(01-28-2014 03:41 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:52 AM)Buzz Lightyear Lite Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:15 AM)Hardcore Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:09 AM)Panthersville Wrote:  

(01-27-2014 10:26 PM)Check Yosef Wrote:  15 and 14 team conferences would hurt financially


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Drop NMSU, Mo State and JMU (IOW, just use the teams currently in the two conferences).

I'm all for it, and if the two conferences looked at how regional tightness leads to stability (see the MAC), it should be a no-brainer.....but it's never gonna happen.

Forgot La Tech

don't we all

CUSA didn't.

It was the only way to stop the incessant crying.

(01-28-2014 09:24 AM)Usajags Wrote:  It won't be another year or so before Mizzou starts complaining about the SEC travel. And these are the big guys in big conferences.

Why would Mizzou complain about the travel? Its not that much of difference going down to Texas than it is anywhere in the SEC.

(01-28-2014 05:14 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 03:41 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:52 AM)Buzz Lightyear Lite Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:15 AM)Hardcore Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:09 AM)Panthersville Wrote:  Drop NMSU, Mo State and JMU (IOW, just use the teams currently in the two conferences).

I'm all for it, and if the two conferences looked at how regional tightness leads to stability (see the MAC), it should be a no-brainer.....but it's never gonna happen.

Forgot La Tech

don't we all

CUSA didn't.

It was the only way to stop the incessant crying.

And it worked, good for them. Also coming off of having both of their major programs in the top 25 at some point helped I'm sure.

(01-28-2014 05:15 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:24 AM)Usajags Wrote:  It won't be another year or so before Mizzou starts complaining about the SEC travel. And these are the big guys in big conferences.

Why would Mizzou complain about the travel? Its not that much of difference going down to Texas than it is anywhere in the SEC.

Problem for Mizzou is fans, not the schools budget. All their conference division games are on the other side of the conference. They aren't in the division with A&M or ArKansas. They are in it with Florida and Georgia. Not exactly a weekend road trip. Got to remember, the fans are the ones that ultimately make the budgets of these schools. As their support goes down due to not being happy with the current situation, school budgets will start to suffer.

(01-28-2014 06:26 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 05:15 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:24 AM)Usajags Wrote:  It won't be another year or so before Mizzou starts complaining about the SEC travel. And these are the big guys in big conferences.

Why would Mizzou complain about the travel? Its not that much of difference going down to Texas than it is anywhere in the SEC.

Problem for Mizzou is fans, not the schools budget. All their conference division games are on the other side of the conference. They aren't in the division with A&M or ArKansas. They are in it with Florida and Georgia. Not exactly a weekend road trip. Got to remember, the fans are the ones that ultimately make the budgets of these schools. As their support goes down due to not being happy with the current situation, school budgets will start to suffer.

Their budget will be fine. Visitor travel is vastly overrated.

The reason for Mizzou being in the wrong half of the SEC lies in the state of Alabama. Both Bama and Auburn have ties to the East they will not abandon, and ties to the West they will not abandon so Missou was put in the wrong half of the conference. Auburn should have move to the East and everything would have been absolutely peachy keen for everybody.

LA Tech wants no part of ULM. I would imagine USM wants no part of USA. I look for the Belt to die in the next five years and CUSA to be a huge conference.

(01-28-2014 06:46 PM)Louisianafanrcajun90 Wrote:  LA Tech wants no part of ULM. I would imagine USM wants no part of USA. I look for the Belt to die in the next five years and CUSA to be a huge conference.

And then it will split just like the WAC did and there will be a whole new conference.

(01-28-2014 06:46 PM)Louisianafanrcajun90 Wrote:  LA Tech wants no part of ULM. I would imagine USM wants no part of USA. I look for the Belt to die in the next five years and CUSA to be a huge conference.

I don't see anything that drastic...only way that happens would be if several SBC Members decided to form their own league.

(01-28-2014 06:26 PM)Usajags Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 05:15 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:24 AM)Usajags Wrote:  It won't be another year or so before Mizzou starts complaining about the SEC travel. And these are the big guys in big conferences.

Why would Mizzou complain about the travel? Its not that much of difference going down to Texas than it is anywhere in the SEC.

Problem for Mizzou is fans, not the schools budget. All their conference division games are on the other side of the conference. They aren't in the division with A&M or ArKansas. They are in it with Florida and Georgia. Not exactly a weekend road trip. Got to remember, the fans are the ones that ultimately make the budgets of these schools. As their support goes down due to not being happy with the current situation, school budgets will start to suffer.

Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and Tennessee are close trips or at least the same distance or closer than going to Oklahoma. Not to mention Missourians travel to Tennessee for vacations a lot. Every airport in Missouri has flights to Atlanta. East division travel is fairly easy for Missouri fans. Not to mention Arkansas is now a yearly game.

(01-28-2014 08:28 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and Tennessee are close trips or at least the same distance or closer than going to Oklahoma. Not to mention Missourians travel to Tennessee for vacations a lot. Every airport in Missouri has flights to Atlanta. East division travel is fairly easy for Missouri fans. Not to mention Arkansas is now a yearly game.

