(11-01-2021 01:50 PM)BeagleUSM Wrote:  Could JMU leave early?

Obviously things should start to get a lot clearer about our transition once the announcement is official and our AD can actually give real answers to questions about it, but yeah I'm really curious if things could end up looking very different due to covid and the extra scholarships. Here's one interesting side of it that someone pointed out on our board:

But obviously the flipside of that is that maybe we could seek a waiver to transition more quickly due to being so close to FBS scholarships already. Seems most likely that the transition will be pretty normal, but if there were ever a time that a transitioning team could make an argument for something out of the ordinary it's now.

(11-01-2021 04:05 PM)CajunFan3406 Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 12:50 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 12:46 PM)ChooChoo Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 11:57 AM)MusicEagle Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 10:08 AM)BeagleUSM Wrote:  Seems this is getting some play.

If the MAC decides to indeed add WKU and MTSU, I think that C-USA indeed dissolves for good. And I think that both WKU and MTSU will make that move if the offer is extended from the MAC.

People are talking about some of these schools staying in C-USA to its last breath to collect exit fees, but you have to weigh that against the opportunity costs of being subsequently homeless and forced to take on the costs and logistical nightmares of independence. Nevermind the fact that your teams then have no ties to NCAA bids which makes recruiting, marketing, fundraising, etc. all the more difficult.

I think 2022 comes into play if C-USA falls apart.

I don't see it falling apart, even with three. I'm not sold that the WAC has this magical card to FBS like some believe, but CUSA currently IS FBS. NMST would be crazy not to use this as their launching pad to an FBS conference than to hope their WAC experiment works. CUSA would be wise to wave entry fees and take on NMST, the TX 4, Tarleton St and McNeese St.

NMST / UTEP
Abilene Christian / Tarleton St
SFA / SHSU
Lamar / McNeese St
LA Tech / FIU

Currently best option on the table for football. Still several options (Grand Canyon, UTRGV, UTA, LR) to build up the other sports as well.

NMSU and UTEP should reach out to the MWC. Neither of them is any worse than UNLV in football and both bring value in reduced travel costs and good basketball.

Leave the FCS teams where they are. None of them are on the level of a JMU in terms of FBS readiness. McNeese couldn't even afford to fix their stadium lighting, yet they are supposed to finance however many more scholarships?

Don't take this reply as a defense of McNeese, because I'm in absolute agreement that they should stay FCS, but their stadium lighting issue is not a financial one. Trust me on this one, I have fairly good knowledge of what's going down with hurricane repairs at that stadium. And that's about as much as I can say on that topic.

So they're thinking of dropping football all together and just don't want to repair the stadium? Or are they wanting an entirely new stadium to be furnished through insurance funds and a fundraiser?

(11-01-2021 05:58 PM)Johns1124 Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 10:38 AM)slycat Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 10:16 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  App and Marshall will have to scramble to find replacements in the nonconference schedule if MU starts next year.

Schedule the CUSA games they have to replace.

A similar thing happened to UNM and Nevada after teams left the WAC. TXST ended up playing one off games of each team to help them out.

We were discussing this today on a MU forum. The problem is if ODU and MU left. We would leave the rest of the CUSA east left to scramble for one or two games next year.
Which might affect their BE. I would like to see an early jump, but ton's to sort out before we can do it.

As others have said, if there is a foregoance (don't even think that's a word) of funds in the C-USA's programs next season, what contract stipulation or contract law forces them to stay in C-USA for 2022? I know that there is a Notice of Cancelation Clause that includes a time frame but if those programs are forced to forego any income during that notice time frame, couldn't they conceivably just break off sooner? Would a court really force an individual, or a program in this instance, to forego income?

There are no Grant of Rights, only their contract with C-USA, so it shouldn't be that difficult to arbitrate as they are already foregoing their league revenues as if they weren't in the league. If the league still has 9 members, they can play 8 conference games without issue.

Not sure why people are saying that they will need to find an extra game if those programs leave. C-USA just changes it's league schedule and all is well in conference play.

(11-02-2021 01:45 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 04:05 PM)CajunFan3406 Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 12:50 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 12:46 PM)ChooChoo Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 11:57 AM)MusicEagle Wrote:  If the MAC decides to indeed add WKU and MTSU, I think that C-USA indeed dissolves for good. And I think that both WKU and MTSU will make that move if the offer is extended from the MAC.

People are talking about some of these schools staying in C-USA to its last breath to collect exit fees, but you have to weigh that against the opportunity costs of being subsequently homeless and forced to take on the costs and logistical nightmares of independence. Nevermind the fact that your teams then have no ties to NCAA bids which makes recruiting, marketing, fundraising, etc. all the more difficult.

I think 2022 comes into play if C-USA falls apart.

I don't see it falling apart, even with three. I'm not sold that the WAC has this magical card to FBS like some believe, but CUSA currently IS FBS. NMST would be crazy not to use this as their launching pad to an FBS conference than to hope their WAC experiment works. CUSA would be wise to wave entry fees and take on NMST, the TX 4, Tarleton St and McNeese St.

