Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
Author Message
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #61
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 01:59 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 01:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 12:21 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 12:15 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 10:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  Is there any NCAA mandated minimum number of conference football games? This might work for Marshall, but how difficult would it be for all 14 CUSA members to be looking for two more games a year?

That would be the hitch. Athletic directors would have to schedule 6 non-con football games a year instead of 4, and they probably don't want the extra hassle. Some (probably most) of those additional "new" home non-con games would be no more attractive than whichever conference opponents you don't really care about. Obviously it's not impossible to do it; indy teams manage to schedule 12 every year. But a lot of ADs and football coaches would not see the reduction in conference games as an improvement.

It would only be 1 more FBS game if you schedule an FCS. And you could schedule a team from the opposite division to play as an OOC game. But it frees up the schedule for schools who want to make their schedule as good as possible.

For the teams that benefit from it, it would be only a marginal gain.

Hypothetically, let's say Marshall replaces a future home/home conference series vs. North Texas or UTSA with a home/home non-conference series vs. Ball State or EMU. (Everyone can hope the new home games wouldn't just be against MAC or SBC teams or UConn or UMass, but realistically that's the pool for 90% of these extra home games.) Comparing the road games in the series, it's really nice to make a fairly short bus trip to Indiana or Michigan instead of a long and more expensive road trip to Texas. Comparing the home games, it's probably a wash in terms of the interest level of Marshall fans. So there is some benefit, but not an enormous amount.

A much larger benefit would be implementing a conference schedule in all sports that is more local and maybe a bit smaller. Find a way to have fewer road games that require airline travel for every non-football team sport: Basketball, baseball, softball, volleyball, soccer, etc. The goal should be something like eliminating two airline trips each year in each of those sports and replacing them with road games that only require a bus. That's a good start on significant travel cost reduction.

Your example only assumes the two teams to replace two CUSA-W teams would be MAC teams we don't care about. There are others we do care about (Ohio, Toledo, Miami). There's App State in the Sun Belt. AAC schools like Cinci, ECU, UCF. Power 5 schools who we have a decent track record of getting home and homes with. My example included an away money game vs a P5 and another home game:

@ECU (happening)
Pitt (happening)
@Ohio (happening)
Boise State (happening)
Wake Forest (hypothetical replacing Rice)
@Florida State for big $ (hypothetical replacing LT)

That would not be a wash in terms of Marshall fan interest. That would create a lot of excitement. We could split the difference and say a money game at FSU and a home game vs. Ball State. But I bet if you polled the Marshall fanbase they'd far prefer those two games than against Rice and @LT.

To your second part, a more local conference would be great. But the powers that be are saying that's not happening and they plan to tweak the conference schedule.

To get the home game vs. Ball State, you'd probably have to agree to play one there as well. You can pick and choose which MAC teams to schedule, if they are agreeable, and of course money games are always available, though your coaches probably wouldn't schedule more than one a year.

Also, I wasn't talking about a new conference above, I was talking about eliminating conference games against farther-away opponents and replacing them with additional games against closer conference opponents. For example, Marshall's volleyball team could play WKU and MTSU twice every year and not play UTEP or UTSA at all, except in a conference tournament. Schedule like that in every sport, and most schools will eliminate a lot of airplane travel.
06-01-2020 02:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MUsince96 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,112
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 169
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #62
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 02:30 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 01:59 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 01:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 12:21 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 12:15 PM)Wedge Wrote:  That would be the hitch. Athletic directors would have to schedule 6 non-con football games a year instead of 4, and they probably don't want the extra hassle. Some (probably most) of those additional "new" home non-con games would be no more attractive than whichever conference opponents you don't really care about. Obviously it's not impossible to do it; indy teams manage to schedule 12 every year. But a lot of ADs and football coaches would not see the reduction in conference games as an improvement.

It would only be 1 more FBS game if you schedule an FCS. And you could schedule a team from the opposite division to play as an OOC game. But it frees up the schedule for schools who want to make their schedule as good as possible.

For the teams that benefit from it, it would be only a marginal gain.

