No moves make much sense to me for the MWC. They clearly have no interest in two obvious geographical fits (Idaho and New Mexico State). A third, UTEP, seems to prefer being aligned with schools to their east. That leaves very slim pickins for them.

It's hard to see many teams that would not make the AAC weaker than it is now.

The MAC could expand in a geographically logical way, and in a way that might even help it competitively. They could potentially seek out Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky, Marshall and Army.

That would leave the MAC at 16, and the MWC and AAC at 12 apiece. The SBC would stand at 9 and CUSA at 10. I suppose they could merge, but why bother? It's not going to improve their bottom line.

(02-20-2015 01:39 PM)ken d Wrote:  No moves make much sense to me for the MWC. They clearly have no interest in two obvious geographical fits (Idaho and New Mexico State). A third, UTEP, seems to prefer being aligned with schools to their east. That leaves very slim pickins for them.

It's hard to see many teams that would not make the AAC weaker than it is now.

The MAC could expand in a geographically logical way, and in a way that might even help it competitively. They could potentially seek out Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky, Marshall and Army.

That would leave the MAC at 16, and the MWC and AAC at 12 apiece. The SBC would stand at 9 and CUSA at 10. I suppose they could merge, but why bother? It's not going to improve your bottom line.

I think the MWC is set for now until something happens like a team going to a P5 conference or something happens to Hawaii.
I'd like to think that NMSU and Texas St. would be good options for the MW. Idaho has no facilities worthwhile for the MW. We'll see when the MW TV contract comes up. Perhaps a Texas presence again will be worthwhile or as the MW Digital Network matures to where is begins to start making money then adding NMSU and Texas St for additional content may make more financially rewarding.

(02-20-2015 10:05 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 08:37 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Once the AAC goes to 20 teams and starts up it's own tournament thus putting it a step above the others then you might see some more serious realignment happening down in the G5 ranks.

I don't think anyone could pull any MAC teams away except for that future AAC conference. After that, the MAC should pretty solid as at most they lose maybe one school. If they could take advantage of the chaos and push farther South it would be a good move for them. Grab the likes of Western Kentucky and Middle Tenn State. If they too can get to 20 then they can play the same scenario as the AAC in terms of a strongly regionalized conference where most of your conference play is against the teams in your regional division. That would help draw a contingent of five programs to the South of where the MAC currently lies geographically.

If the MAC does that then it should be easier for the likes of the SBC to stonewall attempts by CUSA to steal away programs as they usually do. With that, CUSA could then implode and the SBC could fill up from there.

So, if the MAC got aggressive then yes I could see a G4 happen.

The G5 have three potential models.

1. Smaller compact and fairly regional. Old time 9-10 member leagues.
2. More geographically diverse, compulsion to be like Mike er four of the the P5 and have a title game.
3. Very large trying to gain some degree of leverage with TV by controlling a larger swath of filler material.

The first model has worked for Big East hoops.

Since #2 is the P5 model, I think it is foolish for the G5 to follow it.

The sensible choices are either be smaller leagues focused on a core of good teams and make your name by success or follow the third model, go big, try to restrict the inventory that TV has to fill in with.

The 20 team, four division AAC that I have suggested will inevitably be formed up is based upon your point #3. If they are able to pick up the best of the rest then there will be significant distance between them and the rest of the G5. As the desire for college football continues to grow with the CFP, that conference could find itself making more than they ever have.

(02-20-2015 01:39 PM)ken d Wrote:  No moves make much sense to me for the MWC. They clearly have no interest in two obvious geographical fits (Idaho and New Mexico State). A third, UTEP, seems to prefer being aligned with schools to their east. That leaves very slim pickins for them.

It's hard to see many teams that would not make the AAC weaker than it is now.

The MAC could expand in a geographically logical way, and in a way that might even help it competitively. They could potentially seek out Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky, Marshall and Army.

That would leave the MAC at 16, and the MWC and AAC at 12 apiece. The SBC would stand at 9 and CUSA at 10. I suppose they could merge, but why bother? It's not going to improve your bottom line.

It's a shame, because there are exactly 16 G5 programs in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones - BYU, the 12 members of the Mountain West, Idaho, NMSU, and UTEP. If you could somehow get them to all cooperate, that is the first quadrant of the G4.

The second quadrant would be for the American to fill in the eastern part of its footprint by adding UMass, Marshall, Old Dominion, and Army. Honestly you could make a good argument for any number of schools - Arkansas State, Louisiana Tech, Georgia State, Georgia Southern, UTSA, Western Kentucky, Middle Tennessee, etc., but I think in the end the American ultimately seeks out new states and markets not covered by its current members.

