Comprehensive Conference Realignment Thread

If all of the announced future conference changes took place today, this is how the NCAA Division I conference landscape would look.

Pac-12	Big 12	Big Ten	SEC	ACC
Washington	West Virginia	Rutgers	Kentucky	Boston College
Washington State	Iowa State	Maryland	Vanderbilt	Syracuse
Oregon	Kansas	Penn State	Tennessee	Pittsburgh
Oregon State	Kansas State	Ohio State	South Carolina	Notre Dame
California	Oklahoma	Michigan	Georgia	Louisville
Stanford	Oklahoma State	Michigan State	Florida	Virginia
USC	Texas	Purdue	Auburn	Virginia Tech
UCLA	Texas Tech	Indiana	Alabama	North Carolina
Arizona	TCU	Illinois	Ole Miss	NC State
Arizona State	Baylor	Northwestern	Mississippi State	Duke
Utah		Wisconsin	LSU	Wake Forest
Colorado		Minnesota	Texas A&M	Clemson
		Iowa	Arkansas	Georgia Tech
		Nebraska	Missouri	Florida State
				Miami (Fla.)
Mountain West	C-USA	MAC	American	Big East
New Mexico	Marshall	Buffalo	UConn	Providence
Air Force	Old Dominion	Kent State	Temple	St. John's
Colorado State	Charlotte	Akron	Navy	Seton Hall
Wyoming	Florida Atlantic	Ohio	East Carolina	Villanova
Utah State	FIU	Miami (Ohio)	UCF	Georgetown
Boise State	WKU	Bowling Green	South Florida	Xavier
Nevada	Middle Tennessee	Toledo	Cincinnati	Butler
UNLV	UAB	Eastern Michigan	Memphis	DePaul
San Jose State	Southern Miss	Central Michigan	Tulane	Marquette
Fresno State	Louisiana Tech	Western Michigan	Wichita State	Creighton
San Diego State	North Texas	Ball State	Tulsa
Hawai'i	Rice	Northern Illinois	SMU
	UTSA		Houston
	UTEP
FBS Independents	West Coast	Missouri Valley	Sun Belt	Atlantic 10
Notre Dame	Gonzaga	Valparaiso	Appalachian State	UMass
BYU	Portland	Indiana State	Coastal Carolina	Rhode Island
Army	BYU	Evansville	Georgia State	Fordham
UMass	San Francisco	Loyola (Chicago)	Georgia Southern	La Salle
New Mexico State	Saint Mary's	Bradley	Troy	Saint Joseph's
Liberty	Santa Clara	Illinois State	South Alabama	George Washington
	Pacific	Southern Illinois	Arkansas State	George Mason
	Pepperdine	Northern Iowa	UA-Little Rock	VCU
	Loyola Marymount	Drake	LA-Monroe	Richmond
	San Diego	Missouri State	LA-Lafayette	Davidson
			UT-Arlington	St. Bonaventure
			Texas State	Duquesne
				Dayton
				Saint Louis
Ivy	SoCon	Horizon	Colonial	Patriot
Dartmouth	VMI	Cleveland State	Maine	Boston U
Harvard	UNC-Greensboro	Detroit	New Hampshire	Holy Cross
Brown	Western Carolina	Oakland	Northeastern	Colgate
Yale	East Tennessee State	UW-Green Bay	Rhode Island	Army
Columbia	UT-Chattanooga	UW-Milwaukee	Albany	Fordham
Princeton	Wofford	UI-Chicago	Stony Brook	Lafayette
Penn	Furman	Wright State	Hofstra	Lehigh
Cornell	The Citadel	Youngstown State	Villanova	Bucknell
	Mercer	Northern Kentucky	Drexel	Loyola (Md.)
	Samford	IU-PU-Indianapolis	Delaware	Navy
			Towson	American
			James Madison	Georgetown
			Richmond
			William & Mary
			Elon
			UNC-Wilmington
			College of Charleston
Northeast	Southland	Big Sky	America East	Metro Atlantic
Bryant	Southeastern Louisiana	Montana State	Maine	Niagara
Central Connecticut	New Orleans	Montana	New Hampshire	Canisius
Sacred Heart	Nicholls State	Idaho State	Vermont	Siena
Fairleigh Dickinson	McNeese State	Idaho	UMass Lowell	Marist
LIU Brooklyn	Northwestern State	Eastern Washington	Hartford	Quinnipiac
St. Francis (N.Y.)	Central Arkansas	Portland State	Albany	Fairfield
Wagner	Abilene Christian	Northern Colorado	Binghamton	Iona
Mount St. Mary's	Stephen F. Austin	Weber State	Stony Brook	Manhattan
St. Francis (Penn.)	Lamar	Southern Utah	UM-Baltimore County	Saint Peter's
Duquesne	Sam Houston State	Northern Arizona		Monmouth
Robert Morris	Houston Baptist	Sacramento State		Rider
	Incarnate Word	UC Davis
	TAMU-Corpus Christi	Cal Poly
Big South	Summit	Big West	Missouri Valley Football	Ohio Valley
Monmouth	IU-PU-Fort Wayne	UC Davis	Youngstown State	Eastern Illinois
Campbell	Western Illinois	Cal Poly	Indiana State	SIU-Edwardsville
High Point	North Dakota State	UC Santa Barbara	Illinois State	Southeast Missouri State
South Carolina Upstate	North Dakota	Cal State Northridge	Southern Illinois	Murray State
Longwood	South Dakota State	Long Beach State	Western Illinois	Eastern Kentucky
Radford	South Dakota	Cal State Fullerton	Northern Iowa	Morehead State
Charleston Southern	UN-Omaha	UC Irvine	Missouri State	Tennessee Tech
Gardner-Webb	Denver	UC Riverside	North Dakota State	Tennessee State
Presbyterian	Oral Roberts	CSU Bakersfield	North Dakota	Belmont
UNC-Asheville		UC San Diego	South Dakota State	Austin Peay
Winthrop		Hawai'i	South Dakota	UT-Martin
Kennesaw State				Jacksonville State
North Alabama
Hampton
MEAC	Pioneer Football	Atlantic Sun	WAC	SWAC
Delaware State	Marist	NJIT	Chicago State	Alabama A&M
UM-Eastern Shore	Davidson	Lipscomb	UM-Kansas City	Alabama State
Morgan State	Presbyterian	Kennesaw State	UT-Rio Grande Valley	Mississippi Valley State
Coppin State	Jacksonville	Jacksonville	New Mexico State	Jackson State
Howard	Stetson	North Florida	Grand Canyon	Alcorn State
Norfolk State	Morehead State	Stetson	Utah Valley	UA-Pine Bluff
North Carolina A&T	Dayton	Florida Gulf Coast	Seattle	Grambling State
North Carolina Central	Butler	North Alabama	California Baptist	Southern
South Carolina State	Valparaiso	Liberty	Dixie State	Texas Southern
Florida A&M	Drake			Prairie View A&M
Bethune-Cookman	San Diego
FCS Independent			Legend
Dixie State			black = all-sports
			blue = non-football
			red = football-only

