(05-29-2020 08:47 AM)johnintx Wrote:  I'm an outsider with no axe to grind and no dog in the hunt.

I have nothing against Louisiana Tech, but from my perspective, this is one of the roadblocks to a reshuffling of C-USA and the Sun Belt. They see themselves as above ULL and especially ULM. They would consider it a step down to move to a conference with them.

The other roadblocks: the Sun Belt schools are generally happy with each other, and no one outside of Texas wants to go to UTEP.

Plus North Texas, UTSA, FIU, FAU, MTSU, WKU just left the Sun Belt a few years ago and going back would be admitting they made a mistake.

Anyone who has been reading between the lines and not taking every beat writer and ESPN clickbait article as barometers knew there was little chance of SBC-CUSA realignment.

It's not like picking two captains to choose kickball teams on the playground. You won't come up with a split that will make everyone happy and even if you do there's the challenge of exit fees which worth many years of any meager travel savings.

We are stuck in the current lineup in the two leagues unless there's more major realignment at P5 level coming up.

(05-28-2020 08:02 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I don’t know which burn is worse: calling ULL by the wrong name ...

He called them by the right name ... "Lafayette".

(05-29-2020 11:07 AM)Herd6993 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 08:47 AM)johnintx Wrote:  I'm an outsider with no axe to grind and no dog in the hunt.

I have nothing against Louisiana Tech, but from my perspective, this is one of the roadblocks to a reshuffling of C-USA and the Sun Belt. They see themselves as above ULL and especially ULM. They would consider it a step down to move to a conference with them.

The other roadblocks: the Sun Belt schools are generally happy with each other, and no one outside of Texas wants to go to UTEP.

Plus North Texas, UTSA, FIU, FAU, MTSU, WKU just left the Sun Belt a few years ago and going back would be admitting they made a mistake.

No, going back would be the mistake.

As much as some want to promote the idea that the Sun Belt is as good as C-USA, that just isn't the case, and it isn't just about football.

The Bowl ties announced yesterday shows that despite the fact that the Sun Belt has been better on the field, C-USA still enjoys slightly better bowl options. And the Sun Belt still has no bowl tie with a P5. Sure C-USA isn't guaranteed a P5 bowl, but it is still a possibility for the conference. Also, over the last 3 seasons, the Sun Belt has only 4 programs (40% of the Sun Belt) with a winning record, while C-USA has produced 7 programs (50% of C-USA) with winning records over the same time span.

But, I think the bigger difference is in the other major sport and in financing. Overall, C-USA basketball is much better than Sun Belt basketball. And overall, C-USA programs have larger athletic budgets.

(05-28-2020 08:02 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I don’t know which burn is worse: calling ULL by the wrong name or not acknowledging that ULM exists

Or just calling them "Northeast".

He's going to look foolish in just a few short years. C-USA and the Sun Belt will reshuffle the deck between themselves geographically. If LA Tech wants no part of other Louisiana schools they can head west like they did in the WAC and play a crapload of TX schools out of the Sun Belt and C-USA West divisions.

(05-29-2020 01:48 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  He's going to look foolish in just a few short years. C-USA and the Sun Belt will reshuffle the deck between themselves geographically. If LA Tech wants no part of other Louisiana schools they can head west like they did in the WAC and play a crapload of TX schools out of the Sun Belt and C-USA West divisions.

Yup...when something makes economic sense...its eventually going to happen. Its inevitable. The only thing that would stop it is if the current landscape changes through rule change or some other upheaval within college athletics.

(05-29-2020 01:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 01:48 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  He's going to look foolish in just a few short years. C-USA and the Sun Belt will reshuffle the deck between themselves geographically. If LA Tech wants no part of other Louisiana schools they can head west like they did in the WAC and play a crapload of TX schools out of the Sun Belt and C-USA West divisions.

Yup...when something makes economic sense...its eventually going to happen. Its inevitable. The only thing that would stop it is if the current landscape changes through rule change or some other upheaval within college athletics.