You poor bastages. I like TN and all, but I really don't consider that a vacation destination!

(01-28-2014 09:14 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 08:28 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and Tennessee are close trips or at least the same distance or closer than going to Oklahoma. Not to mention Missourians travel to Tennessee for vacations a lot. Every airport in Missouri has flights to Atlanta. East division travel is fairly easy for Missouri fans. Not to mention Arkansas is now a yearly game.

You poor bastages. I like TN and all, but I really don't consider that a vacation destination!

I should have those weekend/3 day trips. Nashville, Memphis/Tunica, and Smoky Mountains are pretty popular for Missourians.

(01-27-2014 10:24 PM)rknj8993 Wrote:  If the two conferences were smart and not constantly at each other's throats, they could realign to make much tighter geographical conferences. For example, have an eastern conference, maybe entitled The Southern Atlantic Conference, and then a western conference, maybe entitled The Deep South Conference.

Southern Atlantic:
Old Dominion
UNC-Charlotte
Appalachian State
Marshall
Western Kentucky
Middle Tennessee
Georgia State
Georgia Southern
Alabama-Birmingham
Troy
Florida International
Florida Atlantic
James Madison

Deep South:
South Alabama
Southern Mississippi
Louisiana
Louisiana-Monroe
Arkansas State
Arkansas-Little Rock
Rice
Texas-San Antonio
Texas State
Texas-Arlington
North Texas
Texas-El Paso
Missouri State
NMSU

Sorry, Idaho, but in this scenario, you get the boot.

Why would CUSA see this as a good thing for them? What's in it for CUSA? We are already have fairly tight geography now with Charlotte, ODU, WKU and others on board. We have arguably the best bowl lineup of the remaining GO5. Besides if CUSA really wanted anyone they could pick anyone from the Sunbelt to fill a void. From what I'm hearing, Texas State, Georgia Southern, Arkansas State and Louisiana are next in line if the need arises.

(01-27-2014 10:24 PM)rknj8993 Wrote:  Deep South:
South Alabama
Southern Mississippi
Louisiana
Louisiana-Monroe
Arkansas State
Arkansas-Little Rock
Rice
Texas-San Antonio
Texas State
Texas-Arlington
North Texas
Texas-El Paso
Missouri State
NMSU

Sorry, Idaho, but in this scenario, you get the boot.

Replace Missouri State with La Tech and I would have a blast in this conference. Rivalries would be there. Fan interest would be there. It makes sense geographically. Too bad it will never happen

1. getting 64 teams together to negotiate for "half the content" of college football just gives the networks a chance to low ball the 64 teams for half of the content of college football......there is no shortage of content there is a shortage of hours in the day that people can sit in front of the TV and watch football and the number of channels they can watch at one time

if each game takes 3 hours that is 4 games that can be shown in 12 hours showing football from 12 noon to 12 midnight and if that is east coast time that means 8am to 8pm west coast time so toss in one more game and you have 5 games in a day from noon to 3am east coast to 8am to 11pm west coast

multiply that by 8 channels (espn the ocho) and you are showing 40 games or 80 teams total on TV on 8 channels at all hours of the day and night

with 124+ D1-A teams that means being one of "the 64" leaves you with a very good chance of being one of "the 44" that do not get on TV at all

and networks are not going to pay huge money to have 5 channels that they own all competing with each other for viewers that they payed big money to try and obtain the viewership of

so trying to negotiate as "the 64" means you can probably become "the 64" in D1-A.5

2. no one cares about a "rivalry" between two teams that suck.....if UT and OU or FSU and Florida are both 1-4 going into their "big game" no one cares near as much especially casual fans that just want to see good teams play....that game would probably still be on TV because of past contracts, but it might not be on the prime spot or get the major Us coverage map

this is all the more important for teams that do not have near the fan base or national appeal

and that matters because if you get that "all craved" "Texas Conference" that so many fans of lower level Texas teams love to talk about you end up with 7-8 Texas teams, you lose a ton of national appeal and you even worse end up with 4+ of those teams that are terrible because of the basic math and if you are really unlucky you end up with 7+ teams that all suck because they are 1-2 or 0-3 in the OOC before coming back to the "coveted" "Texas Conference" to play a bunch of "rivalry games" that no one including their own fans care about

and eventually you will end up with 4-5 of those teams that will be perennial bottom feeders in the conference and their program will start to suffer long term

no one likes to go to work and talk about "their team" when their team has had losing seasons for 8 years straight and no one likes to call a team with 8 straight losing seasons their rival

and you add in that no one outside of Texas (and perhaps the fans of the team or two that are not in Texas that might be unlucky enough to be in that conference) would care about what happens in that conference since their team is not in that conference and only occasionally plays a team from that conference and you have a disaster of a conference on your hands

there will always be recruits that want to stay close to home, play in state and the like, but when every team in the conference (or nearly every one) is basically the same offer with a few exceptions dealing with location differences you have no appeal that individualizes your team over others that offer basically the same deal

3. markets only matter if you actually bring that market and few non-major conference teams can make that claim consistently

