chance to rotate through a few coaches ect. FAU has been in the game what 14 years and starting to finally take off.

Buffalo has been in the MAC 20 years. The first decade in the MAC was dismal but now they are an OK MAC FB team.

Another thing to look at is how good is a teams best season? That shows where the potential is. If a program can't do more than 8 wins in 20 years in FBS than it probably isn't happening.

(04-28-2018 08:42 AM)tigerjeb Wrote:  the original six in the 1996 inaugural football season were:

That Tulane logo. lol

CUSA 1.0 was one of my favorite conferences. Realignment has ruined a lot of great things.

(04-27-2018 08:51 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 07:44 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  Still glad to be here over MAC. While it sucked to see majority of our conference make a lateral move in football to the AAC, basketball wise they had to do it. CUSA is young again and things will improve. The important thing is to improve our basketball. Football is irrelevant until an expanded playoff down the road.

Looking back (hindsight I know), I don't think the Memphis admin or fans view the CUSA to AAC move as lateral in any way. I have looked most closely at Memphis financials and listened to the decision makers speak more than other schools, but they are better off in every metric mentioned. For them, it's been an FB upgrade in a very substantial way...exposure, attendance, tix sold/contrib. $. Obviously, the new admin coming in and making football a priority was key...more money for coaching, facilities etc, but the AAC has also elevated the program in a real way as well with double the media dollars (still paltry) and exponentially better exposure. Not to mention conference perception with multiple Access bowl teams, media coverage and narrative (referencing mass coverage not the P6 thing). That was something CUSA was never able to accomplish due in part to the Tigers poor performance. Sadly, the thing that helped them make the move (an effort to improve football) could have really helped both the school and CUSA back in the day. Just goes to show what a sports friendly admin can accomplish.

The bball point is also why I don't see those teams aligning solely based on geography. Several programs make money, good money, and won't throw basketball under the bus. If something happens to blow the G5 up, there's a likelihood that the higher budgeted schools with the biggest fan bases (most self generated $) would find a way to come to some sort of arrangement...which ultimately comes down to which set of schools can make the most $ vs. focusing solely on the reduction of cost side of the equation.

Having said all that I do think CUSA can improve. I think the AAC can too as well. it isn't mutually exclusive. The success of one isn't dependent on the failure of the other.

Does the AAC have direct access to the College Football Playoff? Nether does CUSA, MAC, MTN WEST or the Sun Belt. The only “perception” is created by the AAC marketing team. Otherwise an undefeated UCF would of been in the CFP. Everything else you talked about was fluff and irrelevant in terms of where the AAC stands. Roy Kramer & co. and your garden variety fans don’t care nor will ever care who the AAC or CUSA is and probably can’t name 3 schools in each conf. Hell I witnessed that last night when Chicago picked that Memphis WR. People were pissed that they picked him and many things I read talked about the level of competition. I don’t agree but just telling you the stuff I read.

Hoops-wise the AAC is doing great even with Memphis basketball a big pile of poop.

(04-28-2018 10:38 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  It probably takes 20 years to see what a FCS to FBS upgrade is capable of.

A chance to rotate through a few coaches ect. FAU has been in the game what 14 years and starting to finally take off.

Buffalo has been in the MAC 20 years. The first decade in the MAC was dismal but now they are an OK MAC FB team.

Another thing to look at is how good is a teams best season? That shows where the potential is. If a program can't do more than 8 wins in 20 years in FBS than it probably isn't happening.

Yeah though Boise St moved up in 1996, won the Fiesta Bowl in 06 and have never really let up. The miracle of college football....I still can’t believe it. I laughed the first time I heard that Boise had a FB team......

(04-28-2018 12:12 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 08:51 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 07:44 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  Still glad to be here over MAC. While it sucked to see majority of our conference make a lateral move in football to the AAC, basketball wise they had to do it. CUSA is young again and things will improve. The important thing is to improve our basketball. Football is irrelevant until an expanded playoff down the road.