I wouldn't be totally sure about that. Tribalism and pridefulness are strong, especially when it comes to sports and colleges, and La Tech is just one of hundreds of college athletic departments that have to deal with those issues.

Look at how much money every non-P5 school in Division I spends every year to subsidize its athletic department. The maximum potential savings in "travel costs" that would be realized by shuffling schools between those two conferences is a small fraction of what each of them spends every year to subsidize their athletic departments.

Many of the CUSA/SBC athletic departments, if not most, have wasted more money on bad coaching hires followed by expensive buyouts than they would save in 100 years' worth of "travel cost" reductions. (Obviously they're not alone in that category of wasteful spending.)

And, as several others have pointed out in these threads, the potential savings from a west-east split, for La Tech and other schools in the middle of the CUSA/SBC geographic footprint, is quite a bit less than it would be for schools on either fringe of that footprint. Providing significant savings to the schools in the middle would require dividing those 26 schools into 3 or 4 conferences.

(05-29-2020 01:48 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  He's going to look foolish in just a few short years. C-USA and the Sun Belt will reshuffle the deck between themselves geographically. If LA Tech wants no part of other Louisiana schools they can head west like they did in the WAC and play a crapload of TX schools out of the Sun Belt and C-USA West divisions.

I'll take that bet.

(05-29-2020 02:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 01:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 01:48 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  He's going to look foolish in just a few short years. C-USA and the Sun Belt will reshuffle the deck between themselves geographically. If LA Tech wants no part of other Louisiana schools they can head west like they did in the WAC and play a crapload of TX schools out of the Sun Belt and C-USA West divisions.

Yup...when something makes economic sense...its eventually going to happen. Its inevitable. The only thing that would stop it is if the current landscape changes through rule change or some other upheaval within college athletics.

I wouldn't be totally sure about that. Tribalism and pridefulness are strong, especially when it comes to sports and colleges, and La Tech is just one of hundreds of college athletic departments that have to deal with those issues.

Look at how much money every non-P5 school in Division I spends every year to subsidize its athletic department. The maximum potential savings in "travel costs" that would be realized by shuffling schools between those two conferences is a small fraction of what each of them spends every year to subsidize their athletic departments.

Many of the CUSA/SBC athletic departments, if not most, have wasted more money on bad coaching hires followed by expensive buyouts than they would save in 100 years' worth of "travel cost" reductions. (Obviously they're not alone in that category of wasteful spending.)

And, as several others have pointed out in these threads, the potential savings from a west-east split, for La Tech and other schools in the middle of the CUSA/SBC geographic footprint, is quite a bit less than it would be for schools on either fringe of that footprint. Providing significant savings to the schools in the middle would require dividing those 26 schools into 3 or 4 conferences.

Well said. People are way overestimating the travel savings. They could reduce cross division games and save 90% of the cost that a more regional conference would provide. I suspect that is what will happen and life will go on. Granted if the P5 starts moving again things can change drastically, but short of that I don't see it.

(05-29-2020 02:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I wouldn't be totally sure about that. Tribalism and pridefulness are strong, especially when it comes to sports and colleges, and La Tech is just one of hundreds of college athletic departments that have to deal with those issues.

Look at how much money every non-P5 school in Division I spends every year to subsidize its athletic department. The maximum potential savings in "travel costs" that would be realized by shuffling schools between those two conferences is a small fraction of what each of them spends every year to subsidize their athletic departments.

Many of the CUSA/SBC athletic departments, if not most, have wasted more money on bad coaching hires followed by expensive buyouts than they would save in 100 years' worth of "travel cost" reductions. (Obviously they're not alone in that category of wasteful spending.)

And, as several others have pointed out in these threads, the potential savings from a west-east split, for La Tech and other schools in the middle of the CUSA/SBC geographic footprint, is quite a bit less than it would be for schools on either fringe of that footprint. Providing significant savings to the schools in the middle would require dividing those 26 schools into 3 or 4 conferences.

