(07-11-2014 01:31 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 10:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

C-USA sticking to the plan of larger urban schools. Old Dominion and UTSA look solid. Time will tell how the trade of SMU for North Texas, Houston for UTSA, Memphis for MTSU and ECU for Charlotte will play out. Agree on the UCF loss being the toughest.

I think it's quite evident that North Texas is representing C-USA well in the Dallas/Fort Worth market. The Mean Green crowd at the Heart of Dallas Bowl was a good sign of what could be ahead for North Texas, if they can continue to win. SMU has had a few good football seasons, but the local community here still has not embraced the Pony's football team. Despite posting respectable records over the course of a few years, the actual attendance at Ford is still terrible. I think they just don't have the alumni size to compete with the professional teams, and the large segment of football fans that follow the Big 12. And, I don't see how playing in the AAC, with few Texas rivals, and longer distances between universities, can fix their problem. To me, SMU seems more focused on being a basketball school. They had an amazing basketball season, and were able to generate strong interest in their basketball program.

North Texas is off to a good start in C-USA, but for UNT to grow its' program, it must continue to win over the next several seasons. North Texas must win the majority of their games against SMU over the next decade. I think trading SMU for North Texas will turn out to be a great trade for C-USA. I believe North Texas has a greater potential to deliver a larger portion of the DFW market for C-USA, then SMU was able to. North Texas may even deliver more of the DFW market for C-USA, then SMU does for the AAC.

I think it will be interesting to follow which team will be able to post stronger actual attendance numbers, and what local television rating look like for each team's home games.

(07-11-2014 05:27 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 01:31 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 10:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

C-USA sticking to the plan of larger urban schools. Old Dominion and UTSA look solid. Time will tell how the trade of SMU for North Texas, Houston for UTSA, Memphis for MTSU and ECU for Charlotte will play out. Agree on the UCF loss being the toughest.

I think it's quite evident that North Texas is representing C-USA well in the Dallas/Fort Worth market. The Mean Green crowd at the Heart of Dallas Bowl was a good sign of what could be ahead for North Texas, if they can continue to win. SMU has had a few good football seasons, but the local community here still has not embraced the Pony's football team. Despite posting respectable records over the course of a few years, the actual attendance at Ford is still terrible. I think they just don't have the alumni size to compete with the professional teams, and the large segment of football fans that follow the Big 12. And, I don't see how playing in the AAC, with few Texas rivals, and longer distances between universities, can fix their problem. To me, SMU seems more focused on being a basketball school. They had an amazing basketball season, and were able to generate strong interest in their basketball program.

North Texas is off to a good start in C-USA, but for UNT to grow its' program, it must continue to win over the next several seasons. North Texas must win the majority of their games against SMU over the next decade. I think trading SMU for North Texas will turn out to be a great trade for C-USA. I believe North Texas has a greater potential to deliver a larger portion of the DFW market for C-USA, then SMU was able to. North Texas may even deliver more of the DFW market for C-USA, then SMU does for the AAC.

I think it will be interesting to follow which team will be able to post stronger actual attendance numbers, and what local television rating look like for each team's home games.

The hard thing for us the fans in tracking TV is the fact that the national sports sites don't get Fox Regional or CBSS numbers.

FS1 numbers from last year are hard to interpret and there is a small sample for UNT among available numbers making it even harder to draw any conclusions.

Last year
UNT-Rice on FS1 drew 108,000 viewers topping ULM-Troy (Troy and ULM over the past two years have been the dogs of Sun Belt ratings) at 73k on ESPNU but well behind USF-Houston on ESPN with 1.13 million viewers. That was the least watched Sun Belt game of the year.

For comparison Rice-UAB 79k

The only other SBC ESPNU head-to-head vs CUSA on FS1
9/12
AState-Troy 137k
Tulane-La.Tech 124k
TCU-Texas Tech on ESPN sucked most of the wind with 2.28 million

Heart of Dallas which suffers on ESPNU with numerous games in competition drew 332k and was the only bowl with less than a million viewers.

