I like this conference but it does have obvious warts. For starters, all of us would rather be somewhere else (MWC or AAC depending on your location). It doesn't make sense to have a league spread so far apart if it isn't held together by programs that can actually sustain success. I don't know what the solution is for sure, but I do know that there isn't enough separation for any of us to thumb our noses up at anyone else. I do think it would probably make sense to split up the SBC and the C-USA into two geographic conferences (one in the Southwest, one in the Southeast). It also makes sense for some programs to drop to the FCS level to be honest.

(12-06-2017 10:56 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:50 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:46 AM)goliath74 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:41 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:29 AM)goliath74 Wrote:  We're not talking perfect. We're talking an improvement. otherwise, what's the point re-aligning?

To adapt to decreased TV revenue by reducing costs and creating more fan interest (leading to better attendance and more value to networks). A more regional conference could help in all aspects. It could help build rivalries and may allow for fans to travel to more away games.

Then, in that case, we would need to make sure it is better for all members of the conference, not just several.

That brings me back to the first point. 2 out 20+ members aint enough reason to delay it.

not only is it enough to delay it, it's enough to prevent it. these conference associations are voluntary. what do you plan to do, force them at gunpoint?

I dont think anything happens any time soon. But if all but 2 schools agree to adapt and find a solution for realignment, do you really think 2 schools would prevent it? No, they'd see the tides changing and decide to jump aboard or go off on their own (Indy).

(12-06-2017 11:33 AM)freshtop Wrote:  It also makes sense for some programs to drop to the FCS level to be honest.

Which programs should be FCS, and why should they be FCS?

performance? fans? budget? history?

(12-06-2017 11:34 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:56 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:50 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:46 AM)goliath74 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:41 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  To adapt to decreased TV revenue by reducing costs and creating more fan interest (leading to better attendance and more value to networks). A more regional conference could help in all aspects. It could help build rivalries and may allow for fans to travel to more away games.

Then, in that case, we would need to make sure it is better for all members of the conference, not just several.

That brings me back to the first point. 2 out 20+ members aint enough reason to delay it.

not only is it enough to delay it, it's enough to prevent it. these conference associations are voluntary. what do you plan to do, force them at gunpoint?

I dont think anything happens any time soon. But if all but 2 schools agree to adapt and find a solution for realignment, do you really think 2 schools would prevent it? No, they'd see the tides changing and decide to jump aboard or go off on their own (Indy).

realignment created this problem. I reject the notion that more realignment will fix it.

just a word of advice; we apparently have a mod that despises any discussion of realignment. threads get tossed into the realignment forum if we say "realignment" too many times.

once you get there, the tone, and the audience both change dramatically. then we get asked why a bull**** little conference like us is worried about realignment in the first place. it's just a generally bad experience.

as I said, just a word of advice.

(12-06-2017 11:32 AM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 11:07 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:58 AM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:50 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:46 AM)goliath74 Wrote:  Then, in that case, we would need to make sure it is better for all members of the conference, not just several.

That brings me back to the first point. 2 out 20+ members aint enough reason to delay it.

The problem with you 18 of 20 wanting realignment is that the 18 can't agree on who they think is worthy of associating with them in a smaller league.

I don't disagree, but as I have gotten older I have found that is more about a regional fit than who were are too good to associate with. ULL isn't going to all of a sudden start stealing our recruits because they are in the same league as us. Heck until a few years ago we were playing them again and drawing statewide attention doing it. Playing FAU or Charlotte does not register here in Louisiana and vice versa

I agree with all your points. However, LaTech may want to include Texas schools because they have alumni in Houston/Denton but USM doesn't want Texas schools because the drive is too far. how do you resolve this?

Make no bones about it, Tech goes where Texas goes. Oru bread and butter is in the Lone Star state. We have always recruited Mississippi well too, but not like Texas. Dallas is the where all our Alumni are and also why we strive to make a bowl game there every year.

