The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(01-07-2013 11:24 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  Everyone keeps saying lateral move.

How is it a lateral move when what is left is inferior. CUSA is replacing teams with schools I didn't even know had D1 athletic programs (UTSA)

I didn't it was a lateral move. I said it was looking more and more like one daily.

Is where we are great? Of cours not. Is what the Big East becoming a significant to profound improvement?

Well...

CUSA currently has 4 Top 100 teams in RPI.
We're losing 1 of them (Memphis)... maybe Tulsa if rumors are true.
We're adding 3 teams currently in Top 100 (UNCC, La Tech, MTSU).
Yes, it would be nice to be in a conference with Cincy, Memphis, UCONN, and Temple for basketball. Worth millions, though? We can't know how long those teams will be in the nBE.

Will our football attendance be significantly lower with UTSA and MTSU than it was for Houston and Tulane?

(01-07-2013 10:57 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Perhaps "committed to C-USA" means we can't spend millions just to go to the Little East. Maybe if it was a significant step up but I just don't see it that way any more. We're all on the outside looking in.

I agree it's not a step up to go to the Big East at this point. It's a lateral move. They are trying to hang on to the positions they have established.

But staying in the new C-USA is not status quo for UAB. It's a continuation of free falling. UAB's free falling started back with the massive exodus of C-USA teams to the Big East around 2005. This is stage two of the free fall.

It's all an exercise in evolution, where the fittest athletic programs improve their standings, or at least remain at the same level. The weakest athletic programs are lowered into weaker conferences with time, or just left behind in their current conference. I call it free falling.

I love UAB basketball. I started following UAB basketball in the mid 90s, when teams like Louisville, Cincinnati, and Marquette would come to town. That was big-time basketball. Now we are staring at teams like FAU, FIU, UTSA, and North Texas coming to The Bart. That's the reality of free falling. That is not big-time basketball.

This process of evolution is being driven by football. UAB football has been no friend to UAB athletics. It's failure to grow and be successful has cost UAB dearly.

Just for fun here are the current average RPI,s for each conference as it stands now.

Current CUSA - 145
New CUSA - 172
New Big East - 78

They are drawing their teams from 11th ranked CUSA.
CUSA is drawing their teams from 17th ranked Sun Belt

(01-07-2013 11:42 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  CUSA currently has 4 Top 100 teams in RPI.
We're losing 1 of them (Memphis)... maybe Tulsa if rumors are true.
We're adding 3 teams currently in Top 100 (UNCC, La Tech, MTSU).
Yes, it would be nice to be in a conference with Cincy, Memphis, UCONN, and Temple for basketball. Worth millions, though? We can't know how long those teams will be in the nBE.

Will our football attendance be significantly lower with UTSA and MTSU than it was for Houston and Tulane?

I would argue that games with MTSU would draw more fans than Houston and Tulane due to close proximity of MTSU.

(01-07-2013 11:48 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  Just for fun here are the current average RPI,s for each conference as it stands now.

Current CUSA - 145
New CUSA - 172
New Big East - 78

They are drawing their teams from 11th ranked CUSA.
CUSA is drawing their teams from 17th ranked Sun Belt

Yep.

Basketball-wise, UAB has to be appealing to better conferences. Unfortunately, football is driving this train, and it has no room for UAB football.

The Big East is not a lateral move. Quit saying that. It makes us all look stupid. It's just like the people who thought the Big East was closer to the ACC than C-USA and the MWC or the people who thought the Sun Belt was close to C-USA.(key word there is was) You guys can go on and on saying it, but it won't ever make it true. Half of our former conference is going there. Adding USF, Temple, UConn and Cincy to that group makes it better. Even if UConn and Cincy bolt, that league will still be better because they will backfill it with teams like Southern Miss and Tulsa. I wish Houston and SMU would head to the MWC and UAB, Marshall, Tulsa, USM, and two of the newcomers(with good basketball) would move into the Big East. That league would have me more excited than what we are currently looking at.

(01-07-2013 11:56 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  The Big East is not a lateral move. Quit saying that. It makes us all look stupid. It's just like the people who thought the Big East was closer to the ACC than C-USA and the MWC or the people who thought the Sun Belt was close to C-USA.(key word there is was) You guys can go on and on saying it, but it won't ever make it true. Half of our former conference is going there. Adding USF, Temple, UConn and Cincy to that group makes it better. Even if UConn and Cincy bolt, that league will still be better because they will backfill it with teams like Southern Miss and Tulsa. I wish Houston and SMU would head to the MWC and UAB, Marshall, Tulsa, USM, and two of the newcomers(with good basketball) would move into the Big East. That league would have me more excited than what we are currently looking at.

