My sense is that BB views Conf USA as an a conference of opportunity rather than a place schools want to stay long term. I know for example, that TH, when he was AD at ECU, had no intention of keeping ECU in Conf USA long term. In this Conference world, you are either actively looking to move up, or you are in the process of slowly dying. I do not know for sure, but I am willing to bet that at no time did BB say to Terry Holland, Hey Terry, why don't you think about sticking around in Conf USA and helping to build this conference. This probably did not happen, because BB is on record saying that it is a good thing when schools move up to other Conferences.

No G5 school wants to stay G5. The AAC, or the MWS are not places where any of the AAC schools want to stay for long. Why should Conf USA be a place where schools want to stay for long? Having said this, I think that what is missing from the COnf USA leadership is a plan for the in between time, the time in which schools are working to build their resumes so they can move up. Right now, it looks like the leadership of Conf USA, sees the schools like they are a loose group of tenants renting space at the Conf USA Storage facility. To further this analogy, the Storage facility promises to provide locks on the doors, and 24 hour maintenance, but not much else.

The realignment game however, is drawing to a close in the P5 world. There are maybe 3-5 slots left in these conferences. This means that the majority of the G5 teams, will remain G5 for a long, long time. Based on this reality then, is there something more the COnf USA leadership can be doing to make Conf USA a home where schools want to be associated with. Or is there something so compelling about Conf USA that the leadership can help create, that schools in this league will think twice before accepting a call to the MWC or the AAC.

(04-22-2014 03:02 AM)MUther Wrote:  

(04-22-2014 02:23 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-21-2014 10:30 PM)MUther Wrote:  Bottom line is a strong leader would have back-doored the Big East on their acquisitions and positioned themselves as stronger than they started, like the MWC did. 3-4 schools would have been forced to join us after the inevitable Catholic break-off instead of creating two abominations, we would have had one damn strong conference in the East and one in the West with much stronger bargaining power against the P5. Now everything is diluted in both money sports with the un-needed third conference. Merger or not, had the CUSA defectors done what Boise et al did, we would be holding all the cards.

Not sure what you had in mind. Boise went back because once the MW renegotiated thier tv deal, they could offer Boise a deal that actually netted more money as a full member of the MW than they would receive as a football-only member of the Big East.

And you wouldn't call that good leadership to negotiate that deal and make sure Boise knew about it? It stopped the bleeding of the MWC, severely weakened the AAC/Big East's plan of bringing in the western markets and top teams. If BB could have done something similar to get you guys to think twice or halt your move, the BE would have folded and their would be one less conference in the mix to compete with for everyone. CUSA dropped the ball at precisely the wrong time. It may have been inevitable, but they didn't have to make it look that easy.

Would have been a lot easier on everyone to bring in 3 teams to CUSA, two of which had already been here, than for us to lose seven, and it would have reduced the competition for TV money by folding the BE. MWC and CUSA would have received the lion's share of what was available after the fact.

I like the teams we brought in. But if BB had pulled off a coupe like that, no one would be questioning his ability to lead at this point in time.

It was a pretty sly move by Thompsom, but to be fair--Thompson had something Banowsky didn't. The Mountain (the old MW conference network) failed to get enough carriage to cover its costs and was shut down. Since the MW network was a contractual requirement of the original MW media deal, the MW had the right to demand a renegotiation. That's how they were able to get back the rights to all the games the Mountain had the rights to show. That essentially allowed the MW to resell thiose games to ESPN---which is where the money came from to lure back Boise. CUSA didn't have a similar card to play. Thompson did a good job playing he cards he had, but to be fair, he was the beneficiary of some good fortune that allowed him to reopen his media contract. I'm not sure he could have done much if the Mountain had not collapsed.

There is nothing different that Brit could have done. He was dealt lousy cards and he had to play with them. When all this shuffling occurred the BE still had the upper hand with the basketball teams that were in it and the good fb teams that hadn't left for other conferences. You guys talk like just because we cusa wanted something everyone else would have agreed. Sheesh, look at e.c.u. even with that prospect of not being AQ decided to leave and the way y'all talk your school would have done the same thing. Wishing for something isn't the same as getting what you wish for because most of the time Santa doesn't bring you that gift.

In other words quit your belly aching and just accept what you have. Everyone of us wants what's best for our schools and just because we can't get it doesn't mean it's the Commish's fault.

Who you should blame are those schools that despite not improving their circumstances still decided to leave instead of trying to make cusa better.

(04-22-2014 05:40 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  There is nothing different that Brit could have done. He was dealt lousy cards and he had to play with them. When all this shuffling occurred the BE still had the upper hand with the basketball teams that were in it and the good fb teams that hadn't left for other conferences. You guys talk like just because we cusa wanted something everyone else would have agreed. Sheesh, look at e.c.u. even with that prospect of not being AQ decided to leave and the way y'all talk your school would have done the same thing. Wishing for something isn't the same as getting what you wish for because most of the time Santa doesn't bring you that gift.

In other words quit your belly aching and just accept what you have. Everyone of us wants what's best for our schools and just because we can't get it doesn't mean it's the Commish's fault.

Who you should blame are those schools that despite not improving their circumstances still decided to leave instead of trying to make cusa better.

Not to , but by what criteria? The only current equalizer, as far as I can tell, is access bowl accessibility. Nobody took a pay cut or decreased exposure...quite the opposite. In accessing all options, it was an overall improvement...though the incremental degree is debatable.