Lets be honest for a second. If the western schools got what they wanted and the eastern schools got what they wanted...

a split with a few regional schools added in

we are still going to find something to ***** and complain about. We are not going to attend any more road games than we do today. Your football team is still going to fly and cost about the same. Unless it's a 4 hour or less trip.

You are still going to struggle getting games on TV unless you play during the week. Your basketball games are still going to be on a streaming service. Most likely one you will need to pay for with in the next 5 years....

As I said lets be honest....fans love to blame someone else. Anyone else than to look at why you are where you're at.

Grass is not always greener over there. Most of us left this close regional conference 30 or 40 years ago.

(12-06-2017 11:18 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 09:54 AM)goliath74 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 09:22 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 09:14 AM)goliath74 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 08:51 AM)herdfan129 Wrote:  Yes. I would rather play App State and Ga Southern as opposed to some of the teams in this conference.

I would love to end this conference and start fresh with some eastern based teams that actually care about football. These 4 schools could easily break off and form a new conference if we wanted. Why we haven't done so is starting to just piss me off to be honest.

Marshall
WKU
MTSU
ODU





New USM athletic director Jon Gilbert is among those who are open to suggestions, saying earlier this year, “I think that the idea of a regionally based conference probably warrants discussion.”

MTSU athletic director Chris Massaro told The Virginian Pilot in April that “It’s inevitable that there’s going to be some kind of consolidation among the Group of Five.”

If the consolidation includes a nation-wide G5 re-alignment - then I am fine with it. If it involves just C-USA and Sunbelt - what's the point?

I sort of agree, but the only other conference that would really be in the mix is the AAC, and they don't want to reshuffle. Even if they wanted to get rid of Tulane, Tulsa and ECU (which they probably shouldn't have brought in to begin with), why would those guys ever agree to leave? I'd be absolutely thrilled with annual basketball games against Memphis, Cincy, UConn and Temple, so Im sure they are too. The MW and MAC are already regionally aligned. UTEP might be able to slide to the MW, while ODU and Marshall could theoretically go to the MAC. But frankly, I think I like CUSA better than the MAC and their Tuesday night football games. They just seem to have much better conference leadership. CUSA teams and potential should be better than theirs most seasons.

A CUSA/SB reconfiguration of the like of Marshall, ODU, WKU, MTSU, UNCC, App St, (North) Ga St, GSU, Ark. St., UAB, So Miss., FAU (South) I could get behind.

But what's the point in it for us (FAU)? What advantage do we get out of this? Why re-align to get what we already have? Geographically speaking, through no fault of C-USA's or NCAA's, FIU and FAU are on the "island". Even in your configuration, we have two C-USA West teams. South Florida, does not fit too well in any geography based configuration. That's why if the re-alignment does not include AAC, it makes no sense.

Think about this division: USF, UCF, FAU, FIU, Troy, GaSo, USA

Well, USF and UCF are out because the AAC isn't playing at this time. Perhaps if their TV money gets cut to a third of what it is, that could happen. But not now. FAU could go into a division with Troy, GaSo and USA just as easily. Its always difficult to figure what to do the the F–Us so either way works fine for them. The bigger question would be why wouldn't you do it?

I think you misunderstood. The point I was making is that why do anything if nothing truly changes? For us (FIU and FAU), at least.

(12-06-2017 11:07 AM)EagNBran Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:04 AM)DETLTU Wrote:  I still think this is a terrible idea. What we need is time to develop a rivalry with some of the schools in the conference. We don't have 50 years of playing each other to draw from like some conferences. I honestly miss playing games against some of the WAC teams we shared the conference with the longest. Boise, Nevada, Fresno, Hawaii. I would love to play some of those teams again before they are forgotten by Tech fans.

Give this configuration time together and the fan interest will grow. FAU and FIU both having successful seasons this year and the game actually meaning something was a big step. Do that a few times and the fans will treat that game as important and can't miss. Even cross division rivalries can be developed.

Do you ever believe that you'll create a real rivalary with ODU, FXU, UTEP, or Marshall? That's not a slight against those schools, it's just that there's no real rivalries that can be formed. They're too far away. You don't interact with their fans on a daily basis.

