Serious Conference Realignment Discussion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

You clowns down on I-10 are such lying BS spinners. Y’all are totally clueless.

---

Don’t pay him any mind. Just another Louisville fan spelling GO like he is from Baton Rouge or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jharris

Did CUSA not court UMass and UConn for football only? If so, IMHO, that's a mistake. (Though I'd read UConn wouldn't be interested.) Having existing FBS teams looks better than moving up FCS teams. Granted, UMass has been a perennial loser, and UConn hasn't been good lately. But UConn has fielded competitive teams in the past. And we'd have gained two flagship universities in the wealthy and powerful northeast. Ah well, can't wait to play a university whose name begins with "Sam" and another founded by a televangelist.

---

Sam Houston is absolutely better than either Connecticut or Massachusetts in football. And Jacksonville State is also, but just not as far ahead. Missouri State is also right up there with SHSU.

If you look at the current Sagarin blended ratings, here is what you get:
89 Sam Houston State
103 Missouri State
168 Jacksonville State
195 Connecticut
201 Massachusetts

No way C-USA needs any football only members now that WKU and MT are staying put. Those schools for football only would just divide revenue more ways when it is not needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jharris

Did CUSA not court UMass and UConn for football only? If so, IMHO, that's a mistake. (Though I'd read UConn wouldn't be interested.) Having existing FBS teams looks better than moving up FCS teams. Granted, UMass has been a perennial loser, and UConn hasn't been good lately. But UConn has fielded competitive teams in the past. And we'd have gained two flagship universities in the wealthy and powerful northeast. Ah well, can't wait to play a university whose name begins with "Sam" and another founded by a televangelist.

---

To be FBS you have to 8 full members sponsoring FB, MBB & WBB. That is why the FCS schools were brought in. UMass/UConn would not count as FB-only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

14 teams didn't save us this go around. So we spent 9 years splitting the crumbs 14 ways for nothing (ok, not nothing - some travel savings, too and I guess maybe the overall size of the tv crumbs was higher overall with more product).

I say go as small as possible. And if we get robbed again, we're either gone (great) or as a remaining member of CUSA we lobby for bringing up another FCS school (preferably right in the middle of the recruiting footprint of whatever conference has raided us).

---

^^^THIS! Go small. Stay small. There's no need to split the pie 14 ways when you can split it 8 or 9 ways. It will still be a one-bid basketball league. But with only 8 or 9 teams instead of 14, Tech has a much better chance of earning the auto bid. STAY SMALL!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

Yes. Yes we do.

This version of CUSA is a marriage of convenience and everyone knows it. But it's better for Tech with WKU in. I don't care if they aren't happy about it. We aren't either. It's just where we happen to be for the moment.

It's not their dream conference. So what? It's not anyone's dream conference and it's pretty unlikely that it's going to last terribly long. That's fine. We don't need a 20 year solution. We need a "for now" solution.

---

Great post. My thoughts exactly. Not Tech's ideal situation either. But we can make it work, and with WKU in it, it will definitely work better. Make no mistake, WKU is a GREAT basketball program, so this conference is much more valuable with them in it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FriscoDawg

They won't pay "exit fees" since there is no exit fee. But the 9 schools leaving have to forego conference revenue distributions the next two years while they remain in the conference. That's in the conference by-laws.

Teams leaving absolutely should not host any championships with a predetermined site in the 2022-2023 year unless there is no other suitable site. I still think any spring 2022 championships should also be moved if possible, especially baseball from Hattiesburg, softball from Denton, and outdoor track and field from San Antonio.

