(12-31-2012 07:34 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  I'm not sure western is a lock anymore. I don't think we are fighting to bring them in as a partner. Odu and former WKU AD says they are not a fit. I think it is an uphill battle for them.

That screams butthurt.

Nothing screams butthurt except your pet goat after your romantic weekends. It's simply pointing out that people are assuming we want you in because you're a rival and close by and I don't think that was the case even before bowl traveshamockery. We are looking for ways to get an edge on wku not ways to keep us on equal footing. Sorry if you don't like it but it is what is. The real shame is your former AD who knows you best doesn't want you.

(01-01-2013 02:13 AM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Nothing screams butthurt except your pet goat after your romantic weekends. It's simply pointing out that people are assuming we want you in because you're a rival and close by and I don't think that was the case even before bowl traveshamockery. We are looking for ways to get an edge on wku not ways to keep us on equal footing. Sorry if you don't like it but it is what is. The real shame is your former AD who knows you best doesn't want you.

Personal attacks? You mad, bro? Feel free to bring up the goat. I'm not a Frat boy. I'd bring up bad things out of MTSU's past, but I'll stay classy.

As for equal footing, you're taking a step down. Enjoy further mediocrity in C-USA. It suits you.

Stepping down
Never cease to be amazed at what people in denial will tell themselves.

(01-01-2013 02:34 AM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Stepping down
Never cease to be amazed at what people in denial will tell themselves.

I believe the SBC is 12-5 vs CUSA over the last two seasons.

Hope you have a Happy New Year. :-)

(12-31-2012 07:34 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  I'm not sure western is a lock anymore. I don't think we are fighting to bring them in as a partner. Odu and former WKU AD says they are not a fit. I think it is an uphill battle for them.

A couple things.

1. Former WKU AD Selig said "They do not fit the profile of what Conference USA has been going for recently." He did not say WKU was not a fit which would prevent WKU from getting a CUSA invite. He just said that it didn't fit the profile of what CUSA had been going for recently....i.e. big markets. Big difference. He also said "Greatest selling points are investment in athletics, community support of athletics in attendance, quality facilities, extremely competitive – both now and historically. There are a lot of selling points"

2. I and probably most WKU fans never believed MT was "fighting to bring" WKU in as a partner with MT into CUSA. That's message board and fan speculation.

3. i agree. WKU is not a lock. As I've stated here and elsewhere on numerous occasions, I don't believe WKU is going to be in CUSA. Like above, that's all fan and message board speculation.

I don not see how Conference USA is a step up, especially after the Big East gets through with it. Big East will not just go away. They will call up whoever they want from Conference USA because no team will turn them down and risk the other teams saying yes. When that happens Conf USA will bring in Sun Belt Teams. In the end MTSU, North Texas, FIU, FAU will all be in a rebranded Sun Belt. The Sun Belt will then call up teams from FCS.

MTSU did not go to Conf USA because it was a step up. They went because they didn't want to be left behind.

(01-01-2013 12:23 PM)WKUTopFlight Wrote:  I don not see how Conference USA is a step up, especially after the Big East gets through with it. Big East will not just go away. They will call up whoever they want from Conference USA because no team will turn them down and risk the other teams saying yes. When that happens Conf USA will bring in Sun Belt Teams. In the end MTSU, North Texas, FIU, FAU will all be in a rebranded Sun Belt. The Sun Belt will then call up teams from FCS.

MTSU did not go to Conf USA because it was a step up. They went because they didn't want to be left behind.

It won't be a step up, but it will be a step in the right direction. The Sun Belt will be FCS call ups, CUSA will be the old Belt sans a few teams. That is where the difference is.

I suspect that unless certain schools can do a tremendous sales job the new CUSA will look something like this.

FIU
FAU
Ga State
MTSU
WKU
USA
stAte
La Tech
Louisiana
UNT
UTSA or Texas State
Rice

Looks like a lot like the Sun Belt circa 2010. Just with more of a Texas footprint and the addition and subtraction of a few programs.

Cajun fans get it. I never said it was a huge step up. I think it is a step forward for our program but if you're hoping wku turns down an invite to cusa more power to you. I doubt it but sounds good for now I'm sure. My point is that it is not a step down no matter how you want to slice it. Being left behind on the other hand could be a huge step back.

(01-01-2013 02:11 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Cajun fans get it. I never said it was a huge step up. I think it is a step forward for our program but if you're hoping wku turns down an invite to cusa more power to you. I doubt it but sounds good for now I'm sure. My point is that it is not a step down no matter how you want to slice it. Being left behind on the other hand could be a huge step back.