I do believe we could create a rivalry with any of those schools. I truly believe we had a rivalry with Hawaii and Fresno and Nevada. Sure they didn't bring a ton of fans to Ruston, but they got our fans interested. Those were can't miss games for us. Building rivalries with teams in the east is harder because we don't play as much. ODU is off to a good start because they seem to have our number across multiple sports. WKU is already becoming a rival because we have faced each other so many times with a lot on the line lately. I don't interact with fans of any schools except LSU and Alabama on a daily basis and I doubt a conference with them is in the cards.

(12-06-2017 10:32 AM)cmett003 Wrote:  Here is the problem with C-USA and why regional alignment will help. First off college attendance is dropping everywhere, we can all agree on that. But when you look at P5 football, most of the games have a good amount of fans from the opposing school, because they care enough to go to the games and they have some sort of hatred to that opposing team because chances are they are not that far away. You need the fans to travel. Regional realignment makes it so that it is easier for away fans to get to games.

I am an ODU alum and right now my only realistic conference away game I could attend is Charlotte, now to be fair I live in Charlotte but if I lived in Norfolk I would still go to that game because Charlotte is a cool city to visit. I went to 4 home games and 1 away game this year; Albany, UNC, @VT, WKU and Rice.

If ODU was in a conference that included any of the following:

JMU
ECU
App State
Charlotte
Coastal Carolina
Ga Southern

I could travel to any of those away games from Charlotte relatively easily. I would like to get to a game at Marshall but its hard to go when you have gone to a bunch of home games. However im not going to texas or florida it is just to far and the fans from FAU, FIU, NT, Rice and so on just dont care. Why would I want to go to an away game where their fans dont care enough to make it to a home game. Im not travelling several hundred miles to go to an empty stadium. The next round of conference realignment should be based on the proximity and strength of fan base. If you dont make the cut then too bad. [/u]

Its hard to hate someone that is halfway across the country.

That's bullchit. LA Tech HATED Fresno St, Hawaii and Nevada when we were in the WAC. Sure, it took a handful of years to get established, but after joining the WAC in 2001, it was HATE CITY by 2005. Never mind we were 2 time zones apart! The hate between FSU & LA Tech was so genuine that we actually had a pregame brawl on the field one year.

Some of you eastern guys just like to biiitch a lot. I guess we just have to expect threads like this in the "offseason".

(12-06-2017 11:53 AM)DETLTU Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 11:07 AM)EagNBran Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:04 AM)DETLTU Wrote:  I still think this is a terrible idea. What we need is time to develop a rivalry with some of the schools in the conference. We don't have 50 years of playing each other to draw from like some conferences. I honestly miss playing games against some of the WAC teams we shared the conference with the longest. Boise, Nevada, Fresno, Hawaii. I would love to play some of those teams again before they are forgotten by Tech fans.

Give this configuration time together and the fan interest will grow. FAU and FIU both having successful seasons this year and the game actually meaning something was a big step. Do that a few times and the fans will treat that game as important and can't miss. Even cross division rivalries can be developed.

Do you ever believe that you'll create a real rivalary with ODU, FXU, UTEP, or Marshall? That's not a slight against those schools, it's just that there's no real rivalries that can be formed. They're too far away. You don't interact with their fans on a daily basis.

I do believe we could create a rivalry with any of those schools. I truly believe we had a rivalry with Hawaii and Fresno and Nevada. Sure they didn't bring a ton of fans to Ruston, but they got our fans interested. Those were can't miss games for us. Building rivalries with teams in the east is harder because we don't play as much.

Great point. When LA Tech was in the WAC we played Fresno St, Hawaii and Nevada all the time. However, here in CUSA, LA Tech rarely plays anyone from the east in football other than WKU & MTSU. We've never played Charlotte, and we've only played ODU & FAU once each. I still say it's a crime that LA Tech doesn't get to play Marshall in football. The only time LA Tech has played Marshall in football was during the 2014 CUSA championship game, when LA Tech played without 6 starters, who were suspended for academic reasons. And that was still probably CUSA's best championship game in many years.

