|
|
Originally Posted by dawg80
That's my point. It's the same schools from old CUSA driving the selection process and they are applying the same formula. In this case UTSA = UTEP.
Of course I think their criteria is flawed, but they're not asking me for input.
Their main criteria has always seemed to be…..
Any FBS > Tech.
I think the "budget" thing is vastly overblown. It just doesn't cost as much to run an athletic program in Ruston, LA as it does in most places. Plus, a lot of schools --perhaps even most-- rely on student fees for the majority of support (UNT, for example). To my knowledge, LA Tech isn't doing that, or if we are, it's not typically as much per student. Besides, LA Tech just proved that it can totally remodel, renovate and rebuild its' entire athletic hardscape plant as needed in as little as 6 yrs. In only 6 yrs, Tech added the South End Zone (SEZ) project, the new Press box facility, and other renovations to Joe Aillet Stadium. Tech also built a new baseball stadium, a new girls softball stadium, a new soccer stadium and replaced the basketball floor with a brand new one. And these are only the projects I know about.
UAB…funny. Weren’t they shut down just a few years ago?
I won’t be sad to see them go.
The issue will be if any schools like USM court the Belt. Not sure the Belt is a pill our money men are willing to swallow.
Yeah, lots of interest from USM folks in joining the Belt.
I think if we were to move to AAC, we would immediately be competitive in many of our main sports. Schools like UTSA joined our conference because of the "potential" due
to being located in a big market, but they havent done much and are not even the face of CUSA.
Their basketball arena and baseball field are pretty sad too
If the AAC took UAB and 3 MWC schools, that's not a bad situation for Tech. Ideally the MWC would take UTEP (along with a couple of those NW FCS powerhouses) and CUSA could just bump WKU over to the west division (may have to let them have a standing rivalry with MTSU) and roll with 12 teams.
After that, if the long predicted CUSA/Belt shuffle-up took place, well, whatever (so long as we end up with schools in that bunch we'd prefer, which I think would mostly happen since the main point would be to split geographically). Or (more likely) if nothing happened, we'd be roughly in the same boat we're in now just minus UAB and UTEP.
I would hope that school presidents and AD's would understand how to dig through the mythical reported budgets of college sports (since they're the ones doing all the silliness to begin with) to see what really matters. I don't know what the thresholds are on this kind of thing, but I do think they're looking for "commitment" in the AAC. You'd hope our on-field success and recent facility upgrades would speak to that more than a bottom line fake number.
I’m not doing any studying of this and don’t think it matters much where Tech goes. We’ll do the same things we always do regardless of who we play. In the end I wouldn’t be surprised one bit to find that ULM and ULL are better off. If we didn’t suck so bad at taking advantage of our opportunities we would’ve left them miles behind already.
Looks like the AAC wants Boise, Air Force, Colorado State, San Diego State, and UAB. Other than here I have not seen Tech mentioned on any list of possible AAC replacements. So, it looks like if we want to get in a stronger football conference it is the Sun Belt. In our movement to either the AAC or the Sun Belt, Skip would have to go. The level of coaching in either conference would spell doom for our football program.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...n-realignment/
We definitely want to shoot for Sunbelt membership. Watching ULL tonight. Nothing like the awesome environment in Cajun Field playing in front of 2,000 for a nationally televised contest. That’s big time.
I truly don't understand any school's infatuation with the Belt. They had a good year last year and are playing decent in football these days, but it is extremely short sighted to think they are doing anything that will result in a permanently better conference. I can say that if some CUSA teams move to the Belt, that will make them stronger. Overall, though, I think CUSA has power in the long run right now. I hope we have some chance at the AAC, but if we don't, I would say we stay put and try to keep our current schools from leaving to the Belt. It would be a mistake for us all to move to a conference that had about a year and a half of being decent in football for a G5 conference.
My opinion is try for AAC and, if that fails, stay where we are. I think most CUSA programs should do the same. Now, if Southern Miss moves (which would be a huge mistake for them), we need to look at it again. I don't see Southern Miss moving to the belt, though - no matter what some fans want. Just extremely short sighted.
CUSA has the worst leadership of any FBS conference, and worse than most FCS leagues. Judy "fiddling while Rome burns" Macleod is a frickin' sick joke. Get us a real commish and I think we'd see some positive change...for a change. In the meantime, schools like Marshall and USM simply look at the better TV contracts the Belch has and see the $$$$$$$$$$ and better exposure.
And basically nailing their coffin shut. Someone on the CUSA board put it like this:
"It is to ESPN's advantage to keep the Sun Belt a bargain basement conference. That's how they sell you on those weekday games."
The comment is not meant as a slight to the SBC schools, rather what he's saying is that ESPN has more or less told them to "know their place" -- if Marshall and USM are cool with relegating themselves to "knowing their place" -- not sure what to tell them. I personally have much more respect for both of them, and hope they think long and hard about what that move would ultimately mean for them.
Ga. Southern-38 (SBC)
La. Tech-3 (CUSA)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
