Looks like it is probably going to be four pods in the alliance.


dmrnevada: Confirmed: ECU Chancellor says #mwc #cusa merger will have a 4 pod system.

https://twitter.com/dmrnevada/status/189825338879115264


Should help promote rivalries geographically, save travel money, and allow them to take the best candidates regardless of geography. Good move.

I imagine it would probably be like this setup:

West-
Hawaii (fb only)
Fresno
SJSU
Nevada
UNLV

Mountain- (predicting afa to big east)
USU
Wyoming
CSU
UNM
UTEP

Central-
Tulsa
UNT
Rice
Tulane
La Tech

East-
ECU
Marshall
UAB
FIU
USM


Add some protected rivalries where needed and it could be pretty good.

(04-11-2012 09:47 AM)Sammy11 Wrote:  Looks like it is probably going to be four pods in the alliance.


dmrnevada: Confirmed: ECU Chancellor says #mwc #cusa merger will have a 4 pod system.

https://twitter.com/dmrnevada/status/189825338879115264


Should help promote rivalries geographically, save travel money, and allow them to take the best candidates regardless of geography. Good move.

I imagine it would probably be like this setup:

West-
Hawaii (fb only)
Fresno
SJSU
Nevada
UNLV

Mountain- (predicting afa to big east)
USU
Wyoming
CSU
UNM
UTEP

Central-
Tulsa
UNT
Rice
Tulane
La Tech

East-
ECU
Marshall
UAB
FIU
USM


Add some protected rivalries where needed and it could be pretty good.

This is nothing new really. It's the direction they've been heading. He didn't really confirm anything as his words in the transcripts are as follows:

"So here is where we stand in terms of a new conference.
First, if this merger is successful, it could be stronger than the old CUSA and it will probably be more stable.
Second, members of the new conference recognize the importance of regional rivalries; they are committed to adding more teams with the goal of ensuring 4 divisions of geographical proximity. We look forward to playing long-time rivals such as Marshall and Southern Miss and to adding several eastern universities to our schedule. Hopefully, one will be Charlotte. This is a good trend and certainly one that allows us to concentrate on the academic success and graduation of our student athletes."

The talk of 4 Pods with semifinals and a championship was long before all the "hiccups" recently. Now everything is "if" rather than "when". Just something IMO he put out there before anybody in the crowd started hammering him with questions.

Wasn't it just a week ago we were told that the merger wouldn't happen, at least for a while?

How can this pod system work if the MWC and CUSA remain separate leagues?

Terry Holland has been pushing this master plan of his for years. I'm actually pleased to see that Charlotte is mentioned so much. They're a CUSA original and most defintely fill a gaping need on the Eastern edge of the conference. Good basketball tradition and a decent market.

I think you might see Idaho, UTSA and Charlotte plugged into that list.

(04-11-2012 10:32 AM)wvucrazed Wrote:  I think you might see Idaho, UTSA and Charlotte plugged into that list.

I'd like to see MTSU added to that list. They are getting to be an enormous school, and Nashville isn't far.

So would this mean that the two CUSA pod winners would play each other and the MWC pod winners play each other and then those two winners play each other for the conference championship..

Would the NCAA allow this?

(04-11-2012 10:43 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  So would this mean that the two CUSA pod winners would play each other and the MWC pod winners play each other and then those two winners play each other for the conference championship..

Would the NCAA allow this?

There could be a way to do this.

The 2 semifinal winners play each other in..... a bowl game.

(04-11-2012 10:32 AM)wvucrazed Wrote:  I think you might see Idaho, UTSA and Charlotte plugged into that list.

Idaho? Why? Never gonna happen.

(04-11-2012 10:43 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  So would this mean that the two CUSA pod winners would play each other and the MWC pod winners play each other and then those two winners play each other for the conference championship..

Would the NCAA allow this?

I would take the 4 pod winners and have (based on rankings)
#1 vs. #4 at #1 home stadium, and #2 vs. #3 at #2 home stadium.

Then championship at the highest ranked team left home stadium the following week.

Of they can't do a semifinal they probably are better off going to 18 or 20 for football with 2 or 4 (3 or 5 if/when afa/Fresno bolts) additions.