Looking back (hindsight I know), I don't think the Memphis admin or fans view the CUSA to AAC move as lateral in any way. I have looked most closely at Memphis financials and listened to the decision makers speak more than other schools, but they are better off in every metric mentioned. For them, it's been an FB upgrade in a very substantial way...exposure, attendance, tix sold/contrib. $. Obviously, the new admin coming in and making football a priority was key...more money for coaching, facilities etc, but the AAC has also elevated the program in a real way as well with double the media dollars (still paltry) and exponentially better exposure. Not to mention conference perception with multiple Access bowl teams, media coverage and narrative (referencing mass coverage not the P6 thing). That was something CUSA was never able to accomplish due in part to the Tigers poor performance. Sadly, the thing that helped them make the move (an effort to improve football) could have really helped both the school and CUSA back in the day. Just goes to show what a sports friendly admin can accomplish.

The bball point is also why I don't see those teams aligning solely based on geography. Several programs make money, good money, and won't throw basketball under the bus. If something happens to blow the G5 up, there's a likelihood that the higher budgeted schools with the biggest fan bases (most self generated $) would find a way to come to some sort of arrangement...which ultimately comes down to which set of schools can make the most $ vs. focusing solely on the reduction of cost side of the equation.

Having said all that I do think CUSA can improve. I think the AAC can too as well. it isn't mutually exclusive. The success of one isn't dependent on the failure of the other.

Does the AAC have direct access to the College Football Playoff? Nether does CUSA, MAC, MTN WEST or the Sun Belt. The only “perception” is created by the AAC marketing team. Otherwise an undefeated UCF would of been in the CFP. Everything else you talked about was fluff and irrelevant in terms of where the AAC stands. Roy Kramer & co. and your garden variety fans don’t care nor will ever care who the AAC or CUSA is and probably can’t name 3 schools in each conf. Hell I witnessed that last night when Chicago picked that Memphis WR. People were pissed that they picked him and many things I read talked about the level of competition. I don’t agree but just telling you the stuff I read.

Hoops-wise the AAC is doing great even with Memphis basketball a big pile of poop.

None of which addresses the improvement in Memphis football and what it has meant to the school. It started with the admin, but the conference platform helped exposure, awareness and recruiting. The Pres and BOD members have credited the AAC and FB with increased visibility not only for the team but for the university itself...applications, donations, collaborations...

ETA: Not meaning to come across as controversial, but couldn't agree with the stance as I interpreted it G5=G5 and P5=P5. If that were the case, there would be no merited movement within both groups. Just giving an example of where it was a meaningful upgrade on multiple levels...resulting in increased $ to the FB program and school.

Piss on all the traitors that left USM behind.
Die.

^now this I get behind. SMTTT!!!

In general, I have a problem with blanket statements. A conference move may very well be an upgrade for a particular school depending on factors unique to its' situation.

(04-28-2018 08:31 AM)USM@FTL Wrote:  I was there. There were 6 original football members in 1996. USM, Houston, Louisville, Cincy, Memphis, and Tulane. Houston and USM were the first champions with Houston holding the tie-breaker. ECU came the next year, and it took a vote to kick out Louisville to get them in. Oh how the world would be so different if we had left Louisville on the curb.

Mike Slive built us well, then he left for much greener pastures.

In 1995, there was a Liberty Bowl alliance that included most of us.

Yeah I was referring to '95 you only had 5 football playing schools. Houston picked up when conference football started in '96

(04-27-2018 09:44 AM)BKTopper Wrote:  I really think in all 3-4 iterations of this league that the next 5 seasons or so are going to be the best top-to-bottom in basketball production. Different than "Memphis and Co". The level of basketball cooperation and investment from all 14 members is unprecedented and I for one am totally psyched.

The current membership could definitely be the equal of anything C-USA did in the 2005-2013 era, which you have described (accurately) as “Memphis and Co.” and is sometimes called the “2.0” version of C-USA.

