(05-19-2022 11:48 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  I think WKU will get to the MAC eventually, especially if the AAC loses more schools to the Big XII and the AAC adds Buffalo to placate Temple.

Don't you think the MAC is a better place for Buffalo at this point?

I'd get it if it was the original AAC 1.0 and only Houston was leaving. That would give Buffalo a conference with UConn, Temple and Cincinnati. Unless the AAC is going to invite multiple MAC schools to replace the lost markets.

Then in that case it would make sense for the MAC to raid the MVC for ISU/UNI and possibly consider a FB only of a XDSU.

MTSU will hold to to hell or high water for the AAC. They seem to think they are a lock for a Memphis backfill. I can't see them joining WKU. I don't think the MAC makes a move here even with 5+5/5. I mean, that's 10 Conf games.

(05-19-2022 11:33 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 08:40 AM)HoustonCajun Wrote:  

(05-08-2022 06:26 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-08-2022 06:14 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(05-08-2022 05:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  The MAC seems better, IMO.

Bad take.

CUSA is going to be one of the best mid major conferences in NCAA Basketball. They literally got freed of most of the dead NET weight and added consistent programs like NMSU and Liberty (and a NCAA team in JSU).

As for football, CUSA just welcomed these name coaches:
Jerry Kill
Rich Rodriguez
Sonny Cumbie
Hugh Freeze

CUSA has much better brands than the MAC. UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, and Louisiana Tech were all valued higher than the majority of the Sunbelt which is why they either departed the Sunbelt or poached the Sunbelt in 2013. Teams like ULM, USA, Troy, etc, are like a lot of the MAC teams those CUSA teams have tried to avoid.

Then, SHSU is a recent FCS National Champion and JSU won the upset of the year last year against Florida State.
Liberty is probably the jewel of the new CUSA. They are one of the most well-funded programs in the G5. Their contract with Freeze speaks to their commitment. NMSU just embarrassed UCONN in the NCAA tournament,

All of that doesn't even take into account that the MAC sits on a recruiting tundra.

All of the MAC schools are so close together in Michigan and Ohio that they cannibalize their fellow conference mates recruiting classes.

CUSA was fortunate to retain a Florida and Texas presence. The MAC just can't offer those recruiting fields. When you add in Louisiana and Alabama, CUSA still has access to the greatest regions for talent acquisition in FBS. (And they aren't suffocating each other trying to land a 2 star)

It can be argued that a 9-team league is preferable to a 14-team league with SBC caliber talent (or even a 12 team league with MAC caliber talent).

If I was CUSA, I might add 1 or 2 more and go into a Double Round Robin Scheduling philosophy. That's literally the optimal league structure for those programs (Southern bent and compact).

IMO, CUSA is the worst dumpster fire. The MAC at least has a tight-knit culture. CUSA raided the SBC in 2013 and seemed to be gunning for the MW as the second-best G5, everyone was predicting big things.

And what happened over the last 8 years? IMO CUSA went in to the toilet.

And why did that happen? Because CUSA foolishly pursued "markets" instead of programs with actual histories and cultures of successful football. CUSA did the SBC a favor by ridding it of over-bloated, under-performing "market" schools**.

CUSA is like the shadow-AAC, except it has fallen behind the Sun Belt so is now the Shadow-Shadow-AAC.

About the worst thing to be.


** Ironically, the AAC has arguably done CUSA a favor by taking some of those same "market" schools off CUSA hands.

You are exactly right. And, the AAC just did the same thing expanding with "markets" instead of programs.

The difference there is that CUSA doesn't have a TV deal and the AAC does. BUT... the CUSA schools that the AAC added do not have their market at all. Charlotte can barely get 11k in the stands on game day.

The AAC did add markets, but that was not their main focus. First they wanted the top of the MWC, when that didn't happen they locked up Texas, so the MWC has no where good to grow. UAB and Charlotte simply back filled the east a bit.

UAB became the gem of what was available, rightly or wrongly that was the perception. FAU and Charlotte provided markets and potential rivals for ECU and USF. Once the MWC was off the table the AAC had to act with what was left, time will tell but I think they chose well, as did the Belt.
CUSA was butchered, and did what they needed to survive. We won't really know how well everyone did or didn't do for a few years.

(05-20-2022 09:10 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:48 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  I think WKU will get to the MAC eventually, especially if the AAC loses more schools to the Big XII and the AAC adds Buffalo to placate Temple.