Football would have an 8 or 9 game round robin with a title game between east and west.

Hoops would be two separate leagues and could add non fb members at their convenience.

If you add the right ones you save more on travel than a non fb share of tv money would cost you. You also raise the quality of your league in RPI leading to more frequent and better tourney runs.

Schools to consider

College of Charleston in the East
Wichita State, Oral Roberts, UA Little Rock, or UT Arlington in the old CUSA west region.

Denver or San Diego State in the MWC regions.

I am at the point that I do not believe anything I read on this Alliance/merger thing.

(04-11-2012 11:02 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  I am at the point that I do not believe anything I read on this Alliance/merger thing.

That's probably very true right now.

I think the thing that kind of took them by surprise quite frankly and set them back was the loss of Memphis. It seems after that- things have really scuttled along.

(04-11-2012 11:10 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(04-11-2012 11:02 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  I am at the point that I do not believe anything I read on this Alliance/merger thing.

That's probably very true right now.

I think the thing that kind of took them by surprise quite frankly and set them back was the loss of Memphis. It seems after that- things have really scuttled along.

I think this is the first time in the history of sports that sentence has ever been written.

(04-11-2012 11:10 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(04-11-2012 11:02 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  I am at the point that I do not believe anything I read on this Alliance/merger thing.

That's probably very true right now.

I think the thing that kind of took them by surprise quite frankly and set them back was the loss of Memphis. It seems after that- things have really scuttled along.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that we knew Memphis was gone. TH told me that via email a long time ago. No surprise at all there.

As far as Alliance / Merger / Whatever, this is the kind of progression that should be expected when 16 representatives from academia, lawyers and television execs try working things out. At this point it wouldn't surprise me at all if the merger is just scrapped and they work out a scheduling Alliance. I'd actually prefer that I think.

Bottom line is CUSA and MWC have lost a combined 12 schools over the past 10 years to the Big East and we'll likely lose another one and then another if there are more defections. What you're seeing with this clusterf'ck just illustrates how powerless we are to do anything about it. It's really sad and frustrating to be a part of it.

(04-11-2012 10:43 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  So would this mean that the two CUSA pod winners would play each other and the MWC pod winners play each other and then those two winners play each other for the conference championship..

Would the NCAA allow this?

No, they won't allow this at all. It's amazing to me that people within the MWC and C-USA actually acted like that this was viable back when the Alliance was announced since anyone that knows anything about the NCAA knew it would get slammed. The NCAA didn't allow the ACC an exemption to hold a conference championship game when it was at 11 for one season (before BC could join). They're not going to make exceptions for the MWC and C-USA.

What a pod system does is rotate the teams in divisions on a periodic basis (e.g. every 2 years). For instance, Division 1 would initially consist of Pod A and Pod B and Division 2 would have Pod C and Pod D. The pods would then rotate after 2 years so that Division 1 would have Pod A and Pod C and Division 2 would have Pod B and Pod D. This gets everyone in a 16-team conference playing each other consistently, provides everyone with 3 permanent rivals, and complies with the NCAA's "round robins within each division" rule in order to play a conference championship game.

That's how the old 16-team WAC was set up, where the divisions ended up rotating once before the conference broke apart.

(04-11-2012 11:22 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-11-2012 10:43 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  So would this mean that the two CUSA pod winners would play each other and the MWC pod winners play each other and then those two winners play each other for the conference championship..

Would the NCAA allow this?

No, they won't allow this at all. It's amazing to me that people within the MWC and C-USA actually acted like that this was viable back when the Alliance was announced since anyone that knows anything about the NCAA knew it would get slammed. The NCAA didn't allow the ACC an exemption to hold a conference championship game when it was at 11 for one season (before BC could join). They're not going to make exceptions for the MWC and C-USA.

What a pod system does is rotate the teams in divisions on a periodic basis (e.g. every 2 years). For instance, Division 1 would initially consist of Pod A and Pod B and Division 2 would have Pod C and Pod D. The pods would then rotate after 2 years so that Division 1 would have Pod A and Pod C and Division 2 would have Pod B and Pod D. This gets everyone in a 16-team conference playing each other consistently, provides everyone with 3 permanent rivals, and complies with the NCAA's "round robins within each division" rule in order to play a conference championship game.