I despise that headline.

I think it is much more a case of "If we knew then, what we know now".

The six team expansion, three of the eight voting schools left. Would the remaining five have voted the same way knowing ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa were leaving? Probably not.

Far more importantly though there have been some HUGE changes.

When the six team expansion took place, the powers that be had agreed in principle to a playoff but what it would look like was unknown. There was still a lot of push to simply select #1 and #2 post-bowls to play a single game.

The economic model was not established. Even when it was established, it ended up changing as the $12 million maximum base per conference was the first version, the G5 schools then voted to change that to $10 million and poured the extra into the performance pool.

The changing direction of TV was not fully apparent just yet either.

A more accurate article would be.

"Changing athletic situation poses questions"

The primary question being, "What is the best way to maximize net income?" Is it becoming more compact? Is it coordinating with one or more other conferences for a joint television package? Would it make better sense to eliminate some or all crossover games and replace those with inter-conference games scheduled jointly with someone else?

Does it even make sense for leagues like the Sun Belt and CUSA to pay to rent offices and hire fairly large staffs when they could merge their administrative functions into a single office while remaining two different conferences? Or maybe outsource most of the league office work to someone like SEC, Big XII or ACC and only employ a commissioner?

And I would also say that today isn't the day to solve the TV issue given that ESPN is in the process of trying to purchase the Fox Regionals because two years from now we may find ourselves in a situation where ESPN is taking content that normally is parked on ESPN3 and distributing it regionally via the ESPN Regional Networks they buy from Fox.

It would be very useful to know what is going on there.

The writer implies that CUSA botched its moves. I would say that the real issue is the world changed around CUSA AFTER the realignment decisions were made and those changes MIGHT be best addressed by realignment but I think there are options to innovate.

(12-06-2017 10:55 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Just give me the Western Division and add Arky State and ULL. I hate ULL but would much rather play another game in state that have to drive to Bowling Green or Boca. A 9 team Conference with no Championship game and 4 or 5 regional bowls and I am set. Hell we already watch our games on the internet why the hell bother trying to please anybody else but ourselves.

What you really want is the old Gulf States conference, or Southland Conference.

(12-06-2017 11:53 AM)DETLTU Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 11:07 AM)EagNBran Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 10:04 AM)DETLTU Wrote:  I still think this is a terrible idea. What we need is time to develop a rivalry with some of the schools in the conference. We don't have 50 years of playing each other to draw from like some conferences. I honestly miss playing games against some of the WAC teams we shared the conference with the longest. Boise, Nevada, Fresno, Hawaii. I would love to play some of those teams again before they are forgotten by Tech fans.

Give this configuration time together and the fan interest will grow. FAU and FIU both having successful seasons this year and the game actually meaning something was a big step. Do that a few times and the fans will treat that game as important and can't miss. Even cross division rivalries can be developed.

Do you ever believe that you'll create a real rivalary with ODU, FXU, UTEP, or Marshall? That's not a slight against those schools, it's just that there's no real rivalries that can be formed. They're too far away. You don't interact with their fans on a daily basis.

I do believe we could create a rivalry with any of those schools. I truly believe we had a rivalry with Hawaii and Fresno and Nevada. Sure they didn't bring a ton of fans to Ruston, but they got our fans interested. Those were can't miss games for us. Building rivalries with teams in the east is harder because we don't play as much. ODU is off to a good start because they seem to have our number across multiple sports. WKU is already becoming a rival because we have faced each other so many times with a lot on the line lately. I don't interact with fans of any schools except LSU and Alabama on a daily basis and I doubt a conference with them is in the cards.

AState fans travel in good numbers to ULM. Now ask an A-State fan who they MOST want to beat? Answer is ULL or App. Now we don't travel many to either and they don't travel to us in any significant numbers and part of that is ESPN having a tendency to make those weeknight games but A-State fans travel to Monroe because it is the only easy travel road game and for fans in Central Arkansas it's nearly as close as traveling to Jonesboro so people just go into the season expecting to make that trip.