Don't you think the MAC is a better place for Buffalo at this point?

I'd get it if it was the original AAC 1.0 and only Houston was leaving. That would give Buffalo a conference with UConn, Temple and Cincinnati. Unless the AAC is going to invite multiple MAC schools to replace the lost markets.

Then in that case it would make sense for the MAC to raid the MVC for ISU/UNI and possibly consider a FB only of a XDSU.

I can give you 5 million $$ reasons why the AAC is better for Buffalo.

(05-20-2022 09:19 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:10 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:48 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  I think WKU will get to the MAC eventually, especially if the AAC loses more schools to the Big XII and the AAC adds Buffalo to placate Temple.

Don't you think the MAC is a better place for Buffalo at this point?

I'd get it if it was the original AAC 1.0 and only Houston was leaving. That would give Buffalo a conference with UConn, Temple and Cincinnati. Unless the AAC is going to invite multiple MAC schools to replace the lost markets.

Then in that case it would make sense for the MAC to raid the MVC for ISU/UNI and possibly consider a FB only of a XDSU.

I can give you 5 million $$ reasons why the AAC is better for Buffalo.

Only the AAC 1.0 schools are getting the enhanced payout.

Travel costs would be several million more.

Not to mention who wants to be in a conference with FAU, Charlotte, ECU? I don't think any MAC president wants that.

(05-20-2022 09:22 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:19 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:10 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:48 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  I think WKU will get to the MAC eventually, especially if the AAC loses more schools to the Big XII and the AAC adds Buffalo to placate Temple.

Don't you think the MAC is a better place for Buffalo at this point?

I'd get it if it was the original AAC 1.0 and only Houston was leaving. That would give Buffalo a conference with UConn, Temple and Cincinnati. Unless the AAC is going to invite multiple MAC schools to replace the lost markets.

Then in that case it would make sense for the MAC to raid the MVC for ISU/UNI and possibly consider a FB only of a XDSU.

I can give you 5 million $$ reasons why the AAC is better for Buffalo.

Only the AAC 1.0 schools are getting the enhanced payout.

Travel costs would be several million more.

Not to mention who wants to be in a conference with FAU, Charlotte, ECU? I don't think any MAC president wants that.

I think not having to play mid-week football games, more TV money, and being in a likely multi-bid basketball league (even if Memphis and USF depart) would be worth the move to Buffalo.

(05-20-2022 09:51 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:22 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:19 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:10 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:48 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  I think WKU will get to the MAC eventually, especially if the AAC loses more schools to the Big XII and the AAC adds Buffalo to placate Temple.

Don't you think the MAC is a better place for Buffalo at this point?

I'd get it if it was the original AAC 1.0 and only Houston was leaving. That would give Buffalo a conference with UConn, Temple and Cincinnati. Unless the AAC is going to invite multiple MAC schools to replace the lost markets.

Then in that case it would make sense for the MAC to raid the MVC for ISU/UNI and possibly consider a FB only of a XDSU.

I can give you 5 million $$ reasons why the AAC is better for Buffalo.

Only the AAC 1.0 schools are getting the enhanced payout.

Travel costs would be several million more.

Not to mention who wants to be in a conference with FAU, Charlotte, ECU? I don't think any MAC president wants that.

I think not having to play mid-week football games, more TV money, and being in a likely multi-bid basketball league (even if Memphis and USF depart) would be worth the move to Buffalo.

The longer it doesn't happen, the more likely it won't.

I can remember when Toledo and Miami were candidates for CUSA 2.0. That didn't happen and CUSA from that point began a decline. Nobody wants to join a declining conference. In the case of the AAC they don't even have Marshall which is an important draw for MAC schools.

Its when their is clear upside is when programs are interested in rolling the dice on a far flung move. AAC will probably get picked apart and forced to add WKU/MT/FIU.

XII: CSU, SMU, Memphis, USF
MWC: UNT, Rice, Tulane
AAC: WKU, MT, FIU, LaTech
CUSA: EKU, Chattanooga, SFA, Kennesaw St.

WKU/MT I give better odds of landing in AAC 3.0 than in the MAC.

(05-20-2022 09:22 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:19 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:10 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:48 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  I think WKU will get to the MAC eventually, especially if the AAC loses more schools to the Big XII and the AAC adds Buffalo to placate Temple.

Don't you think the MAC is a better place for Buffalo at this point?

