(01-24-2015 01:38 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 01:35 PM)galojah Wrote:  Let's be honest, we took F_U's simply for market, Georgia State would be no different.

Yeah, except that Downtown Atlanta > St. Floridasburg.

nope. Georgia Sate is non factor in Atlanta. No market share. Atlanta sux anyhow.

(01-24-2015 02:50 PM)No Bull Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 01:38 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 01:35 PM)galojah Wrote:  Let's be honest, we took F_U's simply for market, Georgia State would be no different.

Yeah, except that Downtown Atlanta > St. Floridasburg.

nope. Georgia Sate is non factor in Atlanta. No market share. Atlanta sux anyhow.

Yeah, no offense, but I've seen that for literally a decade on this site. All we have done is the opposite of what's been predicted. We came from a bunch of grassroot guys talking about football in a bagel shop to FBS in that span. God help these boards if we actually start winning too.

It will be a tough decision. Many will have trouble getting rid of UAB based on history as a founding member. Others will have trouble when they consider the loss of one of the biggest college sports markets in the nation (Birmingham). UAB even without football adds value in men's basketball, men's soccer, softball, baseball.

But will CUSA folks trust Watts? That is the biggest question quite frankly.

I honestly think that in the end, CUSA will give UAB a deadline and make UABs continued inclusion dependent on a commitment to reinstate football.

(01-24-2015 03:08 PM)Blazer85 Wrote:  It will be a tough decision. Many will have trouble getting rid of UAB based on history as a founding member. Others will have trouble when they consider the loss of one of the biggest college sports markets in the nation (Birmingham). UAB even without football adds value in men's basketball, men's soccer, softball, baseball.

But will CUSA folks trust Watts? That is the biggest question quite frankly.

I honestly think that in the end, CUSA will give UAB a deadline and make UABs continued inclusion dependent on a commitment to reinstate football.

That's my biggest concern as well. We can't trust Watts or the UA BOT to do what is right. If they get rid of football, who's to say the rest of the athletic department won't be eliminated in the future by these same people?

(01-24-2015 01:35 PM)galojah Wrote:  Let's be honest, we took F_U's simply for market, Georgia State would be no different.

Funny that you said "we" although FIU was the first school invited and WKU was the last. Meaning, WKU was not in CUSA when we joined. Let's not forget that FIU was coming off two bowl appearances when it was invited. Hence, schools are not invited solely on performance but rather based on market, academic profile, budget ect. As evident, non of the G5 schools is immune from a few down years.

(01-24-2015 03:26 PM)CivilEng Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 01:35 PM)galojah Wrote:  Let's be honest, we took F_U's simply for market, Georgia State would be no different.

Funny that you said "we" although FIU was the first school invited and WKU was the last. Meaning, WKU was not in CUSA when we joined. Let's not forget that FIU was coming off two bowl appearances when it was invited. Hence, schools are not invited solely on performance but rather based on market, academic profile, budget ect. As evident, non of the G5 schools is immune from a few down years.

Let it go man. Can't argue with the people who hate our programs no matter what we do.

(01-24-2015 03:30 PM)FAUAEPi Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 03:26 PM)CivilEng Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 01:35 PM)galojah Wrote:  Let's be honest, we took F_U's simply for market, Georgia State would be no different.

Funny that you said "we" although FIU was the first school invited and WKU was the last. Meaning, WKU was not in CUSA when we joined. Let's not forget that FIU was coming off two bowl appearances when it was invited. Hence, schools are not invited solely on performance but rather based on market, academic profile, budget ect. As evident, non of the G5 schools is immune from a few down years.

Let it go man. Can't argue with the people who hate our programs no matter what we do.

True.

I'm a fan of the FAU/FIU adds. Great locations that bring in the FL market.

Larry Coker spent all last week in the sunshine state mining for Gems.

Boca Bowl was a success. There's a lot to like about the F_U twins.

(01-24-2015 03:08 PM)Blazer85 Wrote:  It will be a tough decision. Many will have trouble getting rid of UAB based on history as a founding member. Others will have trouble when they consider the loss of one of the biggest college sports markets in the nation (Birmingham). UAB even without football adds value in men's basketball, men's soccer, softball, baseball.

But will CUSA folks trust Watts? That is the biggest question quite frankly.

