Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 49,317
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1910
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #1
CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/...ar-AAOqO7M

Good read on several sportswriters opinions on who the CUSA could least afford to lose, who they are most likely to lose and what they do.
09-14-2021 02:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,546
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 295
I Root For: VanMemIndDePaulUNCBelCin
Location: Nashville
Post: #2
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
(09-14-2021 02:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/...ar-AAOqO7M

Good read on several sportswriters opinions on who the CUSA could least afford to lose, who they are most likely to lose and what they do.

Good find. I did not realize FAU football offered such plusses.
(This post was last modified: 09-14-2021 03:04 PM by bill dazzle.)
09-14-2021 03:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,788
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 576
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #3
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
(09-14-2021 03:00 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(09-14-2021 02:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/...ar-AAOqO7M

Good read on several sportswriters opinions on who the CUSA could least afford to lose, who they are most likely to lose and what they do.

Good find. I did not realize FAU brought such a robust number of plusses.

I think that's very much up for debate. On the hierarchy I think the AAC is probably picking on in no particular order

Academics
Facilities/Budget
Football Strength
Basketball Strength
Market

They'd probably fit the AAC metrics in for sure market, good enough in football strength and football facilities but absolutely dreadful in basketball facilities and basketball quality and for whatever this is worth they'd be the lowest rated school on the USNWR rankings by a pretty wide margin.
09-14-2021 03:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 18,516
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 890
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #4
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
Don’t understand why any of those writers think that a 14-team conference would have to find replacements if they lose two teams. 01-wingedeagle
09-14-2021 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 7,162
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #5
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
Was there a paid endorsement by FAU in that article?
09-14-2021 04:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 8,389
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 333
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #6
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
(09-14-2021 04:16 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Was there a paid endorsement by FAU in that article?

Right?!?!

No way the Golden Brahman are going for that. That’s a BYU-Utah State situation right there.

Long live the Bluebonnet Bowl!
09-14-2021 04:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,163
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 538
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location:
Post: #7
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
FAU is only getting in if the Golden Brahman find a way out.
09-14-2021 04:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 7,162
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #8
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
C-USA and the SBC are an odd mix of schools whose trajectories are impossible to predict.

You’ve got some rural schools with smaller enrollments that have played football for a long time and have pretty decent followings but are about at their max for potential.

You’ve got some more urban schools who are newer to the game that could grow into something great with the right combination of coaching hires. At the same time, if they can’t break through, they’ll never break the commuter school stigma or get out of the shadow of the local NFL brand.

UTSA is one that could turn into a beast if they could get it together.
(This post was last modified: 09-14-2021 04:48 PM by Fighting Muskie.)
09-14-2021 04:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TOPSTRAIGHT Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,394
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 136
I Root For: WKU
Location: Glasgow,KY.
Post: #9
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
I call balk on that FAU football attendance figure.
09-14-2021 04:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,185
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 204
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #10
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
Here are some ideas.

George Mason R1
Georgia state R1
Montana State R1
Rice R1
Stony Brook R1
Albany R1
UTA R1
Buffalo R1
UAB R1
UConn R1
Delaware R1
UMass R1
New Hampshire R1
North Texas R1
FIU R1
S. Miss. R1
Milwaukee R1
VCU R1

Arkansas State R2
Ball State R2
Bowling Green
Central Michigan
'Florida A&M
FAU
Georgia Southern
Illinois State
Jackson State
Kennesaw State
La. Tech
Marshall
Mercer
Miami Ohio
North Carolina A&T
North Dakota State
Northern Illinois
Ohio U.
ODU
Saint Louis
South Dakota State
Southern Illinois
Montana
UTSA
Little Rock
Dayton
La.-Lafayette
UMBC
Charlotte
URI
South Alabama
Toledo
Vermont
Villanova
Western Michigan

Belmont R3
Dallas Baptist
Indiana State
Lamar
Liberty
Lincoln Memorial
Mid. Tenn. State
Missouri State
N. Kentucky
Sam Houston State
SFAU
Chattanooga
Towson
UCA
La.-Monroe
North Florida
Valparaiso
Western Kentucky


L4
Appalachian State
College of Charleston
Eastern Kentucky
FGCU
Jacksonville State
James Madison
Murray State
Troy
Central Oklahoma
North Alabama
Southern Indiana
Youngstown State

I do think football product could be North Dakota State and South Dakota State as a pair of football only and bringing in Dayton and VCU for the rest of the sports.