I'd get it if it was the original AAC 1.0 and only Houston was leaving. That would give Buffalo a conference with UConn, Temple and Cincinnati. Unless the AAC is going to invite multiple MAC schools to replace the lost markets.

Then in that case it would make sense for the MAC to raid the MVC for ISU/UNI and possibly consider a FB only of a XDSU.

I can give you 5 million $$ reasons why the AAC is better for Buffalo.

Only the AAC 1.0 schools are getting the enhanced payout.

Travel costs would be several million more.

Not to mention who wants to be in a conference with FAU, Charlotte, ECU? I don't think any MAC president wants that.

short term they take the $ hit, Right now best estimate is they get 1/2 the AAC payout, which will work out 2.5 mil to around 4 before getting full share. that said in 9 years they likely make 2 to 3x what the Mac gets. What MAC prez want and what Buffalo prez want may well be very different. Temple is a natural for Buffalo, Travel is helped by most AAC schools being in large airport markets.

(05-20-2022 10:34 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:22 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:19 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:10 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:48 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  I think WKU will get to the MAC eventually, especially if the AAC loses more schools to the Big XII and the AAC adds Buffalo to placate Temple.

Don't you think the MAC is a better place for Buffalo at this point?

I'd get it if it was the original AAC 1.0 and only Houston was leaving. That would give Buffalo a conference with UConn, Temple and Cincinnati. Unless the AAC is going to invite multiple MAC schools to replace the lost markets.

Then in that case it would make sense for the MAC to raid the MVC for ISU/UNI and possibly consider a FB only of a XDSU.

I can give you 5 million $$ reasons why the AAC is better for Buffalo.

Only the AAC 1.0 schools are getting the enhanced payout.

Travel costs would be several million more.

Not to mention who wants to be in a conference with FAU, Charlotte, ECU? I don't think any MAC president wants that.

short term they take the $ hit, Right now best estimate is they get 1/2 the AAC payout, which will work out 2.5 mil to around 4 before getting full share. that said in 9 years they likely make 2 to 3x what the Mac gets. What MAC prez want and what Buffalo prez want may well be very different. Temple is a natural for Buffalo, Travel is helped by most AAC schools being in large airport markets.

The AAC added six members last time around and it didn't happen. They even picked up North Texas which is in the same market as SMU ahead of Buffalo.

Listening to this board it sounds like Buffalo has a 70% chance at the AAC and WKU has a 80% chance at the MAC in the next 5 years. While that makes logical sense to a lot of people as moves I'd peg the chances at 10% for Buffalo to the AAC and 20% for WKU to the MAC. They are simply ideas which time has passed.

(05-20-2022 07:20 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 05:10 AM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:14 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  [quote='jimrtex' pid='18242730' dateline='1653019386']

I don't think the MAC really wanted to expand, or WKU and MTSU really wanted to leave CUSA.

There was probably a consultant who went to the MAC and said "there's these schools that are really interested in the MAC" and then went to the schools and said, "The MAC is really looking at expanding." The consultant was just looking for his fee.

NOT TRUE. The whole situation was real and moving forward till close to a final decision.

It was NOT just some consultant "shopping" the idea to both sides.

The MAC has the same teams they had in 1976, with the exception of Akron which was added in 1992, and Buffalo which was added in 1999.

Northern Illinois left but came back. UCF, Marshall, Temple, UMass have come and gone.

Quote:

Quote:The MAC only wanted two teams and it was set for Western Kentucky and Middle Tennessee State to join, however MTSU backed out at the last second causing them to rescind their bid.

the rest of the story
https://www.wbko.com/2021/11/24/wku-athl...ying-cusa/

The story says that after the Oklahoma and Texas moved it was believed that CUSA would lose perhaps two or four, six at the outside.

If the XII had taken say BYU and Cincinnati. What would the AAC have done? Stuck at 10 or maybe go to 12. So maybe UTSA and Charlotte.

That puts CUSA at 12. Would the Sun Belt gone full attack mode? Remember they had 12 members. Who would expect them to add 4 while purging two?

I really doubt at the outset that the MAC went in active mode seeking two new members. The MAC is probably wary about Buffalo or Northern Illinois leaving. Ball State would be suspicious except that Muncie is close to Ohio and if they go anywhere it will be to FCS and the MVFC.

Remember that when the original I-A/I-AA split occurred the MAC survived based on the bare majority of schools qualifying, while the MVC and Big West got ripped apart as far as football goes.

