(01-14-2016 10:53 AM)Farmer Jack Wrote:  Neither NMSU nor Idaho have any business playing FBS football.

And Houston has no business in the Big 12, but hey, that's not a topic for discussion on this thread.

Wow. Thanks, guys. So far the only straight "no" votes come from 4 actual Sun Belt fans, plus visitors from Houston, Army, ???, Memphis & Boise St. (big surprise).

I've noticed the Sun-Belters who voted no so far come from schools that haven't gone through a realignment wave yet. You might think differently about this if you had. This stuff comes fast and it's scary and unpredictable and schools get left out in the cold and turn into Idahos and NMSUs. Insurance is valuable.

(01-14-2016 10:00 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  I've said many times that we owe Idaho and NMSU nothing. We picked them up in a lifeboat and saved them.

But we are really going to ruin the sports programs at two universities when there is no real need?

They aren't hurting my school THAT badly that I can tell.

They aren't hurting any of the Belt schools at all.

If we boot them without two to replace them I promise you it will bite us all right in the ass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If we drop to 10, we gain a CHOICE
Of who we play in one extra game per year.

That can be a money game, an old or new rival, or a game against the AAC or MWC that if we win - helps raise the ranking of this conference.

NMSU and Idaho aren't raising the bar. And may not be worth the travel expenses. Since they would be on the West side - I guess we would rarely have to play them - so I don't care that much, but are they helping the conference?

If we drop them, We CUT EXPENSES.

If we drop them, We could add other teams closer to home if we wanted 12.
And now we have no rush to add (for those desiring a CCG like me) and we can wait for teams to be ready in better areas and better media markets to try and improve our TV contract.

Idaho and NM are not desirable states for a TV deal with a combined population of less than 4 million. Lots of teams that can be better than them when given FBS recruiting power - closer to home and in much better media markets.

There is a lot to gain be dropping them and there are advantages to being a 10 team conference. I'm not hell bent on dropping them right now, it won't hurt us that bad to keep them around a little longer - but I'm fine either way and can live with 10 members.

If we do drop them, we can still schedule them - but their losses wouldn't count against the conference.

And I'm not to worried about the number of bowl games being affected for the conference. I'm guessing the ratio of bowls/teams would stay about the same. And at any rate, it doesn't mean any of us would have more losses - since we wouldn't replace the extra game with a conference member. That is IF we win that extra OOC game. So we could still have the same number of bowl tie ins.

Who voted before they knew we could split into divisions with only 10 and the round robin only applies within your division? Thus allowing us to play a true CCG between the winners of each division with only 10 members.

If you did vote before, would you have voted differently after knowing this?

Keep 'em . . .

. . . and add NMSU all sports . . .

. . nothing against Idaho, but sooner or later I think that they need to take the initiative and find another home . . . simply because they're so far out of the footprint . . .

12 is a good number . . . Solid number . . . and insulates somewhat if raided . .

Here's a thought, keep them and add Jacksonville State and Eastern Kentucky anyway. The more the merrier.

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6560 using Tapatalk

"Oh that probably won't happen" is no reassurance. Similar to "the WAC is a healthier football conference than the Sun Belch".

(01-14-2016 01:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  "Oh that probably won't happen" is no reassurance. Similar to "the WAC is a healthier football conference than the Sun Belch".

I'm seeing a trend developing that it's predominately the new guys pushing to go to ten.

Those of us 2001ers are a little set in our ways I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(01-14-2016 01:34 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  

(01-14-2016 01:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  "Oh that probably won't happen" is no reassurance. Similar to "the WAC is a healthier football conference than the Sun Belch".

I'm seeing a trend developing that it's predominately the new guys pushing to go to ten.

Those of us 2001ers are a little set in our ways I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think that's it. When you stare death in the face a couple of times it changes your way of thinking.

(01-14-2016 12:23 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  If we drop them, We CUT EXPENSES.

With them being football only, you do realize we are talking about one longer plane ride per year than flying to Texas right? And that's only if we don't go to division play, in which case the eastern teams will have to fly out to NMSU or Idaho once every three years at best (I think that's right, doing the math on the fly in my head).

The cost is minimal in relation to EVERY schools' budget (even ULM).

The argument to cut Idaho & NMSU would have to be due to performance. But if that's the case, then the Sun Belt should instead cut ULM & Texas State (the two worst teams in conference this season). Both NMSU & Idaho showed improvement.