Hypothetically, let's say Marshall replaces a future home/home conference series vs. North Texas or UTSA with a home/home non-conference series vs. Ball State or EMU. (Everyone can hope the new home games wouldn't just be against MAC or SBC teams or UConn or UMass, but realistically that's the pool for 90% of these extra home games.) Comparing the road games in the series, it's really nice to make a fairly short bus trip to Indiana or Michigan instead of a long and more expensive road trip to Texas. Comparing the home games, it's probably a wash in terms of the interest level of Marshall fans. So there is some benefit, but not an enormous amount.

A much larger benefit would be implementing a conference schedule in all sports that is more local and maybe a bit smaller. Find a way to have fewer road games that require airline travel for every non-football team sport: Basketball, baseball, softball, volleyball, soccer, etc. The goal should be something like eliminating two airline trips each year in each of those sports and replacing them with road games that only require a bus. That's a good start on significant travel cost reduction.

Your example only assumes the two teams to replace two CUSA-W teams would be MAC teams we don't care about. There are others we do care about (Ohio, Toledo, Miami). There's App State in the Sun Belt. AAC schools like Cinci, ECU, UCF. Power 5 schools who we have a decent track record of getting home and homes with. My example included an away money game vs a P5 and another home game:

@ECU (happening)
Pitt (happening)
@Ohio (happening)
Boise State (happening)
Wake Forest (hypothetical replacing Rice)
@Florida State for big $ (hypothetical replacing LT)

That would not be a wash in terms of Marshall fan interest. That would create a lot of excitement. We could split the difference and say a money game at FSU and a home game vs. Ball State. But I bet if you polled the Marshall fanbase they'd far prefer those two games than against Rice and @LT.

To your second part, a more local conference would be great. But the powers that be are saying that's not happening and they plan to tweak the conference schedule.

To get the home game vs. Ball State, you'd probably have to agree to play one there as well. You can pick and choose which MAC teams to schedule, if they are agreeable, and of course money games are always available, though your coaches probably wouldn't schedule more than one a year.

Also, I wasn't talking about a new conference above, I was talking about eliminating conference games against farther-away opponents and replacing them with additional games against closer conference opponents. For example, Marshall's volleyball team could play WKU and MTSU twice every year and not play UTEP or UTSA at all, except in a conference tournament. Schedule like that in every sport, and most schools will eliminate a lot of airplane travel.

Oh I totally agree and I think they will do something along those lines.

I just had the idea to take it a step further and do something similar with division only football games if allowed.
06-01-2020 02:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mturn017 Offline
ODU Homer
*

Posts: 16,741
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1592
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Roanoke, VA
Post: #63
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
Football is probably not that big of deal. We play everyone in our division and two cross-division games, 1 home and 1 away. So you're only saving one trip to the other division a year by messing with it. The other sports are where the savings will be. That said, I agree that our conference makes little sense as is. If we're going to play only the teams in our division then what's the purpose of being in a conference with the other division?
06-01-2020 02:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TOPSTRAIGHT Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,786
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 451
I Root For: WKU
Location: Glasgow,KY.
Post: #64
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
The purpose is the alternative is worse. You lose the auto bid and CFP money by splitting into two new leagues. In other words-- we are stuck unless you want to lose money. The play division only (or mostly) plan at least saves some money.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 05:10 PM by TOPSTRAIGHT.)
06-01-2020 05:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,337
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #65
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 02:50 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  Football is probably not that big of deal. We play everyone in our division and two cross-division games, 1 home and 1 away. So you're only saving one trip to the other division a year by messing with it. The other sports are where the savings will be. That said, I agree that our conference makes little sense as is. If we're going to play only the teams in our division then what's the purpose of being in a conference with the other division?

I agree about football. But even with the other sports, how many opportunities are there to avoid a plane trip in a conference as geographically far flung as CUSA? Marshall's closest division opponent (WKU) is a 4 1/2 hour drive away. Charlotte is 5 hours, MTSU 5:40 and ODU 7 hours. There probably isn't anybody within reasonable driving distance for FIU and FAU except each other.