I never said WKU should turn down an invite, if they do then they would be in the sun belt by name only. The step forward is more of perception. In the end, if you end up in a conference with all but a couple of teams you left behind, then how can that be a step forward. In reality you are just changing the name of your conference.

If CUSA does lose teams (USM, Marshall etc.) to the Big East, CUSA would be crazy to expand to 12 programs. Also, its not a lock that they will come after SBC programs. The only SBC program I truly see being taken is Ga. State, for the market. Other than that, I see CUSA going after JMU and Delaware.

(01-01-2013 11:51 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(12-31-2012 07:34 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  I'm not sure western is a lock anymore. I don't think we are fighting to bring them in as a partner. Odu and former WKU AD says they are not a fit. I think it is an uphill battle for them.

A couple things.

1. Former WKU AD Selig said "They do not fit the profile of what Conference USA has been going for recently." He did not say WKU was not a fit which would prevent WKU from getting a CUSA invite. He just said that it didn't fit the profile of what CUSA had been going for recently....i.e. big markets. Big difference. He also said "Greatest selling points are investment in athletics, community support of athletics in attendance, quality facilities, extremely competitive – both now and historically. There are a lot of selling points"

2. I and probably most WKU fans never believed MT was "fighting to bring" WKU in as a partner with MT into CUSA. That's message board and fan speculation.

3. i agree. WKU is not a lock. As I've stated here and elsewhere on numerous occasions, I don't believe WKU is going to be in CUSA. Like above, that's all fan and message board speculation.

I don't think anybody is a "lock" for anything. I can sit here and make a valid case for several schools and none of them are head and shoulders above the others.

(01-01-2013 11:30 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 02:34 AM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Stepping down
Never cease to be amazed at what people in denial will tell themselves.

I believe the SBC is 12-5 vs CUSA over the last two seasons.

Hope you have a Happy New Year. :-)

Let's look at that 12-5 number.

2011 Arkansas State 47 Memphis(departing) 3
2012 Arkansas State 33 Memphis(departing) 28
2011 FAU(departing) 38 UAB 35
2011 FIU(departing) 17 UCF(departing) 10
2011 Marshall 20 FIU(departing) 10
2012 UCF(departing) 33 FIU 20(departing)
2012 Louisiana 41 Tulane(departing) 13
2012 ULM 63 Tulane(departing) 10
2011 MT(departing) 38 Memphis(departing) 31
2012 MT(departing) 48 Memphis(departing) 30
2011 Houston(departing) 48 North Texas(departing) 23
2011 Tulsa 41 North Texas(departing) 24
2012 Houston(departing) 44 North Texas(departing) 21
2011 Troy 24 UAB 23
2012 Troy 39 UAB 29
2012 WKU 42 USM 17

I only came up with 16 games, maybe there's a 17th one I missed, but of the 16 games I came up with, only 3 were played between schools that are remaining in the same conference they were in when the games were played.

Granted the Sun Belt is 3-0 in those games, but if you want to try and use two bad Troy teams beating two bad UAB teams and a good WKU team beating a horrid Southern Miss team, be my guest, but the head to head record will hold no water with anyone paying attention.

There is absolutely no denying that the Sun Belt was better on the field than C-USA in 2012, but there's also no denying that it was more than likely the best season in Sun Belt football history and one of the worst in C-USA football history. So you're trying to base your claim that moving to C-USA is a step down on a bunch of head to head match ups that don't properly reflect the changing memberships of both conferences and one conference having it's best season in it's history happening to line up with another conference having one of it's worst seasons in history. The Sun Belt is improving, so I won't call what happened in 2012 an anomaly, the Sun Belt very well may have another fantastic season in 2013, but it's unrealistic to expect the same or better as 2012. I would be much more likely to call C-USA's 2012 an anomaly, or at least major aspects of it, like USM who went winless for the first time in their history and had their last losing season since 1993.

The decision makers at MT are not stupid, we wouldn't be making this move if it wasn't a step up. Is it anything more than a slight step up in football? That remains to be seen, but if we have the choice of surrounding ourselves with schools where $20 million is about the bottom of the pack when it comes to budget, or being in a conference where $20 million is top half, we'll take our chances with the former. WKU, who is the only other Sun Belt school who spends like MT and puts a focus on Olympic sports to the extent that MT deoes, would absolutely make the exact same decision if given the opportunity.