To me, the only reason you sever ties with them is if you found a GOOD (not comparable, not adequate, but good) replacement. Right now, that means Liberty (which couldn't get in before, and not enough has changed to alter that landscape), EKU (which I don't know that they are that significant of an upgrade)... Missouri State would be a good choice, but they aren't showing any indication of moving anytime soon. JMU would be as well, but... well, we know that story.

So removing them now makes no sense. At least to me.

(01-14-2016 01:37 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-14-2016 01:34 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  

(01-14-2016 01:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  "Oh that probably won't happen" is no reassurance. Similar to "the WAC is a healthier football conference than the Sun Belch".

I'm seeing a trend developing that it's predominately the new guys pushing to go to ten.

Those of us 2001ers are a little set in our ways I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think that's it. When you stare death in the face a couple of times it changes your way of thinking.

Agree . . when your school has not been the one out there scrambling to find a conference home, it is pretty easy to be cold, callous and heartless.

We need numbers for security and stability . . as one of the stAte posters said . . this will come back to bite us in the ass if we do not extend Idaho and NMSU.

Many have stated in this thread that having NMSU and Idaho does not (or has not) affected their schools.

That would be an incorrect statement.

Last year, without those two schools, we would have finished ahead of the MAC when it came to CFP revenue distribution. And, I think the same was true this year, since NMSU did not win a single OOC game and Idaho's only win was over an FCS school.

So, those two schools have cost YOUR program plenty.

While both schools showed some improvement this year, reality is there is no pattern of consistency, especially in the case of New Mexico State. Love Las Cruces, love their fans, love their basketball. But their football has dragged us down financially and there's no indication that will change. History says otherwise.

Idaho had one good season under Rob Akey. Everything else has been Akey Breaky Heart. And, it's a MISERABLE trip for anyone who has to go to Moscow.

Look, I feel for these two schools. I HATE that they are in the situation they are in. But, if we're going to reject NMSU's best sport (by choosing someone else for all sports membership) then why do you keep their WORST sport in your league.

The smart thing to do will be to give the two schools a years grace for scheduling purposes, buy out 2017 and send them on their way.

Then stay with an eight game conference schedule for a set number of years, don't worry about a conference championship game and give the member schools some time to fix their OOC schedules. THEN, if you want a championship game and can show you can make money with it, ONLY then do you go to a round robin and host a title game.

Right now a championship game should be out of the question because we would lose money on it.

(01-14-2016 01:59 PM)DoubletapWolf Wrote:  

(01-14-2016 01:37 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-14-2016 01:34 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  

(01-14-2016 01:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  "Oh that probably won't happen" is no reassurance. Similar to "the WAC is a healthier football conference than the Sun Belch".

I'm seeing a trend developing that it's predominately the new guys pushing to go to ten.

Those of us 2001ers are a little set in our ways I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think that's it. When you stare death in the face a couple of times it changes your way of thinking.

Agree . . when your school has not been the one out there scrambling to find a conference home, it is pretty easy to be cold, callous and heartless.

We need numbers for security and stability . . as one of the stAte posters said . . this will come back to bite us in the ass if we do not extend Idaho and NMSU.

And its usually the ones who vote on this type of stuff who pack up and leave you hanging with it the next year.

(01-14-2016 09:30 AM)Eagleditka Wrote:  Voted for 2019. Let's see how 12 works out for a couple years before making the decision.

Of the options given (well, almost given), this sure seems like the best call.

Idaho and NMSU? I don't have anything against them, so let me think...

(01-14-2016 02:04 PM)BirdofParadise Wrote:  Many have stated in this thread that having NMSU and Idaho does not (or has not) affected their schools.

That would be an incorrect statement.

Last year, without those two schools, we would have finished ahead of the MAC when it came to CFP revenue distribution. And, I think the same was true this year, since NMSU did not win a single OOC game and Idaho's only win was over an FCS school.

So, those two schools have cost YOUR program plenty.

While both schools showed some improvement this year, reality is there is no pattern of consistency, especially in the case of New Mexico State. Love Las Cruces, love their fans, love their basketball. But their football has dragged us down financially and there's no indication that will change. History says otherwise.

Idaho had one good season under Rob Akey. Everything else has been Akey Breaky Heart. And, it's a MISERABLE trip for anyone who has to go to Moscow.

Look, I feel for these two schools. I HATE that they are in the situation they are in. But, if we're going to reject NMSU's best sport (by choosing someone else for all sports membership) then why do you keep their WORST sport in your league.

The smart thing to do will be to give the two schools a years grace for scheduling purposes, buy out 2017 and send them on their way.

