http://conferenceusa.cstv.com/genrel/082010aab.html

(08-20-2010 01:44 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  http://conferenceusa.cstv.com/genrel/082010aab.html

So.... the MWC and CUSA are discussing mutual bowl tie-ins? There's nothing in that release that indicates anything more substantial than that.

(08-20-2010 01:51 PM)Vobserver Wrote:  

(08-20-2010 01:44 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  http://conferenceusa.cstv.com/genrel/082010aab.html

So.... the MWC and CUSA are discussing mutual bowl tie-ins? There's nothing in that release that indicates anything more substantial than that.

You're exactly right.
But some are seeing movement with that agreement. I'm not one of them.

BYU sure has been quiet since the Indy announcement possiblity.

Any guess on if they go with the Indy/WCC deal or stay with the MWC and try to build it into a AQ with Boisie/TCU?

Yeah, all I get from this is that the two conferences are talking about working together to strategically do things that benefit them as two non-AQ's (pretty much like I suggested with regard to the SBC and the MAC). Such an alliance will make scheduling easier, open up recruiting areas, and create better packages for television (which opens up the door for other bowl opportunities).

No the key point in the release is the word television.

I've argued this before, the non-AQ are stupid for doing their own deals.

Bowl stuff? No big deal, the leagues fund most of their bowls anyway.

The BCS thing will be laughed out, but bless their hearts for trying.

The important thing is the talk of joint TV. MWC hasn't liked what ESPN was willing to do and the truth is that CSTV significantly over-paid to the get them and used money from venture capitalists to get the rights in order to have something to show. They've since pocketed their profit and sold to CBS who isn't likely to pay like that again. CUSA is going to be lucky to hold their dollars. By negotiating jointly they control a big enough block of weeknight games and Saturday off-channel games to have a chance to get a decent deal.

better than sitting around with our thumb up our @$$ like the Belt...

be PROactive...not REactive

And once again Drew posts provactive and inaccurate statements.

(08-20-2010 04:13 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  better than sitting around with our thumb up our @$$ like the Belt...

be PROactive...not REactive

You mean waiting quietly because there is little chance of us being affected other than to move up the food chain because the WAC folds?

(08-20-2010 04:32 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  And once again Drew posts provactive and inaccurate statements.

it's kinda my thing...

(08-20-2010 04:35 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-20-2010 04:32 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  And once again Drew posts provactive and inaccurate statements.

it's kinda my thing...

what? being a d*ck?

(08-20-2010 04:42 PM)zeebart21 Wrote:  

(08-20-2010 04:35 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-20-2010 04:32 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  And once again Drew posts provactive and inaccurate statements.

it's kinda my thing...

what? being a d*ck?

(08-20-2010 04:53 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-20-2010 04:42 PM)zeebart21 Wrote:  

(08-20-2010 04:35 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-20-2010 04:32 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  And once again Drew posts provactive and inaccurate statements.

it's kinda my thing...

what? being a d*ck?

Kid, I actually like you... Unfortunately, now...I hate myself for admitting that...

At least he admits it...kind of makes it better in a way.

That's why his rep is so high, he knows his material and his audience. If it was accurate it wouldn't be funny.

Okay so if the MWC and CUSA have a "playoff" how will that work? CUSA won't have a conference title game? You aren't allowed to have more than 1 conf title game. If there's a tie with say ECU and Houston for 1st they have some retarded formula(BCS) figure who should play TCU? Then the winner plays the BE champ in the (keep those 2 away from the big boy table) BCS game?

The MWC doesn't need this they've been to BCS bowls on their own CUSA hasn't. They should just hope for the 7th AQ and if it falls though then go for this. I like the Idea of the MWC going to 12 adding Houston or UTEP and then MTSU or FAU go to CUSA. If MWC doesn't get a BCS game the 2 conf winners play in a bowl game.

(08-20-2010 07:14 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  That's why his rep is so high, he knows his material and his audience. If it was accurate it wouldn't be funny.

Okay so if the MWC and CUSA have a "playoff" how will that work? CUSA won't have a conference title game? You aren't allowed to have more than 1 conf title game. If there's a tie with say ECU and Houston for 1st they have some retarded formula(BCS) figure who should play TCU? Then the winner plays the BE champ in the (keep those 2 away from the big boy table) BCS game?

The MWC doesn't need this they've been to BCS bowls on their own CUSA hasn't. They should just hope for the 7th AQ and if it falls though then go for this. I like the Idea of the MWC going to 12 adding Houston or UTEP and then MTSU or FAU go to CUSA. If MWC doesn't get a BCS game the 2 conf winners play in a bowl game.

The whole combining thing is mainly for TV purposes and the concept of a super conference wont happen. itd get laughed at by the rest of the leagues, which would have to approve alot of this anyway

CUSA doesnt make the MWC much better. The CUSA champions the last few years have been very average, and their eward has often been losing to a mid level SEC school in the Liberty Bowl

CUSA getting a chance to play for a BCS bid?? ok seriously... the CUSA champion can't even beat the 6-6/7-5 SEC teams they play in the Liberty Bowl each year.

CUSA has some good teams, but c'mon...