Non-cartel FBS members

School	Athletic Budget	DMA TV Homes
UConn	$71,396,255	996,550
Cincinnati	$55,433,830	897,890
SMU	$55,349,010	2,588,020
BYU	$54,418,408	917,370
Memphis	$50,266,862	662,830
New Mexico	$47,082,167	691,450
South Florida	$46,829,647	1,806,560
Boise State	$45,680,801	259,090
UCF	$45,327,168	1,453,170
San Diego State	$45,063,393	1,075,120
UNLV	$44,467,342	718,990
Hawai'i	$43,086,528	437,790
Air Force	$41,438,813	343,990
Old Dominion	$41,118,876	709,730
Tulane	$41,004,900	641,550
Tulsa	$40,329,852	526,960
Temple	$39,888,882	2,949,310
Houston	$39,486,396	2,215,650
East Carolina	$38,723,518	303,280
Rice	$37,693,040	2,215,650
Navy	N/A	1,085,070
Colorado State	$36,944,157	1,566,460
Fresno State	$36,436,560	576,820
UMass	$33,475,242	252,950
Wyoming	$32,966,973	111,620
Army	$32,532,108	7,384,340
Akron	$32,050,686	1,485,140
North Texas	$31,182,673	2,588,020
Buffalo	$31,134,149	632,150
UAB	$30,805,171	717,530
Western Michigan	$30,113,764	720,150
Eastern Michigan	$30,081,523	1,845,920
New Mexico State	$29,513,451	339,130
Marshall	$29,441,144	455,490
Central Michigan	$29,281,777	446,010
Middle Tennessee	$29,036,660	1,014,910
Miami (Ohio)	$28,712,466	897,890
UTEP	$28,521,887	339,130
Texas State	$28,378,049	705,280
Charlotte	$28,366,612	1,136,420
San Jose State	$27,815,957	2,502,030
Nevada	$27,734,777	265,600
WKU	$27,716,031	78,780
FIU	$27,542,910	1,621,130
Georgia State	$27,488,640	2,326,840
Ohio	$27,298,719	455,490
UTSA	$27,175,879	881,050
Toledo	$26,304,331	409,550
Northern Illinois	$26,130,115	3,484,800
Utah State	$25,707,325	917,370
Ball State	$25,245,450	1,089,700
Troy	$24,628,741	241,930
Kent State	$24,392,281	1,485,140
Florida Atlantic	$24,033,024	794,310
Coastal Carolina	$23,829,311
Southern Miss	$23,536,254	109,950
Bowling Green	$23,306,965	409,550
South Alabama	$22,960,759	525,990
LA-Lafayette	$21,542,643	229,320
Arkansas State	$20,151,793	80,740
Appalachian State	$19,320,283	1,136,420
Louisiana Tech	$19,239,017	560,370
Georgia Southern	$18,109,721	334,750
UT Arlington	$13,068,075	2,588,020
LA-Monroe	$12,336,499	175,960
Little Rock	$9,151,451	561,760

GOOD stuff. thanks.


Things like this are why i prefer coming here to discuss conference realignment than discussing them on the FSU boards. most people over there have no idea who is going where.

Denver is headed for the Summit League, I believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

Denver is headed for the Summit League, I believe.

---

It's on there.

In the beginning (or at least in 2010), Texas wanted their own network. Their conference mates resented it, and started looking for a way out. And then ...

Big10, Pac12, and SEC raided Big12.
Big12 raided BigEast.
Big10 (not to be outdone) raided ACC and BigEast.
ACC raided BigEast.
BigEast raided CUSA and MWC.
CUSA raided SunBelt and WAC. MWC raided WAC.
SunBelt raided WAC and Southland. WAC raided GreatWest and PacWest.
Southland raided GreatWest and LoneStar.


End results of Texas starting LHN ...

WAC football no longer exists.
GreatWest no longer exists at all.
Grand Canyon U. apparently exists.
Two other schools in Texas (ACU & IWU) will now play Division 1 football.

But maybe that was the plan all along. You know Texas politics ...

According to Brett McMurphy at the Mothership: https://twitter.com/McMurphyESPN

Quote:

---

San Diego State expected to be reinstated to MWC today, remain all sports member & not join Big East sources tell @espn.

---

For all you Big East doubters, I added the NCAA MBB Unit Distribution table above. More reason why the Big East won't die and why every C-USA school would accept a Big East invite. It also shows you why we want Memphis and Southern Miss to make runs in the NCAA tournament this year.

They will still go, but the Big East credits will drop to current CUSA standards shortly. As in football, just because those programs are "moving up" won't translate into a difference on the field/court. In a few years CUSA and the Big East will be nearly indistinguishable. They have markets, we will regional rivalries with fans that give a crap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RougeDawg

They will still go, but the Big East credits will drop to current CUSA standards shortly. As in football, just because those programs are "moving up" won't translate into a difference on the field/court. In a few years CUSA and the Big East will be nearly indistinguishable. They have markets, we will regional rivalries with fans that give a crap.

---

What do you think the membership of the two conferences will be?

Dawg06, that is a lot of work you have done. I appreciate your efforts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

What do you think the membership of the two conferences will be?

---

Today's Guess:

Big East	CUSA
East	East
Temple	Marshall
South Florida	MTSU
East Carolina	FIU
UCF	FAU
Navy	UNCC
Umass	Old Dominion
West	West
So Miss	LA Tech
Tulsa	UTEP
Houston	Rice
SMU	North Texas
Tulane	UAB
Memphis	UTSA

Actually, after putting this together, Big East looks pretty regional too. HA! Still, I really don't think we are talking about a big difference to the average college fan between the two.

Can we just combine the Eastern Divisions to form 1 conference and the Western Divsions to form another! :icon_wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RougeDawg

Today's Guess:

Big East	CUSA
East	East
Temple	Marshall
South Florida	MTSU
East Carolina	FIU
UCF	FAU
Navy	UNCC
Umass	Old Dominion
West	West
So Miss	LA Tech
Tulsa	UTEP
Houston	Rice
SMU	North Texas
Tulane	UAB
Memphis	UTSA

Actually, after putting this together, Big East looks pretty regional too. HA! Still, I really don't think we are talking about a big difference to the average college fan between the two.

---

Rouge...add WKU and NMSU to the CUSA outlook.

I am still not so sure we don't eventually end up in the Big East - maybe at the same time as Southern Miss....

I'd definitely prefer LaTech (or ODU or some other from a list schools) to UMass at this point. It bugs me that they're being mentioned again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

I'd definitely prefer LaTech (or ODU or some other from a list schools) to UMass at this point. It bugs me that they're being mentioned again.