But once CUSA was down to five with one in extreme west Texas and another in extreme southern Florida (and both perennial bottom 10 teams), WKU, MTSU, and Louisiana Tech are isolated. Somebody was wanting to finish off CUSA.

Ultimately, MTSU chose UTEP, NMSU, Sam Houston, Louisiana Tech, FIU, Jacksonville State, and Liberty over a bunch of Michigan and Ohio schools.

(05-20-2022 01:29 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 07:20 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 05:10 AM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:14 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  [quote='jimrtex' pid='18242730' dateline='1653019386']

I don't think the MAC really wanted to expand, or WKU and MTSU really wanted to leave CUSA.

There was probably a consultant who went to the MAC and said "there's these schools that are really interested in the MAC" and then went to the schools and said, "The MAC is really looking at expanding." The consultant was just looking for his fee.

NOT TRUE. The whole situation was real and moving forward till close to a final decision.

It was NOT just some consultant "shopping" the idea to both sides.

The MAC has the same teams they had in 1976, with the exception of Akron which was added in 1992, and Buffalo which was added in 1999.

Northern Illinois left but came back. UCF, Marshall, Temple, UMass have come and gone.

Quote:

Quote:The MAC only wanted two teams and it was set for Western Kentucky and Middle Tennessee State to join, however MTSU backed out at the last second causing them to rescind their bid.

the rest of the story
https://www.wbko.com/2021/11/24/wku-athl...ying-cusa/

The story says that after the Oklahoma and Texas moved it was believed that CUSA would lose perhaps two or four, six at the outside.

If the XII had taken say BYU and Cincinnati. What would the AAC have done? Stuck at 10 or maybe go to 12. So maybe UTSA and Charlotte.

That puts CUSA at 12. Would the Sun Belt gone full attack mode? Remember they had 12 members. Who would expect them to add 4 while purging two?

I really doubt at the outset that the MAC went in active mode seeking two new members. The MAC is probably wary about Buffalo or Northern Illinois leaving. Ball State would be suspicious except that Muncie is close to Ohio and if they go anywhere it will be to FCS and the MVFC.

Remember that when the original I-A/I-AA split occurred the MAC survived based on the bare majority of schools qualifying, while the MVC and Big West got ripped apart as far as football goes.

But once CUSA was down to five with one in extreme west Texas and another in extreme southern Florida (and both perennial bottom 10 teams), WKU, MTSU, and Louisiana Tech are isolated. Somebody was wanting to finish off CUSA.

Ultimately, MTSU chose UTEP, NMSU, Sam Houston, Louisiana Tech, FIU, Jacksonville State, and Liberty over a bunch of Michigan and Ohio schools.

MTSU chose those programs for now, vs. "a bunch of Michigan and Ohio schools" forever. I think they would have left for the MAC if they would have been able to exit to the AAC if they came calling. A GoR would have prevented that.

(05-20-2022 10:34 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:22 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:19 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:10 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:48 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  I think WKU will get to the MAC eventually, especially if the AAC loses more schools to the Big XII and the AAC adds Buffalo to placate Temple.

Don't you think the MAC is a better place for Buffalo at this point?

I'd get it if it was the original AAC 1.0 and only Houston was leaving. That would give Buffalo a conference with UConn, Temple and Cincinnati. Unless the AAC is going to invite multiple MAC schools to replace the lost markets.

Then in that case it would make sense for the MAC to raid the MVC for ISU/UNI and possibly consider a FB only of a XDSU.

I can give you 5 million $$ reasons why the AAC is better for Buffalo.

Only the AAC 1.0 schools are getting the enhanced payout.

Travel costs would be several million more.

Not to mention who wants to be in a conference with FAU, Charlotte, ECU? I don't think any MAC president wants that.

short term they take the $ hit, Right now best estimate is they get 1/2 the AAC payout, which will work out 2.5 mil to around 4 before getting full share. that said in 9 years they likely make 2 to 3x what the Mac gets. What MAC prez want and what Buffalo prez want may well be very different. Temple is a natural for Buffalo, Travel is helped by most AAC schools being in large airport markets.

Yeah, and I'm sure they'd be paying 2-3x more in travel costs for all sports (remember, it's not just football) to Boca Raton, Charlotte, and Greenville over Bowling Green, Akron, and Athens.

(05-20-2022 09:16 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The AAC did add markets, but that was not their main focus.

I do not believe this is the case.

You sell the other stuff all you want afterwards, and you can usually find a positive or two for every school in FBS if you're trying.

