UCF never belonged in the MAC anyways, I don't even count them. That situation was like ours was with Idaho and NMSU a while back, a short-term marriage of convieniance.

(03-16-2013 08:09 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(03-16-2013 08:02 PM)Burn the Horse Wrote:  

(03-16-2013 11:46 AM)galojah Wrote:  No insider info, but I feel confident that if the C-USA definitively were to tell WKU they are not getting in, WKU would pursue the MAC.

Wow, it's good for WKU that you don't make their AD decisions. Leave the Sun Belt for the MAC?!! What's next, is Alabama going to leave the SEC for the Big East? Hmmm...?

The MAC is a better conference than the Sun Belt. I don't want WKU in it, but it's better.

This years mens tourney final which is played at the Cleveland Cavs arena had over 12K in attendance. Wouldn't mind seeing WKU hoops playing in front of that crowd.

(03-16-2013 08:02 PM)Burn the Horse Wrote:  

(03-16-2013 11:46 AM)galojah Wrote:  No insider info, but I feel confident that if the C-USA definitively were to tell WKU they are not getting in, WKU would pursue the MAC.

Wow, it's good for WKU that you don't make their AD decisions. Leave the Sun Belt for the MAC?!! What's next, is Alabama going to leave the SEC for the Big East? Hmmm...?

That's a bit of hyperbole. The Sun Belt and MAC are close, an argument could be made for either side, a fan of either side arguing they have the better conference is not a ridiculous statement.

The SEC and Big East? If the gap between the Sun Belt and MAC were as large as the gap between the SEC and Big East, no one would be leaving the Belt, in fact we'd probably be at least the sixth best conference. The Sun Belt is closer to the Big East than than the Big East is to the SEC.

As far as basketball goes as a WKU fan I would rather walk through knee deep snow in Ohio than to play in the SBC of the near future. Football is a different matter. For the next few years the MAC will probably put a little space in between their self and the SBC and widen a gap the SBC had closed over the past 2 to 3 years.

I know there's potential in the schools added and schools talked about being added but...
I believe it will take a lot longer for them to step up to the big boys table than most of their fans believe. No matter how bad UNT, the FU'S been and the MUTS falling off before this past season. All 4 already went through the growing pains and at one time each played at the top of the SBC.

If they new schools coming in win it will be because the SBC is weaker not those teams are better than who left.

USA
GSU
TX ST
APPY
GSU

Five schools that range in 2 to zero years of FBS football experience come 2014. It's about like 10 years ago and the SBC was just getting it's feet wet. Probably wont take another 10 years to catch up but it won't be over night either.

So looking at it that way yes the MAC is a better conference when all 5 of those schools start playing football in the SBC. Basketball will be like the Big 10 playing the SBC this year, That's about as big of a gap.

With that I want WKU to play football in a southern conference. If WKU doesn't move to CUSA the best of both worlds for WKU would be football in the SBC and basketball in the MVC.

(03-17-2013 02:32 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  As far as basketball goes as a WKU fan I would rather walk through knee deep snow in Ohio than to play in the SBC of the near future. Football is a different matter. For the next few years the MAC will probably put a little space in between their self and the SBC and widen a gap the SBC had closed over the past 2 to 3 years.

I know there's potential in the schools added and schools talked about being added but...
I believe it will take a lot longer for them to step up to the big boys table than most of their fans believe. No matter how bad UNT, the FU'S been and the MUTS falling off before this past season. All 4 already went through the growing pains and at one time each played at the top of the SBC.

If they new schools coming in win it will be because the SBC is weaker not those teams are better than who left.

USA
GSU
TX ST
APPY
GSU

Five schools that range in 2 to zero years of FBS football experience come 2014. It's about like 10 years ago and the SBC was just getting it's feet wet. Probably wont take another 10 years to catch up but it won't be over night either.

So looking at it that way yes the MAC is a better conference when all 5 of those schools start playing football in the SBC. Basketball will be like the Big 10 playing the SBC this year, That's about as big of a gap.

With that I want WKU to play football in a southern conference. If WKU doesn't move to CUSA the best of both worlds for WKU would be football in the SBC and basketball in the MVC.

"Basketball will be like the Big 10 playing the SBC this year". What exactly does that mean? I don't see basketball being much worse, if at all, compared to the MAC next year. Are you actually comparing the MAC to the Big Ten? There isn't one MAC team that the top 2/3 of the conference (the Sun Belt) could play and a win would be considered that big of an upset. If you're talking about losing MTSU in that comment, they have to replace 5 of their top 6 starters.