---

Paralex, you are in great standing on this Board. We like you. You need to say you prefer La Tech over anyone else. ODU doesn't even have close to the reputation that we have nationally. I am shocked that UMass is even being considered. I know the "market" issue, but Southern Miss is being considered. Also, market is so much more than just the city you are in.........

I wouldn't be honest if I said I would prefer you over Southern Miss. You're my choice after that. I mention ODU because if they went that direction, I'd be happier with it than if they went with the UMass. Ditto UTSA, Rice, and UTEP (In no particular order, as an incomplete list).

Aside from market, the only reason I can think of why UMass/ODU might have an advantage is divisioning.I

I don't think that market is all-important, which is one of the reasons I think USM is being considered and I'd hope you would be, too. ODU does have good market position, and a lot of potential, though they're still new and an unknown. They're my next preference after you, though. UMass just leaves me cold, the more I read about their current situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

I wouldn't be honest if I said I would prefer you over Southern Miss. You're my choice after that. I mention ODU because if they went that direction, I'd be happier with it than if they went with the UMass. Ditto UTSA, Rice, and UTEP (In no particular order, as an incomplete list).

Aside from market, the only reason I can think of why UMass/ODU might have an advantage is divisioning.I

I don't think that market is all-important, which is one of the reasons I think USM is being considered and I'd hope you would be, too. ODU does have good market position, and a lot of potential, though they're still new and an unknown. They're my next preference after you, though. UMass just leaves me cold, the more I read about their current situation.

---

I can live with that. I think Southern Miss and La. Tech would add a lot of name appeal over any other team being mentioned and, let's face it, name appeal is what the Big East is going to need over UMass or ODU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sportdawg

Can we just combine the Eastern Divisions to form 1 conference and the Western Divsions to form another! :icon_wink:

---

That would make way too much sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sportdawg

Can we just combine the Eastern Divisions to form 1 conference and the Western Divsions to form another! :icon_wink:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

That would make way too much sense.

---

We'd love it, but it's the ole "why isn't Tech in the SunBelt" argument we've heard for years from the standpoint of Houston and SMU (and UCF/USF).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

We'd love it, but it's the ole "why isn't Tech in the SunBelt" argument we've heard for years from the standpoint of Houston and SMU (and UCF/USF).

---

Bingo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

Bingo.

---

Really? I haven't heard that argument from any of those schools.......

I've been saying from the start that UH didn't want to be with NT, UTSA, and that U_F didn't want to be with F_U.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

I've been saying from the start that UH didn't want to be with NT, UTSA, and that U_F didn't want to be with F_U.

---

Well...who does? We don't either.

If you believe USM has a shot to get in you aren't keeping up. USM fans know they have some major housekeeping to do. They have zero chance for at least two years.

We are behind them in the running.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

Well...who does?

---

I know this one! New Mexico State and the entire membership of the Sun Belt!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

If you believe USM has a shot to get in you aren't keeping up. USM fans know they have some major housekeeping to do. They have zero chance for at least two years.

---

I'd hate to see long-term decisions be made on the basis of a two-or-three year hardship. Of course, the same could be said of UMass (maybe everything will be awesome when they get their stadium done and all that), but at least with USM we know that contributing isn't their problem. It seems to me that one of the biggest things the conference needs to worry about at the moment is competitiveness*. Not being left behind by the MWC. That's where I'd like to think USM comes in, and why I hope they've been name-checked a couple times.

* - So what's up with ODU being so high on my list? I believe that they will be a dominant force in C*USA East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

I've been saying from the start that UH didn't want to be with NT, UTSA, and that U_F didn't want to be with F_U.

---

I was referring to the Tech in the Belch. I may have misunderstood the comparison. My point was that I haven't heard Houston, SMU, Tulsa, etc.... say anything about they didn't want to be in a conference with us. I understand not wanting to be in a conference with UNT, F_U, or UTSA. We don't either....... And the comparison holds true with us not wanting to be associated with belch schools.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

I was referring to the Tech in the Belch. I may have misunderstood the comparison. My point was that I haven't heard Houston, SMU, Tulsa, etc.... say anything about they didn't want to be in a conference with us. I understand not wanting to be in a conference with UNT, F_U, or UTSA. We don't either....... And the comparison holds true with us not wanting to be associated with belch schools.

---

But that is the reason that you can't just split the conjectured list up above down the middle.

From a Tech standpoint, it just looks like a no-brainer decision (just like most non-Tech folks could never understand why we'd travel in the WAC instead of playing closer to home in the SB). But the reason it won't happen (as awesome as it would be for Tech) is because Houston and SMU don't want to play with UTSA and UNT, and USF/UCF don't want to play with FIU/FAU. It doesn't have anything (or at least not much) with anyone wanting or not wanting to play with Tech per se.

If you swapped us and Tulane for some reason, you'd still get opposition to splitting that group geographically for the same reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

But that is the reason that you can't just split the conjectured list up above down the middle.

From a Tech standpoint, it just looks like a no-brainer decision (just like most non-Tech folks could never understand why we'd travel in the WAC instead of playing closer to home in the SB). But the reason it won't happen (as awesome as it would be for Tech) is because Houston and SMU don't want to play with UTSA and UNT, and USF/UCF don't want to play with FIU/FAU. It doesn't have anything (or at least not much) with anyone wanting or not wanting to play with Tech per se.

If you swapped us and Tulane for some reason, you'd still get opposition to splitting that group geographically for the same reasons.

---

I agree with what you are saying. It is the reason we need to be trying to get in the Big East. Who would have ever thought that the Big East would be just as regional as CUSA for us.........

We either out recruit or give those schools a run for their money in recruiting. Having us as conference mates takes away the perception advantage they gained by being in a separate conference. This was the primary reason we always got so much hate from Tulane and Memphis, but SMU enjoys not being associate with us too. Tulsa will soon enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

We either out recruit or give those schools a run for their money in recruiting. Having us as conference mates takes away the perception advantage they gained by being in a separate conference. This was the primary reason we always got so much hate from Tulane and Memphis, but SMU enjoys not being associate with us too. Tulsa will soon enough.

---

I don't know how the administration of SMU feels, but I feel nothing but respect from them over here in Texas. SMU, Houston, and Rice all seem to have a very favorable view towards our name and who we are. The only perception problem I have seen is in N. Louisiana. Now, Tulane may be a whole different story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

I don't know how the administration of SMU feels, but I feel nothing but respect from them over here in Texas. SMU, Houston, and Rice all seem to have a very favorable view towards our name and who we are. The only perception problem I have seen is in N. Louisiana. Now, Tulane may be a whole different story.

---

100% true. This area is so insecure of itself it hurts to watch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

100% true. This area is so insecure of itself it hurts to watch.

---

So true...... Just wish we had the same reputation in N. Louisiana as most of the rest of the country. Thinking is too small..........

The thinking in N.La isn't keeping us out of the BE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

The thinking in N.La isn't keeping us out of the BE.

