UConn Leaving AAC for Big East

[KSDAWG]

This thing with UConn and the AAC is no big deal. The AAC isn't likely to add anyone now.

But what's coming in about 3 years could be a really big deal when the P-5 media contracts start maturing. If ever there was a time we need all the athletic programs to get on a roll, now's the time starting with football.

Uconn leaving is a watershed moment for the CUSA, Sunbelt and MAC. It accentuates the chasm between the AAC-MWC and the other three. This will force a lot of AD to go back and rethink how they were pursuing relevance. A lot of donors and BOT members are gonna start banging the drum for a more financially feasible and geographically comfortable conference. If there is no value in being in CUSA why should any of the West teams stick around or vice versa? These are hard truths and vivid realities for a group of schools who have been swallowing a lot of crap thinking they were next up when someone moved.

[Champ967]

That's a pretty small sample size you're using.

twss

[Houston Techsan]

I think we are on the same page with this. We are just as good as most of the AAC but don't have their money or media rights.

We are on the same page. While we are about as good, we're still on the outside looking in and not likely going to be asked to join.

[ptaylor]

If you want comparisons, go to the USA Today site about university athletic budgets and compare AAC and CUSA schools. That's the separation, not on the playing field. Its a business, not a competition anymore. Doesn't matter about facilities or win-loss records. Can Tech get to the minimum $60 million/year budget for athletics? That's what will get the attention of the AAC.

[Blue Dawg]

I fear that we are too far behind the curve. 30 years of playing "not quite good enough" shockingly did not produce attractive results.

[The Historian]

Uconn leaving is a watershed moment for the CUSA, Sunbelt and MAC. It accentuates the chasm between the AAC-MWC and the other three. This will force a lot of AD to go back and rethink how they were pursuing relevance. A lot of donors and BOT members are gonna start banging the drum for a more financially feasible and geographically comfortable conference. If there is no value in being in CUSA why should any of the West teams stick around or vice versa? These are hard truths and vivid realities for a group of schools who have been swallowing a lot of crap thinking they were next up when someone moved.

There is no interest in this within CUSA. The subject keeps coming up because fans of Sun Belt schools keep bringing it up.

[PawDawg]

If you want comparisons, go to the USA Today site about university athletic budgets and compare AAC and CUSA schools. That's the separation, not on the playing field. Its a business, not a competition anymore. Doesn't matter about facilities or win-loss records. Can Tech get to the minimum $60 million/year budget for athletics? That's what will get the attention of the AAC.

This!

Of course we can't get to $60 million per year, but we should be making an attempt to grow our budget by a small percentage each year. Instead we have wasted progress on the field while focusing on a demographic that only contains a few thousand people. Our leadership doesn't get it, but maybe another year of falling attendance will make them take notice.

[Houston Techsan]

If you want comparisons, go to the USA Today site about university athletic budgets and compare AAC and CUSA schools. That's the separation, not on the playing field. Its a business, not a competition anymore. Doesn't matter about facilities or win-loss records. Can Tech get to the minimum $60 million/year budget for athletics? That's what will get the attention of the AAC.

But my comparison shows that money does not necessarily buy success on the field which you say is not important anymore. Does any of that AAC money trickle down or up to the average fan? As someone pointed out the AAC has a bread winner or two - Houston and CF. Houston does not like having to share that money with also rans and is trying feverishly to get into a real P5 conference. They are a prime candidate for the Big 12 (10?) when they finally decide to go back to 12 teams. I have no feeling about CF -- maybe the ACC to take the place of Maryland. When those teams leave where does that leave the AAC? Back in the middle of the G5 group. All that lucrative bowl money will just go away.

[KSDAWG]

There is no interest in this within CUSA. The subject keeps coming up because fans of Sun Belt schools keep bringing it up.

Then I fear that CUSA will rot on the vine. Its very unsustainable as it sets and major changes are needed to adapt. I have no interest in playing in the Sunbelt or with 90% of their teams, but reality and economics will eventually set in.

[HogDawg]

Anyon know how C-USA has fared against AAC teams the last few years? Of course there were our wins against Navy and SMU and we weren't even conference champs, but about their same level in conference play. Perception is everything.

.....and Hawaii.....

[inudesu]

Then I fear that CUSA will rot on the vine. Its very unsustainable as it sets and major changes are needed to adapt. I have no interest in playing in the Sunbelt or with 90% of their teams, but reality and economics will eventually set in.

Our current division consists of UNT, UTSA, UTEP, USM, Rice, UAB. UTEP is on out there, but past that it's hardly the old WAC. The geography in CUSA is fine. It's overly large, and essentially two almost conferences operating as one, but that's the trend with almost every conference these days.

