Let me start by saying that I like all 14 schools in C-USA. I'd be very happy if we stayed with our current line up for a long while, so this isn't about our make-up. It's about trying to bring the Conference even closer.

I'd love to see some discussion on a 9 game schedule. AS it stands, we play 6 division games and only 2 cross division games. That means that we only visit the "other side" completely once over 4 years (7 opponents with 2 cross divisionals in each of three years and the remaining 1 in the 4th year.) That's sustainable, of course, but could be improved by having 3 cross divisional opponents.

I understand that you need at least 6 home games to survive. This would give you 5 conference home games in year one and 4 in year two. With 3 OOC games, that could be balance with 1 in year one and 2 in year two.

Is it workable this way? Is it desirable? I would hope we could all eliminate the FCS games and schedule two G5 and 1 P5. Thoughts?

I see your point, but UTSA brings in big name teams to San Antonio with our out of conference schedule. I just don't want to lose any of those games.

(04-13-2014 05:44 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  Let me start by saying that I like all 14 schools in C-USA. I'd be very happy if we stayed with our current line up for a long while, so this isn't about our make-up. It's about trying to bring the Conference even closer.

I'd love to see some discussion on a 9 game schedule. AS it stands, we play 6 division games and only 2 cross division games. That means that we only visit the "other side" completely once over 4 years (7 opponents with 2 cross divisionals in each of three years and the remaining 1 in the 4th year.) That's sustainable, of course, but could be improved by having 3 cross divisional opponents.

I understand that you need at least 6 home games to survive. This would give you 5 conference home games in year one and 4 in year two. With 3 OOC games, that could be balance with 1 in year one and 2 in year two.

Is it workable this way? Is it desirable? I would hope we could all eliminate the FCS games and schedule two G5 and 1 P5. Thoughts?

I like the way you are thinking, but I don't know if 9 conference games really helps in the long run. First, some teams will end up with 5 conferences home games, while some only get 4. That's pretty big when looking at fighting for a place in the championship game. Also, I think we need to be scheduling regular OOC games against MWC and AAC programs as well as a P5 program every season. I agree we need to get the FCS games out of our schedules, but sometimes you have to buy a 6th game at home.

We need to improve our Strength of Schedules... limiting the number of games to play against better competition will not help us when the conference average is already so low.

(04-13-2014 06:59 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  We need to improve our Strength of Schedules... limiting the number of games to play against better competition will not help us when the conference average is already so low.

I think my plan accomplishes that goal when we eliminate FCS opposition

I don't think you will see it because probably all of us other than Rice could use a money game to help with the athletic budget.

I'll pass. I prefer 4 out of conf games and going west of the Mississippi River as little as possible in conf. I agree about the 1-AA games. I wish they'd do away with them all together.

(04-13-2014 07:40 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 06:59 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  We need to improve our Strength of Schedules... limiting the number of games to play against better competition will not help us when the conference average is already so low.

I think my plan accomplishes that goal when we eliminate FCS opposition

not when you add in 6 or 7 more conference losses every season

when you play a D1-AA team even as a CUSA team you have a pretty good chance for a win and if every CUSA team plays 1 D1-AA school that could be as high as 14-0

when you switch that out for a conference game the BEST you will ever get is 7 wins and of course 7 corresponding losses as well

when you need to fill bowl slots that 1 extra win per team can matter for some teams and the conference as well

I prefer out 4 OOC's. But I don't think most member schools would mind trips to either Texas or Florida every year.

(04-13-2014 10:31 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 07:40 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 06:59 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  We need to improve our Strength of Schedules... limiting the number of games to play against better competition will not help us when the conference average is already so low.

I think my plan accomplishes that goal when we eliminate FCS opposition

not when you add in 6 or 7 more conference losses every season

when you play a D1-AA team even as a CUSA team you have a pretty good chance for a win and if every CUSA team plays 1 D1-AA school that could be as high as 14-0

when you switch that out for a conference game the BEST you will ever get is 7 wins and of course 7 corresponding losses as well

when you need to fill bowl slots that 1 extra win per team can matter for some teams and the conference as well

I have no idea what you're trying to say, dude. Maybe it's too early in the morning or something but I read that 3 times and still don't understand your comment.

(04-14-2014 06:35 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 10:31 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 07:40 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 06:59 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  We need to improve our Strength of Schedules... limiting the number of games to play against better competition will not help us when the conference average is already so low.