---

Maybe -- but it doesnt help.

http://www.mwcconnection.com/2013/2/...eal-nbc-sports

BE tv deal.

Not knocking anyone's socks off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

http://www.mwcconnection.com/2013/2/...eal-nbc-sports

BE tv deal.

Not knocking anyone's socks off.

---

Better than C-USA fo sho. Do these people edit anymore?

number does not include however, that the ability for the league to sale games that are not protected by CBS Sports, approximately 15 games

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

The thinking in N.La isn't keeping us out of the BE.

---

Think about it........ The media, the alumni, the communities, and the administration. Any one of these causes a ripple effect on the others. It does matter...... lsu has a role in this, but I hand it to them to make the people of N. Louisiana think the way they do. It is so pervasive in Shreveport that they think we are in a different division. Outside of the state, we stand on our own name alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

Think about it........ The media, the alumni, the communities, and the administration. Any one of these causes a ripple effect on the others. It does matter...... lsu has a role in this, but I hand it to them to make the people of N. Louisiana think the way they do. It is so pervasive in Shreveport that they think we are in a different division. Outside of the state, we stand on our own name alone.

---

But this is about money.

It's the demographics of North Louisiana not the mindset of the people living there that has Tech in CUSA instead of the "Big" East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

But this is about money.

It's the demographics of North Louisiana not the mindset of the people living there that has Tech in CUSA instead of the "Big" East.

---

You can draw a direct corralation between what I stated and money. I happen to think it has more to do with not marketing ourselves in the right way to conference officials - more than the money. However, even if you think it is just about money, that goes back to the mindset.

Champion110, I completely agree with your point about mindset. Having lived in WAC/MWC country for more than a decade, I can tell you that the Louisiana Tech name is known and respected. Fans outside of North Louisiana view us (and themselves) very differently than fans in North La.

And, when you read articles about Tech in the Las Vegas Review Journal or the Fresno Bee, you don't see the writers taking shots at the fans and teams like the Shreveport Times does. Mindset plays a big role in this.

I also agree that the mindset has a big impact on money. How many Tech alumni live in Shreveport-Bosser, but don't attend Tech games or give money to the program? How many of those same fans attend games in BR, or give money to that school? If they weren't beaten down by the Shreveport bandwagon mentality, they would give more to Tech and would not wait until we played in Independence Stadium to go see a game. School pride has a lot to do with money donated and mindset has everything to do with school pride.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrayDawg

Champion110, I completely agree with your point about mindset. Having lived in WAC/MWC country for more than a decade, I can tell you that the Louisiana Tech name is known and respected. Fans outside of North Louisiana view us (and themselves) very differently than fans in North La.

And, when you read articles about Tech in the Las Vegas Review Journal or the Fresno Bee, you don't see the writers taking shots at the fans and teams like the Shreveport Times does. Mindset plays a big role in this.

I also agree that the mindset has a big impact on money. How many Tech alumni live in Shreveport-Bosser, but don't attend Tech games or give money to the program? How many of those same fans attend games in BR, or give money to that school? If they weren't beaten down by the Shreveport bandwagon mentality, they would give more to Tech and would not wait until we played in Independence Stadium to go see a game. School pride has a lot to do with money donated and mindset has everything to do with school pride.

---

Thank you and AMEN to your post!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StrayDawg

Champion110, I completely agree with your point about mindset. Having lived in WAC/MWC country for more than a decade, I can tell you that the Louisiana Tech name is known and respected. Fans outside of North Louisiana view us (and themselves) very differently than fans in North La.

And, when you read articles about Tech in the Las Vegas Review Journal or the Fresno Bee, you don't see the writers taking shots at the fans and teams like the Shreveport Times does. Mindset plays a big role in this.

I also agree that the mindset has a big impact on money. How many Tech alumni live in Shreveport-Bosser, but don't attend Tech games or give money to the program? How many of those same fans attend games in BR, or give money to that school? If they weren't beaten down by the Shreveport bandwagon mentality, they would give more to Tech and would not wait until we played in Independence Stadium to go see a game. School pride has a lot to do with money donated and mindset has everything to do with school pride.

---

100% correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

You can draw a direct corralation between what I stated and money. I happen to think it has more to do with not marketing ourselves in the right way to conference officials - more than the money. However, even if you think it is just about money, that goes back to the mindset.

---

Well, sure. If we had more fans we'd be more attractive (because we'd have more money and draw bigger ratings, etc.). There are any number of reasons we don't have more fans.

But SMU/Houston/USF/whoever is left in the BE isn't saying to themselves "who gives us the best regional attitude?" they're saying "who adds value in real terms?" They want some combination of market potential and on-field reputation. They've already invited Memphis and Tulane, which should tell you which side of that equation they place the most weight on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

Well, sure. If we had more fans we'd be more attractive (because we'd have more money and draw bigger ratings, etc.). There are any number of reasons we don't have more fans.

But SMU/Houston/USF/whoever is left in the BE isn't saying to themselves "who gives us the best regional attitude" they're saying "who adds value in real terms." They want some combination of market potential and on-field reputation. They've already invited Memphis and Tulane, which should tell you which side of that equation they place the most weight.

---

We have the fans and numbers. We aren't marketed correctly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

Well, sure. If we had more fans we'd be more attractive (because we'd have more money and draw bigger ratings, etc.). There are any number of reasons we don't have more fans.

But SMU/Houston/USF/whoever is left in the BE isn't saying to themselves "who gives us the best regional attitude" they're saying "who adds value in real terms." They want some combination of market potential and on-field reputation. They've already invited Memphis and Tulane, which should tell you which side of that equation they place the most weight.

---

Except Tulane wasn't market. Not sure why they picked Tulane. Private with a large endowment, but other than they they offer NOTHING. As I've said before, I believe them picking Tulane was the final straw for the Catholics. Tulane was just a bizarre pick for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Except Tulane wasn't market. Not sure why they picked Tulane. Private with a large endowment, but other than they they offer NOTHING. As I've said before, I believe them picking Tulane was the final straw for the Catholics. Tulane was just a bizarre pick for them.

---

Picked because they were Catholic and possibly because they have a huge endowment IMHO. Had zero to do with market as Da Big Easy doesn't pay any attention to Tulane anymore. They haven't in at least 2 decades or longer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

Picked because they were Catholic and possibly because they have a huge endowment IMHO. Had zero to do with market as Da Big Easy doesn't pay any attention to Tulane anymore. They haven't in at least 2 decades or longer.

---

Tulane Catholic? Are you serious?

Market has nothing to do with who folks pay attention to. Never has. UNT will now be C-USA's Metroplex team and Middle will be the Nashville team from a market standpoint. It's all about DMA. New Orleans is not a large market and never has been desirable. That's why the market thing doesn't work for them.

Tulane's not catholic is it?

