Interesting CUSA article

This quote makes a lot of sense.

Quote:

---

A school can make up the revenue for maybe one game with TV receipts, but the damage done long-term in establishing and keeping a fan base can be catastrophic for schools and conferences trying to build below the BCS core conferences.

---

Regional rivalries is something that Tech hasn't had since joining D-1A. An occasional NLU or ULL game doesn't count, in my opinion. Consistent rivalries are important for fans and for revenue. The old E-WAC was a step in the right direction, but we need a regional conference. The good parts of the WAC will eventually be consumed by the MWC. We need to be gone before that happens.

This quote is harder to believe because of the money they bring in, but I see his point...and it's why I think Arkansas might be interested in a move back to the Big 12.

Quote:

---

I have come to the conclusion that 12-team conferences do not work well for long term," Holland wrote. "The power conferences can survive the disadvantages but I believe that in the long term they will suffer some damage to rivalries, etc., as well.

---

Overall, he makes a lot of sense, but the most important thing is WHO do they add. At the end of the article, the writer notes that just because a team doesn't have tons of "value" now doesn't mean that they would not have value in CUSA. Tech is a perfect example of that. Playing games in Boise, Honolulu, and Fresno isn't exactly travel-friendly for fans.

The day we start scheduling 2 for 1's with CUSA schools is the day we need to dissolve the program.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MoonPieBlue

I don't think ULL would draw a big crowd. I know it didn't in the past. If both schools were good that could change.

---

USL has always been our biggest Ruston draw outside of the juco -

You can bank 20,000+ easy for any game in Ruston - and that's with NO EFFORT -

Need them as a recurring OOC opponent - Lafayette is a good trip for our average fans who ONLY get to go to one away game a year right now - NONE inconference -

I posted this on February 20th under another discussion about the next AD (Before it was DD) but it kind of reiterates what the article was mentioning:


I really don't see the advantage of loading the eastern side of the WAC with teams that are just moving up. It does not promote the best perception. At the same time, I do think that many schools and conferences across the country are starting to look into the crystal football to see what combinations are out there in the future. Maybe for others, they are not as excited about Boise, Nevada, and Fresno but for I and an average of 20k fans this season, we do want to see how we match up with these teams. And that beats the average of what our UL brethern are experiencing with closer teams.

I hope that our next AD will be able to position us as an attactive and interesting program that is able to associate with a group of schools that is not scoffed at by virtually every other quality conference in the country.

My preference of association of Eastern/Central schools would be the likes of USM, Troy, FAU, Tulsa, SMU, Houston, Rice, UNT, I guess Tulane and maybe a few others. I do not want ULM and to a lesser extent ULL because I still do like our seperation but am not opposed to OOC scheduling.

The rumblings I see on message boards are that the Big East is thinking about a 2010-11 expansion and I think it will bring another domino effect. I think there is also a possibility that parts of the Sunbelt and Conference USA will be looking into new combinations because some of those teams are not making it attendance wise.

As always, I like the WAC but we have to be ready for the next wave.

The only reason that I said a 2-1 with CUSA schools is that right now, we can't them to agree to a 1-1 deal. They can bring in a money game vs 1-AA team to fill that spot. This will start the relationship with CUSA, Tech and both teams fans and expose those schools to the good things happening at Tech. I know that if played any CUSA school within 5 hours, we would bring 3-5,000 fans. Show them that OOC and then the invitation would be ours. This is what the schools are looking for.

The 1-1 with Miss. St. is the exception to our scheduling history. What was the last CUSA school to come play in Ruston that was not in the WAC with us? UAB 10 years ago?

And again I want to stress the fact that the reason that the ECU AD even thought about two 9 school divisions is because of the drop in NCAA basketball units. Get men's basketball everything that they need to get to the tournament the next 3 years! That is the real key to CUSA!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tech XXIX

The only reason that I said a 2-1 with CUSA schools is that right now, we can't them to agree to a 1-1 deal.

---

Do you know if we have even ASKED?!?!

If we turned down a 1-1 with BAYLOR because they weren't paying enough, do you seriously think that we asked the CUSA teams??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DocMarvin362

Do you know if we have even ASKED?!?!

If we turned down a 1-1 with BAYLOR because they weren't paying enough, do you seriously think that we asked the CUSA teams??

---

That is a quality point. We probably didn't try and that should be the first thing we do.

The WAC is not good for our Long Term future.

We need to be in C-USA because of both Geographical and Economic factors.

Our current travel costs are killing the Athletic Dept.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbone1

Our current travel costs are killing the Athletic Dept.

---

Not again!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbone1

Our current travel costs are killing the Athletic Dept.

---

Most people believe this; however, the facts and $$$ prove that this belief is wrong.

I am going to go out on a limb and say that the financial stress that the current oil market is putting on the U.S. is going to have a extremly negative effect on our ability to remain in the WAC long term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbone1

Our current travel costs are killing the Athletic Dept.

---

This topic has been beat worse than a dead horse. In a nut shell our travel cost are comparable and below most CUSA schools. Do a search of other threads to find the specific numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RGTech98

This topic has been beat worse than a dead horse. In a nut shell our travel cost are comparable and below most CUSA schools. Do a search of other threads to find the specific numbers.

---

I'll save everyone the trouble of searching....

The updated Tech-ULL comparison for 2006-2007....conference revenues vs team travel
Tech--$1,558,017 WAC revenues vs $1,734,943 team travel...a net -176,926
ULL--$804,780 SBC revenues vs $1,152,820 team travel...a net -348,040

Once again...advantage to Tech in the WAC by $171,114

For the three years that direct comparisons are possible (2004-2005 through 2006-2007) due to the report format, here are the figures....

Tech...$4,008,672 WAC revenue vs $4,520,719 team travel....difference -$512,047

ULL...$1,929,571 Sun Belt revenue vs $3,328,183 team travel....difference -$1,398,612

Three straight years Tech has been on the plus side of this comparison by a total $886,565 or an average of $295,522 per year.

Yeah but that's sunbelt, I wonder what CUSA travel and revenue comparison would be.

I would rather pick CUSA because:

1) Regional opponents that I can drive to see when we play them, and regional rivalries with the likes of SMU, USM, and Tulane (awesome imo)
2) Boise is not going to stay in the WAC, they are gonna jump to the MWC, and that is a huge blow to the WAC
3) CUSA could get us in a more regional bowl against better competition, with the ACC defection the WAC bowls aren't as attractive anymore
4) Better non-football sport competition
5) Playing games all over Texas would help our Texas recruiting big time, not to mention LA and MS recruits

We would lose:

1) Recruiting pitch of Hawaii trip every other year
2) Being in a better ranking football conference (but NOT if Boise leaves, and they openly admit they want in the MWC)

That being said, just say no to the belch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken_Horndawgs

2) Being in a better ranking football conference (but NOT if Boise leaves, and they openly admit they want in the MWC)

---

Is "they" the BSU message board fans, or Boise administration? Doesn't the MWC have something to say about the matter? I'm just not convinced that Boise is going anywhere too soon (but I don't have any inside info or anything).