NMST / UTEP
Abilene Christian / Tarleton St
SFA / SHSU
Lamar / McNeese St
LA Tech / FIU

Currently best option on the table for football. Still several options (Grand Canyon, UTRGV, UTA, LR) to build up the other sports as well.

NMSU and UTEP should reach out to the MWC. Neither of them is any worse than UNLV in football and both bring value in reduced travel costs and good basketball.

Leave the FCS teams where they are. None of them are on the level of a JMU in terms of FBS readiness. McNeese couldn't even afford to fix their stadium lighting, yet they are supposed to finance however many more scholarships?

Don't take this reply as a defense of McNeese, because I'm in absolute agreement that they should stay FCS, but their stadium lighting issue is not a financial one. Trust me on this one, I have fairly good knowledge of what's going down with hurricane repairs at that stadium. And that's about as much as I can say on that topic.

So they're thinking of dropping football all together and just don't want to repair the stadium? Or are they wanting an entirely new stadium to be furnished through insurance funds and a fundraiser?

I read it as that hurricane repairs are having to be so thorough that lighting repairs are way down the list of important things to do, or that due to hurricane repairs it has been revealed that lighting repairs are a non-starter for one reason or another.

(11-01-2021 02:18 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 02:08 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 02:05 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  The risk of doing nothing is hoping a better option comes on the table after the Big XII makes their moves. If nothing comes up better than they can grab NMSU and UTEP then. UTEP and NMSU are gonna be available no matter what, why does the MWC have any urgency to do it now?

I think the 2022 plan, if it happens, will happen regardless of the solvency of C-USA.

UTEP could be a worse option 3 years from now than they are right now. What happens to their program when conference revenue dries up?

Oh yeah no it could be really bad news for them. But I'm talking from the MWC perspective. What incentive do they have to expand now, when if they expand later they probably have at the very least the exact same candidates as before?

Depends. If the AAC turns out to be the dumpster fire we think it will, there might be all kinds of Texas options for the MWC.

(11-02-2021 01:45 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 04:05 PM)CajunFan3406 Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 12:50 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 12:46 PM)ChooChoo Wrote:  

(11-01-2021 11:57 AM)MusicEagle Wrote:  If the MAC decides to indeed add WKU and MTSU, I think that C-USA indeed dissolves for good. And I think that both WKU and MTSU will make that move if the offer is extended from the MAC.

People are talking about some of these schools staying in C-USA to its last breath to collect exit fees, but you have to weigh that against the opportunity costs of being subsequently homeless and forced to take on the costs and logistical nightmares of independence. Nevermind the fact that your teams then have no ties to NCAA bids which makes recruiting, marketing, fundraising, etc. all the more difficult.

I think 2022 comes into play if C-USA falls apart.

I don't see it falling apart, even with three. I'm not sold that the WAC has this magical card to FBS like some believe, but CUSA currently IS FBS. NMST would be crazy not to use this as their launching pad to an FBS conference than to hope their WAC experiment works. CUSA would be wise to wave entry fees and take on NMST, the TX 4, Tarleton St and McNeese St.

NMST / UTEP
Abilene Christian / Tarleton St
SFA / SHSU
Lamar / McNeese St
LA Tech / FIU

Currently best option on the table for football. Still several options (Grand Canyon, UTRGV, UTA, LR) to build up the other sports as well.

NMSU and UTEP should reach out to the MWC. Neither of them is any worse than UNLV in football and both bring value in reduced travel costs and good basketball.

Leave the FCS teams where they are. None of them are on the level of a JMU in terms of FBS readiness. McNeese couldn't even afford to fix their stadium lighting, yet they are supposed to finance however many more scholarships?

Don't take this reply as a defense of McNeese, because I'm in absolute agreement that they should stay FCS, but their stadium lighting issue is not a financial one. Trust me on this one, I have fairly good knowledge of what's going down with hurricane repairs at that stadium. And that's about as much as I can say on that topic.

So they're thinking of dropping football all together and just don't want to repair the stadium? Or are they wanting an entirely new stadium to be furnished through insurance funds and a fundraiser?

No and No on both questions. They're not building an entirely new stadium, but the improvements they are making to the current stadium, which are being brought upon due to damages sustained during Laura and Delta, would have made hastily throwing in light poles (which is a pricey endeavor) an unwise decision from a cost and engineering standpoint. Plus they already played the spring season without lights, so they figured they could do the same in the fall if it meant having their stadium repairs/improvements done the right way.