Playing a regional schedule is more than travel savings: it's a huge increase at the gate. LA Tech might hate ULM and snub their nose at them .... but they make more money playing ULM at home than they do nearly everybody in C-USA.

If Tech is so superior to ULM, they shouldn't worry about being in a conference with them and just destroy them annually. Treat it like your annual FCS game. UCF did that with Stetson basketball for years. Road trip to Stetson? Time to take over their arena. I know football is a little different, but so what? Easy road trip, will interest most fans (other than the die hards pushing the superiority narrative), and apparently an easy win.

That said, the push for realignment seems to be more out of the eastern schools. Both conferences are weighted toward the west, so I get where Marshall, ODU, and such are coming from. It's not impossible for them to carve out a conference, assuming they could work it out with the NCAA and CFP, that would be more eastern focused, but they'd need to get UMass, UConn, and maybe Army on-board or else get JMU, Delaware, or such to move up. They also could be in a position to raid the MAC if the MAC actually loses some members due to finances. Regardless, it's certainly complicated.

I'm sure CUSA isn't jonesing to split revenue more ways, but adding two eastern members like JMU and Delaware would probably do a lot for Marshall and ODU, especially once you split most things in the 8 team division-only play.

UTEP doesnt belong in CUSA. Since the MW doesnt want it, there is no other choice.

Independence in FB (or FCS) and the WAC would be a death sentence.

(05-29-2020 03:03 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  UTEP doesnt belong in CUSA. Since the MW doesnt want it, there is no other choice.

Independence in FB (or FCS) and the WAC would be a death sentence.

UTEP needs to get basketball back to being a tourney competitor and get football to just be decent, and everyone will quit whining. El Paso is at least accessible by air thanks to Southwest. I'd argue for a lot of people it's a heck of a lot harder to get to App State or ECU or some of these other college towns not near a major airport.

For my part, I enjoyed having UTEP in CUSA. I hate that I didn't make it out there for a game.

(05-29-2020 03:00 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 02:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I wouldn't be totally sure about that. Tribalism and pridefulness are strong, especially when it comes to sports and colleges, and La Tech is just one of hundreds of college athletic departments that have to deal with those issues.

Look at how much money every non-P5 school in Division I spends every year to subsidize its athletic department. The maximum potential savings in "travel costs" that would be realized by shuffling schools between those two conferences is a small fraction of what each of them spends every year to subsidize their athletic departments.

Many of the CUSA/SBC athletic departments, if not most, have wasted more money on bad coaching hires followed by expensive buyouts than they would save in 100 years' worth of "travel cost" reductions. (Obviously they're not alone in that category of wasteful spending.)

And, as several others have pointed out in these threads, the potential savings from a west-east split, for La Tech and other schools in the middle of the CUSA/SBC geographic footprint, is quite a bit less than it would be for schools on either fringe of that footprint. Providing significant savings to the schools in the middle would require dividing those 26 schools into 3 or 4 conferences.

Playing a regional schedule is more than travel savings: it's a huge increase at the gate. LA Tech might hate ULM and snub their nose at them .... but they make more money playing ULM at home than they do nearly everybody in C-USA.

Yeah, I've been making the same argument on the CUSA board, but the Tech posters would rather burn their school down than share a conference with ULM. And apparently their AD feels similar. Makes no sense to me when you'd have two in-state schools coming to town regularly that fans recognize. Way different than bringing in Charlotte, ODU, the Florida schools, etc.

Outside of the rules making a reshuffling very difficult, La Tech seems to be one of the biggest stumbling block in making such a realignment happen.

(05-29-2020 03:00 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 02:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I wouldn't be totally sure about that. Tribalism and pridefulness are strong, especially when it comes to sports and colleges, and La Tech is just one of hundreds of college athletic departments that have to deal with those issues.

Look at how much money every non-P5 school in Division I spends every year to subsidize its athletic department. The maximum potential savings in "travel costs" that would be realized by shuffling schools between those two conferences is a small fraction of what each of them spends every year to subsidize their athletic departments.