That doesn't make it a big rivalry, its just easy travel.

Rivalries require games to have some stakes. USC and Notre Dame is rivalry because the game tends to be critical to the post-season dreams of the teams. Now Cal and Stanford is a rivalry and until lately rarely had any impact on the league race but those fans live on top of each other. Not a few hours down the road, they are working in the same office.

(12-06-2017 12:31 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I despise that headline.

I think it is much more a case of "If we knew then, what we know now".

The six team expansion, three of the eight voting schools left. Would the remaining five have voted the same way knowing ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa were leaving? Probably not.

Far more importantly though there have been some HUGE changes.

When the six team expansion took place, the powers that be had agreed in principle to a playoff but what it would look like was unknown. There was still a lot of push to simply select #1 and #2 post-bowls to play a single game.

The economic model was not established. Even when it was established, it ended up changing as the $12 million maximum base per conference was the first version, the G5 schools then voted to change that to $10 million and poured the extra into the performance pool.

The changing direction of TV was not fully apparent just yet either.

A more accurate article would be.

"Changing athletic situation poses questions"

The primary question being, "What is the best way to maximize net income?" Is it becoming more compact? Is it coordinating with one or more other conferences for a joint television package? Would it make better sense to eliminate some or all crossover games and replace those with inter-conference games scheduled jointly with someone else?

Does it even make sense for leagues like the Sun Belt and CUSA to pay to rent offices and hire fairly large staffs when they could merge their administrative functions into a single office while remaining two different conferences? Or maybe outsource most of the league office work to someone like SEC, Big XII or ACC and only employ a commissioner?

And I would also say that today isn't the day to solve the TV issue given that ESPN is in the process of trying to purchase the Fox Regionals because two years from now we may find ourselves in a situation where ESPN is taking content that normally is parked on ESPN3 and distributing it regionally via the ESPN Regional Networks they buy from Fox.

It would be very useful to know what is going on there.

The writer implies that CUSA botched its moves. I would say that the real issue is the world changed around CUSA AFTER the realignment decisions were made and those changes MIGHT be best addressed by realignment but I think there are options to innovate.

seriously impressed with your out of the box thinking. Ever think about a job as a Commish?

All of this talk of who's a rival and fans not interested I want to point something out....

S. Miss since the year 2000 (not counting 2017) has played 94 home games

Would it surprise anyone if 3 of the 7 S, Miss games in that span vs ECU was in the bottom 24 attended games (3,23,24)
Would it surprise anyone if 2 out of the 3 games vs Tech was in the bottom 15 games (9,15)
Would it surprise anyone if 2 of the bottom 10 came against UAB (1, 10)
Would it surprise anyone if 2 of the bottom 20 came against Marshall (11,20)
Would it surprise anyone if 2 of the top 4 came vs FCS schools...the other 2 Miss St and Neb.
Would it surprise anyone if only 2 S. MISS games vs the current CUSA was higher than vs ODU #27..Marshall #16, UAB #26 (TOTAL 94 GAMES) Only 2 of the 7 S. Miss home games vs Memphis is higher than ODU

Before a S. Miss fan goes off I have this info at my fingertips...if I had Techs or ODU or anyone else I would used those

Below is S. Miss lowest 25 attendance games and top 30. For those of you complaining about the limited number of games on espn today. You will notice not a lot on espn for S. Miss not even in those good old days. Mostly games vs P-5

Tossed into this mix eventually might be a few longtime under-performing P5 schools. When things get really tight, don't think it's impossible that some of biggest P5 names won't push others out just to keep their share of the pie.

(12-06-2017 12:57 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 12:31 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I despise that headline.

I think it is much more a case of "If we knew then, what we know now".

The six team expansion, three of the eight voting schools left. Would the remaining five have voted the same way knowing ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa were leaving? Probably not.

