(01-29-2014 12:59 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:52 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:36 AM)statefanatic Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:32 AM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  I want to stay in a southern league.

I want to do what's best for our program.

You aren't in a southern league now.....Moscow, Las Cruces, San Marcos

I think your Geography needs a little work. San Marcos is in Texas, and Las Cruces makes Jonesboro look like Canada.

El Paso is also in Texas.

Is that the South? Is that the West?

Is it.....Mexico?

(01-29-2014 01:02 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:59 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:52 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:36 AM)statefanatic Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:32 AM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  I want to stay in a southern league.

I want to do what's best for our program.

You aren't in a southern league now.....Moscow, Las Cruces, San Marcos

I think your Geography needs a little work. San Marcos is in Texas, and Las Cruces makes Jonesboro look like Canada.

El Paso is also in Texas.

Is that the South? Is that the West?

Is it.....Mexico?

El Paso is West Texas. San Marcos is East Texas. Its close to Austin.

We're talking about bowl tie-ins, but bowl tie-ins are not permanent. The SBC has improved and can continue. We're talking about tv deals. But tv deals are not permanent and the SBC can improve in that regard. We are talking about Top 25 teams, but that is year to year and there is no guarantee that the MAC will have Top 25 teams and no guarantee that the SBC will not have Top 25 teams. In fact, if this lineup remains unchanged the SBC WILL have Top 25 teams.

Staying in the southern SBC with the same lineup (sans Idaho) and growing it is much preferable.

The problem is....keeping the same lineup. This is the part that nobody has been able to guarantee. There is no stability. There is no assurance of survivability. This is why a program would leave a perfectly good SBC lineup that led the non-AQ conferences and go to FIU/FAU/UAB or EMU/CMU/Akron instead.

Sucks. I would prefer that this be fixed. This would require ULL firmly committing to the SBC. Something which unfortunately might get their administration fired by their fans.

What would be weird is if this instability led ASU to go to the MAC and then TXST/USA get picked up by CUSA leaving ULL fans wondering what the hell happened.

Our schools need to firmly commit to one another. Seriously.

(01-29-2014 01:09 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  We're talking about bowl tie-ins, but bowl tie-ins are not permanent. The SBC has improved and can continue. We're talking about tv deals. But tv deals are not permanent and the SBC can improve in that regard. We are talking about Top 25 teams, but that is year to year and there is no guarantee that the MAC will have Top 25 teams and no guarantee that the SBC will not have Top 25 teams. In fact, if this lineup remains unchanged the SBC WILL have Top 25 teams.

Staying in the southern SBC with the same lineup (sans Idaho) and growing it is much preferable.

The problem is....keeping the same lineup. This is the part that nobody has been able to guarantee. There is no stability. There is no assurance of survivability. This is why a program would leave a perfectly good SBC lineup that led the non-AQ conferences and go to FIU/FAU/UAB or EMU/CMU/Akron instead.

Sucks. I would prefer that this be fixed. This would require ULL firmly committing to the SBC. Something which unfortunately might get their administration fired by their fans.

What would be weird is if this instability led ASU to go to the MAC and then TXST/USA get picked up by CUSA leaving ULL fans wondering what the hell happened.

Our schools need to firmly commit to one another. Seriously.

That will be the day that they have to shut Ragin Pagin down and declare it uninhabitable for the next twenty years.

(01-29-2014 01:03 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 01:02 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:59 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:52 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 12:36 AM)statefanatic Wrote:  I want to do what's best for our program.

You aren't in a southern league now.....Moscow, Las Cruces, San Marcos

I think your Geography needs a little work. San Marcos is in Texas, and Las Cruces makes Jonesboro look like Canada.

El Paso is also in Texas.

Is that the South? Is that the West?

Is it.....Mexico?

El Paso is West Texas. San Marcos is East Texas. Its close to Austin.

Its close to the Alamo....

The only way I see Arkansas State in the MAC is if we are going with them.

(01-29-2014 01:21 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  The only way I see Arkansas State in the MAC is if we are going with them.

I actually think that's been a large part of the discussion. I don't think either of us stand a chance on our own, but I could see a situation where a significant TV increase led to a 16 team league expanding to the West.

stAte and MoSt to the MAC West and JMU to the MAC East. That would put the MAC at 16. I can live with that.