The MAC is the one that would be hardest to call, but ultimately I see them going hard to push southward - this would likely be Western Kentucky, Middle Tennessee, Arkansas State, and Louisiana Tech. Louisiana Tech could probably be coaxed into this move simply to avoid being in a conference with Louisiana-Monroe. If the American chooses a MAC school (or two) over Army, I could see Army joining the MAC and the MAC trying to become a "national" conference, at least in the Eastern and Central Time Zones.

The end result is that the Sun Belt and C-USA merge with exactly 16 members.

MWC
Pacific - San Diego State, San Jose State, Fresno State, Hawaii
Western - Boise State, Idaho, Nevada, UNLV
Mountain - BYU, Colorado State, Air Force, Wyoming
Southern - Utah State, New Mexico, New Mexico State, UTEP

AAC
North - UConn, UMass, Temple, Army
East - Cincinnati, Marshall, Old Dominion, Navy
South - USF, UCF, East Carolina, Memphis
West - SMU, Houston, Tulsa, Tulane

MAC
East - Buffalo, Kent, Akron, Ohio
West - NIU, Ball State, WMU, CMU
North - EMU, Toledo, Bowling Green, Miami (OH)
South - Louisiana Tech, WKU, MTSU, Arkansas State

C-USA
West - UTSA, Texas State, Rice, North Texas
Central - Louisiana, ULM, Southern Miss, South Alabama
East - Charlotte, App State, Georgia State, UAB*
South - FAU, FIU, Troy, Georgia Southern

The real drawback is that right now there is $60.8 Million of CFP money divided between the G5 conferences, Army, and BYU. There would have to be a way to make sure each conference can distribute at least $1 MM to its members, as members of the conferences at or below 12 currently enjoy that payout now.

a 16 team conference is a horrible idea, no matter who is in it.

These restructured conference concepts look terrible. If the MAC and MWC wanted to add Belt teams, they would have done it back when C-USA added North Texas, MTSU, WKU, FAU, and FIU, and the Belt probably would have gone the way of the WAC. They didn't choose that path. Why would they bother with it now?

C-USA is fine just the way it is. I believe most in the AAC, MAC, and MWC feel the same way about their conferences.

The way its going, the next move might be new additions to the Independent ranks.

UMass is leaving the MAC after 2015. NMSU and Idaho will probably be out of the SBC after 2017. UConn is talking about leaving the AAC.

So the SBC looks like it could be in a position of adding JMU and or Missouri St. They will eventually be at 12 FB schools some day.

Conferences have no financial incentive to go beyond 12. The coast 2 coast conference will never happen either with Boise making 3.2 mil in the MWC as part of its TV package.

A G5 is better than a G4 because you have more conferences to play in bowl games. A G5 with 6-8 independents is probably the future state we are looking at.

So the SBC looks like it could be in a position of adding JMU and or Missouri St. They will eventually be at 12 FB schools some day.

Im not sure why you think the sbc is going to be in position to add jmu. As far as i can tell theyve said no already and since may well incur financial issues due to their state legislature. So my guess is JMU is not going to the sbc and probably no other fbs conference at this point.
Mo St. On the other hand, has not made alot of official noise about a move so who knows what they are planning. Perhaps fbs and perhaps sbc.

(02-19-2015 09:05 AM)MJG Wrote:  Probably not very likely but it is possible.
Conference USA could take three and the MAC Two.
Taking five of the all sports members and killing the conference. Now they could back fill but would they lose G5 status.

I don't see it happening but have seen the possibility mentioned so don't kill me for advocating it.
Decision makers don't read this and the board is slow.

I could see APP ST and one of the Georgia schools in the MAC.
I guess it would depend who CUSA took to get to sixteen.
The MAC could even go to sixteen especially if they accepted some football only members.

The only viable reason to form a G4 is to implement a playoff tournament for the access spot or if the CFP expands to include a G5 school. The only way it would work in my opinion is for the SBC schools to receive football only memberships to the other G4 conferences and each conference splits into 3 divisions of 5 schools. Here’s an example:

AAC: Georgia St/Georgia So, Louisiana/UL-Monroe, So Alabama/Troy

CUSA: Georgia St/Georgia So, So Alabama/Troy

MAC: Ark St, App. St, Louisiana/UL-Monroe

MWC: Idaho, NMSU, Texas St

The SBC would remain intact for all other sports. It would be compensated from $$ generated by the playoff tournament. Obviously, the regular season would have to be shortened…..

(02-21-2015 01:48 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  The way its going, the next move might be new additions to the Independent ranks.