But it's clear what priority #1 was here.

(05-20-2022 02:34 PM)freshtop Wrote:  MTSU chose those programs for now, vs. "a bunch of Michigan and Ohio schools" forever. I think they would have left for the MAC if they would have been able to exit to the AAC if they came calling. A GoR would have prevented that.

And by the same token, after the UCF / Temple / Marshall experiences, it may be that the MAC would rather have no expansion over expansion with another footloose, "here today, gone tomorrow" school, irrespective of the particular appeal of the school(s) in question.

(05-20-2022 05:37 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 02:34 PM)freshtop Wrote:  MTSU chose those programs for now, vs. "a bunch of Michigan and Ohio schools" forever. I think they would have left for the MAC if they would have been able to exit to the AAC if they came calling. A GoR would have prevented that.

And by the same token, after the UCF / Temple / Marshall experiences, it may be that the MAC would rather have no expansion over expansion with another footloose, "here today, gone tomorrow" school, irrespective of the particular appeal of the school(s) in question.

Well-stated and on target. IMO, IF !! any expansion, MAC wants all sports, slight footprint expansion, no media deal loss with adds while keeping stability. In no hurry, tho. ESPN deal negotiations in a couple years with current expiring 2026-27.

(05-20-2022 09:16 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:33 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 08:40 AM)HoustonCajun Wrote:  

(05-08-2022 06:26 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-08-2022 06:14 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  Bad take.

CUSA is going to be one of the best mid major conferences in NCAA Basketball. They literally got freed of most of the dead NET weight and added consistent programs like NMSU and Liberty (and a NCAA team in JSU).

As for football, CUSA just welcomed these name coaches:
Jerry Kill
Rich Rodriguez
Sonny Cumbie
Hugh Freeze

CUSA has much better brands than the MAC. UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, and Louisiana Tech were all valued higher than the majority of the Sunbelt which is why they either departed the Sunbelt or poached the Sunbelt in 2013. Teams like ULM, USA, Troy, etc, are like a lot of the MAC teams those CUSA teams have tried to avoid.

Then, SHSU is a recent FCS National Champion and JSU won the upset of the year last year against Florida State.
Liberty is probably the jewel of the new CUSA. They are one of the most well-funded programs in the G5. Their contract with Freeze speaks to their commitment. NMSU just embarrassed UCONN in the NCAA tournament,

All of that doesn't even take into account that the MAC sits on a recruiting tundra.

All of the MAC schools are so close together in Michigan and Ohio that they cannibalize their fellow conference mates recruiting classes.

CUSA was fortunate to retain a Florida and Texas presence. The MAC just can't offer those recruiting fields. When you add in Louisiana and Alabama, CUSA still has access to the greatest regions for talent acquisition in FBS. (And they aren't suffocating each other trying to land a 2 star)

It can be argued that a 9-team league is preferable to a 14-team league with SBC caliber talent (or even a 12 team league with MAC caliber talent).

If I was CUSA, I might add 1 or 2 more and go into a Double Round Robin Scheduling philosophy. That's literally the optimal league structure for those programs (Southern bent and compact).

IMO, CUSA is the worst dumpster fire. The MAC at least has a tight-knit culture. CUSA raided the SBC in 2013 and seemed to be gunning for the MW as the second-best G5, everyone was predicting big things.

And what happened over the last 8 years? IMO CUSA went in to the toilet.

And why did that happen? Because CUSA foolishly pursued "markets" instead of programs with actual histories and cultures of successful football. CUSA did the SBC a favor by ridding it of over-bloated, under-performing "market" schools**.

CUSA is like the shadow-AAC, except it has fallen behind the Sun Belt so is now the Shadow-Shadow-AAC.

About the worst thing to be.


** Ironically, the AAC has arguably done CUSA a favor by taking some of those same "market" schools off CUSA hands.

You are exactly right. And, the AAC just did the same thing expanding with "markets" instead of programs.

The difference there is that CUSA doesn't have a TV deal and the AAC does. BUT... the CUSA schools that the AAC added do not have their market at all. Charlotte can barely get 11k in the stands on game day.

The AAC did add markets, but that was not their main focus. First they wanted the top of the MWC, when that didn't happen they locked up Texas, so the MWC has no where good to grow. UAB and Charlotte simply back filled the east a bit.