The original (1995-2005) lineup with Louisville, Cincinnati, Marquette, etc. would be very tough for this league to match. That will require a total, 100% transformation in terms of budget, facilities, attendance, exposure, recruiting, etc. Nothing we’ve seen so far really points to that happening anytime soon.

(04-27-2018 07:44 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  Still glad to be here over MAC.

Amen

Quote:it sucked to see majority of our conference make a lateral move in football to the AAC, basketball wise they had to do it.

Yes.

7 teams left: Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis, UCF, ECU

Those 7 were in a league with: Marshall, UAB, Southern Miss, Rice, UTEP

They left to join a league with: Navy, Cincinnati, Temple, South Florida, UCONN

They were replaced by: Charlotte, Old Dominion, Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky, Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Louisiana Tech, UT-San Antonio, North Texas

(04-26-2018 11:13 PM)born in the burg Wrote:  Army was in the original 6. Houston came in year 2.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J727AZ using CSNbbs mobile app

Army didn't come until year 3 at the earliest. Houston didn't come until the 1996-97 academic school year, meaning they were around for the first football season but missed the first Olympic season, spending it as part of the dissolved SWC.

(04-28-2018 11:07 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 08:42 AM)tigerjeb Wrote:  the original six in the 1996 inaugural football season were:

That Tulane logo. lol

The Wave looks like toothpaste.

Played like it too usually. Glad we don't have to prop them up any more.

(04-29-2018 12:05 AM)Cardiff Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 09:44 AM)BKTopper Wrote:  I really think in all 3-4 iterations of this league that the next 5 seasons or so are going to be the best top-to-bottom in basketball production. Different than "Memphis and Co". The level of basketball cooperation and investment from all 14 members is unprecedented and I for one am totally psyched.

The current membership could definitely be the equal of anything C-USA did in the 2005-2013 era, which you have described (accurately) as “Memphis and Co.” and is sometimes called the “2.0” version of C-USA.

The original (1995-2005) lineup with Louisville, Cincinnati, Marquette, etc. would be very tough for this league to match. That will require a total, 100% transformation in terms of budget, facilities, attendance, exposure, recruiting, etc. Nothing we’ve seen so far really points to that happening anytime soon.

Agreed, my original post might have been a bit hyperbolic. Not close to version 1.0. But the conference is definitely trending up in basketball.

If you just punched your ticket to the dance and find out you're pitted against the CUSA champ you should start to sweat a little. First round NCAA game "upsets": MT, MT, Marshall --3 years in a row, starting to become a trend.

The traditional bottom of the conference is starting to scare me now. I can't wait to see what happens at Rice.

(04-28-2018 11:07 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 08:42 AM)tigerjeb Wrote:  the original six in the 1996 inaugural football season were:

That Tulane logo. lol

I actually still have that book

(04-29-2018 09:56 AM)BKTopper’' Wrote:  If you just punched your ticket to the dance and find out you're pitted against the CUSA champ you should start to sweat a little. First round NCAA game "upsets": MT, MT, Marshall --3 years in a row, starting to become a trend.

4 years in a row — UAB dropped Iowa State in a 3/14 matchup in 2015. Game played at Louisville and Blazers fell behind 12-2 at the very beginning. Fought back and won 60-59. Cyclones were ranked #9 before the game.

(04-29-2018 09:46 PM)Cardiff Wrote:  

(04-29-2018 09:56 AM)BKTopper’' Wrote:  If you just punched your ticket to the dance and find out you're pitted against the CUSA champ you should start to sweat a little. First round NCAA game "upsets": MT, MT, Marshall --3 years in a row, starting to become a trend.

4 years in a row — UAB dropped Iowa State in a 3/14 matchup in 2015. Game played at Louisville and Blazers fell behind 12-2 at the very beginning. Fought back and won 60-59. Cyclones were ranked #9 before the game.

Even better

UAB is an original member, however, football was invited later.

I will always respect C-USA and always root for the conference to still do very well. Our football battles with Southern Miss were always a good time