That's how the old 16-team WAC was set up, where the divisions ended up rotating once before the conference broke apart.

Which raises the question of, what is the value to making sure that, say, ECU and Marshall play Hawaii and Fresno State periodically, at the cost of not playing Southern Miss and Tulsa? A rotating pod system makes some sense when you have a conference with historic rivalries that has (over)expanded. In a new conference, where some people are promoting regional rivalries and lower travel costs, a rotating pod system is especially retarded.

I really don't think that there's going to be a merger in the next five years.

(04-11-2012 11:22 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-11-2012 10:43 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  So would this mean that the two CUSA pod winners would play each other and the MWC pod winners play each other and then those two winners play each other for the conference championship..

Would the NCAA allow this?

No, they won't allow this at all. It's amazing to me that people within the MWC and C-USA actually acted like that this was viable back when the Alliance was announced since anyone that knows anything about the NCAA knew it would get slammed. The NCAA didn't allow the ACC an exemption to hold a conference championship game when it was at 11 for one season (before BC could join). They're not going to make exceptions for the MWC and C-USA.

What a pod system does is rotate the teams in divisions on a periodic basis (e.g. every 2 years). For instance, Division 1 would initially consist of Pod A and Pod B and Division 2 would have Pod C and Pod D. The pods would then rotate after 2 years so that Division 1 would have Pod A and Pod C and Division 2 would have Pod B and Pod D. This gets everyone in a 16-team conference playing each other consistently, provides everyone with 3 permanent rivals, and complies with the NCAA's "round robins within each division" rule in order to play a conference championship game.

That's how the old 16-team WAC was set up, where the divisions ended up rotating once before the conference broke apart.

Who the hell cares? Pods only makes a bit of sense if there was going to be some semi final with some sort of financial windfall from it. Otherwise it's a huge waste of time. This entire merger is a huge waste of time. I once thought it would work. It's not going to. It's a laughing stock and a joke and we are about to set ourselves back even further than the BE set us back. I am flat out disgusted by Terry Holland and Steve Ballard and can't figure out what the hell they are thinking with their support of Charlotte.

(04-11-2012 11:28 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Which raises the question of, what is the value to making sure that, say, ECU and Marshall play Hawaii and Fresno State periodically, at the cost of not playing Southern Miss and Tulsa? A rotating pod system makes some sense when you have a conference with historic rivalries that has (over)expanded. In a new conference, where some people are promoting regional rivalries and lower travel costs, a rotating pod system is especially retarded.

I really don't think that there's going to be a merger in the next five years.

I agree with your first point. It makes more sense to me that C-USA and MWC would effectively just be permanent east and west divisions (with UTEP shifting over west) as opposed to using pods.

Considering how quickly the 16-team WAC died, your 5-year prediction is certainly reasonable.

(04-11-2012 11:17 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-11-2012 11:10 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(04-11-2012 11:02 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  I am at the point that I do not believe anything I read on this Alliance/merger thing.

That's probably very true right now.

I think the thing that kind of took them by surprise quite frankly and set them back was the loss of Memphis. It seems after that- things have really scuttled along.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that we knew Memphis was gone. TH told me that via email a long time ago. No surprise at all there.

As far as Alliance / Merger / Whatever, this is the kind of progression that should be expected when 16 representatives from academia, lawyers and television execs try working things out. At this point it wouldn't surprise me at all if the merger is just scrapped and they work out a scheduling Alliance. I'd actually prefer that I think.

Bottom line is CUSA and MWC have lost a combined 12 schools over the past 10 years to the Big East and we'll likely lose another one and then another if there are more defections. What you're seeing with this clusterf'ck just illustrates how powerless we are to do anything about it. It's really sad and frustrating to be a part of it.

You bring up tv. I wonder with Memphis, if indeed they were expecting to lose them- which I don't totally buy- if TV folks drastically reduced the tv value with Memphis gone- to a point where the numbers didn't make up for the loss in the exit fees and hoops money forfeited.