UMass is leaving the MAC after 2015. NMSU and Idaho will probably be out of the SBC after 2017. UConn is talking about leaving the AAC.

So the SBC looks like it could be in a position of adding JMU and or Missouri St. They will eventually be at 12 FB schools some day.

Conferences have no financial incentive to go beyond 12. The coast 2 coast conference will never happen either with Boise making 3.2 mil in the MWC as part of its TV package.

A G5 is better than a G4 because you have more conferences to play in bowl games. A G5 with 6-8 independents is probably the future state we are looking at.

The State of VA has placed all public higher education institution in a potentially perilous position. "The House of Delegates passed a bill Jan. 23 which will cap the percentage of student fees supporting athletics in all Virginia higher-level-education institutions. House Bill 1897 — sponsored by Del. Kirk Cox, R-Colonial Heights — requires schools to limit student fees funding their athletic department budgets."
Full article here: http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/201...etics-fees

Those student fee restrictions are a major topic on the JMU and ODU boards as they will have a significant impact on athletic budgets and athletic/student fees.

JMU is simply not in the highly desirable position it was last year, due to financial restrictions, when they were the acknowledged number one FCS move-up.

No conference should have more than 9 schools - it is the perfect number for scheduling

(02-20-2015 08:37 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Once the AAC goes to 20 teams and starts up it's own tournament thus putting it a step above the others then you might see some more serious realignment happening down in the G5 ranks.

I don't think anyone could pull any MAC teams away except for that future AAC conference. After that, the MAC should pretty solid as at most they lose maybe one school. If they could take advantage of the chaos and push farther South it would be a good move for them. Grab the likes of Western Kentucky and Middle Tenn State. If they too can get to 20 then they can play the same scenario as the AAC in terms of a strongly regionalized conference where most of your conference play is against the teams in your regional division. That would help draw a contingent of five programs to the South of where the MAC currently lies geographically.

If the MAC does that then it should be easier for the likes of the SBC to stonewall attempts by CUSA to steal away programs as they usually do. With that, CUSA could then implode and the SBC could fill up from there.

So, if the MAC got aggressive then yes I could see a G4 happen.

AAC going to 20? I'd like to see the AAC add some western schools to go to 18, with two relatively independent football divisions joined in a championship game (and some cross-division games).

EAST - UConn, Temple, Cincinnati, ECU, UCF, USF, Memphis, Navy, Tulane.

WEST - Tulsa, SMU, Houston, BYU, Air Force, Colorado State, Boise, SDSU, Fresno.

Possible alternatives for those western schools that won't join: UNLV, New Mexico, Wyoming. BYU and Boise need to get over themselves.

If UConn can't be in a P5 conference, we might as well make things interesting. I would think it would be hard for the national media to completely ignore this larger AAC.

(02-23-2015 08:58 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 08:37 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Once the AAC goes to 20 teams and starts up it's own tournament thus putting it a step above the others then you might see some more serious realignment happening down in the G5 ranks.

I don't think anyone could pull any MAC teams away except for that future AAC conference. After that, the MAC should pretty solid as at most they lose maybe one school. If they could take advantage of the chaos and push farther South it would be a good move for them. Grab the likes of Western Kentucky and Middle Tenn State. If they too can get to 20 then they can play the same scenario as the AAC in terms of a strongly regionalized conference where most of your conference play is against the teams in your regional division. That would help draw a contingent of five programs to the South of where the MAC currently lies geographically.

If the MAC does that then it should be easier for the likes of the SBC to stonewall attempts by CUSA to steal away programs as they usually do. With that, CUSA could then implode and the SBC could fill up from there.

So, if the MAC got aggressive then yes I could see a G4 happen.

AAC going to 20? I'd like to see the AAC add some western schools to go to 18, with two relatively independent football divisions joined in a championship game (and some cross-division games).

EAST - UConn, Temple, Cincinnati, ECU, UCF, USF, Memphis, Navy, Tulane.

WEST - Tulsa, SMU, Houston, BYU, Air Force, Colorado State, Boise, SDSU, Fresno.

Possible alternatives for those western schools that won't join: UNLV, New Mexico, Wyoming. BYU and Boise need to get over themselves.

If UConn can't be in a P5 conference, we might as well make things interesting. I would think it would be hard for the national media to completely ignore this larger AAC.

Well, the funny thing about 20 for a conference like the AAC is that it allows you the best of both worlds. You would have four divisions of five teams in each and they would be geographically based. That means four games in division and most likely 1 against every other division. That means your conference suddenly becomes extremely regional while at the same time tying in everyone together with that 1 single game. That helps with strength of schedule in terms of the conference as a whole. It also provides you with more scheduling freedom than the Majors. So if your school felt like it they could have a very strong ooc schedule.

