Ok so I'm hearing a lot of talk that the Sun Belt is better than C-USA even with MTSU leaving. I just wanted to do a comparison of the teams here and see what you think:

Sun Belt:
Ark St.
FAU
Ga St.
Louisiana
ULM
USA
Troy
Tx St.
WKU
(Insert two more FCS teams here)

C-USA:
Southern Miss
Marshall
Tulsa
UTEP
UAB
Rice
La Tech
UTSA
FIU
UNT
ODU
Charlotte
MTSU

Ok so how do you want to compare the teams? Am I forgetting anyone? Also, there is a good chance FAU/WKU will be on the C-USA side here soon.

I just think on the field, in the classroom, and with a TV deal, C-USA is superior. This is why Sun Belt teams are leaving the Sun Belt to join C-USA.

The point of this thread is for a healthy debate. Let's hear it.

too soon.

The "SBC is better then C-USA" talk is all about on the field this past season.

USM was 0-11, Memphis sucked ass, Tulane sucked ass, UAb sucks ass. TSU beat Houston, ECU was mediocre, ULM beat ArKansas, MTSU beat Ga Tech, WKU beat Kentucky.

If you go by name, C-USA wins, more recognizable names to the average fan, if you go by this past seasons football record, SBC was just better, that is the truth.

I honestly dont think it matters that much if you are in SBC or CUSA at this point.

(11-28-2012 12:23 PM)Fish Wrote:  Ok so I'm hearing a lot of talk that the Sun Belt is better than C-USA even with MTSU leaving. I just wanted to do a comparison of the teams here and see what you think:

Sun Belt:
Ark St.
FAU
Ga St.
Louisiana
ULM
USA
Troy
Tx St.
WKU
(Insert two more FCS teams here)

C-USA:
Southern Miss
Marshall
Tulsa
UTEP
UAB
Rice
La Tech
UTSA
FIU
UNT
ODU
Charlotte
MTSU

Ok so how do you want to compare the teams? Am I forgetting anyone? Also, there is a good chance FAU/WKU will be on the C-USA side here soon.

I just think on the field, in the classroom, and with a TV deal, C-USA is superior. This is why Sun Belt teams are leaving the Sun Belt to join C-USA.

The point of this thread is for a healthy debate. Let's hear it.

How about the Belt beat CUSA'a ass without help from "Little Sister of the WEAK" (FIU)

(11-28-2012 12:29 PM)GEAGLESJAG Wrote:  How about the Belt beat CUSA'a ass without help from "Little Sister of the WEAK" (FIU)

You are correct, however, we would like to thank USA for rolling over like a little girl.

How about you having some reading comprehension and try to debate on facts and merit without hurling dumb comments? BTW, USA lost to FIU very recently.


As for the debate, I will only muster that I hate all these changes and uprootings, and the change of behavior it brings in some fans in these boards. At the end of the day, each school ends up doing what they feel is in their best interests. To those leaving, good luck....and to those that end up staying, the best of luck as well. For the most part, this conference has been great to all of us.

(11-28-2012 12:28 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  I honestly dont think it matters that much if you are in SBC or CUSA at this point.

Agreed.

Though I'll say I liked SBC alot more with MT in it than without them and if stAte, or WKU jumps....

(11-28-2012 12:28 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  I honestly dont think it matters that much if you are in SBC or CUSA at this point.

This.

It's all about frustration for the fans. That is why we all react, and this will end badly for college football as a whole as fans become disenfranchised, confused and tired of this money grab.

When rivalries end due to this mess, it becomes a problem for fans. We no longer have:

Texas-Texas A&M
Michigan-ND
UAb-Memphis
MTSU-WKU
ECU-USM

If you don't think that is a bid deal, ask their fans. This will only get worse before it is over.

(11-28-2012 12:26 PM)Usajags Wrote:  The "SBC is better then C-USA" talk is all about on the field this past season.

USM was 0-11, Memphis sucked ass, Tulane sucked ass, UAb sucks ass. TSU beat Houston, ECU was mediocre, ULM beat ArKansas, MTSU beat Ga Tech, WKU beat Kentucky.

If you go by name, C-USA wins, more recognizable names to the average fan, if you go by this past seasons football record, SBC was just better, that is the truth.

This year's results notwithstanding, CUSA is the more attractive option. Academics, TV deal, bowl commitments, market size, whatever else.

Not to get into a pissing contest on your board but the fact remains, of the 12 or however many schools in the last year who had the option of landing in CUSA or the Belt, every damn one of them chose CUSA.

It's not my intent hate on the Belt, but there it is.

(11-28-2012 12:56 PM)Usajags Wrote:  This will only get worse before it is over.

On that, we agree.

(11-28-2012 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(11-28-2012 12:26 PM)Usajags Wrote:  The "SBC is better then C-USA" talk is all about on the field this past season.

USM was 0-11, Memphis sucked ass, Tulane sucked ass, UAb sucks ass. TSU beat Houston, ECU was mediocre, ULM beat ArKansas, MTSU beat Ga Tech, WKU beat Kentucky.

If you go by name, C-USA wins, more recognizable names to the average fan, if you go by this past seasons football record, SBC was just better, that is the truth.

This year's results notwithstanding, CUSA is the more attractive option. Academics, TV deal, bowl commitments, market size, whatever else.

Not to get into a pissing contest on your board but the fact remains, of the 12 or however many schools in the last year who had the option of landing in CUSA or the Belt, every damn one of them chose CUSA.

It's not my intent hate on the Belt, but there it is.

I'm not talking about money, the name on the helmets, the name on the conference, or the market you are located in. I'm not talking anything past this current football season. On the field, SBC>C-USA. It just was.

Sure, but that wasn't the conversation as I understood it.

MT-UAB will be a good rivalry in the coming years, and I imagine that MTSU will still try to keep the series going with WKU, though it might be hard since we're ("we" meaning "the other school has decided to") restarting the Vandy series too.