Here is applicable text from the last copy of the C-USA Membership Handbook that I have:
"From the date of notice of withdrawal, the withdrawing member shall have no rights to receive distribution of Conference revenues of any nature (i.e. the Conference shall be entitled to retain distribution for two fiscal years) and shall continue to be obligated to pay Conference expenses, assessments, or debts. Further, the term of office of any Board Member representing a Withdrawing Member shall automatically expire and such Chief Executive Officer shall no longer be a Board Member of the Conference effective as of the notice date or determination of notice to withdraw and such Withdrawing Member shall not be entitled to have a representative on the Board of Directors thereafter. During the period thereafter the number of Board Members shall automatically be reduced by the number of Withdrawing Members; and the Withdrawing Member(s) shall not be permitted to attend any meeting of, vote on any matter before, receive notice of any meeting of, or receive copies of materials distributed to the Board of Directors; the Conference shall however, inform the Chief Executive Officer of a Withdrawing Member about matters (as determined by the Commissioner in his sole discretion) that may materially impact the Withdrawing Member during the period prior to the effective date of the withdrawal in a manner disproportionate to the Withdrawing Member and shall provide the Chief Executive Officer of the Withdrawing Member with a reasonable opportunity for discussion with the Board of Directors on such issues as requested.

"Each of the Members agrees that withdrawal of a member from the Conference would cause damage and financial hardship to the Conference and its continuing members, that the financial consequences to the Conference and its continuing members of such withdrawal cannot be measured or estimated with certainty at this time, and that the withholding of distributions pursuant to the preceding paragraph is a reasonable method of compensating the Conference and the continuing members for such damage and financial hardship and is not and shall not be construed as a penalty."

---

Thanks for explaining again. I had you in mind when I posted my rant about Judy, but didn't word it correctly. I say again, if our weak commissioner and remaining presidents enforce the C-USA bylaws and take away the championships I'll be amazed. If anything they should have already announced that CHANGES WILL BE MADE.

Seems like the SLC commish at least showed some hustle. A Tech grad at that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jharris

Did CUSA not court UMass and UConn for football only? If so, IMHO, that's a mistake. (Though I'd read UConn wouldn't be interested.) Having existing FBS teams looks better than moving up FCS teams. Granted, UMass has been a perennial loser, and UConn hasn't been good lately. But UConn has fielded competitive teams in the past. And we'd have gained two flagship universities in the wealthy and powerful northeast. Ah well, can't wait to play a university whose name begins with "Sam" and another founded by a televangelist.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FriscoDawg

Sam Houston is absolutely better than either Connecticut or Massachusetts in football. And Jacksonville State is also, but just not as far ahead. Missouri State is also right up there with SHSU.

If you look at the current Sagarin blended ratings, here is what you get:
89 Sam Houston State
103 Missouri State
168 Jacksonville State
195 Connecticut
201 Massachusetts

No way C-USA needs any football only members now that WKU and MT are staying put. Those schools for football only would just divide revenue more ways when it is not needed.

---

I was going to say the same thing. SHSU and JSU are both waaaaay better at football than UMass and UConn. Once we were able to get to the bare minimum, why add long trips to play terrible programs? The only reasons to go beyond 9 members (or frankly beyond 8 in my opinion) is to ease the travel costs by splitting into divisions and/or to bump the total amount of product in an attempt to get a better tv deal. And the tv thing is moot because there isn't anyone to add that's going to get us more money per program by expanding further. And getting to the point of having divisions would require so many new teams that your travel costs are eaten up by splitting the pie (and you'd be absolutely crushing the conference strength at this point because you'd have to take teams that aren't as good as SHSU and JSU).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jharris

Did CUSA not court UMass and UConn for football only? If so, IMHO, that's a mistake. (Though I'd read UConn wouldn't be interested.) Having existing FBS teams looks better than moving up FCS teams. Granted, UMass has been a perennial loser, and UConn hasn't been good lately. But UConn has fielded competitive teams in the past. And we'd have gained two flagship universities in the wealthy and powerful northeast. Ah well, can't wait to play a university whose name begins with "Sam" and another founded by a televangelist.