The western division is pretty widely scattered as well. I'm not sure there's anybody who could save more than one plane trip a year in any sport.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 05:10 PM by ken d.)
06-01-2020 05:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,019
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #66
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 01:10 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 08:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Would it be better if CUSA and the SBC swapped some members so as to be geographically tighter? I guess. Is it silly that schools like UL-Monroe and LA-Tech are in different conferences? Sure. But it's basically arguing over positions in a Soup Line.

I understand from another thread why LaTech doesn't want to be in a conference with UL and ULM. It's the optics, man. The optics.

The notion that anyone anywhere sees a difference between CUSA or the Sun Belt is pretty crazy, IMO.
06-01-2020 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #67
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 05:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 01:10 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 08:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Would it be better if CUSA and the SBC swapped some members so as to be geographically tighter? I guess. Is it silly that schools like UL-Monroe and LA-Tech are in different conferences? Sure. But it's basically arguing over positions in a Soup Line.

I understand from another thread why LaTech doesn't want to be in a conference with UL and ULM. It's the optics, man. The optics.

The notion that anyone anywhere sees a difference between CUSA or the Sun Belt is pretty crazy, IMO.

Quo, you consistently overestimate how much information people take in when making decisions. CUSA is a league that used to have higher profile schools than it has now. Some of that halo effect remains. (Enough to be ahead of the Sun Belt anyway.) And CUSA schools have almost all been FBS/ Division IA schools for a long time. 6 of the 10 Sun Belt football schools have transitioned to FBS since the Big Ten invited Nebraska. (Sure, the half of CUSA that was in the Sun Belt doesn't have that much more longevity, but it's still more).

I used to underestimate how much FBS history matters. But the name of the game is selling pipe dreams to rich donors, and the longer you've been in that game the better at it you can become.

I'm not sure it's as important as CUSA boosters make it out to be, but based on the revealed preferences of schools and the sentiments of donors, it's *something* and not nothing. Especially combined with sheer cussedness and perversity of people who have to justify the past decisions they made.
06-01-2020 05:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,019
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #68
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 05:29 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 01:10 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 08:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Would it be better if CUSA and the SBC swapped some members so as to be geographically tighter? I guess. Is it silly that schools like UL-Monroe and LA-Tech are in different conferences? Sure. But it's basically arguing over positions in a Soup Line.

I understand from another thread why LaTech doesn't want to be in a conference with UL and ULM. It's the optics, man. The optics.

The notion that anyone anywhere sees a difference between CUSA or the Sun Belt is pretty crazy, IMO.

Quo, you consistently overestimate how much information people take in when making decisions. CUSA is a league that used to have higher profile schools than it has now. Some of that halo effect remains. (Enough to be ahead of the Sun Belt anyway.)

I bet that 95% of all college football fans cannot tell you whether LA-Tech or UL-Monroe are in CUSA or the Sun Belt. It would be a pure guess.
06-01-2020 05:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TOPSTRAIGHT Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,786
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 451
I Root For: WKU
Location: Glasgow,KY.
Post: #69
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
They do not sound like very knowledgeable college football fans. Fans like that probably struggle to name everyone in their own conference.
06-01-2020 06:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,337
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #70
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 05:29 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 01:10 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 08:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Would it be better if CUSA and the SBC swapped some members so as to be geographically tighter? I guess. Is it silly that schools like UL-Monroe and LA-Tech are in different conferences? Sure. But it's basically arguing over positions in a Soup Line.

I understand from another thread why LaTech doesn't want to be in a conference with UL and ULM. It's the optics, man. The optics.

The notion that anyone anywhere sees a difference between CUSA or the Sun Belt is pretty crazy, IMO.

Quo, you consistently overestimate how much information people take in when making decisions. CUSA is a league that used to have higher profile schools than it has now. Some of that halo effect remains. (Enough to be ahead of the Sun Belt anyway.) And CUSA schools have almost all been FBS/ Division IA schools for a long time. 6 of the 10 Sun Belt football schools have transitioned to FBS since the Big Ten invited Nebraska. (Sure, the half of CUSA that was in the Sun Belt doesn't have that much more longevity, but it's still more).