I'm no contract lawyer, but I'm sure both ODU and Marshall have had some on speed dial. Both schools have seemingly implied that 2022 might be a possibility, so whatever is in CUSA's contract, it isn't a vice grip. I'm sure there are annoying hoops to jump through, but if there's a will there's a way

(11-02-2021 03:20 PM)ODU-Z8 Wrote:  I'm no contract lawyer, but I'm sure both ODU and Marshall have had some on speed dial. Both schools have seemingly implied that 2022 might be a possibility, so whatever is in CUSA's contract, it isn't a vice grip. I'm sure there are annoying hoops to jump through, but if there's a will there's a way

Well, since there is not a GoR, in which the strength lies in the ability to withhold monies, we could be like Maryland and leave, not paying an exit fee, and tieing it up in the courts for a few years.

(11-02-2021 04:16 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(11-02-2021 03:20 PM)ODU-Z8 Wrote:  I'm no contract lawyer, but I'm sure both ODU and Marshall have had some on speed dial. Both schools have seemingly implied that 2022 might be a possibility, so whatever is in CUSA's contract, it isn't a vice grip. I'm sure there are annoying hoops to jump through, but if there's a will there's a way

Well, since there is not a GoR, in which the strength lies in the ability to withhold monies, we could be like Maryland and leave, not paying an exit fee, and tieing it up in the courts for a few years.

I'm going to guess that is what happens. If litigation is cheaper than the exit fees, you could just jump ship and foregoing revenue from the conference wouldn't be an issue. So you're actually increasing your income a year earlier and not foregoing any lost revenues which in the world of finance is very, very important. A dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow.

We’re planning on making a F4 run this year and call it even

I do understand the scheduling difficulty, although I'm sure that could be worked out.

Question: if Marshall, USM and ODU leave in 2022, wouldn't they be foregoing distributions from CUSA as a penalty, but wouldn't that also be a wash if the Sun Belt includes those three teams in its 2022 distributions?

The net of this (financially) seems to be that regardless of whether the money comes from the Sun Belt or CUSA, the payout is the same (or potentially even larger, with the Sun Belt distributions.)

If that's the case, find a replacement game and get 'er done!

The issue I see is that our TV partners may feel they are getting less content than they negotiated for. Granted, they seem mostly oblivious to C-USA, so may not care. If they pay the same to C-USA as they would without the three, then I see no issues. If they will pay C-USA less then C-USA will want that money paid by the departing schools. Still, paying C-USA back our part of the C-USA TV deal out of what we get from the Sunbelt's TV deal should still be a net positive for the schools. Lawyers will get paid for sure!

(11-04-2021 08:23 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  The issue I see is that our TV partners may feel they are getting less content than they negotiated for. Granted, they seem mostly oblivious to C-USA, so may not care. If they pay the same to C-USA as they would without the three, then I see no issues. If they will pay C-USA less then C-USA will want that money paid by the departing schools. Still, paying C-USA back our part of the C-USA TV deal out of what we get from the Sunbelt's TV deal should still be a net positive for the schools. Lawyers will get paid for sure!

How many C-USA games are broadcast each year? You may get one or two CBSSN games, one stadium game, the rest are on ESPN+?

They could make it work without three programs, easily. The other schools may actually prefer that because their distributions increase and the hit the AAC programs take in "exit fees" would net zero by the time they leave, I'd imagine.

It seems like a win-win. The new SBC schools forego distribution of C-USA revenue by leaving and then join the SBC where they collect league revenue, resulting in no exit "fees".

The confusing part of this is how people are calculating "exit fees". They are saying that the three or five remaining C-USA programs stand to gain X amount of dollars in exit fees. The reality is that there are no exit fees, just withholding of league revenue.

It’s been said but maybe since the other 6 are eyeing a 2023 move the three SBC additions can just slip out for 2022 and leave them with 11 and no divisions for a season.

(11-04-2021 08:29 AM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(11-04-2021 08:23 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  The issue I see is that our TV partners may feel they are getting less content than they negotiated for. Granted, they seem mostly oblivious to C-USA, so may not care. If they pay the same to C-USA as they would without the three, then I see no issues. If they will pay C-USA less then C-USA will want that money paid by the departing schools. Still, paying C-USA back our part of the C-USA TV deal out of what we get from the Sunbelt's TV deal should still be a net positive for the schools. Lawyers will get paid for sure!

They could make it work without three programs, easily. The other schools may actually prefer that because their distributions increase and the hit the AAC programs take in "exit fees" would net zero by the time they leave, I'd imagine.

The cusa TV partners probably wouldn’t be happy about us leaving early. Marshall has by far the most games picked up by the tier 1 and tier 2 deals every year and I’m sure CBS is already eyeing the App game.

(11-04-2021 08:10 AM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  I do understand the scheduling difficulty, although I'm sure that could be worked out.

Question: if Marshall, USM and ODU leave in 2022, wouldn't they be foregoing distributions from CUSA as a penalty, but wouldn't that also be a wash if the Sun Belt includes those three teams in its 2022 distributions?

The net of this (financially) seems to be that regardless of whether the money comes from the Sun Belt or CUSA, the payout is the same (or potentially even larger, with the Sun Belt distributions.)

If that's the case, find a replacement game and get 'er done!

I like the way you talk. Mmmhmm