The only other UNT game in the last 2 years with nationally reported numbers was Louisiana-UNT on ESPN2 on a Tuesday drawing 366k. AState vs. Louisiana the next week drew 778k.

While I think everyone understands that FS1 numbers last year have to be taken with a grain of salt, what I think has to be a concern is the line-up change. Looking at CUSA intra-conference games or comparable on FS1 the returning line-up didn't perform as well in games not including departees.
ECU-FAU 181k
Tulsa-Marshall 155k
Tulsa-UTEP 148k
La.Tech-Army 129k
Tulane-La.Tech 124k
Rice-UNT 108k
Marshall-MTSU 91k
Rice-UAB 79k
FIU-FAU 46k

(07-11-2014 09:35 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 05:27 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 01:31 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 10:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

C-USA sticking to the plan of larger urban schools. Old Dominion and UTSA look solid. Time will tell how the trade of SMU for North Texas, Houston for UTSA, Memphis for MTSU and ECU for Charlotte will play out. Agree on the UCF loss being the toughest.

I think it's quite evident that North Texas is representing C-USA well in the Dallas/Fort Worth market. The Mean Green crowd at the Heart of Dallas Bowl was a good sign of what could be ahead for North Texas, if they can continue to win. SMU has had a few good football seasons, but the local community here still has not embraced the Pony's football team. Despite posting respectable records over the course of a few years, the actual attendance at Ford is still terrible. I think they just don't have the alumni size to compete with the professional teams, and the large segment of football fans that follow the Big 12. And, I don't see how playing in the AAC, with few Texas rivals, and longer distances between universities, can fix their problem. To me, SMU seems more focused on being a basketball school. They had an amazing basketball season, and were able to generate strong interest in their basketball program.

North Texas is off to a good start in C-USA, but for UNT to grow its' program, it must continue to win over the next several seasons. North Texas must win the majority of their games against SMU over the next decade. I think trading SMU for North Texas will turn out to be a great trade for C-USA. I believe North Texas has a greater potential to deliver a larger portion of the DFW market for C-USA, then SMU was able to. North Texas may even deliver more of the DFW market for C-USA, then SMU does for the AAC.

I think it will be interesting to follow which team will be able to post stronger actual attendance numbers, and what local television rating look like for each team's home games.

The hard thing for us the fans in tracking TV is the fact that the national sports sites don't get Fox Regional or CBSS numbers.

FS1 numbers from last year are hard to interpret and there is a small sample for UNT among available numbers making it even harder to draw any conclusions.

Last year
UNT-Rice on FS1 drew 108,000 viewers topping ULM-Troy (Troy and ULM over the past two years have been the dogs of Sun Belt ratings) at 73k on ESPNU but well behind USF-Houston on ESPN with 1.13 million viewers. That was the least watched Sun Belt game of the year.

For comparison Rice-UAB 79k

The only other SBC ESPNU head-to-head vs CUSA on FS1
9/12
AState-Troy 137k
Tulane-La.Tech 124k
TCU-Texas Tech on ESPN sucked most of the wind with 2.28 million

Heart of Dallas which suffers on ESPNU with numerous games in competition drew 332k and was the only bowl with less than a million viewers.

The only other UNT game in the last 2 years with nationally reported numbers was Louisiana-UNT on ESPN2 on a Tuesday drawing 366k. AState vs. Louisiana the next week drew 778k.

While I think everyone understands that FS1 numbers last year have to be taken with a grain of salt, what I think has to be a concern is the line-up change. Looking at CUSA intra-conference games or comparable on FS1 the returning line-up didn't perform as well in games not including departees.
ECU-FAU 181k
Tulsa-Marshall 155k
Tulsa-UTEP 148k
La.Tech-Army 129k
Tulane-La.Tech 124k
Rice-UNT 108k
Marshall-MTSU 91k
Rice-UAB 79k
FIU-FAU 46k

Right now I'm more interested in how our local DFW ratings look compared to SMU's local T.V. ratings. North Texas has to improve the interest level of Dallas/Fort Worth and throughout Texas, before it can concern itself with the national numbers. I'll be interested in how our local numbers compare to those of SMU over the next few seasons.