I think you'll be in CUSA in two years.

(03-17-2013 03:33 AM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 02:32 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  As far as basketball goes as a WKU fan I would rather walk through knee deep snow in Ohio than to play in the SBC of the near future. Football is a different matter. For the next few years the MAC will probably put a little space in between their self and the SBC and widen a gap the SBC had closed over the past 2 to 3 years.

I know there's potential in the schools added and schools talked about being added but...
I believe it will take a lot longer for them to step up to the big boys table than most of their fans believe. No matter how bad UNT, the FU'S been and the MUTS falling off before this past season. All 4 already went through the growing pains and at one time each played at the top of the SBC.

If they new schools coming in win it will be because the SBC is weaker not those teams are better than who left.

USA
GSU
TX ST
APPY
GSU

Five schools that range in 2 to zero years of FBS football experience come 2014. It's about like 10 years ago and the SBC was just getting it's feet wet. Probably wont take another 10 years to catch up but it won't be over night either.

So looking at it that way yes the MAC is a better conference when all 5 of those schools start playing football in the SBC. Basketball will be like the Big 10 playing the SBC this year, That's about as big of a gap.

With that I want WKU to play football in a southern conference. If WKU doesn't move to CUSA the best of both worlds for WKU would be football in the SBC and basketball in the MVC.

"Basketball will be like the Big 10 playing the SBC this year". What exactly does that mean? I don't see basketball being much worse, if at all, compared to the MAC next year. Are you actually comparing the MAC to the Big Ten? There isn't one MAC team that the top 2/3 of the conference (the Sun Belt) could play and a win would be considered that big of an upset. If you're talking about losing MTSU in that comment, they have to replace 5 of their top 6 starters.

I think you'll be in CUSA in two years.

The MAC isn't a bad basketball conference, nothing special either and no I'm not comparing them to the Big10...

I'm saying with the addition of the incoming schools (I believe UTA will lose their top 3 scorers) and the exit of the MUTS, UNT and even FIU now is a huge loss for the SBC..MUTS and UNT actually care about basketball amd willing to spend money on their program...the new comers care about football first, second, third...spring football, then basketball.

So what I'm saying is that while we might have played a few of the teams in the Big10 competitive overall there's a wide wide wide gap in talent. I don't see but a few SBC teams that would even be competitive with the MAC.. Maybe a little bit of hyper bold on my part but I honestly can't see it being very good for the SBC schools that actually care about basketball.

USA
ULL
ARKST
UALR

---------
Troy
ULM
GSU
GSU
AST
TXST
UTA

On paper that looks ugly and a 16 seed every year especially with a 20 game conference schedule. That's what you will get because other wise you have 7 schools that can't fill their OOC schedule without D2 or pay check games

(03-17-2013 04:03 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 03:33 AM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 02:32 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  As far as basketball goes as a WKU fan I would rather walk through knee deep snow in Ohio than to play in the SBC of the near future. Football is a different matter. For the next few years the MAC will probably put a little space in between their self and the SBC and widen a gap the SBC had closed over the past 2 to 3 years.

I know there's potential in the schools added and schools talked about being added but...
I believe it will take a lot longer for them to step up to the big boys table than most of their fans believe. No matter how bad UNT, the FU'S been and the MUTS falling off before this past season. All 4 already went through the growing pains and at one time each played at the top of the SBC.

If they new schools coming in win it will be because the SBC is weaker not those teams are better than who left.

USA
GSU
TX ST
APPY
GSU

Five schools that range in 2 to zero years of FBS football experience come 2014. It's about like 10 years ago and the SBC was just getting it's feet wet. Probably wont take another 10 years to catch up but it won't be over night either.

So looking at it that way yes the MAC is a better conference when all 5 of those schools start playing football in the SBC. Basketball will be like the Big 10 playing the SBC this year, That's about as big of a gap.

With that I want WKU to play football in a southern conference. If WKU doesn't move to CUSA the best of both worlds for WKU would be football in the SBC and basketball in the MVC.

"Basketball will be like the Big 10 playing the SBC this year". What exactly does that mean? I don't see basketball being much worse, if at all, compared to the MAC next year. Are you actually comparing the MAC to the Big Ten? There isn't one MAC team that the top 2/3 of the conference (the Sun Belt) could play and a win would be considered that big of an upset. If you're talking about losing MTSU in that comment, they have to replace 5 of their top 6 starters.