I don't really think our travel is a problem. Sure it could be reduced (there is an FBS school 30 miles away) but it's not unreasonable. When our nearest conference mate was a Texas away in NMSU, this argument had some legs (although it still wasn't a slam dunk). I just don't see why CUSA is so unsustainable.

[HogDawg]

Then I fear that CUSA will rot on the vine. Its very unsustainable as it sets and major changes are needed to adapt. I have no interest in playing in the Sunbelt or with 90% of their teams, but reality and economics will eventually set in.

CUSA is not going to rot on a vine. Simply put, it doesn't take $60M to run a football program in Ruston. Or Hattiesburg. Or Huntington, for that matter. Compared to most "big time schools", the tuition rates in Ruston are much cheaper, the teaching and coaching salaries are much less expensive, the simple cost of living is much lower and the taxes are much less. I would argue that any 10 people from this BB&B board would have a very difficult time spending $60M annually on OPERATING expenses to run LA Tech's athletic programs in Ruston.

Many large companies have already figured this out, and now pay their employees differently for the same jobs in different regions of the country. For example, they pay someone in Boston more to work the same job than they pay someone else to work the same job in Dallas. That's because they know that "homeowners" in Boston need an income of 129K per year to live comfortably, while homeowners in Dallas only need 83K. For Houston home owners, that number is 79K. So the person in Boston needs 39% more in income than the person in Houston, to work the same job.
https://www.gobankingrates.com/makin...-cities-us/#18

I'm sure the same can be said for running college athletic programs. But of course, the NCAA will be the last to figure this out and fully understand it.

I've always thought the whole "big budget" requirement was a little silly. Sure, any good conference wants their members to be able to build good facilities and keep up with modern technologies, etc... But, we're not talking about capital expenses, we're talking about OPERATING budgets here. It just doesn't take as much money to run a football program in Ruston, LA as it does in Austin, TX. It's nothing more than the big schools' attempt to punish the traditionally smaller schools, and intimidate them into thinking they have to spend more money to "keep up".

[Champ967]

I've always thought the whole "big budget" requirement was a little silly. Sure, any good conference wants their members to be able to build good facilities and keep up with modern technologies, etc... But, we're not talking about capital expenses, we're talking about OPERATING budgets here. It just doesn't take as much money to run a football program in Ruston, LA as it does in Austin, TX. It's nothing more than the big schools' attempt to punish the traditionally smaller schools, and intimidate them into thinking they have to spend more money to "keep up".

Danggit -- there's that rash acting up again.

Stop saying things I agree with, HD! You know I'm allergic!

[KSDAWG]

Our current division consists of UNT, UTSA, UTEP, USM, Rice, UAB. UTEP is on out there, but past that it's hardly the old WAC. The geography in CUSA is fine. It's overly large, and essentially two almost conferences operating as one, but that's the trend with almost every conference these days.

I don't really think our travel is a problem. Sure it could be reduced (there is an FBS school 30 miles away) but it's not unreasonable. When our nearest conference mate was a Texas away in NMSU, this argument had some legs (although it still wasn't a slam dunk). I just don't see why CUSA is so unsustainable.

I enjoy the Western Division a lot. Its been the most comfortable we have had. CUSA is unsustainable for several reasons. First is that it operates as two conferences totally disinterested in the other. We had an average attendance of 14,603 this year with the two Eastern Div games averaging 13,203 both home and away. That means no interest. The second thing is that the money coming in is only going to get worse. We aren't making anything to be in this conference and with 14 mouths to feed our CFP payout is the lowest in FBS. It is literally costing us money to be in this conference. The third thing isn't something that we can help right now but it is a problem and that's enthusiasm all around. We have posted five straight bowl seasons and have seen a major decline in attendance. We all have our issues with the athletic department, but it seems that this is a conference trend that will worsen now that the last glimmer of AAC hope is snuffed out. The MAC and MWC both enjoy an element of geographical security which makes them more stable. CUSA, Sunbelt and even the AAC overlap so much that it makes stability impossible.

As to what Historian stated that there was no interest, I am skeptical of that. The Rice athletic Dept has quietly stated that change was on the horizon. Time will tell.

[Champ967]

Let me take this opportunity to also reiterate what I've said before about dimishing returns.

A football budget of INFINITY will still not bring your program more than 85 FBS-caliber players, nor more than 15 wins. And the same goes for your whole athletic program.

As long as the number total of wins available remains finite, you'll reach a point on the ROI curve where each new dollar accomplishes less than the one before it. And just like (blech! gag) HogDawg explained, that point is going to be substantially lower in Ruston than in Seattle.