As for the HOD Bowl, North Texas pulled better T.V. numbers in the Dallas market then the Gator Bowl, and the Gator Bowl was on ESPN 2 at the same time the HOD was on ESPNU, and it featured Nebraska and Georgia.

North Texas needs to sustain their winning, and grow viewership in the Dallas market, and interest throughout Texas. Next season every UNT game verses the other Texas programs in C-USA will be aired on Fox Sports Southwest, with an option to be upgraded to Fox Sports 1. UNT, Rice, and UTSA all have very competitive programs. I believe North Texas and the other Texas programs can and will develop strong rivalries and generate considerable fan interest in our markets before C-USA has to sign the next media deal.

C-USA has some time to increase viewership before the new media deal gets done. I believe the western division will increase their T.V. numbers over the next two seasons.

except the deal only has 2 years to go, and will likely get done this time next year before the 2015-16 season even starts... So really CUSA doesn't have that much time at all right now. No where much as they would probably have liked. The only thing going for them is that it's a pretty barren sports rights landscape right now. Not many properties to bid on at all right now.

(07-11-2014 11:01 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Right now I'm more interested in how our local DFW ratings look compared to SMU's local T.V. ratings. North Texas has to improve the interest level of Dallas/Fort Worth and throughout Texas, before it can concern itself with the national numbers. I'll be interested in how our local numbers compare to those of SMU over the next few seasons.

The problem with that is - a conference's media deal isn't based on one market, nor does it compare just two schools of separate conferences.

I also don't think it helps in an argument about potential to pit yourself against what most people routinely believe is the weakest school of another conference. (SMU is NOT one of the AAC's valuable football programs - success for the Ponies is merely a bonus to ESPN, but right now most look at them and Tulsa as one of the weak links in the AAC football attendance and ratings.

The ucf vs smu game last year at noon had viewership over 1 million. SMU is also drawing good ratings in hoops.

(07-11-2014 03:18 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  CUSA will be renegotiating its tv contract in a couple years, and, in a rebuilding mode for the next few years, this timing seems to work favorably for CUSA, as it provides time to establish its product and public identity.

This SDSU article about the Aztec's conference revenue and the MWC finanancial situation provides a parameter, guide, and/or goal whatever for CUSA.

Regarding bowls, CUSA has done a great job in balancing its bowls geographically for its eastern teams and western teams...and will minimize bowl travel costs and hopefully won't face the difficult financial situation as SDSU experienced with Spuds Bowl.

Aztecs get $3M check; lost $88K on Bowl

CUSA's TV contract stays the same or is reduced with all of the Sunbelt / WAC / FCS move up teams it has taken on with the OBE / American poaching its best teams in the last realignment cycle to stay alive. CUSA would have been better served to have pulled off a merger of some type with the remaining OBE schools.

(07-11-2014 11:53 PM)stever20 Wrote:  except the deal only has 2 years to go, and will likely get done this time next year before the 2015-16 season even starts... So really CUSA doesn't have that much time at all right now. No where much as they would probably have liked. The only thing going for them is that it's a pretty barren sports rights landscape right now. Not many properties to bid on at all right now.

Yes the deal will probably get signed around this time next season. C-USA really needs to put extra effort into promoting our televised conference games. I hope B.B. has a good plan and is willing to put some conference money into advertizing.

I hope the lack of competition for our football content will increase the value of our deal. ESPN might make a bid, but they have tons of football inventory, and already pays the Sun Belt next to nothing to play on Tuesdays. I think Fox Sports is still ideal for C-USA, and I have to believe NBC is desperate for FBS football. I'm sure as we get closer to negotiations, we will hear a ballpark figure for the new deal. C-USA could sure benefit from having a few teams end the season ranked in the top 25. If Marshall goes undefeated and earns the access bowl, that certainly wouldn't hurt.

(07-12-2014 06:19 AM)IceJus10 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 11:01 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Right now I'm more interested in how our local DFW ratings look compared to SMU's local T.V. ratings. North Texas has to improve the interest level of Dallas/Fort Worth and throughout Texas, before it can concern itself with the national numbers. I'll be interested in how our local numbers compare to those of SMU over the next few seasons.

