Both in a heartbeat. LA Tech was a good conference member in the WAC and brought a good crowd to San Marcos. USM is still one of top attended games of all time.

Both would be a boost to the conference profile too.

But if LA Tech would never happen then make it UTSA instead.

If the Sun Belt had a chance to take Southern Miss and New Mexico State, I'd be on board.

USM and UTSA.

We have an old rivaly with LaTech, but they would go indy before joining so UTSA it is.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

(10-07-2017 06:15 AM)Golota Wrote:  People bring up Jackonsoville State as a potential SBC memeber. That’s 3 in Alabama. LT won’t in a conference with Cajuns and ULM it’s beneath them. They also refer to SBC as the SunBelch.

No thanks. Heck, I want UAB to drop FB again. Troy and S.Alabama should be the only G5 programs in Alabama... actually, S.Alabama should move down to FCS. Troy recruiting would be so much easier that way... :D

USM and LA Tech in a heartbeat, wouldn't mind trading LA Tech for either ULM or ULL, or even both.

(10-07-2017 10:45 AM)dewclaws Wrote:  If the Sun Belt had a chance to take Southern Miss and New Mexico State, I'd be on board.

Had a chance to have NMSU.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ULM and ULL are charter members of Sunbelt football, neither are going anywhere. That’s absurd. I was waiting for these comments, but wasn’t expecting them to come from Troy fans. :smh

(10-07-2017 04:53 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(10-07-2017 02:35 AM)SouthJags2012 Wrote:  La Tech would demand we drop ULM therefore we would have 11. Then we would have to add another team. Southern Miss has a chance to become a great regional rival with multiple schools.

La Tech would not "demand" anything. We'd simply stay in CUSA. We've made it pretty clear that we have no interest in being in a conference that already has two Louisiana universities in it. Besides, I don't imagine that most of the current SBC membership would want to have three Louisiana universities as SBC members either.

Correct.

UTSA might would come if USM did. That would give Texas St. a close rivalry game.

(10-07-2017 08:48 AM)Arrowhead Wrote:  USM and UTSA would be my choice.

YES!

(10-07-2017 10:52 AM)T2003 Wrote:  

(10-07-2017 06:15 AM)Golota Wrote:  People bring up Jackonsoville State as a potential SBC memeber. That’s 3 in Alabama. LT won’t in a conference with Cajuns and ULM it’s beneath them. They also refer to SBC as the SunBelch.

No thanks. Heck, I want UAB to drop FB again. Troy and S.Alabama should be the only G5 programs in Alabama... actually, S.Alabama should move down to FCS. Troy recruiting would be so much easier that way... :D

USM and LA Tech in a heartbeat, wouldn't mind trading LA Tech for either ULM or ULL, or even both.

What are you smoking? South Alabama will only get stronger when there's a change in HC job.

I'd be all for it but I'd prefer UTSA for obvious reasons.

One can dream lol

(10-07-2017 11:32 AM)Arrowhead Wrote:  ULM and ULL are charter members of Sunbelt football, neither are going anywhere. That’s absurd. I was waiting for these comments, but wasn’t expecting them to come from Troy fans. :smh

Just a couple of Troy fans. Don't look at the Troy fan base as a whole having that same perception though.

Fact is, with the current membership, LA Tech will NEVER be a part of the SBC again, even if they wanted to (they burned too many bridges when they were here). If the Belt were fortunate enough to add USM, we could probably grab just about anyone else we wanted from the remnants of CUSA.

The irony of these threads, aside from the financial aspect, is that the SBC already has 12 members. Adding two FB members would require dropping two schools to make the rest of the 17 sports work.

(10-07-2017 03:13 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  The irony of these threads, aside from the financial aspect, is that the SBC already has 12 members. Adding two FB members would require dropping two schools to make the rest of the 17 sports work.

Yeah...its not like we don't have two non football members that we could easily remove from the equation by simply creating a bylaw that requires they sponsor football to remain a member or something...

J/K

(10-07-2017 04:14 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-07-2017 03:13 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  The irony of these threads, aside from the financial aspect, is that the SBC already has 12 members. Adding two FB members would require dropping two schools to make the rest of the 17 sports work.

Yeah...its not like we don't have two non football members that we could easily remove from the equation by simply creating a bylaw that requires they sponsor football to remain a member or something...

J/K

Or we do like the AAC, 12 football, 14 other sports. It really isn't that big a deal. I'd love to have USM in the same conference as South.

(10-07-2017 06:24 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(10-07-2017 04:14 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-07-2017 03:13 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  The irony of these threads, aside from the financial aspect, is that the SBC already has 12 members. Adding two FB members would require dropping two schools to make the rest of the 17 sports work.

Yeah...its not like we don't have two non football members that we could easily remove from the equation by simply creating a bylaw that requires they sponsor football to remain a member or something...

J/K

Or we do like the AAC, 12 football, 14 other sports. It really isn't that big a deal. I'd love to have USM in the same conference as South.

I do love hypotheticals, "what if this team wanted to join" type questions.

It will never happen, but why not talk about it?

Southern Miss and Marshall please and thank you.

(10-07-2017 06:34 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  Southern Miss and Marshall please and thank you.

Second

(10-07-2017 06:37 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(10-07-2017 06:34 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  Southern Miss and Marshall please and thank you.

Second

Yep.