UCF President John Hitt helped Tulane get their Big East invite: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...517,full.story

Hitt texted the commissioner of the Big East about interest from Tulane University in joining the conference. "Scott Cowen at Tulane wants to talk with me about possibilities for Tulane in the Big East. Scott is a friend. Will listen and then call you. John," Hitt wrote to Big East Commissioner Mike Aresco. Aresco responded, "This would be a big one for us, important market, great school academically, and Scott would be in our tent on the BCS revenue share matter we have to deal with as well as other things."

The Greater New Orleans market is untapped by the Big East. It's not a huge market, but it's still a big market. It is a very good market for recruiting. New Orleans hosts 2-3 bowl games per year, and they hosted the Final Four last season. New Orleans is a great place to host NCAA events.

Tulane has invested heavily in their facilities.

- Tulane announced their new $60 million football stadium well after we announced Q4E, and they will have it completed well before we complete our $16 million value engineered end zone project.

- Tulane has completely renovated their basketball fieldhouse with a second phase to be completed before next school year (I'm still looking for a price tag), and we've yet to replace the original TAC scoreboard from 1982 that we were told would be replaced 2 years ago ($1 million?).

- Tulane constructed a brand new basketball and volleyball practice facility, and we just replaced the floor in Memorial Gym.

- Tulane built a brand new $10.5 million baseball stadium in 2008, and we just now doing a $450,000 renovation to our baseball stadium (and we're still $100,000 short).

- Tulane plans to build an Olympic-style village to house their track and field, cross country, tennis, and sand volleyball programs in addition to football practice fields. Our track doesn't even have permanent seating, and our track and field, cross country, and tennis programs don't even have locker rooms. Our plan is to stick those locker rooms and coaching officies in the south end zone of the football field along with our softball and soccer teams.

Tulane has a lot of money, a lot more money than we do.

Since the creation of C-USA in 1995, Tulane has been conference mates with Cincinnati, South Florida, Memphis, Houston, SMU, and UCF. That's everybody except UConn and Temple. We only shared a conference with SMU for a few years.

Also, Tulane boasts AAU membership, which blows all of our academic accomplishments out of the water. No comparison.

Remember, Tulane also had conversations with the Big 12.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

We have the fans and numbers. We aren't marketed correctly.

---

Look at the current BE membership.

Look at all the teams invited to CUSA before we were.

It's not just marketing. I agree that we offer more to a conference than many of those schools do. But the ones calling the shots have different priorities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parisdog

Tulane's not catholic is it?

---

No I believe it's not but growing up there I always thought is was having the all female university Newcomb next to and associated with Tulane (all male at the time) . Sorry as I was totally wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Tulane Catholic? Are you serious?

Market has nothing to do with who folks pay attention to. Never has. UNT will now be C-USA's Metroplex team and Middle will be the Nashville team from a market standpoint. It's all about DMA. New Orleans is not a large market and never has been desirable. That's why the market thing doesn't work for them.

---

Actually it's not. But I always thought it was even growing up in New Orleans with Newcomb (female) and Tulane (male) associated and next door to each other. Sorry!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

If you believe USM has a shot to get in you aren't keeping up. USM fans know they have some major housekeeping to do. They have zero chance for at least two years.

We are behind them in the running.

---

According to ESPN's Andy Katz, Southern Miss is either No. 3 or No. 4 on the Big East's list.

1. Tulsa
2. UMass
3/4. Southern Miss and Rice

There's one Big East spot open right now for Tulsa.

After that, the timing all depends on the Maryland/ACC lawsuit. That's what the Big Ten and SEC are waiting on, and I doubt we'll have to wait 2 more years for that lawsuit to get settled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

According to ESPN's Andy Katz, Southern Miss is either No. 3 or No. 4 on the Big East's list.

1. Tulsa
2. UMass
3/4. Southern Miss and Rice

There's one Big East spot open right now for Tulsa.

After that, the timing all depends on the Maryland/ACC lawsuit. That's what the Big Ten and SEC are waiting on, and I doubt we'll have to wait 2 more years for that lawsuit to get settled.

---

UMass is a stupid choice. And, they don't need Rice - they already have Houston. I guess the old CUSA schools are pulling Rice along with them - just like Tulane got the benefit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

Actually it's not. But I always thought it was even growing up in New Orleans with Newcomb (female) and Tulane (male) associated and next door to each other. Sorry!

---

The nickname for Tulane is far from Catholic.

'06 that was a great answer to my "why Tulane?" question. Still doesn't change the fact that they are losers. Traditional losers. One thing I question is the money they have and appear to be committed to spend. Their people have never committed to athletics in the past and don't care about athletics. They don't need athletics. Why are they now spending money they don't really need to spend?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

The nickname for Tulane is far from Catholic.

'06 that was a great answer to my "why Tulane?" question. Still doesn't change the fact that they are losers. Traditional losers. One thing I question is the money they have and appear to be committed to spend. Their people have never committed to athletics in the past and don't care about athletics. They don't need athletics. Why are they now spending money they don't really need to spend?

---

Tulane has always been about name appeal. They want to be associated with SMU, Tulsa, and eventually Rice. They, also, want separation from any Louisiana school. They take pride in being a top private school. I can't blame them and they have done a good job with the name appeal. They don't don't care as much about athletics as they do about separation. They will do anything to keep it - especially spend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

I guess the old CUSA schools are pulling Rice along with them - just like Tulane got the benefit.

---

Exactly! Which is why I posted somewhere that the CUSA schools seem to be a club. My perception is that they stick together and even if some move up, they look to bring the others up as soon as they can. And because of that, my gut feeling is that Tulsa, Rice, USM, and probably UAB and Marshall have a better chance of going to the BE before we do. Only UTEP seems to be a misfit and is not likely to get pulled up, but then they have, and are better suited for, the MWC. Just my perception of how the CUSA schools look out for each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hookdown

not likely to get pulled

---

twss

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Better than C-USA fo sho. Do these people edit anymore?

number does not include however, that the ability for the league to sale games that are not protected by CBS Sports, approximately 15 games

---

Don't YOU edit anymore? :laugh:

It's "sell", not "sale".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

UMass is a stupid choice. And, they don't need Rice - they already have Houston. I guess the old CUSA schools are pulling Rice along with them - just like Tulane got the benefit.

---

This whole BE realignment thing is really, really stupid, even for someone of my minimal intellect. :D. It's just dumb that all these former CUSA schools are rejoining each other in the new Big East. I'm starting not to care anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

This whole BE realignment thing is really, really stupid, even for someone of my minimal intellect. :D. It's just dumb that all these former CUSA schools are rejoining each other in the new Big East. I'm starting not to care anymore.

---

I am getting to the same place. If they had stayed put, it would have been a better conference than what they are going to end up with. Plus, the fact that all these southern schools are not in the East. It will end up being a southern regional conference - the same one they left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

I am getting to the same place. If they had stayed put, it would have been a better conference than what they are going to end up with. Plus, the fact that all these southern schools are not in the East. It will end up being a southern regional conference - the same one they left.