The problem with that is - a conference's media deal isn't based on one market, nor does it compare just two schools of separate conferences.

I also don't think it helps in an argument about potential to pit yourself against what most people routinely believe is the weakest school of another conference. (SMU is NOT one of the AAC's valuable football programs - success for the Ponies is merely a bonus to ESPN, but right now most look at them and Tulsa as one of the weak links in the AAC football attendance and ratings.

Yes, but North Texas can only focus on doing our part. We can't do anything about our other markets. What C-USA needs is for our programs to out perform the AAC programs in markets that we share.

(07-12-2014 07:44 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The ucf vs smu game last year at noon had viewership over 1 million. SMU is also drawing good ratings in hoops.

Yes, but those viewers were watching UCF, finishing the season, and getting ready to play in a BCS bowl. I believe the numbers for that game had very little to do with viewers tuning in to watch SMU. The reported attendance for the UCF game was 12,589, but the actual attendance was no where near that number.

SMU is doing a fantastic job with basketball.

(07-12-2014 08:35 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 07:44 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The ucf vs smu game last year at noon had viewership over 1 million. SMU is also drawing good ratings in hoops.

Yes, but those viewers were watching UCF, finishing the season, and getting ready to play in a BCS bowl. I believe the numbers for that game had very little to do with viewers tuning in to watch SMU. The reported attendance for the UCF game was 12,589, but the actual attendance was no where near that number.

SMU is doing a fantastic job with basketball.

Yep SMU to cheer for UNT football and UNT to cheer for SMU basketball

(07-12-2014 07:58 AM)panite Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 03:18 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  CUSA will be renegotiating its tv contract in a couple years, and, in a rebuilding mode for the next few years, this timing seems to work favorably for CUSA, as it provides time to establish its product and public identity.

This SDSU article about the Aztec's conference revenue and the MWC finanancial situation provides a parameter, guide, and/or goal whatever for CUSA.

Regarding bowls, CUSA has done a great job in balancing its bowls geographically for its eastern teams and western teams...and will minimize bowl travel costs and hopefully won't face the difficult financial situation as SDSU experienced with Spuds Bowl.

Aztecs get $3M check; lost $88K on Bowl

CUSA's TV contract stays the same or is reduced with all of the Sunbelt / WAC / FCS move up teams it has taken on with the OBE / American poaching its best teams in the last realignment cycle to stay alive. CUSA would have been better served to have pulled off a merger of some type with the remaining OBE schools.

For the most part it looks like CUSA has put together a good line up of like minded schools, but took a step back in football in the process.

I find that rather ironic when I thought football was driving realignment.

Bottom line CUSA and AAC are shells of their former selves, and efforts by their new members to convince everyone other wise is rather silly.

The other 3 G5's really have faired rather well, especially the SBC in football. A case of addition through subtraction, which is the main reason they were the top non-aq conference last year, and will be even better going forward. They seem very football focused.

(07-12-2014 09:38 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 07:58 AM)panite Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 03:18 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  CUSA will be renegotiating its tv contract in a couple years, and, in a rebuilding mode for the next few years, this timing seems to work favorably for CUSA, as it provides time to establish its product and public identity.

This SDSU article about the Aztec's conference revenue and the MWC finanancial situation provides a parameter, guide, and/or goal whatever for CUSA.

Regarding bowls, CUSA has done a great job in balancing its bowls geographically for its eastern teams and western teams...and will minimize bowl travel costs and hopefully won't face the difficult financial situation as SDSU experienced with Spuds Bowl.

Aztecs get $3M check; lost $88K on Bowl

CUSA's TV contract stays the same or is reduced with all of the Sunbelt / WAC / FCS move up teams it has taken on with the OBE / American poaching its best teams in the last realignment cycle to stay alive. CUSA would have been better served to have pulled off a merger of some type with the remaining OBE schools.

For the most part it looks like CUSA has put together a good line up of like minded schools, but took a step back in football in the process.

I find that rather ironic when I thought football was driving realignment.

Bottom line CUSA and AAC are shells of their former selves, and efforts by their new members to convince everyone other wise is rather silly.