UAB became the gem of what was available, rightly or wrongly that was the perception. FAU and Charlotte provided markets and potential rivals for ECU and USF. Once the MWC was off the table the AAC had to act with what was left, time will tell but I think they chose well, as did the Belt.
CUSA was butchered, and did what they needed to survive. We won't really know how well everyone did or didn't do for a few years.

The AAC hasn't completely locked up Texas unless they can pull Texas State from the SunBelt. And since E$PN controls both conferences, Texas State isn't going anywhere for awhile, IMO.

(05-20-2022 04:03 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:16 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The AAC did add markets, but that was not their main focus.

I do not believe this is the case.

You sell the other stuff all you want afterwards, and you can usually find a positive or two for every school in FBS if you're trying.

But it's clear what priority #1 was here.

They chose the best athletic departments over the last 10 years and most funded athletic departments.

All 6 were in the Top 8 winning percent wise over the 4 major sports(football, basketball, baseball and women's basketball) and the 6 were in in the top 7 in athletic spending/investment.

(05-13-2022 06:28 PM)b2b Wrote:  I feel like people don't understand that MTSU isn't really that close to Nashville. It's about 45 mins away from there. WKU is about an hour. Not much difference really but yeah... The package deal to the MAC makes a lot of sense.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Huge difference between Bowling Green and Murfreesboro. Pretty much everyone that lives in the Boro commutes to Nashville. The Boro is very much a part of the Nashville metro. I commute to downtown Nashville every day. From MTSU it’s 36 miles to downtown Nashville vs 65 from WKU.

(05-21-2022 06:57 PM)spenser Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 04:03 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 09:16 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The AAC did add markets, but that was not their main focus.

I do not believe this is the case.

You sell the other stuff all you want afterwards, and you can usually find a positive or two for every school in FBS if you're trying.

But it's clear what priority #1 was here.

They chose the best athletic departments over the last 10 years and most funded athletic departments.

All 6 were in the Top 8 winning percent wise over the 4 major sports(football, basketball, baseball and women's basketball) and the 6 were in in the top 7 in athletic spending/investment.

Sure

And this one has a great tiddly winks team and that one just opened a top notch Starbucks in the student center.

But also (and mostly) #markets.

(05-20-2022 01:29 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 07:20 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 05:10 AM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 11:14 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  [quote='jimrtex' pid='18242730' dateline='1653019386']

I don't think the MAC really wanted to expand, or WKU and MTSU really wanted to leave CUSA.

There was probably a consultant who went to the MAC and said "there's these schools that are really interested in the MAC" and then went to the schools and said, "The MAC is really looking at expanding." The consultant was just looking for his fee.

NOT TRUE. The whole situation was real and moving forward till close to a final decision.

It was NOT just some consultant "shopping" the idea to both sides.

The MAC has the same teams they had in 1976, with the exception of Akron which was added in 1992, and Buffalo which was added in 1999.

Northern Illinois left but came back. UCF, Marshall, Temple, UMass have come and gone.

Quote:

Quote:The MAC only wanted two teams and it was set for Western Kentucky and Middle Tennessee State to join, however MTSU backed out at the last second causing them to rescind their bid.

the rest of the story
https://www.wbko.com/2021/11/24/wku-athl...ying-cusa/

The story says that after the Oklahoma and Texas moved it was believed that CUSA would lose perhaps two or four, six at the outside.

If the XII had taken say BYU and Cincinnati. What would the AAC have done? Stuck at 10 or maybe go to 12. So maybe UTSA and Charlotte.

That puts CUSA at 12. Would the Sun Belt gone full attack mode? Remember they had 12 members. Who would expect them to add 4 while purging two?

I really doubt at the outset that the MAC went in active mode seeking two new members. The MAC is probably wary about Buffalo or Northern Illinois leaving. Ball State would be suspicious except that Muncie is close to Ohio and if they go anywhere it will be to FCS and the MVFC.

Remember that when the original I-A/I-AA split occurred the MAC survived based on the bare majority of schools qualifying, while the MVC and Big West got ripped apart as far as football goes.

But once CUSA was down to five with one in extreme west Texas and another in extreme southern Florida (and both perennial bottom 10 teams), WKU, MTSU, and Louisiana Tech are isolated. E$PN was wanting to finish off CUSA.

Ultimately, MTSU chose UTEP, NMSU, Sam Houston, Louisiana Tech, FIU, Jacksonville State, and Liberty over a bunch of Michigan and Ohio schools.

Mystery solved, IMHO.