I think you'll be in CUSA in two years.

The MAC isn't a bad basketball conference, nothing special either and no I'm not comparing them to the Big10...

I'm saying with the addition of the incoming schools (I believe UTA will lose their top 3 scorers) and the exit of the MUTS, UNT and even FIU now is a huge loss for the SBC..MUTS and UNT actually care about basketball amd willing to spend money on their program...the new comers care about football first, second, third...spring football, then basketball.

So what I'm saying is that while we might have played a few of the teams in the Big10 competitive overall there's a wide wide wide gap in talent. I just don't see but a few SBC teams that would even be competitive with the MAC.. Maybe a little bit of hyper bold on my part but I honestly can't see it being very good for the SBC schools that actually care about basketball.

USA
ULL
ARKST
UALR

---------
Troy
ULM
GSU
GSU
AST
TXST
UTA

On paper that looks ugly and a 16 seed every year especially with a 20 game conference schedule. That's what you will get because other wise you have 7 schools that can't fill their OOC schedule without D2 or pay check games

Does Western Kentucky play any paycheck games? I know South does play one or two a year (We beat Florida State this past season in a payday game at their place). Its not a bad thing to play a few games against top competition and USA and WKU will only get those on the road for the most part. You're acting like Georgia State's basketball schedule is like a typical SWAC schedule playing all its non conference games on the road. I'd be shocked if there's more than one d2 school on any Sun Belt schedule or if WKU's non conference schedule looked that different than Texas-Arlington's next season.

UTA and Troy just spent millions on beautiful new arenas, nicer than WKU's. In that sense, UTA ($70 million arena opened last year) spends far more than WKU on basketball. Georgia State has the potential to be quite competitive next season. And you're assuming New Mexico State isn't joining the Sun Belt for basketball too.

If you're upset with a 15 or 16 seed in the NCAA's try not losing 10 conference games. In any league. 10 conference losses in CUSA will earn maybe a 14 seed as conference tournament champion.

(03-17-2013 04:30 AM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 04:03 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 03:33 AM)AlaIllTex Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 02:32 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  As far as basketball goes as a WKU fan I would rather walk through knee deep snow in Ohio than to play in the SBC of the near future. Football is a different matter. For the next few years the MAC will probably put a little space in between their self and the SBC and widen a gap the SBC had closed over the past 2 to 3 years.

I know there's potential in the schools added and schools talked about being added but...
I believe it will take a lot longer for them to step up to the big boys table than most of their fans believe. No matter how bad UNT, the FU'S been and the MUTS falling off before this past season. All 4 already went through the growing pains and at one time each played at the top of the SBC.

If they new schools coming in win it will be because the SBC is weaker not those teams are better than who left.

USA
GSU
TX ST
APPY
GSU

Five schools that range in 2 to zero years of FBS football experience come 2014. It's about like 10 years ago and the SBC was just getting it's feet wet. Probably wont take another 10 years to catch up but it won't be over night either.

So looking at it that way yes the MAC is a better conference when all 5 of those schools start playing football in the SBC. Basketball will be like the Big 10 playing the SBC this year, That's about as big of a gap.

With that I want WKU to play football in a southern conference. If WKU doesn't move to CUSA the best of both worlds for WKU would be football in the SBC and basketball in the MVC.

"Basketball will be like the Big 10 playing the SBC this year". What exactly does that mean? I don't see basketball being much worse, if at all, compared to the MAC next year. Are you actually comparing the MAC to the Big Ten? There isn't one MAC team that the top 2/3 of the conference (the Sun Belt) could play and a win would be considered that big of an upset. If you're talking about losing MTSU in that comment, they have to replace 5 of their top 6 starters.

I think you'll be in CUSA in two years.

The MAC isn't a bad basketball conference, nothing special either and no I'm not comparing them to the Big10...

I'm saying with the addition of the incoming schools (I believe UTA will lose their top 3 scorers) and the exit of the MUTS, UNT and even FIU now is a huge loss for the SBC..MUTS and UNT actually care about basketball amd willing to spend money on their program...the new comers care about football first, second, third...spring football, then basketball.

So what I'm saying is that while we might have played a few of the teams in the Big10 competitive overall there's a wide wide wide gap in talent. I just don't see but a few SBC teams that would even be competitive with the MAC.. Maybe a little bit of hyper bold on my part but I honestly can't see it being very good for the SBC schools that actually care about basketball.