The other 3 G5's really have faired rather well, especially the SBC in football. A case of addition through subtraction, which is the main reason they were the top non-aq conference last year, and will be even better going forward. They seem very football focused.

We might take a step backwards next year as we add two moveups and two troubled FBS programs. If we finish above anyone next year with that lineup, its a sign we really have passed them in football.

(07-12-2014 10:27 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 09:38 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 07:58 AM)panite Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 03:18 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  CUSA will be renegotiating its tv contract in a couple years, and, in a rebuilding mode for the next few years, this timing seems to work favorably for CUSA, as it provides time to establish its product and public identity.

This SDSU article about the Aztec's conference revenue and the MWC finanancial situation provides a parameter, guide, and/or goal whatever for CUSA.

Regarding bowls, CUSA has done a great job in balancing its bowls geographically for its eastern teams and western teams...and will minimize bowl travel costs and hopefully won't face the difficult financial situation as SDSU experienced with Spuds Bowl.

Aztecs get $3M check; lost $88K on Bowl

CUSA's TV contract stays the same or is reduced with all of the Sunbelt / WAC / FCS move up teams it has taken on with the OBE / American poaching its best teams in the last realignment cycle to stay alive. CUSA would have been better served to have pulled off a merger of some type with the remaining OBE schools.

For the most part it looks like CUSA has put together a good line up of like minded schools, but took a step back in football in the process.

I find that rather ironic when I thought football was driving realignment.

Bottom line CUSA and AAC are shells of their former selves, and efforts by their new members to convince everyone other wise is rather silly.

The other 3 G5's really have faired rather well, especially the SBC in football. A case of addition through subtraction, which is the main reason they were the top non-aq conference last year, and will be even better going forward. They seem very football focused.

We might take a step backwards next year as we add two moveups and two troubled FBS programs. If we finish above anyone next year with that lineup, its a sign we really have passed them in football.

We had this same discussion last year, and CUSA again finished as the worse FBS Conference in football. Remember the base line for this year is the SBC was the top non-aq last year and CUSA the worse, and that is the baseline.

I think the SBC could be a little off this year. UL, ArSt, USA should be as good maybe better, ULM maybe a little off, and the other returning SBC members should, especially Troy, and TxSt , improve.

GaSo and ApSt, play pretty good football even when they are bad, and I think Idaho and NMSU will be better than people think.

Even though I think some CUSA teams, especially La Tech and USM will show significant improvement, CUSA will be weaker.

Adding a decent WKU does not offset their loses, and they have to many programs that are just bad in football period, and IMO will be the worse FBS conference in football most years going forward.

Anyone who thinks that CUSA will benefit from NBCSN entering the fray is forgetting two things:
1) They will have NASCAR coverage for most of the college football season, like qualifying, practice and races in the Series soon to be formerly known as Nationwide. This will be true even when Sprint Cup races the occasional Saturday Nighter on NBC.
2) The Premier League occupies the morning/early afternoon slot. And, unfortunately for CUSA, it can only extend rights for a maximum of 3 years due to UEFA rules.

(07-12-2014 11:02 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 10:27 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 09:38 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 07:58 AM)panite Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 03:18 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  CUSA will be renegotiating its tv contract in a couple years, and, in a rebuilding mode for the next few years, this timing seems to work favorably for CUSA, as it provides time to establish its product and public identity.

This SDSU article about the Aztec's conference revenue and the MWC finanancial situation provides a parameter, guide, and/or goal whatever for CUSA.

Regarding bowls, CUSA has done a great job in balancing its bowls geographically for its eastern teams and western teams...and will minimize bowl travel costs and hopefully won't face the difficult financial situation as SDSU experienced with Spuds Bowl.

Aztecs get $3M check; lost $88K on Bowl

CUSA's TV contract stays the same or is reduced with all of the Sunbelt / WAC / FCS move up teams it has taken on with the OBE / American poaching its best teams in the last realignment cycle to stay alive. CUSA would have been better served to have pulled off a merger of some type with the remaining OBE schools.

For the most part it looks like CUSA has put together a good line up of like minded schools, but took a step back in football in the process.