Then stay with an eight game conference schedule for a set number of years, don't worry about a conference championship game and give the member schools some time to fix their OOC schedules. THEN, if you want a championship game and can show you can make money with it, ONLY then do you go to a round robin and host a title game.

Right now a championship game should be out of the question because we would lose money on it.

Sorry we drug down the Belt's stellar OOC performance. Oh, wait ...

In 2014 the entire Sun Belt won a grand total of 4 OOC FBS games during the season. In 2015 the number shot all the way up to 5.

Yes, Idaho & NMSU stunk in 2014. Given what our programs went through in 2011-2013, who wouldn't have? We both improved in 2015. I don't know about NMSU, but Idaho lost very few contributors and is poised to keep improving next year.

You can make us the scapegoat for OOC issues if you want, but it's a conference-wide problem.

(01-14-2016 02:05 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(01-14-2016 09:30 AM)Eagleditka Wrote:  Voted for 2019. Let's see how 12 works out for a couple years before making the decision.

Of the options given (well, almost given), this sure seems like the best call.

It's absolutely the best call


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(01-14-2016 02:04 PM)BirdofParadise Wrote:  Many have stated in this thread that having NMSU and Idaho does not (or has not) affected their schools.

That would be an incorrect statement.

Last year, without those two schools, we would have finished ahead of the MAC when it came to CFP revenue distribution. And, I think the same was true this year, since NMSU did not win a single OOC game and Idaho's only win was over an FCS school.

So, those two schools have cost YOUR program plenty.

While both schools showed some improvement this year, reality is there is no pattern of consistency, especially in the case of New Mexico State. Love Las Cruces, love their fans, love their basketball. But their football has dragged us down financially and there's no indication that will change. History says otherwise.

Idaho had one good season under Rob Akey. Everything else has been Akey Breaky Heart. And, it's a MISERABLE trip for anyone who has to go to Moscow.

Look, I feel for these two schools. I HATE that they are in the situation they are in. But, if we're going to reject NMSU's best sport (by choosing someone else for all sports membership) then why do you keep their WORST sport in your league.

The smart thing to do will be to give the two schools a years grace for scheduling purposes, buy out 2017 and send them on their way.

Then stay with an eight game conference schedule for a set number of years, don't worry about a conference championship game and give the member schools some time to fix their OOC schedules. THEN, if you want a championship game and can show you can make money with it, ONLY then do you go to a round robin and host a title game.

Right now a championship game should be out of the question because we would lose money on it.

I agree with this. Extend them on a year-to-year basis until they can figure out their problem. Both programs knew this wasn't a permanent thing, so let's not act like it is. NMSU and Idaho both knew that when they accepted the football-only invite that it was a saving grace from the Belt. Now that some time has passed, both should have their ducks in a row a bit more and be looking to what's next for their program overall.

(01-14-2016 02:04 PM)BirdofParadise Wrote:  Many have stated in this thread that having NMSU and Idaho does not (or has not) affected their schools.

That would be an incorrect statement.

Last year, without those two schools, we would have finished ahead of the MAC when it came to CFP revenue distribution. And, I think the same was true this year, since NMSU did not win a single OOC game and Idaho's only win was over an FCS school.

So, those two schools have cost YOUR program plenty.

While both schools showed some improvement this year, reality is there is no pattern of consistency, especially in the case of New Mexico State. Love Las Cruces, love their fans, love their basketball. But their football has dragged us down financially and there's no indication that will change. History says otherwise.

Idaho had one good season under Rob Akey. Everything else has been Akey Breaky Heart. And, it's a MISERABLE trip for anyone who has to go to Moscow.

Look, I feel for these two schools. I HATE that they are in the situation they are in. But, if we're going to reject NMSU's best sport (by choosing someone else for all sports membership) then why do you keep their WORST sport in your league.

The smart thing to do will be to give the two schools a years grace for scheduling purposes, buy out 2017 and send them on their way.

Then stay with an eight game conference schedule for a set number of years, don't worry about a conference championship game and give the member schools some time to fix their OOC schedules. THEN, if you want a championship game and can show you can make money with it, ONLY then do you go to a round robin and host a title game.

Right now a championship game should be out of the question because we would lose money on it.

Do you have a source for your numbers or are you making stuff up? The Sun Belt as a whole won a grand total of 4 OOC FBS games last year and I believe another 4
OOC FBS games this year (not including the few bowl wins). Even with Idaho and NMSU taken out, you're still dead last among the G5 conferences by a long ways and certainly not passing up the MAC.