I honestly think that in the end, CUSA will give UAB a deadline and make UABs continued inclusion dependent on a commitment to reinstate football.

Something I really hadn't thought of..we don't all have men's soccer teams. If UAB left the conference, would their replacement need to be a men's soccer playing school?

(01-24-2015 02:17 PM)panama Wrote:  Let's also not minimize the extreme damage that five years under The Levick caused. Charlie Cobb is doing a great job so far of cleaning house and reversing some of her idiocy. He has not been on the job 6 months. Things are definitely different with a President and AD on the same page.

Would that be the same Charlie Cobb who was at Appalachian State?

I was hoping we'd snag either him or the NAIA CEO when we instead...uh, I'll just say "went another direction" for the sake of my own mental health.

(01-24-2015 02:47 PM)TechAlum05 Wrote:  

Quote:If UAB wishes to be in Conference USA, I think three things have to happen. First, the football program must be reinstated. Second, Ray Watts must be fired as the president and replaced with someone who gives a damn about UAB football and UAB athletics. Finally, either the UA Board of Trustees must be restructured to have much greater representation by UAB or UAB must secede from that board and create its own board to oversee its own affairs without unfair influence by a group of Crimson Tide homers.

http://latechreport.com/2015/01/24/louis...g-round-1/

I'll go one better and say those three things need to happen in the opposite order if we're ever going to rely on UAB as a football-playing member. As long as the BoT is controlled by Roll Tiders and has the final say on everything at UAB, there will be nothing to keep them from screwing around with UAB football every time the program builds a little momentum.

Now, if the league just wants to grandfather UAB in as a non-football member, I'd be OK with that. Ultimately, kicking UAB out of CUSA altogether just aids those Bama douchebags in their mission to suppress UAB athletics. If more poop hits the fan later with other sports, we can deal with it then.

(01-24-2015 03:26 PM)CivilEng Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 01:35 PM)galojah Wrote:  Let's be honest, we took F_U's simply for market, Georgia State would be no different.

Funny that you said "we" although FIU was the first school invited and WKU was the last. Meaning, WKU was not in CUSA when we joined. Let's not forget that FIU was coming off two bowl appearances when it was invited. Hence, schools are not invited solely on performance but rather based on market, academic profile, budget ect. As evident, non of the G5 schools is immune from a few down years.

Like i said, Market means something. Most would argue WKU brings more to C-USA in athletics than FIU or FAU (WKU's overall conference success in SBC, fan support, history), but FAU and FIU got in first. It was primarily a market decision. I hope you all continue to grow and hope your fan support exponentially grows. But it's not really there now. I want everyone in C-USA to be successful and the best they can be.

(01-24-2015 03:30 PM)FAUAEPi Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 03:26 PM)CivilEng Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 01:35 PM)galojah Wrote:  Let's be honest, we took F_U's simply for market, Georgia State would be no different.

Funny that you said "we" although FIU was the first school invited and WKU was the last. Meaning, WKU was not in CUSA when we joined. Let's not forget that FIU was coming off two bowl appearances when it was invited. Hence, schools are not invited solely on performance but rather based on market, academic profile, budget ect. As evident, non of the G5 schools is immune from a few down years.

Let it go man. Can't argue with the people who hate our programs no matter what we do.

No hate, promise.

(01-24-2015 07:25 PM)galojah Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 03:30 PM)FAUAEPi Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 03:26 PM)CivilEng Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 01:35 PM)galojah Wrote:  Let's be honest, we took F_U's simply for market, Georgia State would be no different.

Funny that you said "we" although FIU was the first school invited and WKU was the last. Meaning, WKU was not in CUSA when we joined. Let's not forget that FIU was coming off two bowl appearances when it was invited. Hence, schools are not invited solely on performance but rather based on market, academic profile, budget ect. As evident, non of the G5 schools is immune from a few down years.

Let it go man. Can't argue with the people who hate our programs no matter what we do.

No hate, promise.

No worries. It's just what we're used to.