---

It'll be roughly the same, though with Temple, Navy, and South Florida most likely. Those are pretty good additions. So a mild improvement. Regionally, the footprint will extend further north (to Philly, Maryland, maybe Massachusetts) but obviously with mostly the same teams it's mostly the same footprint.

One other thing: I wouldn't put too, too much stock in the list given to Katz. It came right after the BSU/SDSU defections and were probably knee-jerk choices. Brit Banowsky has, in his drawer, a full profile of 20 schools at any given time for precisely this sort of event. I don't think the same is true of Aresco. I think the mention of those four schools is, as much as anything, that they were among the first to come to mind.

I do think that there will be some favoritism towards those that have been with the C*USA. But, as with UMass's mention, it's obviously not iron-clad.

And, lastly, UTEP actually has more friends than a couple other schools. I don't think they would be getting in, due to geography and their failure to live up to the hopes that were had for them in C*USA (I think you're ahead of them, this time). But their "pariah" status has long been exaggerated, in my view.

That's not the Champ110 I know. The BEast must be our next goal, and our admin better get to work on it yesterday. We better start caring, or we will get passed up by former Belch schools when more dominoes eventually fall down the road.

Follow. The. Money. You have to keep in mind that's what all this realignment is about. The BEast has more than 8x the NCAA MBB revenue per school than C-USA. The BEast has almost 2x the TV money per school than C-USA. The BEast is wallowing in significant exit fee money from 13 schools. The BEast will receive a greater football distribution than C-USA most years, if not every year. The BEast will still have better bowl opportunities than C-USA. The BEast will still have a better brand name and reputation than C-USA despite attempts by the media, MW, and C-USA to run them down.

Some of y'all sound like the Belch fans talking about C-USA. Wake up.

BEast > C-USA > Belch
Always has been and always will be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

Don't YOU edit anymore? :laugh:

It's "sell", not "sale".

---

Dude

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

That's not the Champ110 I know. The BEast must be our next goal, and our admin better get to work on it yesterday. We better start caring, or we will get passed up by former Belch schools when more dominoes eventually fall down the road.

Follow. The. Money. You have to keep in mind that's what all this realignment is about. The BEast has more than 8x the NCAA MBB revenue per school than C-USA. The BEast has almost 2x the TV money per school than C-USA. The BEast is wallowing in significant exit fee money from 13 schools. The BEast will receive a greater football distribution than C-USA most years, if not every year. The BEast will still have better bowl opportunities than C-USA. The BEast will still have a better brand name and reputation than C-USA despite attempts by the media, MW, and C-USA to run them down.

Some of y'all sound like the Belch fans talking about C-USA. Wake up.

BEast > C-USA > Belch
Always has been and always will be.

---

:D I am still the same Champ110......... No worries there. I know the Big East is where we need to be and I HOPE that our administration is hard at work trying to get us there. H, I want the B12! Anyway, I just see where HD is coming from. It gets frustrating, because the conference basically is picking up and leaving. It is just like what happened in the WAC and we waited years to be able to get back. Now, we must do it again - except with the Big East. Let's just hope we our administration sees it NOW and not later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

One other thing: I wouldn't put too, too much stock in the list given to Katz. It came right after the BSU/SDSU defections and were probably knee-jerk choices. Brit Banowsky has, in his drawer, a full profile of 20 schools at any given time for precisely this sort of event. I don't think the same is true of Aresco. I think the mention of those four schools is, as much as anything, that they were among the first to come to mind.

I do think that there will be some favoritism towards those that have been with the C*USA. But, as with UMass's mention, it's obviously not iron-clad.

And, lastly, UTEP actually has more friends than a couple other schools. I don't think they would be getting in, due to geography and their failure to live up to the hopes that were had for them in C*USA (I think you're ahead of them, this time). But their "pariah" status has long been exaggerated, in my view.

---

Katz is employed by ESPN, the Big East's television rights holder, and that's why I put stock in what he said. There have been several other sources indicate that Tulsa then UMass are at the top of the Big East's list. Until the ACC/Maryland lawsuit is settled, all that really matters is the one school at the top of the list (Tulsa).

At this point, every school's resume seeking an invitation to the Big East has at least one glaring weakness.

It's not that I think Katz is wrong, rather I think the information he got was premature. More about their first thoughts than actual judgments. Which may turn out to be the same thing. I just think that information came out too quickly to be a firm indication of where the conference is going to go. The only constant I have heard is Tulsa. So that's the only one I am banking on (barring something unforeseen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

The BEast has more than 8x the NCAA MBB revenue per school than C-USA.

---

Right, but how much of that goes with the Catholic schools when they leave (and they are expected to fight for the BE name as well)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hookdown

Right, but how much of that goes with the Catholic schools when they leave (and they are expected to fight for the BE name as well)?

---

$0. The units should stay with the Big East unless the conference dissolves.

The Catholic schools don't need units anyway. They'll probably have 4 at large teams in year one with no auto-bids.

Let me add this.

According to Joe Lunardi's projected bracket for this season:
- Big East expected to earn 18 units
- C-USA expected to earn 1 unit

The Big East's 18 expected units would replace their 13 units from 2007. Net +5 units.
C-USA's 1 expected unit would replace their 4 units from 2007. Net -3 units.

For 2013-14, projected MBB distribution payouts would be:
- Big East: $30,512,932
- C-USA: $3,751,590

Projected BC$ football money for 2013-14:
- Big East: $25 million
- C-USA: $4 million

Projected TV revenue for 2013-14:
- Big East: $33 million
- C-USA: $16 million

Those 3 items total for 2013-14:
- Big East: $88.51 million
- C-USA: $23.75 million

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

Let me add this.

According to Joe Lunardi's projected bracket for this season:
- Big East expected to earn 18 units
- C-USA expected to earn 1 unit

The Big East's 18 expected units would replace their 13 units from 2007. Net +5 units.
C-USA's 1 expected unit would replace their 4 units from 2007. Net -3 units.

For 2013-14, projected MBB distribution payouts would be:
- Big East: $30,512,932
- C-USA: $3,751,590

Projected BC$ football money for 2013-14:
- Big East: $25 million
- C-USA: $4 million

Projected TV revenue for 2013-14:
- Big East: $33 million
- C-USA: $16 million

Those 3 items total for 2013-14:
- Big East: $88.51 million
- C-USA: $23.75 million

---

Those are very big and important differences. And obviously, those numbers justify any school leaving CUSA for the "Big" East even if it just ends up being the old CUSA.

But that difference is going to shrink considerably after next year. The difference in an "AQ" BE (that's also a basketball powerhouse) and a "non-AQ" CUSA is much larger than the difference between say, CUSA and the SB. And going forward (once AQ goes away, and much of the BE's b-ball power), the new BE is basically CUSA, and the new CUSA is not too far off from the SB.

It's still better. But it's not going to maintain the kind of distance you're showing for next season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

Those are very big and important differences. And obviously, those numbers justify any school leaving CUSA for the "Big" East even if it just ends up being the old CUSA.