None of these suggestions address the core issue- FBS D1 College Football is the only sports league on the planet that doesn't provide its members a direct path to a championship. FCS does it, D1 men's basketball does, why doesn't FBS do it? That's the conversation every fan of a non-P5 school should be pushing because the Cartel knows that to solve that problem you have to tear down their totally corrupt, rigged system.

Trying to make 5 into 4 or have 1 break off only fragments their opposition and makes us all weaker.

(02-24-2015 03:44 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  None of these suggestions address the core issue- FBS D1 College Football is the only sports league on the planet that doesn't provide its members a direct path to a championship. FCS does it, D1 men's basketball does, why doesn't FBS do it? That's the conversation every fan of a non-P5 school should be pushing because the Cartel knows that to solve that problem you have to tear down their totally corrupt, rigged system.

Trying to make 5 into 4 or have 1 break off only fragments their opposition and makes us all weaker.

Why is it important that there be a national championship? Is it just because everybody else does it? College football has thrived for more than 140 years without one. Is it suddenly going to wither on the vine if we never have one?

(02-24-2015 10:55 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 03:44 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  None of these suggestions address the core issue- FBS D1 College Football is the only sports league on the planet that doesn't provide its members a direct path to a championship. FCS does it, D1 men's basketball does, why doesn't FBS do it? That's the conversation every fan of a non-P5 school should be pushing because the Cartel knows that to solve that problem you have to tear down their totally corrupt, rigged system.

Trying to make 5 into 4 or have 1 break off only fragments their opposition and makes us all weaker.

Why is it important that there be a national championship? Is it just because everybody else does it? College football has thrived for more than 140 years without one. Is it suddenly going to wither on the vine if we never have one?

you mean besides the fact that its dishonest, unsportsmanlike and totally corrupt?

(02-24-2015 11:10 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 10:55 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 03:44 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  None of these suggestions address the core issue- FBS D1 College Football is the only sports league on the planet that doesn't provide its members a direct path to a championship. FCS does it, D1 men's basketball does, why doesn't FBS do it? That's the conversation every fan of a non-P5 school should be pushing because the Cartel knows that to solve that problem you have to tear down their totally corrupt, rigged system.

Trying to make 5 into 4 or have 1 break off only fragments their opposition and makes us all weaker.

Why is it important that there be a national championship? Is it just because everybody else does it? College football has thrived for more than 140 years without one. Is it suddenly going to wither on the vine if we never have one?

you mean besides the fact that its dishonest, unsportsmanlike and totally corrupt?

I mean besides the fact that perimeterpost believes the system is corrupt. Whether it is or not, having a championship tournament wouldn't change that.

(02-24-2015 11:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 11:10 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 10:55 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-24-2015 03:44 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  None of these suggestions address the core issue- FBS D1 College Football is the only sports league on the planet that doesn't provide its members a direct path to a championship. FCS does it, D1 men's basketball does, why doesn't FBS do it? That's the conversation every fan of a non-P5 school should be pushing because the Cartel knows that to solve that problem you have to tear down their totally corrupt, rigged system.

Trying to make 5 into 4 or have 1 break off only fragments their opposition and makes us all weaker.

Why is it important that there be a national championship? Is it just because everybody else does it? College football has thrived for more than 140 years without one. Is it suddenly going to wither on the vine if we never have one?

you mean besides the fact that its dishonest, unsportsmanlike and totally corrupt?

I mean besides the fact that perimeterpost believes the system is corrupt. Whether it is or not, having a championship tournament wouldn't change that.

you act like giving every team in a sport league a direct path to a championship game is something special. It's STANDARD.

(02-19-2015 01:08 PM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  Why is everyone always trying to kill the Belt??

Haters gonna hate. Makes them feel better about themselves.

Arkansas State, ULL, Ga So, App State, USA and Texas State have as much potential as pretty much everyone in the G5. The conference finished first in the G5 after the 2013 season and isn't going away.

(02-19-2015 04:40 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 04:09 PM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 01:22 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 01:08 PM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  Why is everyone always trying to kill the Belt??

As prior realignment showed, the Sun Belt is the bottom of the pecking order. In addition, all other conferences have more TV $$ and exposure than the Sun Belt.

Someone will always finish last.

Also can anyone on this board state that it is a given that the Sun Belt TV $$ and exposure will still be last 10 years from now even if there are no new conferences added.

No. they are talking about contracts and circumstances that are left over from the old conference memberships. An equilibrium is coming.