USA
ULL
ARKST
UALR

---------
Troy
ULM
GSU
GSU
AST
TXST
UTA

On paper that looks ugly and a 16 seed every year especially with a 20 game conference schedule. That's what you will get because other wise you have 7 schools that can't fill their OOC schedule without D2 or pay check games

Does Western Kentucky play any paycheck games? I know South does play one or two a year (We beat Florida State this past season in a payday game at their place). Its not a bad thing to play a few games against top competition and USA and WKU will only get those on the road for the most part. You're acting like Georgia State's basketball schedule is like a typical SWAC schedule playing all its non conference games on the road. I'd be shocked if there's more than one d2 school on any Sun Belt schedule or if WKU's non conference schedule looked that different than Texas-Arlington's next season.

UTA and Troy just spent millions on beautiful new arenas, nicer than WKU's. In that sense, UTA ($70 million arena opened last year) spends far more than WKU on basketball. Georgia State has the potential to be quite competitive next season. And you're assuming New Mexico State isn't joining the Sun Belt for basketball too.

If you're upset with a 15 or 16 seed in the NCAA's try not losing 10 conference games. In any league. 10 conference losses in CUSA will earn maybe a 14 seed as conference tournament champion.

I will start my last post on this as saying you are full of crap. I actually went to the WKU game at Troy and while it's a nice arena it doesn't compare to Diddle.

Unless UTA increased their budget since 2011 they only spent 9.3 mil TOTAL on all sports. WKU has a 23 mil budget Get your facts together before playing with me...I will.


And I guess you are having a problem understanding what you read...

there's a reason for the lack of D2 games and the 4 or 5 money games are down to 2 or 3...it's called a freaking 20 game conference schedule. Yes that helps the schools that can't afford to buy home games or get their own home and away...IT DOESN'T HELP THE TOP SCHOOLS IN THE CONFERENCE. I put that in caps so maybe you can understand that.

It's TWO less chances to play decent OOC games and I don't care where GSU plays there games they have a bad program. Had 2 winning seasons in the last 10 years. Maybe you don't understand that either...TWO FREAKING SEASONS ABOVE .500 in 10 years, Finished with a RPI under 200 1 time in 6 years.

It's not about the schedule it's about winning games but I guess you can't wrap your head around that part. Let me clue you in on something else...the avg home winning % is 71% so when a school plays a D2 game that doesn't count on the RPI that's a HOME GAME that they should have a 71% chance of winning. You build the conference RPI by winning OOC games..

Not by exchanging wins for a check or a D2 game and WKU did play a D2 game this year. Had a reschedule late and couldn't fill it. No money game on the WKU schedule.

h&h with
VCU
S.Miss
UoL
S.ILL
MurraySt
Played these 3 @home without a return
WCU
A.Peay
IUPUI

With a 20 game conference schedule that leaves 8 OOC games unless you play a tourney. If you play 2 money games that 2 losses 71% of the time and since it's a "money game" I would think that would increase the odds of losing

Again you must have a reading comprehension problem...

No where was I complaining about WKU's seed. What I said was with the added schools the SBC would just about always be a 16 seed.

Can the added schools improve? Sure they can but you also must ask why haven't they already done it. Surely you don't think the SBC is going to boost their recruiting? Surely you don't think their basketball budget will increase along with the huge increase they will need in football.

Now run along I've waste more time than I should have trying to explain something that a USA fan shouldn't need explaining.

I forgot this part. Here's UTA's first 8 games and you will see 6 away 2 home game. I don't know for sure but I'm assuming 2 paycheck games. To their credit they won 5 of 8



Here's their 2011 schedule and just in case you can't understand the little basketballs means D2




2010 SCHEDULE



2009 SCHEDULE and just in case you don't know the basketballs means D2 and the @ means road games




Hey you still hanging around????? You there? I wouldn't blame you if you're not

2008 was a little better...NOT 11 out of their first 12 either road or D2 games

If you had used pie charts instead of graphs you would have totally dominated that argument. Without them you left it in the hands of the committee...
Pie charts are like cowbell-Need more!

I read the first paragraph or so. I am not to take to read all that. Yes, a twenty game conference schedule is absurd. So is losing ten games in it and expecting anything but a 16 seed. Or expecting more with a losing record.

I caught something about UTA's budget being $10 million or so, which could be better, that you appeared to compare to WKU's which plays football. I'd think FBS football costs at least $10 million a year in expenses especially when one considers that you have to add womens sports to match what you're spending on mens sports because of Title IX. Again, I dont have an hour to read all that so I wasn't able to fact check so if you addressed football, apologies.