But that difference is going to shrink considerably after next year. The difference in an "AQ" BE (that's also a basketball powerhouse) and a "non-AQ" CUSA is much larger than the difference between say, CUSA and the SB. And going forward (once AQ goes away, and much of the BE's b-ball power), the new BE is basically CUSA, and the new CUSA is not too far off from the SB.

It's still better. But it's not going to maintain the kind of distance you're showing for next season.

---

This!!!! Dawg06 knows this, he just refuses to acknowledge it.

Any gains SMU, Tulane and Houston earn from being members of the new Big East will only be "transitional". It's money found from sitting in the right chair when the music stops. But as others pointed out, a non-AQ new Big East conference holds very little "value advantage" over a non-AQ CUSA. They will BOTH still be non-AQ's. When the smoke clears, it's still SMU, Tulane, Houston and Memphis,......not Alabama, Texas or Ohio St. No TV network is going to compensate a non-AQ nBE with AQ dollars.



HD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

Those are very big and important differences. And obviously, those numbers justify any school leaving CUSA for the "Big" East even if it just ends up being the old CUSA.

But that difference is going to shrink considerably after next year. The difference in an "AQ" BE (that's also a basketball powerhouse) and a "non-AQ" CUSA is much larger than the difference between say, CUSA and the SB. And going forward (once AQ goes away, and much of the BE's b-ball power), the new BE is basically CUSA, and the new CUSA is not too far off from the SB.

It's still better. But it's not going to maintain the kind of distance you're showing for next season.

---

The difference will shrink considerably, but the Big East will still distribute significantly more money than C-USA.

The Big East MBB money will stick around for the next 7 years, and the few extra C-USA units will be gone after next season. With UConn (if they get their APR fixed), Cincinnati, Temple, and Memphis, the Big East will still bring in a decent amount of MBB units while C-USA will likely be down to a 1-bid league most years.

The Big East will land a second tier TV rights deal that will likely make it at least double what C-USA schools are currently receiving. Also, C-USA's current TV deal will likely shrink considerably after it expires in 2016.

The Big East should also land a greater football distribution than C-USA every year based on performance.

Even though the Big East won't be getting AQ money or a blockbuster TV deal after next season, they will still get considerably more money than C-USA. Yes, the Big East has taken a great fall, but they will still undoubtedly be the richest conference from the "group of five" for the foreseeable future. It isn't close.

Kennesaw State will start up a football program in 2015. Part of Benson's survival plan?
http://www.ksuowls.com/news/2013/2/1...214133151.aspx

UMass-Lowell moving up to Division I and will join the America East Conference.
http://www.goriverhawks.com/news/201...x?path=general

Monmouth football will move from the Northeast Conference to the Big South Conference.
http://www.bigsouthsports.com/ViewAr...CLID=206394001

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

The difference will shrink considerably, but the Big East will still distribute significantly more money than C-USA.

The Big East MBB money will stick around for the next 7 years, and the few extra C-USA units will be gone after next season. With UConn (if they get their APR fixed), Cincinnati, Temple, and Memphis, the Big East will still bring in a decent amount of MBB units while C-USA will likely be down to a 1-bid league most years.

The Big East will land a second tier TV rights deal that will likely make it at least double what C-USA schools are currently receiving. Also, C-USA's current TV deal will likely shrink considerably after it expires in 2016.

The Big East should also land a greater football distribution than C-USA every year based on performance.

Even though the Big East won't be getting AQ money or a blockbuster TV deal after next season, they will still get considerably more money than C-USA. Yes, the Big East has taken a great fall, but they will still undoubtedly be the richest conference from the "group of five" for the foreseeable future. It isn't close.

---

I can't see UConn sticking around for long. They will leave some money on the table, but I can't see them sticking with the new group.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

The difference will shrink considerably, but the Big East will still distribute significantly more money than C-USA.

The Big East MBB money will stick around for the next 7 years, and the few extra C-USA units will be gone after next season. With UConn (if they get their APR fixed), Cincinnati, Temple, and Memphis, the Big East will still bring in a decent amount of MBB units while C-USA will likely be down to a 1-bid league most years.

The Big East will land a second tier TV rights deal that will likely make it at least double what C-USA schools are currently receiving. Also, C-USA's current TV deal will likely shrink considerably after it expires in 2016.

The Big East should also land a greater football distribution than C-USA every year based on performance.

Even though the Big East won't be getting AQ money or a blockbuster TV deal after next season, they will still get considerably more money than C-USA. Yes, the Big East has taken a great fall, but they will still undoubtedly be the richest conference from the "group of five" for the foreseeable future. It isn't close.

---

If i were Cincy or UConn I would demand that the 2nd tier rights stay with the team. they can get a better package with their regional sports networks (FSN Ohio, or YES) than they could as part of a Big East 2nd Tier deal. it will still leave them far behind the AQ conferences, but it can put them ahead of the Big Priest deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

I can't see UConn sticking around for long. They will leave some money on the table, but I can't see them sticking with the new group.

---

they can't leave unless they have somewhere to go. ACC won't pick up UConn and Cincy unless they have to. and if they have to...UConn+Cincy won't be enough to save the conference.

if the rumors of a raid on the ACC are true, i don't think the ACC will reload. i think it will cease to exist!

Big Ten is going for the throat in an attempt to get ND. let's assume it is successful...ACC loses UVA, UNC, FSU, and ND to the B1G.

SEC gets VT and NCSU. (this is the plan B for the SEC. plan A is UNC+Dook)

Big 12 gets Miami, GT, CU, and UL

that leaves Dook, WF, Pitt, Cuse, and BC left.

expect an ACC-Big East merger to get to 16 teams. Big East currently has 11. they have not yet invited Tulsa because they are waiting to see what happens with the ACC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

I can't see UConn sticking around for long. They will leave some money on the table, but I can't see them sticking with the new group.

---

Like Hitman said, UConn and Cincy can't go anywhere until they have somewhere to go. If they do get an invite to move up to the ACC, it means that the Big East will raid C-USA again for their most valuable schools (and could take UMass).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

Like Hitman said, UConn and Cincy can't go anywhere until they have somewhere to go. If they do get an invite to move up to the ACC, it means that the Big East will raid C-USA again for their most valuable schools (and could take UMass).

---

And the tv deal on the next round will be worse......... Face it, the Big East is CUSA. Yes, I want to be there, but they basically will end up with what they started. The Big East name will not be worth much soon either. UConn will find a home - ACC or not. They are not going to stay with the new group. Cincy will be next, if they don't go together.

