Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
stinkfist Offline
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 68,384
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 6862
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: who knows?
Post: #21
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-15-2015 10:30 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:27 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:24 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  I guess I just want to understand the reasoning because it seems a bit counterproductive to not allow some good hoops schools join to strengthen the hoops side of our TV deal. We could also make more money from the NCAA tournament by getting more teams in.

Hoops TV is drop in the bucket compare to Football. Football revenue is close to 85-90% of conference revenue.

I'm not just thinking revenue, but the visability also. The TV for hoops is pretty bad.

then you're a millennial that ignores the 'why' concept....you'll learn one day.....and I hate that for ya....
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2015 10:37 AM by stinkfist.)
04-15-2015 10:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MUsince96 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,112
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 169
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-15-2015 10:35 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:30 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:27 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:24 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  I guess I just want to understand the reasoning because it seems a bit counterproductive to not allow some good hoops schools join to strengthen the hoops side of our TV deal. We could also make more money from the NCAA tournament by getting more teams in.

Hoops TV is drop in the bucket compare to Football. Football revenue is close to 85-90% of conference revenue.

I'm not just thinking revenue, but the visability also. The TV for hoops is pretty bad.

then you're a millennial that ignores the 'why' concept....you'll learn one day.....and I hate that for ya....

Huh? What's up with the condescending tone?
04-15-2015 10:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarborPointe Offline
North American Champion
*

Posts: 5,650
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 594
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: Parts Unknown
Post: #23
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
Money & competitiveness.

Others have already addressed the money, but I'll build upon stink's one-liner by saying that in basketball, you only get the NCAA money if you make it. In CUSA 1.0, the hoops-only teams all hit a slump as soon as the conference was formed, so we got all the disadvantages of being in the same conference with them but none of the expected income. TV money, which is heavily football-driven, is cash in the bank no matter what.

Competitively, having a team on the schedule whose overall athletic program can function on a much smaller budget & can pour the majority of its resources into one sport puts you at a disadvantage when you face said team. The original Big East didn't just accidentally get really great at hoops. Those schools are good at it because it's always been their focus. You can't play football without spending most of your money on football, so it automatically puts everybody on the same footing.
04-15-2015 11:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MUsince96 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,112
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 169
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-15-2015 11:27 AM)HarborPointe Wrote:  Money & competitiveness.

Others have already addressed the money, but I'll build upon stink's one-liner by saying that in basketball, you only get the NCAA money if you make it. In CUSA 1.0, the hoops-only teams all hit a slump as soon as the conference was formed, so we got all the disadvantages of being in the same conference with them but none of the expected income. TV money, which is heavily football-driven, is cash in the bank no matter what.

Competitively, having a team on the schedule whose overall athletic program can function on a much smaller budget & can pour the majority of its resources into one sport puts you at a disadvantage when you face said team. The original Big East didn't just accidentally get really great at hoops. Those schools are good at it because it's always been their focus. You can't play football without spending most of your money on football, so it automatically puts everybody on the same footing.

Yeah I get that. I guess I just assumed the TV money was divided up in a way that football schools got more since football drives the bus. Therefore any perceived advantages the hoops schools had with pouring all their money into hoops only was sort of nullified.
04-15-2015 11:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Offline
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 68,384
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 6862
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: who knows?
Post: #25
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-15-2015 10:42 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:35 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:30 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:27 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:24 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  I guess I just want to understand the reasoning because it seems a bit counterproductive to not allow some good hoops schools join to strengthen the hoops side of our TV deal. We could also make more money from the NCAA tournament by getting more teams in.

Hoops TV is drop in the bucket compare to Football. Football revenue is close to 85-90% of conference revenue.

I'm not just thinking revenue, but the visability also. The TV for hoops is pretty bad.

then you're a millennial that ignores the 'why' concept....you'll learn one day.....and I hate that for ya....

Huh? What's up with the condescending tone?

it's been a bad week....I didn't mean it relative to you per se....but I do believe the wreck that is becoming college football has deeper underlying reasons that I attempted to display....

sometimes I think people understand what I write and they are in my head when I do it.....it's a curse.....

my apologies.....I wasn't trying to offend....
04-15-2015 12:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarborPointe Offline
North American Champion
*

Posts: 5,650
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 594
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: Parts Unknown
Post: #26
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-15-2015 11:45 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  Yeah I get that. I guess I just assumed the TV money was divided up in a way that football schools got more since football drives the bus. Therefore any perceived advantages the hoops schools had with pouring all their money into hoops only was sort of nullified.

That helps, but at our level, the cost to run a football program is too disproportionate to payouts. If you have a school that takes nothing from the conference, they still end up $4 million ahead of a school that gets $3 million from the conference and spends $7 million on football (the latter is what UMass spent on the sport in 2012; that was just the quickest figure I found with a web search).
04-15-2015 12:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
Seems like the decision to be a football first conference was a knee jerk reaction to the first Big East raid. Most of the schools taken were basketball schools---so maybe it was a loyalty issue? It was stupid, because any of the football schools would have bolted if a P5 came calling.