The problem is you want to add teams that have not been good in football to the AAC. The two Dakota schools and Dayton and VCU can fixed the football and men's basketball.

Arkansas State have a better record than UAB in football the last ten years. Toledo, Northern Illinois and Ohio U. are up there as well. Northern Illinois wanted to get out of the MAC because midweek football games is hurting their ticket sales.
09-14-2021 05:02 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AppManDG Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,352
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 240
I Root For: App State
Location: Gastonia, NC
Post: #11
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
The only SB school that would remotely be interested in jumping to CUSA is Texas State. However.... Marshall and USM are in the SB's crosshairs. One other if GA State goes AAC, which I think is a very real possibility.
(This post was last modified: 09-14-2021 05:09 PM by AppManDG.)
09-14-2021 05:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


herdfan129 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,390
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 248
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #12
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
I'll let you all look at the info and make your own decision as to who is the most valuable in CUSA. 07-coffee3


Total Weeks In FBS Top 25 Since 2014

CFP/Coach's Poll/AP Poll

Marshall- 3/16/15 (Highest Rank #15) (Ranked #15 three different weeks)

UAB- 0/0/1 (Highest Rank #25)

FAU- None


Football winning % from 2014-2020 (Info courtesy of PicksUp)


Marshall 65.4

UAB 64.2

FAU 47.4


Last Five Years AVG Massey Rankings

Marshall CUSA 60

FAU CUSA 61

UAB CUSA 68


Average Football Attendance


Marshall- 24,590

UAB- 24,196 (Only four seasons as they shut their program down for two years)

FAU 15,903



Average Basketball Attendance


Marshall- 5,433

UAB- 3,091

FAU- 1,219



Average TV Viewership since 2013

Marshall Average TV Ratings 2013:

ESPN: 1.804 Million (4 games over 2 Million)
CBS: 1.25 Million
ESPN2: 752k
ESPNU: 436k
FS1: 284k

FAU Average TV Ratings Since 2013

Fox- 2.003 Million
ABC- 1.99 Million (One Game)
ESPN- 1.320 Million
FS1- 121k


Average UAB TV Viewership Since 2013

ESPN- 935k
ESPN2- 722k
ESPNU- 578k
FS1- 79k
09-14-2021 05:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TOPSTRAIGHT Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,394
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 136
I Root For: WKU
Location: Glasgow,KY.
Post: #13
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
I'll just throw this in here:

There are only three reasons the SBC media deal is better (marginally) than C-USA.

1.) SBC was willing to sign a LONG term deal giving everything over to espn. This caps their value ( to a large extent) and gives them little wiggle room- "captive".

2.) C-USA leadership was unable to secure a good media agreement due to INEPTNESS and being unwilling to sign for those terms.

3.) KEY reason-- SBC was willing to take a lot of weeknights.

This does not make all SBC teams "worth" more. It just means they were willing to sign a one-sided (IMO) contract. It might be worth it and a gamble SBC leadership was willing to take. Or maybe not.
(This post was last modified: 09-14-2021 05:35 PM by TOPSTRAIGHT.)
09-14-2021 05:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Yosef Himself Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,277
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 285
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #14
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
(09-14-2021 05:32 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  I'll just throw this in here:

There are only three reasons the SBC media deal is better (marginally) than C-USA.

1.) SBC was willing to sign a LONG term deal giving everything over to espn. This caps their value ( to a large extent) and gives them zero wiggle room- "captive".


SBC's media deal was through 2028 and just reupped till 2031. We wiggled to more money and linear games. Have a stellar year and renegotiate when possible

Quote:3.) KEY reason-- SBC was willing to take a lot of weeknights.



No team has no more than one Wed/Thur night game. Its not crazy like the MAC's deal. SBC gets damn good value out of it too.
(This post was last modified: 09-14-2021 05:57 PM by Yosef Himself.)
09-14-2021 05:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
No Bull Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,910
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 610
I Root For: UCF
Location: Deadwood
Post: #15
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
FAU’s basketball arena removes them from contention. Plus USF is not going to accept FAU. That’s not how USF rolls.

Also I had to laugh about UWF. Their wonderful stadium is a minor league baseball stadium about 8 miles from campus.
09-14-2021 05:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,546
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 295
I Root For: VanMemIndDePaulUNCBelCin
Location: Nashville
Post: #16
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
(09-14-2021 03:07 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(09-14-2021 03:00 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(09-14-2021 02:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/...ar-AAOqO7M

Good read on several sportswriters opinions on who the CUSA could least afford to lose, who they are most likely to lose and what they do.