I think my plan accomplishes that goal when we eliminate FCS opposition

not when you add in 6 or 7 more conference losses every season

when you play a D1-AA team even as a CUSA team you have a pretty good chance for a win and if every CUSA team plays 1 D1-AA school that could be as high as 14-0

when you switch that out for a conference game the BEST you will ever get is 7 wins and of course 7 corresponding losses as well

when you need to fill bowl slots that 1 extra win per team can matter for some teams and the conference as well

I have no idea what you're trying to say, dude. Maybe it's too early in the morning or something but I read that 3 times and still don't understand your comment.

when you play an out of conference game your conference has a chance to gain a win without a corresponding loss

when you play an in conference game you have a guaranteed win and a guaranteed loss and no way to get around that

if you have 14 teams playing 12 regular season games that is 168 games

if you have 4 OOC games that is 56 OOC games total

so if your conference went undefeated in those OOC games the best conference record you could have is 112-56

because you have 56 OOC games and you won all of them and you have 112 in conference games and the best you can do in those is 56-56

so 56 OOC wins + 56 in conference wins and 56 in conference losses = 112-56 for a conference record

if you have only 3 OOC games that is 42 OOC games and 126 in conference games

you go 50% wins and 50% losses in the conference games so 63-63

add in 42 OOC wins and you are 105-63

so with 3 OOC games instead of 4 OOC games you have made it so that the best conference record possible for the conference goes from 112-56 to 105-63

you have absolutely guaranteed that your conferences will have 7 more losses and 7 less wins no matter how well you do in the OOC

when you divide 112 wins by 14 teams that is an average of 8 wins

when you divide 105 wins by 14 teams that is an average of 7.5 wins

again the above is working on the idea that you win 100% of your OOC games and it is used as the easiest example, but the idea is pretty simple

when you play an OOC game you have the chance to bring a win (strength and bowl eligibility) back to your conference and you have the chance to bring that win back without a guaranteed loss as well

when you play an in conference game no matter what team wins your conference has 1 win and 1 loss period.........you do not build strength for a conference going .500.......you build strength for a conference by going out and beating way more teams in the OOC than you lose to and you bring that strength and wins back to your conference and you leave some other conference with weakness and a loss

if a conference played 2 OOC games and won all of them still the best that conference could do is 98-70

if a conference played 1 OOC game and won them all the best that conference could do is 91-77

if a conference played 0 OOC games then the best that conference could do is 84-84

so with a reduction in each OOC game you go from having the ability for your conference to have 14 wins and 0 losses to 7 wins and 7 guaranteed losses

so unless your conference is doing less than going .500 in their OOC games there is zero reason to reduce the number of OOC games in favor of an in conference game

the better your conference does in the OOC the dumber the idea is to give up an OOC game

if a team plays 4 OOC games and they go .75 in those games that is 42-14

so the conference would end the season with a 98-70 record

if they instead went with 3 OOC games and still won .75 of the OOC games that is a conference record of 94.5-73.5......of course you don't have half games so the record would be either 95-73 or 94-74

but again with 1 less OOC game you have cost the conference the opportunity to win 3 or 4 more games if the conference was going to go .75 in OOC games

at the end of the day/season 1 less OOC game cost the conference the opportunity to have 7 more wins......if a conference always goes .500 in OOC games it is a wash, but for every % over .500 that a conference goes in OOC games the more wins one less OOC game cost the conference

Playing an extra conference game wouldn't be smart. Our conference SOS is already weak. Why make us weaker by playing weak teams more. Not to mention I know zero people on Hattiesburg who would rather us go play UTSA on the road instead of playing at somewhere like Georgia Tech or Missouri.

(04-13-2014 05:44 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  Let me start by saying that I like all 14 schools in C-USA. I'd be very happy if we stayed with our current line up for a long while, so this isn't about our make-up. It's about trying to bring the Conference even closer.

I'd love to see some discussion on a 9 game schedule. AS it stands, we play 6 division games and only 2 cross division games. That means that we only visit the "other side" completely once over 4 years (7 opponents with 2 cross divisionals in each of three years and the remaining 1 in the 4th year.) That's sustainable, of course, but could be improved by having 3 cross divisional opponents.

I understand that you need at least 6 home games to survive. This would give you 5 conference home games in year one and 4 in year two. With 3 OOC games, that could be balance with 1 in year one and 2 in year two.

Is it workable this way? Is it desirable? I would hope we could all eliminate the FCS games and schedule two G5 and 1 P5. Thoughts?

I'll agree that I hope C-USA stays with the current 14 for a long time. I disagree that playing 9 conference games (a third cross-over opponent each year) is meaningful for building rivalries. Rice played three cross-over games a year in C-USA 2.0, and that was still not enough to build rivalries and fan interest with the eastern time zone programs.

Rather than have that fifth home game guaranteed every other year with a second cross-over opponent, I would much rather have that spot open for geographically closer (think Houston, Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, ULL, Tulane) opponents or Army, Navy, Air Force.

(04-14-2014 12:43 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  I'll agree that I hope C-USA stays with the current 14 for a long time. I disagree that playing 9 conference games (a third cross-over opponent each year) is meaningful for building rivalries. Rice played three cross-over games a year in C-USA 2.0, and that was still not enough to build rivalries and fan interest with the eastern time zone programs.

Rather than have that fifth home game guaranteed every other year with a second cross-over opponent, I would much rather have that spot open for geographically closer (think Houston, Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, ULL, Tulane) opponents or Army, Navy, Air Force.