You claim the Sun Belt additions (and half the conference) are a bunch of losers who aren't willing to spend enough to be competitive and I simply presented several of examples of massive expenditures by two members (off the top of my head) you claimed weren't spending on basketball.

I don't see how you can claim that a WKU-less Sun Belt is a 16 seed league in most years. You're assuming an awful lot.

Ala, did you have to quote his entire post, charts and all?

(03-17-2013 04:41 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  Ala, did you have to quote his entire post, charts and all?

I agree. I fixed it.

(03-17-2013 04:49 PM)Burn the Horse Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 04:41 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  Ala, did you have to quote his entire post, charts and all?

I agree. I fixed it.

Thank you. That was my bad.

I do not think that if the MAC somehow took a Sunbelt team that it would be a raid as much as some school really wanting out (to me a raid would imply that the MAC is hunting for a school and convinces them to join whereas I think this would be a situation where a school would come to the MAC).

With that out of the way I am going to add some MAC info without insulting the Sun Belt (perhaps some Belt fans could learn to do the same). For instance some here seem to be insinuating that the MAC has played at the highest level for as long as it has and has not been competitive. That is not the case as when the MAC participated in the Tangerine Bowl we were beating SEC teams in their own backyard. The MAC was very competitive (we were getting top 20 rankings and finishes back then) up through to about when they created Division 1AA. Traditionally several MAC schools were ahead of Cincy in the football pecking order in the state of Ohio with the order being OSU, Miami, Toledo/Bowling Green (depending on decade I would say), and then Cincy. I think that one year downgrade really hurt the MAC (along with that Oklahoma case that allowed the bigger schools to more fully flex their monetary muscles). The MAC clawed its way back in and the conference decided that it will be Division 1a and it would do whatever it took to stay there. Sadly the MAC did not invest in their football programs in the 80s through the mid 90s and it showed.

The MAC invited Marshal back (after kicking them out decades earlier for cheating) and the program at the time was not your typical FCS squad and they kicked our butts and got a MAC teams first ranking in a while. This seemed to wake up the MAC and since then we have had top 25 teams or nearly top 25 teams every year.

Not sure why anybody says the MAC has done nothing. I know a few like to talk about how poor most of our historic bowl games were but one has to remember a key fact which is we are not in the south. We are not the big name schools in our states and we do not benefit from geography that many of you do. Think about it when a bowl back then wanted to choose a team you wanted schools that would bring a lot of fans. Since we are not the big name schools we would not get auto fan contribution of the sort an Ohio State would get so that leaves the geography issue. For many southern bowls taking a southern team meant that even if the school was not large you could still expect a fair number of fans and local interest to get people to come to the game. MAC schools were far enough away that they would not be household names (so lack of local casual interst at the bowl site) and they could not reasonably expect a large number of MAC fans to make the game.

As for losing teams Marshal and UCF both left desiring southern conferences. UCF nobody minded since they were never really going to be a long term school though Marshal's leaving was a bit bitter. CUSA did try to take Toledo and Miami and they said no (though they may have said yes if CUSA invited more MAC teams but that made those schools unpalatable).

In basketball the MAC has been a multibid league though sadly recently this has been a bad period for MAC basketball.

The MAC opted to not take WKU before though now that they are an established FBS team they may change their minds if WKU came and asked to join. As a MAC fan WKU would be an acceptable team to add due to their basketball history and they are in a contiguous state. As an institution they seem to be similar in profile to EMU which is not preferable but is certainly not a deal breaker (and WKU is obviously in a much better situation than EMU). One knock against them is that I seem them as being similar to most Marshal fans in desiring a southern league and so would leave just for that reason alone.

Now as for teams down in Arkansas and Louisiana would not be preferable only because of geography. I think you REALLY need to be in a league based closer to where you are now rather than a midwestern one. I think you have an excellent future ahead competitively but one of the key ways that the MAC can make FBS work is that we can keep costs down and be an incubator for great coaches (you might be surprised how many good coaches come out of the MAC). Now oddly you would give us an interesting scheduling option. If we play our conference home games up North early in the year (where we are warm but not as hot) and down south later (where you are warm but not too hot) we get best of both worlds in terms of weather.

As I have said before. If a Sun Belt team ends up in the MAC it will be because the Sun Belt school initiated contact.