I find that rather ironic when I thought football was driving realignment.

Bottom line CUSA and AAC are shells of their former selves, and efforts by their new members to convince everyone other wise is rather silly.

The other 3 G5's really have faired rather well, especially the SBC in football. A case of addition through subtraction, which is the main reason they were the top non-aq conference last year, and will be even better going forward. They seem very football focused.

We might take a step backwards next year as we add two moveups and two troubled FBS programs. If we finish above anyone next year with that lineup, its a sign we really have passed them in football.

We had this same discussion last year, and CUSA again finished as the worse FBS Conference in football. Remember the base line for this year is the SBC was the top non-aq last year and CUSA the worse, and that is the baseline.

I think the SBC could be a little off this year. UL, ArSt, USA should be as good maybe better, ULM maybe a little off, and the other returning SBC members should, especially Troy, and TxSt , improve.

GaSo and ApSt, play pretty good football even when they are bad, and I think Idaho and NMSU will be better than people think.

Even though I think some CUSA teams, especially La Tech and USM will show significant improvement, CUSA will be weaker.

Adding a decent WKU does not offset their loses, and they have to many programs that are just bad in football period, and IMO will be the worse FBS conference in football most years going forward.

Yea, the Belt has performed well the last two years, but the NEXT two will really be the test. If our moveups and adds can get up to speed quickly and we don't fall too badly while they're doing so, then it would remove all doubt that the Belt has passed others.

(07-12-2014 12:02 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 11:02 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 10:27 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 09:38 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 07:58 AM)panite Wrote:  CUSA's TV contract stays the same or is reduced with all of the Sunbelt / WAC / FCS move up teams it has taken on with the OBE / American poaching its best teams in the last realignment cycle to stay alive. CUSA would have been better served to have pulled off a merger of some type with the remaining OBE schools.

For the most part it looks like CUSA has put together a good line up of like minded schools, but took a step back in football in the process.

I find that rather ironic when I thought football was driving realignment.

Bottom line CUSA and AAC are shells of their former selves, and efforts by their new members to convince everyone other wise is rather silly.

The other 3 G5's really have faired rather well, especially the SBC in football. A case of addition through subtraction, which is the main reason they were the top non-aq conference last year, and will be even better going forward. They seem very football focused.

We might take a step backwards next year as we add two moveups and two troubled FBS programs. If we finish above anyone next year with that lineup, its a sign we really have passed them in football.

We had this same discussion last year, and CUSA again finished as the worse FBS Conference in football. Remember the base line for this year is the SBC was the top non-aq last year and CUSA the worse, and that is the baseline.

I think the SBC could be a little off this year. UL, ArSt, USA should be as good maybe better, ULM maybe a little off, and the other returning SBC members should, especially Troy, and TxSt , improve.

GaSo and ApSt, play pretty good football even when they are bad, and I think Idaho and NMSU will be better than people think.

Even though I think some CUSA teams, especially La Tech and USM will show significant improvement, CUSA will be weaker.

Adding a decent WKU does not offset their loses, and they have to many programs that are just bad in football period, and IMO will be the worse FBS conference in football most years going forward.

Yea, the Belt has performed well the last two years, but the NEXT two will really be the test. If our moveups and adds can get up to speed quickly and we don't fall too badly while they're doing so, then it would remove all doubt that the Belt has passed others.

Actually I think the focus will now shift to "teams" not conferences.

I thought that was one of the reason for changing the post season format, because it became evident that some unqualified teams were getting in under the old BCS AQ arrangement.

I look forward to seeing teams like La Tech, USM, Troy, ECU and Tulsa return to form, and maybe Memphis will finally live up to it's considerable potential, and make the competition for the best G5 team each year very interesting, and fun for the fans of these programs.

(07-12-2014 11:23 AM)Rube Dali Wrote:  Anyone who thinks that CUSA will benefit from NBCSN entering the fray is forgetting two things:
1) They will have NASCAR coverage for most of the college football season, like qualifying, practice and races in the Series soon to be formerly known as Nationwide. This will be true even when Sprint Cup races the occasional Saturday Nighter on NBC.
2) The Premier League occupies the morning/early afternoon slot. And, unfortunately for CUSA, it can only extend rights for a maximum of 3 years due to UEFA rules.