CUSA won't look like the conference we had hoped to join, but it is still absolutely the best place we could have hoped to land at this time. Can you imagine how we'd feel if we were in the predicament that ULL finds itself in right now? Even if CUSA loses one or two more members, the Cajuns are an unlikely candidate as a replacement. They are stuck in a Sunbelt Conference that will soon look a lot like the Southland Conference. They'll be joined at the hip with ULM for a very long time. Thank goodness that isn't us. It very easily could have been.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brtransplant

CUSA won't look like the conference we had hoped to join, but it is still absolutely the best place we could have hoped to land at this time. Can you imagine how we'd feel if we were in the predicament that ULL finds itself in right now? Even if CUSA loses one or two more members, the Cajuns are an unlikely candidate as a replacement. They are stuck in a Sunbelt Conference that will soon look a lot like the Southland Conference. They'll be joined at the hip with ULM for a very long time. Thank goodness that isn't us. It very easily could have been.

---

Totally agree........ I hope the posts by anyone don't indicate that we are not happy about getting in CUSA. We all just wish it was the same CUSA. Have to keep striving for more, anyway. Never be satisfied. Even if it was the same teams, we should be figuring out the next step.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champion110

Totally agree........ I hope the posts by anyone don't indicate that we are not happy about getting in CUSA. We all just wish it was the same CUSA. Have to keep striving for more, anyway. Never be satisfied. Even if it was the same teams, we should be figuring out the next step.

---

Which is sort of our perspective on the Big East. No, it's not exactly what we were hoping for. Well, it's not close to what we were hoping for. But it's still the best place available to us, and a mild improvement over where we previously were.

I know we are'nt a fit and they don't want us, but I think the MWC will do well. It looks stronger than CUSA, Sunbelt, and maybe Big East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by counselingdawg

I know we are'nt a fit and they don't want us, but I think the MWC will do well. It looks stronger than CUSA, Sunbelt, and maybe Big East.

---

Agreed! Only thing "wrong" with the MWC is that whole geography thing....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

Which is sort of our perspective on the Big East. No, it's not exactly what we were hoping for. Well, it's not close to what we were hoping for. But it's still the best place available to us, and a mild improvement over where we previously were.

---

Actually, I'd say it's just about IDENTICAL to where you were previously. :laugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

Actually, I'd say it's just about IDENTICAL to where you were previously. :laugh:

---

They get quite a raise from the previous conference. He was being nice when he described it as "mild".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by counselingdawg

I know we are'nt a fit and they don't want us, but I think the MWC will do well. It looks stronger than CUSA, Sunbelt, and maybe Big East.

---

I agree. But only because all the "best of the rest from the west" share the same conference. In the west, the best non-BCS teams/programs aren't scattered throughout several conferences. Effective 2013, they will all reside in the MWC.

Unlike the MWC, the new Big East doesn't have all the best non-BCS teams and programs east of the Mississippi. Clearly, CUSA has some of the best non-BCS programs, and the Big East definitely has some of the best and worst programs. Just a fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

They get quite a raise from the previous conference. He was being nice when he described it as "mild".

---

Transitional, transitional, transitional. It's "transitional" money only. And it's got nothing to do with Houston, SMU or Memphis, per se. Rather, those schools will just happen to be sitting in the chairs when the music stops. They'll get a nice revenue bump for a couple of years --from former members' exit fees, leftover NCAA Tournament money, etc....-- and then reality will set in.

It's still hard to believe that all those schools leaving Big East are willing to leave that much money behind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

Transitional, transitional, transitional. It's "transitional" money only. And it's got nothing to do with Houston, SMU or Memphis, per se. Rather, those schools will just happen to be sitting in the chairs when the music stops. They'll get a nice revenue bump for a couple of years --from exit fees, leftover Tournament money, etc....-- and then reality will set in.

---

Yeah, they should have just stayed in C-USA, refused the extra millions in "transitional" money, and accepted reality. Nevermind that extra TV revenue. That will eventually come back to what C-USA is getting too right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

Actually, I'd say it's just about IDENTICAL to where were previously. :laugh:

---

Even the worst TV contract estimates are better than what we had.

But I was referring as much as anything to replacing the left-behinds with Cincy, UConn, USF, Temple, and Navy. That's improvement. And if the first two go, then still mild improvement because the other two are better than most of the schools we left and ione of the replacements would likely include the last of the winning teams from the conference we left.

We temporarily have an influx of cash and better bowl bids, and past that still at least a little better than what we had.

This wasn't what we were hoping for, far from it, but better than the status quo.

Addendum: I should correct my initial statement. The perspective I give applies to me, and I think applies to our leadership, but a lot of fans are really, really upset and think that unless we get a better invite we're doomed. But these same people called C*USA by a derogatory moniker, so I'm not even sure they view it as strictly lateral. They thought C*USA would kill us, too. I've only seen a couple people suggest that there is truly no difference. Mostly that it wasn't the improvement we need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by counselingdawg

I know we are'nt a fit and they don't want us, but I think the MWC will do well. It looks stronger than CUSA, Sunbelt, and maybe Big East.

---

I still lean towards thinking that UH should have tried to work something out with the MWC (though I am probably missing the bigger picture or overestimating what we might have been able to work out). I think they'll be the beat us out in terms of competition, to be perfectly honest (depending on what the BE looks like), or it'll be really close. It's hard to say what the financials will look like (except for Boise State, which is going to make out very, very well, to the detriment of others).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

I agree. But only because all the "best of the rest from the west" share the same conference. In the west, the best non-BCS teams/programs aren't scattered throughout several conferences. Effective 2013, they will all reside in the MWC.

---

*Cough* *Cough* BYU *Cough* *Cough*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Yeah, they should have just stayed in C-USA, refused the extra millions in "transitional" money, and accepted reality. Nevermind that extra TV revenue. That will eventually come back to what C-USA is getting too right?

---

I never said they should stay in CUSA, and I certainly never said they shouldn't accept the "transitional" money. The short term advantages of doing so were duly noted in my previous post. But NONE of this changes the real street value of the non-AQ athletic programs at SMU, Tulane, Houston and Memphis.

These new Big East programs aren't going to suddenly become super valuable commodities simply because they changed the name on their conference door.

SMU football will still draw 12K at home.....and that will look BAD on TV.
Tulane football will still draw 8K at home......and that will look VERY BAD on TV.
Memphis will still post 2-10 football records every couple of years, so it will be very tough for TV networks to sell Memphis football to the masses.

And Houston will still be an "up and down" program that has trouble consistently drawing more than 23K.


I have nothing against these programs. But all this talk about huge TV contracts being imminent for these "non-AQ" schools is a pipe dream.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrassyNoleHitman

*Cough* *Cough* BYU *Cough* *Cough*

---

Fair enough....I will concede that the new MWC will be missing ONE (1) high quality non-AQ from out west: BYU. But that could change at any moment. Besides, now that Boise St & SDSU are back, I don't think the new MWC will miss BYU at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

Even the worst TV contract estimates are better than what we had.

---

That's not a surprise. Any new TV contract negotiated today is certainly going to be worth more than one that was negotiated 5-10 years ago. The question is, will the new TV contract be marginally better, or will it be MUCH better?