If the announcement came tomorrow, they would no longer say it.

(01-07-2013 12:01 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  If the announcement came tomorrow, they would no longer say it.

Exactly! Work with me people. I'm trying to pump sunshine. If we're gonna be stuck in C-USA forever I refuse to be miserable about it.

(01-07-2013 11:51 AM)uab278 Wrote:  

(01-07-2013 11:42 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  CUSA currently has 4 Top 100 teams in RPI.
We're losing 1 of them (Memphis)... maybe Tulsa if rumors are true.
We're adding 3 teams currently in Top 100 (UNCC, La Tech, MTSU).
Yes, it would be nice to be in a conference with Cincy, Memphis, UCONN, and Temple for basketball. Worth millions, though? We can't know how long those teams will be in the nBE.

Will our football attendance be significantly lower with UTSA and MTSU than it was for Houston and Tulane?

I would argue that games with MTSU would draw more fans than Houston and Tulane due to close proximity of MTSU.

Does it really matter? Whether we have 15,000 people at a game or 20,000, it really doesn't matter. It's still very subpar for D1 football.

When UAB football was starting up, it appeared to have great potential. Lack of consistent winning, and a proliferation of UAT fans in the area, at UAB (students and employees), and in the media has sucked the life out of UAB football. CGM is staring at the biggest challenge of his coaching career. Is he UAB's savior or not?

(01-07-2013 12:01 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  

(01-07-2013 11:56 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  The Big East is not a lateral move. Quit saying that. It makes us all look stupid. It's just like the people who thought the Big East was closer to the ACC than C-USA and the MWC or the people who thought the Sun Belt was close to C-USA.(key word there is was) You guys can go on and on saying it, but it won't ever make it true. Half of our former conference is going there. Adding USF, Temple, UConn and Cincy to that group makes it better. Even if UConn and Cincy bolt, that league will still be better because they will backfill it with teams like Southern Miss and Tulsa. I wish Houston and SMU would head to the MWC and UAB, Marshall, Tulsa, USM, and two of the newcomers(with good basketball) would move into the Big East. That league would have me more excited than what we are currently looking at.

If the announcement came tomorrow, they would no longer say it.

Probably, but it will be more to do with we're back where we were last year than that we've made some great stride.

If you're going to shut down UAB Football, it should be for a better reason than not getting in to the Big East.

(01-07-2013 10:33 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  What part of "devoted to the CUSA" do you not understand?

Tulsa president has taken the opposite approach and said they will do what ever is necessary to get out of CUSA.

Oh, I fully understood what AD Mackin was saying. I just chose not to believe it. I believe it now. Dang!

On shutting down UAB football, this is your e-slap.

You do understand that if you shut down football, we don't even get to stay in new CUSA, right?

You wanna talk free fall? Shut down the football program and you'll see what it looks like.

Look at it this way: Has anyone mentioned Troy in conference realignment?

Why is UAB never mentioned with so many others? To borrow a question from "Sesame Street" -- "How is one NOT like the others? UCF, USM, Tulsa, Memphis, UAB, USF, ECU." Which one is dominated by a "plantation minded BOT" rather than being the "Master of its own ship"?? The greatest damage the system BOT has done is not just its interference in coaching selection but the NATIONAL impression that UAB can't be dealt with as an "adult institution able to give and keep its word on its own". What mature girl wants to marry with a "mamma's boy" who can't have an independent thought that is not first run by his "momma" to see if she approves? Since that situation is not likely to change, what chance does UAB have of ever being seriously considered for a BCS-type conference?

If UAB dominates the new C-USA that might be enough to consistently draw a respectable crowd. All UAB can do now is win. Otherwise....

UAB as we are > The Big East + any positives that the Big East would offer us + the $10 million to move to whatever is left of the Big East.

(01-07-2013 12:36 PM)BirminghamBound Wrote:  If UAB dominates the new C-USA that might be enough to consistently draw a respectable crowd. All UAB can do now is win. Otherwise....

I have "wanted" UAB football to win every year since it began, but what chance do we have of becoming a CONSISTENT WINNER when our infrastructure is not competitive with our (now) former and present peers? Our coach made popular statements when he arrived about (#1) having the facilities already in place to win and (#2) having the needed quality of players to win right away. #2 became an instance of "coach speak" as the season ran its course and it is possible that #1 is headed for the same. This is NOT to find fault with the coach, who I believe can do the job, but with the school which can't provide the infrastructure to do any better. Our competitors are building "NEW" while the best we have done is "renovate" the old. How is that being "competitive"? IF the UAB administration is doing the best it can do, then we face doing what we have always done.