I think NBC has much more flexibility than you might think. Keep in mind the current AAC contract with ESPN was actually written by NBC-Sports. ESPN simply exercised its right to "match" the terms of the NBC-Sports offer to the AAC.

NBC-Sports built-in a tremendous amount of AAC exposure and low balled the dollar amount---thinking that ESPN could never match that level of exposure. Turns out they miscalculated. That means that NBC-Sports must have the flexibility to put 90% of all AAC football games on national television along with the ability to put EVERY home AAC basketball game on national TV. If NBC-Sports had the flexibility to offer that contract to the AAC---I suspect they could offer something similar to CUSA if they feel its in their best interests to get the rights to an FBS conference.

(07-11-2014 11:01 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 09:35 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 05:27 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 01:31 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 10:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

C-USA sticking to the plan of larger urban schools. Old Dominion and UTSA look solid. Time will tell how the trade of SMU for North Texas, Houston for UTSA, Memphis for MTSU and ECU for Charlotte will play out. Agree on the UCF loss being the toughest.

I think it's quite evident that North Texas is representing C-USA well in the Dallas/Fort Worth market. The Mean Green crowd at the Heart of Dallas Bowl was a good sign of what could be ahead for North Texas, if they can continue to win. SMU has had a few good football seasons, but the local community here still has not embraced the Pony's football team. Despite posting respectable records over the course of a few years, the actual attendance at Ford is still terrible. I think they just don't have the alumni size to compete with the professional teams, and the large segment of football fans that follow the Big 12. And, I don't see how playing in the AAC, with few Texas rivals, and longer distances between universities, can fix their problem. To me, SMU seems more focused on being a basketball school. They had an amazing basketball season, and were able to generate strong interest in their basketball program.

North Texas is off to a good start in C-USA, but for UNT to grow its' program, it must continue to win over the next several seasons. North Texas must win the majority of their games against SMU over the next decade. I think trading SMU for North Texas will turn out to be a great trade for C-USA. I believe North Texas has a greater potential to deliver a larger portion of the DFW market for C-USA, then SMU was able to. North Texas may even deliver more of the DFW market for C-USA, then SMU does for the AAC.

I think it will be interesting to follow which team will be able to post stronger actual attendance numbers, and what local television rating look like for each team's home games.

The hard thing for us the fans in tracking TV is the fact that the national sports sites don't get Fox Regional or CBSS numbers.

FS1 numbers from last year are hard to interpret and there is a small sample for UNT among available numbers making it even harder to draw any conclusions.

Last year
UNT-Rice on FS1 drew 108,000 viewers topping ULM-Troy (Troy and ULM over the past two years have been the dogs of Sun Belt ratings) at 73k on ESPNU but well behind USF-Houston on ESPN with 1.13 million viewers. That was the least watched Sun Belt game of the year.

For comparison Rice-UAB 79k

The only other SBC ESPNU head-to-head vs CUSA on FS1
9/12
AState-Troy 137k
Tulane-La.Tech 124k
TCU-Texas Tech on ESPN sucked most of the wind with 2.28 million

Heart of Dallas which suffers on ESPNU with numerous games in competition drew 332k and was the only bowl with less than a million viewers.

The only other UNT game in the last 2 years with nationally reported numbers was Louisiana-UNT on ESPN2 on a Tuesday drawing 366k. AState vs. Louisiana the next week drew 778k.

While I think everyone understands that FS1 numbers last year have to be taken with a grain of salt, what I think has to be a concern is the line-up change. Looking at CUSA intra-conference games or comparable on FS1 the returning line-up didn't perform as well in games not including departees.
ECU-FAU 181k
Tulsa-Marshall 155k
Tulsa-UTEP 148k
La.Tech-Army 129k
Tulane-La.Tech 124k
Rice-UNT 108k
Marshall-MTSU 91k
Rice-UAB 79k
FIU-FAU 46k

Right now I'm more interested in how our local DFW ratings look compared to SMU's local T.V. ratings. North Texas has to improve the interest level of Dallas/Fort Worth and throughout Texas, before it can concern itself with the national numbers. I'll be interested in how our local numbers compare to those of SMU over the next few seasons.

