This ones a lil different and is (I guess) taken from a USA perspecitve.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/...ld_be.html

West Division: Tulsa, UTEP, Rice, North Texas, Arkansas State, Louisiana-Monroe and UALR;

Central: Western Kentucky, Middle Tennessee, South Alabama, Southern Miss, Tulane, Louisiana-Lafayette;

East: Marshall, East Carolina, Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Troy and UAB

Quote:A move to C-USA for South Alabama would in some ways be a lateral move, considering the current state of conference alignments and how those alignments could change in a matter of days.

If is lateral, then why's the author have a boner for the CUSA? It would be lateral at best. Stick with the SBC. Its getting there.

(02-10-2012 11:32 AM)WKUSledgeHammer Wrote:  

Quote:A move to C-USA for South Alabama would in some ways be a lateral move, considering the current state of conference alignments and how those alignments could change in a matter of days.

If is lateral, then why's the author have a boner for the CUSA? It would be lateral at best. Stick with the SBC. Its getting there.

The author is saying a pure move to the CUSA with no merger is lateral. He's telling Jag fans to push for a merger rather than pine for a CUSA invite.

(02-10-2012 11:35 AM)Tiguar Wrote:  

(02-10-2012 11:32 AM)WKUSledgeHammer Wrote:  

Quote:A move to C-USA for South Alabama would in some ways be a lateral move, considering the current state of conference alignments and how those alignments could change in a matter of days.

If is lateral, then why's the author have a boner for the CUSA? It would be lateral at best. Stick with the SBC. Its getting there.

The author is saying a pure move to the CUSA with no merger is lateral. He's telling Jag fans to push for a merger rather than pine for a CUSA invite.

A merger of sorts would be interesting, but I thought that's what they're doing with that mountain conference.

(02-10-2012 11:47 AM)WKUSledgeHammer Wrote:  

(02-10-2012 11:35 AM)Tiguar Wrote:  

(02-10-2012 11:32 AM)WKUSledgeHammer Wrote:  

Quote:A move to C-USA for South Alabama would in some ways be a lateral move, considering the current state of conference alignments and how those alignments could change in a matter of days.

If is lateral, then why's the author have a boner for the CUSA? It would be lateral at best. Stick with the SBC. Its getting there.

The author is saying a pure move to the CUSA with no merger is lateral. He's telling Jag fans to push for a merger rather than pine for a CUSA invite.

A merger of sorts would be interesting, but I thought that's what they're doing with that mountain conference.

They are. I think this is just Mr. Hick's politically correct way of saying the Belt has more potential than CUSA right now.

(02-10-2012 11:50 AM)Tiguar Wrote:  

(02-10-2012 11:47 AM)WKUSledgeHammer Wrote:  

(02-10-2012 11:35 AM)Tiguar Wrote:  

(02-10-2012 11:32 AM)WKUSledgeHammer Wrote:  

Quote:A move to C-USA for South Alabama would in some ways be a lateral move, considering the current state of conference alignments and how those alignments could change in a matter of days.

If is lateral, then why's the author have a boner for the CUSA? It would be lateral at best. Stick with the SBC. Its getting there.

The author is saying a pure move to the CUSA with no merger is lateral. He's telling Jag fans to push for a merger rather than pine for a CUSA invite.

A merger of sorts would be interesting, but I thought that's what they're doing with that mountain conference.

They are. I think this is just Mr. Hick's politically correct way of saying the Belt has more potential than CUSA right now.

Got ya.