I used to underestimate how much FBS history matters. But the name of the game is selling pipe dreams to rich donors, and the longer you've been in that game the better at it you can become.

I'm not sure it's as important as CUSA boosters make it out to be, but based on the revealed preferences of schools and the sentiments of donors, it's *something* and not nothing. Especially combined with sheer cussedness and perversity of people who have to justify the past decisions they made.

Two of the fourteen current CUSA members (Rice and Southern Miss) were FBS at the time that subdivision was created. One of ten Sunbelt teams (Louisiana) was FBS before 1981.

By 1996, three more CUSA schools had moved up to FBS - Louisiana Tech (1988) UAB (1993) and North Texas (1995). Current Sunbelt teams that had moved up by 1996 were Arkansas State (1992) and Louisiana Monroe (1994).

I don't view that as a big difference. CUSA is still trying to live off the reputation of its former members who moved up to stronger conferences.
06-01-2020 06:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ESE84 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,596
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 205
I Root For: Rice then UH
Location: Houston

New Orleans BowlDonators
Post: #71
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 05:37 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I bet that 95% of all college football fans cannot tell you whether LA-Tech or UL-Monroe are in CUSA or the Sun Belt. It would be a pure guess.

I disagree with you. The G5 conferences have more fans than you estimate, and they know the difference. The uninformed fan you describe probably never went to college and wears a (fill in your favorite SEC West school) t-shirt.
06-01-2020 07:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,019
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #72
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 07:13 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:37 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I bet that 95% of all college football fans cannot tell you whether LA-Tech or UL-Monroe are in CUSA or the Sun Belt. It would be a pure guess.

I disagree with you. The G5 conferences have more fans than you estimate, and they know the difference. The uninformed fan you describe probably never went to college and wears a (fill in your favorite SEC West school) t-shirt.

I have grave doubts that the typical Boise or SDSU or Toledo fan knows whether LA Tech or ULM are in the SB or CUSA either.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 07:38 PM by quo vadis.)
06-01-2020 07:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #73
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 06:37 PM)ken d Wrote:  Two of the fourteen current CUSA members (Rice and Southern Miss) were FBS at the time that subdivision was created. One of ten Sunbelt teams (Louisiana) was FBS before 1981.

UTEP was in the WAC long before 1978 and has been in I-A/FBS football from the beginning.

Marshall resumed playing I-A/FBS football starting with the 1997 season, Randy Moss' last season of college football before turning pro.
06-01-2020 07:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,337
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #74
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 07:42 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 06:37 PM)ken d Wrote:  Two of the fourteen current CUSA members (Rice and Southern Miss) were FBS at the time that subdivision was created. One of ten Sunbelt teams (Louisiana) was FBS before 1981.

UTEP was in the WAC long before 1978 and has been in I-A/FBS football from the beginning.

Marshall resumed playing I-A/FBS football starting with the 1997 season, Randy Moss' last season of college football before turning pro.

You are correct. I missed UTEP when I reviewed the conference alignment for 1996 after the SWC broke apart. Those schools I didn't name either moved up to or returned to FBS later than that. I hardly think of 24 years as being in FBS for a "long time". I consider all of them "moveups".
06-01-2020 09:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mturn017 Offline
ODU Homer
*

Posts: 16,741
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1592
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Roanoke, VA
Post: #75
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 05:06 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  The purpose is the alternative is worse. You lose the auto bid and CFP money by splitting into two new leagues. In other words-- we are stuck unless you want to lose money. The play division only (or mostly) plan at least saves some money.

It's something. Unless there becomes a critical mass of schools that want change in both conferences or there's movement from above then there's not going to be any membership changes unless an NCAA waiver is guaranteed. There could be a coup like scenario where enough teams leave forcing the conferences to merge. Say CUSA-E + UAB and some SB-E members leave to form a new conference. Leaving both with less than 7 schools. They'd be hard pressed to refill both conferences and one would likely cannibalize the other. It's not likely and probably risky but not impossible.
06-02-2020 08:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #76
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-02-2020 08:20 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:06 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  The purpose is the alternative is worse. You lose the auto bid and CFP money by splitting into two new leagues. In other words-- we are stuck unless you want to lose money. The play division only (or mostly) plan at least saves some money.