As for the HOD Bowl, North Texas pulled better T.V. numbers in the Dallas market then the Gator Bowl, and the Gator Bowl was on ESPN 2 at the same time the HOD was on ESPNU, and it featured Nebraska and Georgia.

North Texas needs to sustain their winning, and grow viewership in the Dallas market, and interest throughout Texas. Next season every UNT game verses the other Texas programs in C-USA will be aired on Fox Sports Southwest, with an option to be upgraded to Fox Sports 1. UNT, Rice, and UTSA all have very competitive programs. I believe North Texas and the other Texas programs can and will develop strong rivalries and generate considerable fan interest in our markets before C-USA has to sign the next media deal.

C-USA has some time to increase viewership before the new media deal gets done. I believe the western division will increase their T.V. numbers over the next two seasons.

Please fix your posts! "Then" needs to be replaced with than!!! In other wprds substitute than for then.

(07-12-2014 11:02 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 10:27 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 09:38 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 07:58 AM)panite Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 03:18 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  CUSA will be renegotiating its tv contract in a couple years, and, in a rebuilding mode for the next few years, this timing seems to work favorably for CUSA, as it provides time to establish its product and public identity.

This SDSU article about the Aztec's conference revenue and the MWC finanancial situation provides a parameter, guide, and/or goal whatever for CUSA.

Regarding bowls, CUSA has done a great job in balancing its bowls geographically for its eastern teams and western teams...and will minimize bowl travel costs and hopefully won't face the difficult financial situation as SDSU experienced with Spuds Bowl.

Aztecs get $3M check; lost $88K on Bowl

CUSA's TV contract stays the same or is reduced with all of the Sunbelt / WAC / FCS move up teams it has taken on with the OBE / American poaching its best teams in the last realignment cycle to stay alive. CUSA would have been better served to have pulled off a merger of some type with the remaining OBE schools.

For the most part it looks like CUSA has put together a good line up of like minded schools, but took a step back in football in the process.

I find that rather ironic when I thought football was driving realignment.

Bottom line CUSA and AAC are shells of their former selves, and efforts by their new members to convince everyone other wise is rather silly.

The other 3 G5's really have faired rather well, especially the SBC in football. A case of addition through subtraction, which is the main reason they were the top non-aq conference last year, and will be even better going forward. They seem very football focused.

We might take a step backwards next year as we add two moveups and two troubled FBS programs. If we finish above anyone next year with that lineup, its a sign we really have passed them in football.

We had this same discussion last year, and CUSA again finished as the worse FBS Conference in football. Remember the base line for this year is the SBC was the top non-aq last year and CUSA the worse, and that is the baseline.

I think the SBC could be a little off this year. UL, ArSt, USA should be as good maybe better, ULM maybe a little off, and the other returning SBC members should, especially Troy, and TxSt , improve.

GaSo and ApSt, play pretty good football even when they are bad, and I think Idaho and NMSU will be better than people think.

Even though I think some CUSA teams, especially La Tech and USM will show significant improvement, CUSA will be weaker.

Adding a decent WKU does not offset their loses, and they have to many programs that are just bad in football period, and IMO will be the worse FBS conference in football most years going forward.

Hmm. AAC and CUSA are now shadows of their former selves and the Sunbelt gained ground by adding the two worst programs in FBS along with multiple startup/FCS programs......

Yes, looking just at the last couple of years---it looks like the strong SB programs stayed behind---but the fact is, looking longer term, the strongest historical programs left the Sunbelt. UL-L and Arky State have done well the last few years and will be the SB bell cows if they can continue to perform at that level---but many of the programs that left have a history of performing well and likely will perform well in the future. The new programs coming in are not likely to match them for some time. All the G5's took hits. The MW probably took the least damage since 2011. I think its a special pair of rose colored glasses that allows one to think the Sunbelt alone is somehow different in realignment---having special powers that allow it to add lesser parts and get better.