Many of the CUSA/SBC athletic departments, if not most, have wasted more money on bad coaching hires followed by expensive buyouts than they would save in 100 years' worth of "travel cost" reductions. (Obviously they're not alone in that category of wasteful spending.)

And, as several others have pointed out in these threads, the potential savings from a west-east split, for La Tech and other schools in the middle of the CUSA/SBC geographic footprint, is quite a bit less than it would be for schools on either fringe of that footprint. Providing significant savings to the schools in the middle would require dividing those 26 schools into 3 or 4 conferences.

Playing a regional schedule is more than travel savings: it's a huge increase at the gate. LA Tech might hate ULM and snub their nose at them .... but they make more money playing ULM at home than they do nearly everybody in C-USA.

La Tech and ULM haven't played in football since 2000 (hat tip to Stassen's database), so we don't have relevant data on how much it would help them. They would certainly sell more tickets for ULM than, say, ODU or Charlotte, but given that LT's total ticket sales, for an entire year for all events in their athletic department, is only $1.9 million, the increased revenue from each home game with ULM would likely be $100,000 at most.

Would being in the same conference with ULM piss off LT's donors? If so, that's a larger concern because their annual athletic donations, about $5.9 million, provide LT with three times as much money as their ticket sales.

And as I said above, other schools are going to have their own "we don't want to associate with School X" issues, even if they are not as loud about it as LT is. So I'll stick with my opinion that this kind of reshuffle is far from a certainty.

I just don’t get it? Trade your long road trips to all the C-USA East schools that you don’t car about for drivable games against Ark St, ULL, and ULM (and probably USA and Texas St too).

Pocket the savings or invest it elsewhere in the program. It’s not that difficult.

(05-29-2020 03:44 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I just don’t get it? Trade your long road trips to all the C-USA East schools that you don’t car about for drivable games against Ark St, ULL, and ULM (and probably USA and Texas St too).

Pocket the savings or invest it elsewhere in the program. It’s not that difficult.

It amazes me how territorial some schools are when the best and richest conference are successful because they have multiple schools in the same area

(05-29-2020 02:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 01:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 01:48 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  He's going to look foolish in just a few short years. C-USA and the Sun Belt will reshuffle the deck between themselves geographically. If LA Tech wants no part of other Louisiana schools they can head west like they did in the WAC and play a crapload of TX schools out of the Sun Belt and C-USA West divisions.

Yup...when something makes economic sense...its eventually going to happen. Its inevitable. The only thing that would stop it is if the current landscape changes through rule change or some other upheaval within college athletics.

I wouldn't be totally sure about that. Tribalism and pridefulness are strong, especially when it comes to sports and colleges, and La Tech is just one of hundreds of college athletic departments that have to deal with those issues.

Look at how much money every non-P5 school in Division I spends every year to subsidize its athletic department. The maximum potential savings in "travel costs" that would be realized by shuffling schools between those two conferences is a small fraction of what each of them spends every year to subsidize their athletic departments.

Many of the CUSA/SBC athletic departments, if not most, have wasted more money on bad coaching hires followed by expensive buyouts than they would save in 100 years' worth of "travel cost" reductions. (Obviously they're not alone in that category of wasteful spending.)

And, as several others have pointed out in these threads, the potential savings from a west-east split, for La Tech and other schools in the middle of the CUSA/SBC geographic footprint, is quite a bit less than it would be for schools on either fringe of that footprint. Providing significant savings to the schools in the middle would require dividing those 26 schools into 3 or 4 conferences.

Tribalism will delay it---but economic reality will eventually win out. Those that hold out the longest could potentially end up finding themselves in the worst long term position as the regional conferences fill up without them. That said---if we end up with a rule change that sets things up where your revenue sports play in one conference and your non-revenue sports play in a different regional conference---then travel savings becomes much less of an issue.

I think the biggest realignment barrier is TV contracts. Until both conferences are under the ESPN umbrellas with relatively equal terms it will be difficult to get movement