I was happy staying in the Sun Belt, the move to C-USA is not what it once was, but to call it a step down from the Sun Belt is a product of nothing more than partaking in copious amounts kool aid drinking.

(01-01-2013 03:09 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 11:30 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 02:34 AM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Stepping down
Never cease to be amazed at what people in denial will tell themselves.

I believe the SBC is 12-5 vs CUSA over the last two seasons.

Hope you have a Happy New Year. :-)

Let's look at that 12-5 number.

2011 Arkansas State 47 Memphis(departing) 3
2012 Arkansas State 33 Memphis(departing) 28
2011 FAU(departing) 38 UAB 35
2011 FIU(departing) 17 UCF(departing) 10
2011 Marshall 20 FIU(departing) 10
2012 UCF(departing) 33 FIU 20(departing)
2012 Louisiana 41 Tulane(departing) 13
2012 ULM 63 Tulane(departing) 10
2011 MT(departing) 38 Memphis(departing) 31
2012 MT(departing) 48 Memphis(departing) 30
2011 Houston(departing) 48 North Texas(departing) 23
2011 Tulsa 41 North Texas(departing) 24
2012 Houston(departing) 44 North Texas(departing) 21
2011 Troy 24 UAB 23
2012 Troy 39 UAB 29
2012 WKU 42 USM 17

I only came up with 16 games, maybe there's a 17th one I missed, but of the 16 games I came up with, only 3 were played between schools that are remaining in the same conference they were in when the games were played.

Granted the Sun Belt is 3-0 in those games, but if you want to try and use two bad Troy teams beating two bad UAB teams and a good WKU team beating a horrid Southern Miss team, be my guest, but the head to head record will hold no water with anyone paying attention.

There is absolutely no denying that the Sun Belt was better on the field than C-USA in 2012, but there's also no denying that it was more than likely the best season in Sun Belt football history and one of the worst in C-USA football history. So you're trying to base your claim that moving to C-USA is a step down on a bunch of head to head match ups that don't properly reflect the changing memberships of both conferences and one conference having it's best season in it's history happening to line up with another conference having one of it's worst seasons in history. The Sun Belt is improving, so I won't call what happened in 2012 an anomaly, the Sun Belt very well may have another fantastic season in 2013, but it's unrealistic to expect the same or better as 2012. I would be much more likely to call C-USA's 2012 an anomaly, or at least major aspects of it, like USM who went winless for the first time in their history and had their last losing season since 1993.

The decision makers at MT are not stupid, we wouldn't be making this move if it wasn't a step up. Is it anything more than a slight step up in football? That remains to be seen, but if we have the choice of surrounding ourselves with schools where $20 million is about the bottom of the pack when it comes to budget, or being in a conference where $20 million is top half, we'll take our chances with the former. WKU, who is the only other Sun Belt school who spends like MT and puts a focus on Olympic sports to the extent that MT deoes, would absolutely make the exact same decision if given the opportunity.

I was happy staying in the Sun Belt, the move to C-USA is not what it once was, but to call it a step down from the Sun Belt is a product of nothing more than partaking in copious amounts kool aid drinking.

It seems that many on this board are correlating the SBC being better in football the last couple of years with this being a step down (in reference to your transition).

Obviously, these people need to think a little harder. Little known fact...quality of football is not the only thing considered in a move.

I would not be upset if my school made a decision to join a conference that would, in return, bring my school more money. Money which can translate into better facilities, coaches, additions to the campus, etc...

Ultimately all this, on paper now, should bring about a higher quality of football being played on the field. I love the SBC, but I'm not so blindly loyal to a label that I'm going to **** all over the fans of schools who have decided to better themselves.

That is pretty ******* stupid and a huge douche move. And I know all about douche moves.

(01-01-2013 03:53 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 03:09 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 11:30 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 02:34 AM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Stepping down
Never cease to be amazed at what people in denial will tell themselves.

I believe the SBC is 12-5 vs CUSA over the last two seasons.

Hope you have a Happy New Year. :-)

Let's look at that 12-5 number.

2011 Arkansas State 47 Memphis(departing) 3
2012 Arkansas State 33 Memphis(departing) 28
2011 FAU(departing) 38 UAB 35
2011 FIU(departing) 17 UCF(departing) 10
2011 Marshall 20 FIU(departing) 10
2012 UCF(departing) 33 FIU 20(departing)
2012 Louisiana 41 Tulane(departing) 13
2012 ULM 63 Tulane(departing) 10
2011 MT(departing) 38 Memphis(departing) 31
2012 MT(departing) 48 Memphis(departing) 30
2011 Houston(departing) 48 North Texas(departing) 23
2011 Tulsa 41 North Texas(departing) 24
2012 Houston(departing) 44 North Texas(departing) 21
2011 Troy 24 UAB 23
2012 Troy 39 UAB 29
2012 WKU 42 USM 17

I only came up with 16 games, maybe there's a 17th one I missed, but of the 16 games I came up with, only 3 were played between schools that are remaining in the same conference they were in when the games were played.