There was some division I suppose---I remember the conference voted to kick Louisville out for being obstinate and blocking the additions of ECU and Army. Plus Louisville was a pile of dung at the time, so the other members decided that they were just too difficult to deal with and were no longer worth the aggravation (lol...I think that was Jurichs first week on the job). I cant remember the exact details, but I think Louisville knew it was coming and didn't attend the meeting, instead they filed for and received a temporary restraining order to prevent CUSA from expelling them. It all ended up getting worked out and Louisville backed off their block of ECU and Army. I don't know the details, but maybe UL was getting support in that battle from the basketball schools...that might explain the later moves to rid themselves of the basketball schools. IIRC, they were not very good when they were asked to add football or leave---so it may have been kinda similar to the Louisville situation. Also, its possible that the money split may have played a role as well. The current Sunbelt basketball schools actually get a share of football money---for some reason Im thinking we may have been doing that as well.
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2015 07:22 PM by Attackcoog.)
04-15-2015 07:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
FriscoDawg Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 982
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 46
I Root For: Louisiana Tech
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-15-2015 10:27 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 10:24 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  I guess I just want to understand the reasoning because it seems a bit counterproductive to not allow some good hoops schools join to strengthen the hoops side of our TV deal. We could also make more money from the NCAA tournament by getting more teams in.

Hoops TV is drop in the bucket compare to Football. Football revenue is close to 85-90% of conference revenue.
Revenue distributions from the various NCAA funds make up about half of the revenue that most G5 conferences make. Football TV and bowl/playoff revenue makes up about 80-90% of the other half.

For the 2013-2014 year, Conference USA received over $12.5 million from the six NCAA funds (Academic Enhancement, Basketball, Student Assistance, Grants-in-Aid, Sports Sponsorship, and Conference Grants).
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2015 07:57 PM by FriscoDawg.)
04-15-2015 07:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Steve1981 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,374
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 258
I Root For: UMass
Location: North Quabbin Region
Post: #29
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-15-2015 12:56 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 11:45 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  Yeah I get that. I guess I just assumed the TV money was divided up in a way that football schools got more since football drives the bus. Therefore any perceived advantages the hoops schools had with pouring all their money into hoops only was sort of nullified.

That helps, but at our level, the cost to run a football program is too disproportionate to payouts. If you have a school that takes nothing from the conference, they still end up $4 million ahead of a school that gets $3 million from the conference and spends $7 million on football (the latter is what UMass spent on the sport in 2012; that was just the quickest figure I found with a web search).
Don't understand the reference to UMass. We've been playing football since 1879 and as a FCS team spent millions on football.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMass_Minutemen_football

Doubt it has anything to do with the BB game series with Ol' Miss.
Quote:Ol’ MISS LIKELY — Nothing is official yet, but UMass is close to finalizing a deal to start a home-and-home series with Mississippi, beginning this year at the MassMutual Center. The teams would have a rematch in 2016-17 at an off-campus site in Mississippi.
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2015 09:56 PM by Steve1981.)
04-15-2015 09:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarborPointe Offline
North American Champion
*

Posts: 5,650
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 594
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: Parts Unknown
Post: #30
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-15-2015 09:11 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Don't understand the reference to UMass.

Then you're pretty dense, because it's right there in the post:

(04-15-2015 12:56 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  (the latter is what UMass spent on the sport in 2012; that was just the quickest figure I found with a web search).

UMass just happened to be the first school for which I found a documented annual football outlay. Nothing more, nothing less.

Good heavens, do people sit around just typing in the name of their favorite school into the search window so they can home in on stuff by which to be offended? So they can swoop in and defend the institution's honor by saying such profound things as "we're playing Ole Miss in basketball?"
04-16-2015 01:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
loki_the_bubba Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,697
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 701
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-16-2015 01:44 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 09:11 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Don't understand the reference to UMass.

Then you're pretty dense, because it's right there in the post:

(04-15-2015 12:56 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  (the latter is what UMass spent on the sport in 2012; that was just the quickest figure I found with a web search).

UMass just happened to be the first school for which I found a documented annual football outlay. Nothing more, nothing less.

Good heavens, do people sit around just typing in the name of their favorite school into the search window so they can home in on stuff by which to be offended? So they can swoop in and defend the institution's honor by saying such profound things as "we're playing Ole Miss in basketball?"

I try, but when I search all I get are recipes.
04-16-2015 02:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarborPointe Offline
North American Champion
*

Posts: 5,650
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 594
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: Parts Unknown
Post: #32
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-16-2015 02:04 PM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  
(04-16-2015 01:44 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  Good heavens, do people sit around just typing in the name of their favorite school into the search window so they can home in on stuff by which to be offended? So they can swoop in and defend the institution's honor by saying such profound things as "we're playing Ole Miss in basketball?"

I try, but when I search all I get are recipes.



04-16-2015 02:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Steve1981 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,374
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 258
I Root For: UMass
Location: North Quabbin Region
Post: #33
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-16-2015 01:44 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 09:11 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Don't understand the reference to UMass.