(01-29-2014 01:15 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 01:09 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  We're talking about bowl tie-ins, but bowl tie-ins are not permanent. The SBC has improved and can continue. We're talking about tv deals. But tv deals are not permanent and the SBC can improve in that regard. We are talking about Top 25 teams, but that is year to year and there is no guarantee that the MAC will have Top 25 teams and no guarantee that the SBC will not have Top 25 teams. In fact, if this lineup remains unchanged the SBC WILL have Top 25 teams.

Staying in the southern SBC with the same lineup (sans Idaho) and growing it is much preferable.

The problem is....keeping the same lineup. This is the part that nobody has been able to guarantee. There is no stability. There is no assurance of survivability. This is why a program would leave a perfectly good SBC lineup that led the non-AQ conferences and go to FIU/FAU/UAB or EMU/CMU/Akron instead.

Sucks. I would prefer that this be fixed. This would require ULL firmly committing to the SBC. Something which unfortunately might get their administration fired by their fans.

What would be weird is if this instability led ASU to go to the MAC and then TXST/USA get picked up by CUSA leaving ULL fans wondering what the hell happened.

Our schools need to firmly commit to one another. Seriously.

That will be the day that they have to shut Ragin Pagin down and declare it uninhabitable for the next twenty years.

They seem assured that if anybody goes they do. But conference realignment has not been sane. It hasn't even been close to sane. There are zero guarantees until an invitation is on your desk.

Truth is, any one of us could be left in a stub conference. Any one of us.

I haven't been able to understand why the schools have not all gone the Big 12/ACC route to guarantee each other stability. We have a good conference to build on as long as everyone sticks.

Sometimes I think CUSA is whispering to all of our schools just to keep us distrusting each other.

Also another thing that the MAC could be looking at is attendance at bowls in the south. MAC team don't attend southern bowl very well. Adding a team like stAte who has proven we will send people to bowl games is a good way to keep those bowl ties.

(01-29-2014 01:49 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 01:15 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 01:09 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  We're talking about bowl tie-ins, but bowl tie-ins are not permanent. The SBC has improved and can continue. We're talking about tv deals. But tv deals are not permanent and the SBC can improve in that regard. We are talking about Top 25 teams, but that is year to year and there is no guarantee that the MAC will have Top 25 teams and no guarantee that the SBC will not have Top 25 teams. In fact, if this lineup remains unchanged the SBC WILL have Top 25 teams.

Staying in the southern SBC with the same lineup (sans Idaho) and growing it is much preferable.

The problem is....keeping the same lineup. This is the part that nobody has been able to guarantee. There is no stability. There is no assurance of survivability. This is why a program would leave a perfectly good SBC lineup that led the non-AQ conferences and go to FIU/FAU/UAB or EMU/CMU/Akron instead.

Sucks. I would prefer that this be fixed. This would require ULL firmly committing to the SBC. Something which unfortunately might get their administration fired by their fans.

What would be weird is if this instability led ASU to go to the MAC and then TXST/USA get picked up by CUSA leaving ULL fans wondering what the hell happened.

Our schools need to firmly commit to one another. Seriously.

That will be the day that they have to shut Ragin Pagin down and declare it uninhabitable for the next twenty years.

They seem assured that if anybody goes they do. But conference realignment has not been sane. It hasn't even been close to sane. There are zero guarantees until an invitation is on your desk.

Truth is, any one of us could be left in a stub conference. Any one of us.

I haven't been able to understand why the schools have not all gone the Big 12/ACC route to guarantee each other stability. We have a good conference to build on as long as everyone sticks.

Sometimes I think CUSA is whispering to all of our schools just to keep us distrusting each other.

Bankowsky has directly threatened to kill off the SBC before. I could certainly see a situation where if our administration got wind that several teams were talking to CUSA, we would turn to the MAC.

I just don't see a lot of common interest between us and CUSA, and have always thought that if we realigned, it would be a more Northern or Western based league.

(01-29-2014 01:53 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Bankowsky has directly threatened to kill off the SBC before. I could certainly see a situation where if our administration got wind that several teams were talking to CUSA, we would turn to the MAC.

I just don't see a lot of common interest between us and CUSA, and have always thought that if we realigned, it would be a more Northern or Western based league.

Chief, you hate CUSA. Of course there are common interests. USM plus some of the schools that left, MTSU, UNT, WKU are more common than Toledo. UAB at least keeps us recruiting in Alabama. We have nearly always had a Texas team and CUSA has those and the MAC doesn't.

ULL and A-State together could interest CUSA because we can go either east or west as needed and A-State fills a bit of a geographic hole.

Whether that means anything is questionable. But to say we have more in common with the MAC than CUSA is showing your prejudices.