Granted the Sun Belt is 3-0 in those games, but if you want to try and use two bad Troy teams beating two bad UAB teams and a good WKU team beating a horrid Southern Miss team, be my guest, but the head to head record will hold no water with anyone paying attention.

There is absolutely no denying that the Sun Belt was better on the field than C-USA in 2012, but there's also no denying that it was more than likely the best season in Sun Belt football history and one of the worst in C-USA football history. So you're trying to base your claim that moving to C-USA is a step down on a bunch of head to head match ups that don't properly reflect the changing memberships of both conferences and one conference having it's best season in it's history happening to line up with another conference having one of it's worst seasons in history. The Sun Belt is improving, so I won't call what happened in 2012 an anomaly, the Sun Belt very well may have another fantastic season in 2013, but it's unrealistic to expect the same or better as 2012. I would be much more likely to call C-USA's 2012 an anomaly, or at least major aspects of it, like USM who went winless for the first time in their history and had their last losing season since 1993.

The decision makers at MT are not stupid, we wouldn't be making this move if it wasn't a step up. Is it anything more than a slight step up in football? That remains to be seen, but if we have the choice of surrounding ourselves with schools where $20 million is about the bottom of the pack when it comes to budget, or being in a conference where $20 million is top half, we'll take our chances with the former. WKU, who is the only other Sun Belt school who spends like MT and puts a focus on Olympic sports to the extent that MT deoes, would absolutely make the exact same decision if given the opportunity.

I was happy staying in the Sun Belt, the move to C-USA is not what it once was, but to call it a step down from the Sun Belt is a product of nothing more than partaking in copious amounts kool aid drinking.

It seems that many on this board are correlating the SBC being better in football the last couple of years with this being a step down (in reference to your transition).

Obviously, these people need to think a little harder. Little known fact...quality of football is not the only thing considered in a move.

I would not be upset if my school made a decision to join a conference that would, in return, bring my school more money. Money which can translate into better facilities, coaches, additions to the campus, etc...

Ultimately all this, on paper now, should bring about a higher quality of football being played on the field. I love the SBC, but I'm not so blindly loyal to a label that I'm going to **** all over the fans of schools who have decided to better themselves.

That is pretty ******* stupid and a huge ****** move. And I know all about ****** moves.

Agreed! One year of success against CUSA on the football field does not and has not changed the perception of the Sun Belt outside of those that post on the board. CUSA is still considered the better conference by athletes and media around the country.

(01-01-2013 04:10 PM)CrazyCajun Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 03:53 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 03:09 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 11:30 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 02:34 AM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Stepping down
Never cease to be amazed at what people in denial will tell themselves.

I believe the SBC is 12-5 vs CUSA over the last two seasons.

Hope you have a Happy New Year. :-)

Let's look at that 12-5 number.

2011 Arkansas State 47 Memphis(departing) 3
2012 Arkansas State 33 Memphis(departing) 28
2011 FAU(departing) 38 UAB 35
2011 FIU(departing) 17 UCF(departing) 10
2011 Marshall 20 FIU(departing) 10
2012 UCF(departing) 33 FIU 20(departing)
2012 Louisiana 41 Tulane(departing) 13
2012 ULM 63 Tulane(departing) 10
2011 MT(departing) 38 Memphis(departing) 31
2012 MT(departing) 48 Memphis(departing) 30
2011 Houston(departing) 48 North Texas(departing) 23
2011 Tulsa 41 North Texas(departing) 24
2012 Houston(departing) 44 North Texas(departing) 21
2011 Troy 24 UAB 23
2012 Troy 39 UAB 29
2012 WKU 42 USM 17

I only came up with 16 games, maybe there's a 17th one I missed, but of the 16 games I came up with, only 3 were played between schools that are remaining in the same conference they were in when the games were played.

Granted the Sun Belt is 3-0 in those games, but if you want to try and use two bad Troy teams beating two bad UAB teams and a good WKU team beating a horrid Southern Miss team, be my guest, but the head to head record will hold no water with anyone paying attention.