(01-24-2015 07:15 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 02:47 PM)TechAlum05 Wrote:  

Quote:If UAB wishes to be in Conference USA, I think three things have to happen. First, the football program must be reinstated. Second, Ray Watts must be fired as the president and replaced with someone who gives a damn about UAB football and UAB athletics. Finally, either the UA Board of Trustees must be restructured to have much greater representation by UAB or UAB must secede from that board and create its own board to oversee its own affairs without unfair influence by a group of Crimson Tide homers.

http://latechreport.com/2015/01/24/louis...g-round-1/

I'll go one better and say those three things need to happen in the opposite order if we're ever going to rely on UAB as a football-playing member. As long as the BoT is controlled by Roll Tiders and has the final say on everything at UAB, there will be nothing to keep them from screwing around with UAB football every time the program builds a little momentum.

Now, if the league just wants to grandfather UAB in as a non-football member, I'd be OK with that. Ultimately, kicking UAB out of CUSA altogether just aids those Bama douchebags in their mission to suppress UAB athletics. If more poop hits the fan later with other sports, we can deal with it then.

I agree with the order of things you suggested. I was just saying that all needed to happen regardless of order.

While I might not grandfather UAB in as a non-football member, I'd definitely vote them back in the first chance I could if they did everything needed to get back in C-USA.

(01-24-2015 03:08 PM)Blazer85 Wrote:  It will be a tough decision. Many will have trouble getting rid of UAB based on history as a founding member. Others will have trouble when they consider the loss of one of the biggest college sports markets in the nation (Birmingham). UAB even without football adds value in men's basketball, men's soccer, softball, baseball.

But will CUSA folks trust Watts? That is the biggest question quite frankly.

I honestly think that in the end, CUSA will give UAB a deadline and make UABs continued inclusion dependent on a commitment to reinstate football.

This. CUSA will be fair, and give UAB a chance to bring football back. I hope they can do it within two years.

(01-25-2015 03:35 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 03:08 PM)Blazer85 Wrote:  It will be a tough decision. Many will have trouble getting rid of UAB based on history as a founding member. Others will have trouble when they consider the loss of one of the biggest college sports markets in the nation (Birmingham). UAB even without football adds value in men's basketball, men's soccer, softball, baseball.

But will CUSA folks trust Watts? That is the biggest question quite frankly.

I honestly think that in the end, CUSA will give UAB a deadline and make UABs continued inclusion dependent on a commitment to reinstate football.

This. CUSA will be fair, and give UAB a chance to bring football back. I hope they can do it within two years.

If we retain UAB for Olympic sports; then, we must send a unanimous conference message thru Banowski to the Alabama Board of Trust (yes that's you Bear Jr. and the inept Pres. Watts) that we are only doing so provided UAB returns to FBS by the 2016 season, and BOT for Alabama must rescind its death knell decision within 30 days of our announcement! Their callous, butchery of the existing UAB athletic program cannot be ignored. Otherwise, during the spring meetings of CUSA, we cut them loose.

Has C-USA announced when they're going to decide whether or not to keep UAB?

(01-25-2015 03:58 PM)UNLVFan90 Wrote:  Has C-USA announced when they're going to decide whether or not to keep UAB?

No.

(01-24-2015 03:26 PM)CivilEng Wrote:  

(01-24-2015 01:35 PM)galojah Wrote:  Let's be honest, we took F_U's simply for market, Georgia State would be no different.

Funny that you said "we" although FIU was the first school invited and WKU was the last. Meaning, WKU was not in CUSA when we joined. Let's not forget that FIU was coming off two bowl appearances when it was invited. Hence, schools are not invited solely on performance but rather based on market, academic profile, budget ect. As evident, non of the G5 schools is immune from a few down years.

At the time taking FIU was a no brainer with CUSA losing the Fla area. Football was good and while I don't care for Miami...

You can't beat S. Fla in Nov-Feb. Presidents and AD's love this trip and it shows because if other fanbases is like Western...

the FIU/FAU road games will have more opposing fans at these games than any other. Other than a close rival that is.

I'm for one that's very glad to be back in the same conference as both. Wish the basketball would get better but every conference has schools that pick a sport and S. Fla is football first, second, third, fourth, then maybe basketball gets a nugget. But overall both schools add something to the conference a northern school can't

But with that it was suppose to be muts and Western instead of FAU...

if the vote was taken 2 (2.5) weeks earlier it would have been that way. Other than Western's president or our AD saying different I would trust my source on that over anyone else at Western.