Far more importantly though there have been some HUGE changes.

When the six team expansion took place, the powers that be had agreed in principle to a playoff but what it would look like was unknown. There was still a lot of push to simply select #1 and #2 post-bowls to play a single game.

The economic model was not established. Even when it was established, it ended up changing as the $12 million maximum base per conference was the first version, the G5 schools then voted to change that to $10 million and poured the extra into the performance pool.

The changing direction of TV was not fully apparent just yet either.

A more accurate article would be.

"Changing athletic situation poses questions"

The primary question being, "What is the best way to maximize net income?" Is it becoming more compact? Is it coordinating with one or more other conferences for a joint television package? Would it make better sense to eliminate some or all crossover games and replace those with inter-conference games scheduled jointly with someone else?

Does it even make sense for leagues like the Sun Belt and CUSA to pay to rent offices and hire fairly large staffs when they could merge their administrative functions into a single office while remaining two different conferences? Or maybe outsource most of the league office work to someone like SEC, Big XII or ACC and only employ a commissioner?

And I would also say that today isn't the day to solve the TV issue given that ESPN is in the process of trying to purchase the Fox Regionals because two years from now we may find ourselves in a situation where ESPN is taking content that normally is parked on ESPN3 and distributing it regionally via the ESPN Regional Networks they buy from Fox.

It would be very useful to know what is going on there.

The writer implies that CUSA botched its moves. I would say that the real issue is the world changed around CUSA AFTER the realignment decisions were made and those changes MIGHT be best addressed by realignment but I think there are options to innovate.

seriously impressed with your out of the box thinking. Ever think about a job as a Commish?

Having ten to 14 university presidents as my boss? Gig doesn't pay enough and that's before the fan emails about the referees are even factored in.

(12-06-2017 12:31 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I despise that headline.

I think it is much more a case of "If we knew then, what we know now".

The six team expansion, three of the eight voting schools left. Would the remaining five have voted the same way knowing ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa were leaving? Probably not.

Far more importantly though there have been some HUGE changes.

When the six team expansion took place, the powers that be had agreed in principle to a playoff but what it would look like was unknown. There was still a lot of push to simply select #1 and #2 post-bowls to play a single game.

The economic model was not established. Even when it was established, it ended up changing as the $12 million maximum base per conference was the first version, the G5 schools then voted to change that to $10 million and poured the extra into the performance pool.

The changing direction of TV was not fully apparent just yet either.

A more accurate article would be.

"Changing athletic situation poses questions"

The primary question being, "What is the best way to maximize net income?" Is it becoming more compact? Is it coordinating with one or more other conferences for a joint television package? Would it make better sense to eliminate some or all crossover games and replace those with inter-conference games scheduled jointly with someone else?

Does it even make sense for leagues like the Sun Belt and CUSA to pay to rent offices and hire fairly large staffs when they could merge their administrative functions into a single office while remaining two different conferences? Or maybe outsource most of the league office work to someone like SEC, Big XII or ACC and only employ a commissioner?

And I would also say that today isn't the day to solve the TV issue given that ESPN is in the process of trying to purchase the Fox Regionals because two years from now we may find ourselves in a situation where ESPN is taking content that normally is parked on ESPN3 and distributing it regionally via the ESPN Regional Networks they buy from Fox.

It would be very useful to know what is going on there.

The writer implies that CUSA botched its moves. I would say that the real issue is the world changed around CUSA AFTER the realignment decisions were made and those changes MIGHT be best addressed by realignment but I think there are options to innovate.

Excellent post. I would prefer the idea of some cross conference scheduling agreement before complete realignment.

Quote:Does it even make sense for leagues like the Sun Belt and CUSA to pay to rent offices and hire fairly large staffs when they could merge their administrative functions into a single office while remaining two different conferences? Or maybe outsource most of the league office work to someone like SEC, Big XII or ACC and only employ a commissioner?

I wonder what those costs are for C-USA and the Belch? Anyone ever take a look?