There is absolutely no denying that the Sun Belt was better on the field than C-USA in 2012, but there's also no denying that it was more than likely the best season in Sun Belt football history and one of the worst in C-USA football history. So you're trying to base your claim that moving to C-USA is a step down on a bunch of head to head match ups that don't properly reflect the changing memberships of both conferences and one conference having it's best season in it's history happening to line up with another conference having one of it's worst seasons in history. The Sun Belt is improving, so I won't call what happened in 2012 an anomaly, the Sun Belt very well may have another fantastic season in 2013, but it's unrealistic to expect the same or better as 2012. I would be much more likely to call C-USA's 2012 an anomaly, or at least major aspects of it, like USM who went winless for the first time in their history and had their last losing season since 1993.

The decision makers at MT are not stupid, we wouldn't be making this move if it wasn't a step up. Is it anything more than a slight step up in football? That remains to be seen, but if we have the choice of surrounding ourselves with schools where $20 million is about the bottom of the pack when it comes to budget, or being in a conference where $20 million is top half, we'll take our chances with the former. WKU, who is the only other Sun Belt school who spends like MT and puts a focus on Olympic sports to the extent that MT deoes, would absolutely make the exact same decision if given the opportunity.

I was happy staying in the Sun Belt, the move to C-USA is not what it once was, but to call it a step down from the Sun Belt is a product of nothing more than partaking in copious amounts kool aid drinking.

It seems that many on this board are correlating the SBC being better in football the last couple of years with this being a step down (in reference to your transition).

Obviously, these people need to think a little harder. Little known fact...quality of football is not the only thing considered in a move.

I would not be upset if my school made a decision to join a conference that would, in return, bring my school more money. Money which can translate into better facilities, coaches, additions to the campus, etc...

Ultimately all this, on paper now, should bring about a higher quality of football being played on the field. I love the SBC, but I'm not so blindly loyal to a label that I'm going to **** all over the fans of schools who have decided to better themselves.

That is pretty ******* stupid and a huge ****** move. And I know all about ****** moves.

Agreed! One year of success against CUSA on the football field does not and has not changed the perception of the Sun Belt outside of those that post on the board. CUSA is still considered the better conference by athletes and media around the country.

I believe most have missed the point in the realignment discussion. Example CUSA - $1.6MM in TV revenue per team.
Sun Belt - $0 in TV revenue per team.

Now what conference do you want to be in??

(01-02-2013 05:26 PM)Lafitte the Pirate Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 04:10 PM)CrazyCajun Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 03:53 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 03:09 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 11:30 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  I believe the SBC is 12-5 vs CUSA over the last two seasons.

Hope you have a Happy New Year. :-)

Let's look at that 12-5 number.

2011 Arkansas State 47 Memphis(departing) 3
2012 Arkansas State 33 Memphis(departing) 28
2011 FAU(departing) 38 UAB 35
2011 FIU(departing) 17 UCF(departing) 10
2011 Marshall 20 FIU(departing) 10
2012 UCF(departing) 33 FIU 20(departing)
2012 Louisiana 41 Tulane(departing) 13
2012 ULM 63 Tulane(departing) 10
2011 MT(departing) 38 Memphis(departing) 31
2012 MT(departing) 48 Memphis(departing) 30
2011 Houston(departing) 48 North Texas(departing) 23
2011 Tulsa 41 North Texas(departing) 24
2012 Houston(departing) 44 North Texas(departing) 21
2011 Troy 24 UAB 23
2012 Troy 39 UAB 29
2012 WKU 42 USM 17

I only came up with 16 games, maybe there's a 17th one I missed, but of the 16 games I came up with, only 3 were played between schools that are remaining in the same conference they were in when the games were played.

Granted the Sun Belt is 3-0 in those games, but if you want to try and use two bad Troy teams beating two bad UAB teams and a good WKU team beating a horrid Southern Miss team, be my guest, but the head to head record will hold no water with anyone paying attention.

There is absolutely no denying that the Sun Belt was better on the field than C-USA in 2012, but there's also no denying that it was more than likely the best season in Sun Belt football history and one of the worst in C-USA football history. So you're trying to base your claim that moving to C-USA is a step down on a bunch of head to head match ups that don't properly reflect the changing memberships of both conferences and one conference having it's best season in it's history happening to line up with another conference having one of it's worst seasons in history. The Sun Belt is improving, so I won't call what happened in 2012 an anomaly, the Sun Belt very well may have another fantastic season in 2013, but it's unrealistic to expect the same or better as 2012. I would be much more likely to call C-USA's 2012 an anomaly, or at least major aspects of it, like USM who went winless for the first time in their history and had their last losing season since 1993.