Why would we join a conference full of ex Belt teams? If we leave then the MAC is the way to go.

(01-29-2014 02:00 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 01:53 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Bankowsky has directly threatened to kill off the SBC before. I could certainly see a situation where if our administration got wind that several teams were talking to CUSA, we would turn to the MAC.

I just don't see a lot of common interest between us and CUSA, and have always thought that if we realigned, it would be a more Northern or Western based league.

Chief, you hate CUSA. Of course there are common interests. USM plus some of the schools that left, MTSU, UNT, WKU are more common than Toledo. UAB at least keeps us recruiting in Alabama. We have nearly always had a Texas team and CUSA has those and the MAC doesn't.

ULL and A-State together could interest CUSA because we can go either east or west as needed and A-State fills a bit of a geographic hole.

Whether that means anything is questionable. But to say we have more in common with the MAC than CUSA is showing your prejudices.

I hate what they have become.

By common interest, I don't think CUSA has any interest in us. Never have really felt that vibe.

(01-29-2014 02:06 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 02:00 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 01:53 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Bankowsky has directly threatened to kill off the SBC before. I could certainly see a situation where if our administration got wind that several teams were talking to CUSA, we would turn to the MAC.

I just don't see a lot of common interest between us and CUSA, and have always thought that if we realigned, it would be a more Northern or Western based league.

Chief, you hate CUSA. Of course there are common interests. USM plus some of the schools that left, MTSU, UNT, WKU are more common than Toledo. UAB at least keeps us recruiting in Alabama. We have nearly always had a Texas team and CUSA has those and the MAC doesn't.

ULL and A-State together could interest CUSA because we can go either east or west as needed and A-State fills a bit of a geographic hole.

Whether that means anything is questionable. But to say we have more in common with the MAC than CUSA is showing your prejudices.

I hate what they have become.

By common interest, I don't think CUSA has any interest in us. Never have really felt that vibe.

They would rather double down in Florida then try to make geographic sense for themselves.

StAte doesnt fit with the MAC culturally. Besides population trends say that the talent pool in the south will increase to the advantage of the SBC and CUSA.

(01-29-2014 02:31 AM)glsjunior74 Wrote:  StAte doesnt fit with the MAC culturally. Besides population trends say that the talent pool in the south will increase to the advantage of the SBC and CUSA.

The problem is that every decade has seen 10 FCS call ups from the South. There are now 30 G5 schools down there, up from about 10 in the early 90's. That is why Southern Miss was so good, no competition.

While the MAC dips into the South and particularly Florida for recruits, never does CUSA (Marshall excepted) or SBC sign anyone from the Midwest. The talent in MAC country stays home.

Ark State though has a more unique position in that it has a good recruiting state but with only 1 FBS program in it. No other school in the South can say the same thing. Louisville used to be able to say it but where are they today? The ACC. Its a definite advantage.

(01-29-2014 02:25 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 02:06 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 02:00 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 01:53 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Bankowsky has directly threatened to kill off the SBC before. I could certainly see a situation where if our administration got wind that several teams were talking to CUSA, we would turn to the MAC.

I just don't see a lot of common interest between us and CUSA, and have always thought that if we realigned, it would be a more Northern or Western based league.

Chief, you hate CUSA. Of course there are common interests. USM plus some of the schools that left, MTSU, UNT, WKU are more common than Toledo. UAB at least keeps us recruiting in Alabama. We have nearly always had a Texas team and CUSA has those and the MAC doesn't.

ULL and A-State together could interest CUSA because we can go either east or west as needed and A-State fills a bit of a geographic hole.

Whether that means anything is questionable. But to say we have more in common with the MAC than CUSA is showing your prejudices.

I hate what they have become.

By common interest, I don't think CUSA has any interest in us. Never have really felt that vibe.

They would rather double down in Florida then try to make geographic sense for themselves.

Last time I checked CUSA is more of a southern conference than the AAC...

which has what?

It makes a lot more sense geographically for CUSA to "double down" in Fla. than it does for the AAC.


I'm sure Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Western Michigan, Buffalo along with a few others will really get the ASU fanbase excited.


But I think there is little to worry about ASU going anywhere and this has no legs...

and will end up being message board talk just like 2005 when everyone was talking about the MUTS and Western joining the MAC

This has legs just FYI but it's not happening fast. Both sides have interest in each other (MAC AND stAte).

So your plan is to go from the best G5 to the worst G5.
Solid planning. Good bye and good luck then. We will root for you.