---

In the wake of all those departures, C-USA has added schools — Liberty, New Mexico State, Jacksonville State and Sam Houston State — and with the retention of MTSU and WKU, the conference will have nine members, as well as the opportunity to add more, considering reported interest from both UConn and UMass.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/this-school-may-have-just-ended-conference-realignment/ar-AAQy7BN?li=BBnbfcL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lotsudo

In the wake of all those departures, C-USA has added schools — Liberty, New Mexico State, Jacksonville State and Sam Houston State — and with the retention of MTSU and WKU, the conference will have nine members, as well as the opportunity to add more, considering reported interest from both UConn and UMass.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/this-school-may-have-just-ended-conference-realignment/ar-AAQy7BN?li=BBnbfcL

---

I just don't see what we get out of that.

And I don't see (especially for UConn) that what those schools get out of this is really worth it to them.

If adding either (or both) for football only was going to be the difference in existing as a conference, then you have to go after them hard (obviously). But really, I can't think of why any scenario past that would include them at all, much less a hard sell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

I just don't see what we get out of that.

And I don't see (especially for UConn) that what those schools get out of this is really worth it to them.

If adding either (or both) for football only was going to be the difference in existing as a conference, then you have to go after them hard (obviously). But really, I can't think of why any scenario past that would include them at all, much less a hard sell.

---

The only thing I see as a benefit is they only have to schedule 4 games a year instead of 12. You get a guaranteed 4 at home. UConn is currently doing the 4 P5 games annually. UConn/UMass are both playing 2 FCS games this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

I just don't see what we get out of that.

And I don't see (especially for UConn) that what those schools get out of this is really worth it to them.

---

I can think of 3 reasons UCONN and UMASS would want to join CUSA:

1) Much easier football scheduling. Scheduling is typically the #1 complaint from AD's at Independent schools
2) They can sell recruits on competing for a possible conference championship
3) CUSA still has a lot of Bowl tie-ins and connections. This too, will make recruiting much easier

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sportdawg

The only thing I see as a benefit is they only have to schedule 4 games a year instead of 12. You get a guaranteed 4 at home. UConn is currently doing the 4 P5 games annually. UConn/UMass are both playing 2 FCS games this year.

---

They would also have conference bowl tie-ins to play for. As an independent (unless you are Notre Dame, BYU or Army) there is no gaurantee that a winning record places you in a bowl.

And unlike Holtz, most people embrace the chance of winning a conference championship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sportdawg

The only thing I see as a benefit is they only have to schedule 4 games a year instead of 12. You get a guaranteed 4 at home. UConn is currently doing the 4 P5 games annually. UConn/UMass are both playing 2 FCS games this year.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

I can think of 3 reasons UCONN and UMASS would want to join CUSA:

1) Much easier football scheduling. Scheduling is typically the #1 complaint from AD's at Independent schools
2) They can sell recruits on competing for a possible conference championship
3) CUSA still has a lot of Bowl connections. This too, will make recruiting much easier

---

Yeah, you'd think so. I can even think of a 4th in the FBS playoff money (which goes to the conferences).

But I read an interesting article about the UConn/UMass game this year and it sounds like they don't really care about building anything with their football programs. It's just a marketing thing or something. Like, they know they're not good and unlikely to get better (and that even if they got decent they might not get a bowl). They just seem content to roll out a couple of northeastern FCS games, something with each other and Army, and then go barnstorming for money games. They also (at least UConn) feel like they can get P5 games at home (especially the Syracuses and BC's of the world). This allows them to make (relatively) good tv deals on their own. And they're content with that.

I don't get the reasoning, but that's their line. Very different mindset from schools that want to win/grow in football.

But even if they were interested, I don't see why CUSA would be. Maybe if there was a Notre Dame/ACC or BYU/WAC style deal with a minimum number of basketball games thrown in. But even then, I'd vote against it (if I had a vote).

Connecticut and Massachusetts need to go back to FCS in football.

Nothing else needs to be said about it.