Then you're pretty dense, because it's right there in the post:

(04-15-2015 12:56 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  (the latter is what UMass spent on the sport in 2012; that was just the quickest figure I found with a web search).

UMass just happened to be the first school for which I found a documented annual football outlay. Nothing more, nothing less.

Good heavens, do people sit around just typing in the name of their favorite school into the search window so they can home in on stuff by which to be offended? So they can swoop in and defend the institution's honor by saying such profound things as "we're playing Ole Miss in basketball?"
Won't call you a liar straight out, but will say it's extremely disingenuous that UMass was the first university that you found an annual football outlay for and it was for 2012. Perhaps Southern Miss or any other CUSA team would have been first, even Ol' Miss or another public university from even 2013.
04-19-2015 11:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarborPointe Offline
North American Champion
*

Posts: 5,650
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 594
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: Parts Unknown
Post: #34
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-19-2015 11:16 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Won't call you a liar straight out, but will say it's extremely disingenuous that UMass was the first university that you found an annual football outlay for and it was for 2012. Perhaps Southern Miss or any other CUSA team would have been first, even Ol' Miss or another public university from even 2013.

You need help.
04-19-2015 04:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofMemphis Away
Official MT.org Ambassador of Smack
*

Posts: 48,797
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 1129
I Root For: Univ of Memphis
Location: Memphis (Berclair)

Donators
Post: #35
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-19-2015 11:16 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  
(04-16-2015 01:44 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  
(04-15-2015 09:11 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Don't understand the reference to UMass.

Then you're pretty dense, because it's right there in the post:

(04-15-2015 12:56 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  (the latter is what UMass spent on the sport in 2012; that was just the quickest figure I found with a web search).

UMass just happened to be the first school for which I found a documented annual football outlay. Nothing more, nothing less.

Good heavens, do people sit around just typing in the name of their favorite school into the search window so they can home in on stuff by which to be offended? So they can swoop in and defend the institution's honor by saying such profound things as "we're playing Ole Miss in basketball?"
Won't call you a liar straight out, but will say it's extremely disingenuous that UMass was the first university that you found an annual football outlay for and it was for 2012. Perhaps Southern Miss or any other CUSA team would have been first, even Ol' Miss or another public university from even 2013.

^ UMass fans are even stranger than UConn fans...must be something in the water up there.
04-19-2015 05:39 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PirateTreasureNC Offline
G's up, Ho's Down ; )
*

Posts: 36,249
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 617
I Root For: ECU Pirates,
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-15-2015 08:53 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  I posed the question in the UAB thread but think it's been lost in all the different debates going on over there.

But did C-USA ever explain why they cut schools who didn't have football? It seems to me we'd have a much stronger hoops conference and better TV contract if Marquette, St. Louis, Depaul and now (probably) UAB were still members.

I understand there are some conflicting motivations when everyone isn't on the same page, but I don't ever remember it being as big of a problem as it was for Big East.

To my understanding and memory, the CUSA schools left after the BE raid got together and decided that having schools in the league with both football and basketball would forge a better identity and unity than doing a split with some schools having basketball only.
04-20-2015 12:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MemTGRS Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,893
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 295
I Root For: Memphis Tigers!
Location: VA Beach, "the 757"
Post: #37
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
As noted above, DePaul and Marquette had announced departures to the Big East. Then I thought it was a mistake for C-USA to "encourage" (or whatever exactly happened?) Charlotte and St. Louis to find new homes. The hoops hit was huge.

But then again, I think both schools would have probably left voluntarily as the Atlantic-10 offered a hoops-centric league that was noticeably stronger than the resulting C-USA. I personally think it is fine and dandy to have 2 or 3 non-football schools if they make your basketball stronger. I would be in favor of sharing a conference with VCU and Wichita State.

I think the current version of C-USA can be a 2 or 3 bid league again with ODU's resurgence. The Ted is a great venue and I think the conference tournament would still be perfect there even if the Scope can't be landed due to the MEAC's contract.
UAB and Western Kentucky have always had nice b'ball programs.
Middle Tennessee's usually is underrated in men's hoops (and women's program is especially strong)
And I saw LA Tech (w/o even noting Karl Malone, Randy White, P.J. Brown, et al) in person lose a late lead at NC State that they should have won ... might have pushed the Bulldogs to an at-large bid if they had held on. And ssshhh, I thought they were victimized by a lot of "no calls" at the end.
04-20-2015 09:44 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CajunFanatico Offline
QDEP
*

Posts: 7,240
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 144
I Root For: Cajuns
Location: In Savacool's head
Post: #38
RE: Why did C-USA become all-sports only?
(04-20-2015 09:44 AM)MemTGRS Wrote:  And I saw LA Tech (w/o even noting Karl Malone, Randy White, P.J. Brown, et al) in person lose a late lead at NC State that they should have won ... might have pushed the Bulldogs to an at-large bid if they had held on.

Their unexplainable loss to a miserable Cajun team is what cost them an at-large. 05-stirthepot
04-20-2015 10:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.