Good find. I did not realize FAU brought such a robust number of plusses.

I think that's very much up for debate. On the hierarchy I think the AAC is probably picking on in no particular order

Academics
Facilities/Budget
Football Strength
Basketball Strength
Market

They'd probably fit the AAC metrics in for sure market, good enough in football strength and football facilities but absolutely dreadful in basketball facilities and basketball quality and for whatever this is worth they'd be the lowest rated school on the USNWR rankings by a pretty wide margin.


Yep. Now that I read all the posts in this thread, I realize I overreacted. FAU does not look as appealing.
09-14-2021 05:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


herdfan129 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,390
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 248
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #17
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
(09-14-2021 05:38 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  
(09-14-2021 05:32 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  I'll just throw this in here:

There are only three reasons the SBC media deal is better (marginally) than C-USA.

1.) SBC was willing to sign a LONG term deal giving everything over to espn. This caps their value ( to a large extent) and gives them zero wiggle room- "captive".


SBC's media deal was through 2028 and just reupped till 2031. We wiggled to more money and linear games. Have a stellar year and renegotiate when possible

Quote:3.) KEY reason-- SBC was willing to take a lot of weeknights.



No team has more than one Wed/Thur night game. Its not crazy like the MAC's deal. SBC gets damn good value out of it too.


Louisiana has 6 home games this year....only 3 of them are on Saturday?
09-14-2021 05:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,788
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 576
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #18
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
(09-14-2021 05:45 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(09-14-2021 03:07 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(09-14-2021 03:00 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(09-14-2021 02:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/...ar-AAOqO7M

Good read on several sportswriters opinions on who the CUSA could least afford to lose, who they are most likely to lose and what they do.

Good find. I did not realize FAU brought such a robust number of plusses.

I think that's very much up for debate. On the hierarchy I think the AAC is probably picking on in no particular order

Academics
Facilities/Budget
Football Strength
Basketball Strength
Market

They'd probably fit the AAC metrics in for sure market, good enough in football strength and football facilities but absolutely dreadful in basketball facilities and basketball quality and for whatever this is worth they'd be the lowest rated school on the USNWR rankings by a pretty wide margin.


Yep. Now that I read all the posts in this thread, I realize I overreacted. FAU does not look as appealing.

Getting back to the main AAC problem, once you get past UAB every single option falls flat on multiple of these criteria. Even UAB doesn't knock most of these out of the park, just doesn't get an F on any of them. Not necessarily sure FAU fails these at any higher rate than any other candidate out there.
(This post was last modified: 09-14-2021 05:55 PM by b0ndsj0ns.)
09-14-2021 05:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
topper1296 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,470
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 45
I Root For: WKU
Location: Nashville, TN
Post: #19
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
Here are football and bball winning percentages from the last 8 seasons from another poster in another thread.

https://csnbbs.com/thread-928489-post-17...id17608416

Code:
FB    MBB    Enrollment (K)        
.676    .588    46    Liberty    Indep/Asun
.667    .535    13    Marshall    CUSA
.663    .637    20    Toledo    MAC
.602    .617    20    W. Kentucky    CUSA
.598    .693    12    La Tech    CUSA
.596    .556    30    Ohio    MAC
.576    .475    17    Northern Illinois    MAC
.563    .464    22    Western Mich    MAC
.532    .674    32    Buffalo    MAC
.520    .479    4    Army    Indep/Pat
.515    .571    22    MTSU    CUSA
.495    .435    15    Southern Miss    CUSA
.490    .618    22    UAB    CUSA
.485    .395    30    Fla Atlantic    CUSA
.479    .516    22    Central Mich    MAC
.455    .506    38    North Texas    CUSA
.430    .472    21    Ball St    MAC
.426    .560    30    UTSA    CUSA
.425    .641    24    Old Dominion    CUSA
.421    .531    17    Bowling Green    MAC
.402    .450    58    Fla International    CUSA
.376    .637    18    Akron    MAC
.366    .413    7    Rice    CUSA
.356    .426    20    Miami    MAC
.344    .533    19    Eastern Mich    MAC
.313    .408    31    Charlotte    CUSA
.295    .599    28    Kent State    MAC
.264    .756    24    New Mexico St    Indep/WAC
.247    .512    25    UTEP    CUSA
.205    .481    31    UMass    Indep/A10
09-14-2021 05:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,788
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 576
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #20
RE: CUSA targets and vulnerabilities
Wow, I didn't realize Marshall's enrollment was that low.
09-14-2021 05:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.