The decision makers at MT are not stupid, we wouldn't be making this move if it wasn't a step up. Is it anything more than a slight step up in football? That remains to be seen, but if we have the choice of surrounding ourselves with schools where $20 million is about the bottom of the pack when it comes to budget, or being in a conference where $20 million is top half, we'll take our chances with the former. WKU, who is the only other Sun Belt school who spends like MT and puts a focus on Olympic sports to the extent that MT deoes, would absolutely make the exact same decision if given the opportunity.

I was happy staying in the Sun Belt, the move to C-USA is not what it once was, but to call it a step down from the Sun Belt is a product of nothing more than partaking in copious amounts kool aid drinking.

It seems that many on this board are correlating the SBC being better in football the last couple of years with this being a step down (in reference to your transition).

Obviously, these people need to think a little harder. Little known fact...quality of football is not the only thing considered in a move.

I would not be upset if my school made a decision to join a conference that would, in return, bring my school more money. Money which can translate into better facilities, coaches, additions to the campus, etc...

Ultimately all this, on paper now, should bring about a higher quality of football being played on the field. I love the SBC, but I'm not so blindly loyal to a label that I'm going to **** all over the fans of schools who have decided to better themselves.

That is pretty ******* stupid and a huge ****** move. And I know all about ****** moves.

Agreed! One year of success against CUSA on the football field does not and has not changed the perception of the Sun Belt outside of those that post on the board. CUSA is still considered the better conference by athletes and media around the country.

I believe most have missed the point in the realignment discussion. Example CUSA - $1.6MM in TV revenue per team.
Sun Belt - $0 in TV revenue per team.

Now what conference do you want to be in??

It is my understanding that value is not net.

$1.6 max is also not much in comparison to total revenue.

(01-01-2013 01:36 PM)geauxcajuns Wrote:  

(01-01-2013 12:23 PM)WKUTopFlight Wrote:  I don not see how Conference USA is a step up, especially after the Big East gets through with it. Big East will not just go away. They will call up whoever they want from Conference USA because no team will turn them down and risk the other teams saying yes. When that happens Conf USA will bring in Sun Belt Teams. In the end MTSU, North Texas, FIU, FAU will all be in a rebranded Sun Belt. The Sun Belt will then call up teams from FCS.

MTSU did not go to Conf USA because it was a step up. They went because they didn't want to be left behind.

It won't be a step up, but it will be a step in the right direction. The Sun Belt will be FCS call ups, CUSA will be the old Belt sans a few teams. That is where the difference is.

I suspect that unless certain schools can do a tremendous sales job the new CUSA will look something like this.

FIU
FAU
Ga State
MTSU
WKU
USA
stAte
La Tech
Louisiana
UNT
UTSA or Texas State
Rice

Looks like a lot like the Sun Belt circa 2010. Just with more of a Texas footprint and the addition and subtraction of a few programs.

Looks about right to me with La Tech maybe looking at the MWC.

(01-02-2013 05:26 PM)Lafitte the Pirate Wrote:  I believe most have missed the point in the realignment discussion. Example CUSA - $1.6MM in TV revenue per team.
Sun Belt - $0 in TV revenue per team.

Now what conference do you want to be in??

Our resident conference office shill has convinced some posters that it is funny money, but no matter how much Baghdad Bobfan tells them there is nothing to see here, there is a significant money gap. Even if some fans don't get it their presidents and ADs do. One or two strong years in football changes nothing.

(01-02-2013 07:44 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 05:26 PM)Lafitte the Pirate Wrote:  I believe most have missed the point in the realignment discussion. Example CUSA - $1.6MM in TV revenue per team.
Sun Belt - $0 in TV revenue per team.

Now what conference do you want to be in??

Our resident conference office shill has convinced some posters that it is funny money, but no matter how much Baghdad Bobfan tells them there is nothing to see here, there is a significant money gap. Even if some fans don't get it their presidents and ADs do. One or two strong years in football changes nothing.

You're right about that. MTSU will go right back to mediocrity and it'll just get worse with 2 more FBS schools in Georgia.

FIU, FAU, North Texas, and MTSU leaving the Sun Belt for CUSA might just instantly make the SBC better in the short term and the conference will be pleasantly surprised with App and Ga Southern.
I hope we can get some games with MTSU. Their fans used to cry harder than any others when the Eagles gave them a regular beat down.