You make a good point that I hadn't thought of. Under the old arrangement, I really didn't care who the western teams were that we were playing. We lost all but one game we played in Texas and beat every Texas based team that we played in Huntington. So it didn't matter to me how often we played them. NOne of them were considered rivals, but they were interesting. So it wouldn't likely make much difference in today's environment, either. And I agree with having a regional team that our fans want to see, like Ohio, East Caroline, Bowling Green, Virginia Tech, Louisville, and I'd like to get something going with Maryland.

I concede the point! One Western team at home and one away works just fine.

(04-14-2014 06:35 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 10:31 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 07:40 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 06:59 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  We need to improve our Strength of Schedules... limiting the number of games to play against better competition will not help us when the conference average is already so low.

I think my plan accomplishes that goal when we eliminate FCS opposition

not when you add in 6 or 7 more conference losses every season

when you play a D1-AA team even as a CUSA team you have a pretty good chance for a win and if every CUSA team plays 1 D1-AA school that could be as high as 14-0

when you switch that out for a conference game the BEST you will ever get is 7 wins and of course 7 corresponding losses as well

when you need to fill bowl slots that 1 extra win per team can matter for some teams and the conference as well

I have no idea what you're trying to say, dude. Maybe it's too early in the morning or something but I read that 3 times and still don't understand your comment.

I got lost too. 14 games? If you play 14 the you are playing a 12 game season plus a conf championship plus a bowl game. No team with 7 loses will play 14 games well maybe an SEC school.

(04-14-2014 05:16 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 06:35 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 10:31 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 07:40 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 06:59 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  We need to improve our Strength of Schedules... limiting the number of games to play against better competition will not help us when the conference average is already so low.

I think my plan accomplishes that goal when we eliminate FCS opposition

not when you add in 6 or 7 more conference losses every season

when you play a D1-AA team even as a CUSA team you have a pretty good chance for a win and if every CUSA team plays 1 D1-AA school that could be as high as 14-0

when you switch that out for a conference game the BEST you will ever get is 7 wins and of course 7 corresponding losses as well

when you need to fill bowl slots that 1 extra win per team can matter for some teams and the conference as well

I have no idea what you're trying to say, dude. Maybe it's too early in the morning or something but I read that 3 times and still don't understand your comment.

I got lost too. 14 games? If you play 14 the you are playing a 12 game season plus a conf championship plus a bowl game. No team with 7 loses will play 14 games well maybe an SEC school.

there are 14 teams in CUSA

when you play 1 less game in the OOC per team that is 14 games

if each CUSA team plays 1 D1-AA game per season that is 14 games and every one of those games should be a win to go 14-0 in those 14 games for the conference

if you instead play 14 more conference games the best you can do is 7-7 for the conference

(04-13-2014 05:49 PM)Irish Rowdy Wrote:  I see your point, but UTSA brings in big name teams to San Antonio with our out of conference schedule. I just don't want to lose any of those games.

Totally agree. I would much rather play Oklahoma State, Arizona, AZ State, Baylor, Texas A&M, etc. in that fourth game than FIU, Charlotte, ODU, UAB etc. No offense to those schools, I'm sure you'd rather play those schools than us as well.

(04-14-2014 01:52 PM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  You make a good point that I hadn't thought of. Under the old arrangement, I really didn't care who the western teams were that we were playing. We lost all but one game we played in Texas and beat every Texas based team that we played in Huntington. So it didn't matter to me how often we played them. NOne of them were considered rivals, but they were interesting. So it wouldn't likely make much difference in today's environment, either. And I agree with having a regional team that our fans want to see, like Ohio, East Caroline, Bowling Green, Virginia Tech, Louisville, and I'd like to get something going with Maryland.

I concede the point! One Western team at home and one away works just fine.

I do think Marshall and Rice are building a rivalry. I just don't think UTSA and North Texas will roll over and let Rice keep winning the West. Marshall may be in for a long run of East championships.

(04-15-2014 07:13 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  I do think Marshall and Rice are building a rivalry. I just don't think UTSA and North Texas will roll over and let Rice keep winning the West. Marshall may be in for a long run of East championships.

I think they are too...a good one...out of mutual respect. But that will be hard to sustain with us playing Rice only once in 4 years. But I do see, now, how 9 conference games will be challenging for us although I did see today where the ACC is considering it and the B12 and PAC already do it.

(04-15-2014 09:47 AM)Cnelson203 Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 07:13 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  I do think Marshall and Rice are building a rivalry. I just don't think UTSA and North Texas will roll over and let Rice keep winning the West. Marshall may be in for a long run of East championships.

I think they are too...a good one...out of mutual respect. But that will be hard to sustain with us playing Rice only once in 4 years. But I do see, now, how 9 conference games will be challenging for us although I did see today where the ACC is considering it and the B12 and PAC already do it.

I feel zero rivalry between Rice and Marshall.

There is no Rice fanbase to have a rivalry with.