4. the simple answer for teams and fans of teams and conferences that want to build respect and viewers is keep your conference games limited, have more OOC games, and schedule those OOC games as best as you can to deliver wins that you bring back to the conference for overall strenght

everything else about 4 teams in the same city all getting their own mini-cluster and "bringing that market" (while ignoring that the 4 of them combined do not bring the market like big state U does) and then all beating up on each other is appealing to nobody and is a recipe for failure and disaster for at least 3 of those 4 teams and the same with 8 teams all right near each other ect.

winning brings fans.....OOC wins bring conference respect......tight clusters of teams beating up on each other leads to sifting of top and bottom feeders and general lack of overall appeal and heaping on more garbage teams for "numbers" just means you have more garbage not more respect because beating up on your former D1-AA conference buddies that just moved up to your 24 team conference impresses no one

(01-27-2014 10:24 PM)rknj8993 Wrote:  If the two conferences were smart and not constantly at each other's throats, they could realign to make much tighter geographical conferences. For example, have an eastern conference, maybe entitled The Southern Atlantic Conference, and then a western conference, maybe entitled The Deep South Conference.

Southern Atlantic:
Old Dominion
UNC-Charlotte
Appalachian State
Marshall
Western Kentucky
Middle Tennessee
Georgia State
Georgia Southern
Alabama-Birmingham
Troy
Florida International
Florida Atlantic
James Madison

Deep South:
South Alabama
Southern Mississippi
Louisiana
Louisiana-Monroe
Arkansas State
Arkansas-Little Rock
Rice
Texas-San Antonio
Texas State
Texas-Arlington
North Texas
Texas-El Paso
Missouri State
NMSU

Sorry, Idaho, but in this scenario, you get the boot.

6 teams is a little much

(01-29-2014 03:39 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(01-27-2014 10:24 PM)rknj8993 Wrote:  If the two conferences were smart and not constantly at each other's throats, they could realign to make much tighter geographical conferences. For example, have an eastern conference, maybe entitled The Southern Atlantic Conference, and then a western conference, maybe entitled The Deep South Conference.

Southern Atlantic:
Old Dominion
UNC-Charlotte
Appalachian State
Marshall
Western Kentucky
Middle Tennessee
Georgia State
Georgia Southern
Alabama-Birmingham
Troy
Florida International
Florida Atlantic
James Madison

Deep South:
South Alabama
Southern Mississippi
Louisiana
Louisiana-Monroe
Arkansas State
Arkansas-Little Rock
Rice
Texas-San Antonio
Texas State
Texas-Arlington
North Texas
Texas-El Paso
Missouri State
NMSU

Sorry, Idaho, but in this scenario, you get the boot.

6 teams is a little much

Not necessarily, Each pair nicely for Olympic sports and makes for some great rivalries

yay, another realignment thread where SBC teams get to pair up with CUSA teams. You would think the mods here would put it on the realignment board.
None of this B.S. will ever happen. CUSA has more bowls, better name recognition, and more money from TV. There is a reason why 4 of the old SBC schools just moved to CUSA.

(01-29-2014 02:50 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. getting 64 teams together to negotiate for "half the content" of college football just gives the networks a chance to low ball the 64 teams for half of the content of college football......there is no shortage of content there is a shortage of hours in the day that people can sit in front of the TV and watch football and the number of channels they can watch at one time
...........

What you just described sounds a lot like the MAC. Regional teams, a bunch of rivalries, perennial bottom dwellers, etc.

The problem with the rest of the ish you wrote is that the MAC as a conference has been very successful. They have TV, they have bowl bids, they have stability, they have had Top25 teams, etc

The 64 teams get together to package themselves together just drives that wedge that much further between P5 and G5.

(01-29-2014 04:25 PM)YouCanUseaMint Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 02:50 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. getting 64 teams together to negotiate for "half the content" of college football just gives the networks a chance to low ball the 64 teams for half of the content of college football......there is no shortage of content there is a shortage of hours in the day that people can sit in front of the TV and watch football and the number of channels they can watch at one time
...........

What you just described sounds a lot like the MAC. Regional teams, a bunch of rivalries, perennial bottom dwellers, etc.

The problem with the rest of the ish you wrote is that the MAC as a conference has been very successful. They have TV, they have bowl bids, they have stability, they have had Top25 teams, etc

the MAC makes 1 million per team on their new TV deal

the AAC makes 2 million per team on theirs and the AAC actually has a real clause in theirs that allows for future renegotiation (VS other conferences that have been said to have had those, but in reality did not)

I will be the first to say the MAC is probably better than many give them credit for, but just saying that shows what most people think of the MAC

and just about everyone out there would say the AAC is a better conference overall (and the TV people think so) and the vast majority of people would say the same about the MWC as well

the MWC TV deal is about 1.5 million per member as well which is better than the MAC

the MAC has some bowl tie ins, but many of them are "if needed" and only about 4 of them are sure things

the American has about the same with 1 fewer team

and name one major MAC rivalry game that gets any national exposure

again the MAC is not terrible, but they are hardly a conference that I think any conference or conference members are really looking to have as a goal