If the SBC were to set up an annual conference vs. conference set-up, which one would you want it to be?

(12-07-2018 09:32 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  If the SBC were to set up an annual conference vs. conference set-up, which one would you want it to be?

I would go Conf USA. I would love to go up a notch but don’t think it would go well for the Belt. I think we are very comparable to Conf USA and there would be some good rival games.

Their geographic footprint is not too much different from ours.

Conference USA would make the most sense. They might not go for it, because they like to believe they are better than the Belt, especially since several Belt teams moved to ConUSA. The reality is, the reconstituted Sun Belt may actually be somewhat better, overall, than the reconstituted ConUSA. Adding AppSt and GaSou certainly strengthened football, and adding GaSt and UTA made up quite nicely for losing WKU and MTSU. Getting rid of FIU and FAU also helped us.

(12-08-2018 10:35 AM)mjs Wrote:  Conference USA would make the most sense. They might not go for it, because they like to believe they are better than the Belt, especially since several Belt teams moved to ConUSA. The reality is, the reconstituted Sun Belt may actually be somewhat better, overall, than the reconstituted ConUSA. Adding AppSt and GaSou certainly strengthened football, and adding GaSt and UTA made up quite nicely for losing WKU and MTSU. Getting rid of FIU and FAU also helped us.

Conference USA went with a baffling strategy of pursing market size instead of pursuing the best available programs and I agree that was a poor decision. The Sunbelt is better this year in football (although the two teams WKU had in '15 and '16 would have beaten any team in the belt those years, I'm biased I know).

I don't agree that Sunbelt basketball is on par with CUSA basketball. There are a couple of very nice teams at the top of the Sunbelt every year but I am amazed with the quality of basketball at the top of CUSA. I think there were 4-5 teams last year in CUSA that would have had a pretty good shot to win the Sun Belt. Personally I think that both WKU and MTSU last year were NCAA tournament caliber teams and both went to the NIT. There are a lot better big men in CUSA than what I saw in the Sunbelt. The games are VERY physical. And I think there are more teams in CUSA that have very strong fan support as compared to the belt. WKU routinely led attendance in the Belt, but in CUSA we are like 4th. UTEP, Old Dominion, Marshall, they all have fantastic fan bases. It is a stronger basketball culture. You don't have to believe me if you don't want to but to my eye CUSA is stronger in basketball.

As to the question in the original post... what I would like to see is a scheduling alliance that happens AFTER conference play. CUSA could do this with the Sunbelt or the MAC (MAC has 14 teams like we do so that might work better numerically). The top team would play home and home with the top team, on down the line. Last place team would play home and home with last place team.

This would give the top teams a chance to get quality wins right before the tournament.

I would not argue your point. And I agree that the Belt has not had an oversupply of good big men. The dominant inside players over the last few years have been 6-7, it seems, and the taller guys just role players.

Remember a guy named Marcus a few years back?

(12-09-2018 10:28 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  Remember a guy named Marcus a few years back?

Of course. Another one that comes to mind is Yemi Nicholson that played for Denver. And who could forget Michael Southhall?

(12-09-2018 11:01 AM)Hilltopper2K Wrote:  

(12-09-2018 10:28 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  Remember a guy named Marcus a few years back?

Of course. Another one that comes to mind is Yemi Nicholson that played for Denver. And who could forget Michael Southhall?

But, alas, those have been few and far between.