It's something. Unless there becomes a critical mass of schools that want change in both conferences or there's movement from above then there's not going to be any membership changes unless an NCAA waiver is guaranteed. There could be a coup like scenario where enough teams leave forcing the conferences to merge. Say CUSA-E + UAB and some SB-E members leave to form a new conference. Leaving both with less than 7 schools. They'd be hard pressed to refill both conferences and one would likely cannibalize the other. It's not likely and probably risky but not impossible.

You only need to backfill to 7 for the basketball tournament, 8 to qualify as an FBS league. And you get a 2 year waiver almost automatically. My dollar is on the Sun Belt and CUSA leftover groups successfully backfilling over the New Group standing strong for 8 years or for the duration of the slow, grinding lawsuit.

Ask BYU how "The Plan" worked out.
06-02-2020 09:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
geauxcajuns Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,722
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 181
I Root For: Louisiana
Location:
Post: #77
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-01-2020 05:29 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 01:10 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 08:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Would it be better if CUSA and the SBC swapped some members so as to be geographically tighter? I guess. Is it silly that schools like UL-Monroe and LA-Tech are in different conferences? Sure. But it's basically arguing over positions in a Soup Line.

I understand from another thread why LaTech doesn't want to be in a conference with UL and ULM. It's the optics, man. The optics.

The notion that anyone anywhere sees a difference between CUSA or the Sun Belt is pretty crazy, IMO.

Quo, you consistently overestimate how much information people take in when making decisions. CUSA is a league that used to have higher profile schools than it has now. Some of that halo effect remains. (Enough to be ahead of the Sun Belt anyway.) And CUSA schools have almost all been FBS/ Division IA schools for a long time. 6 of the 10 Sun Belt football schools have transitioned to FBS since the Big Ten invited Nebraska. (Sure, the half of CUSA that was in the Sun Belt doesn't have that much more longevity, but it's still more).

I used to underestimate how much FBS history matters. But the name of the game is selling pipe dreams to rich donors, and the longer you've been in that game the better at it you can become.

I'm not sure it's as important as CUSA boosters make it out to be, but based on the revealed preferences of schools and the sentiments of donors, it's *something* and not nothing. Especially combined with sheer cussedness and perversity of people who have to justify the past decisions they made.

WKU
MTSU
FIU
FAU
ODU
Charlotte
UTSA
UNT

All programs that were either nonexistent or 1AA/FCS Prior to 2001.
06-02-2020 09:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mturn017 Offline
ODU Homer
*

Posts: 16,741
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1592
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Roanoke, VA
Post: #78
RE: It’s past time for radical change in Conference USA
(06-02-2020 09:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(06-02-2020 08:20 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:06 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  The purpose is the alternative is worse. You lose the auto bid and CFP money by splitting into two new leagues. In other words-- we are stuck unless you want to lose money. The play division only (or mostly) plan at least saves some money.

It's something. Unless there becomes a critical mass of schools that want change in both conferences or there's movement from above then there's not going to be any membership changes unless an NCAA waiver is guaranteed. There could be a coup like scenario where enough teams leave forcing the conferences to merge. Say CUSA-E + UAB and some SB-E members leave to form a new conference. Leaving both with less than 7 schools. They'd be hard pressed to refill both conferences and one would likely cannibalize the other. It's not likely and probably risky but not impossible.

You only need to backfill to 7 for the basketball tournament, 8 to qualify as an FBS league. And you get a 2 year waiver almost automatically. My dollar is on the Sun Belt and CUSA leftover groups successfully backfilling over the New Group standing strong for 8 years or for the duration of the slow, grinding lawsuit.

Ask BYU how "The Plan" worked out.


Maybe.

CUSA

UTEP
Rice
UTSA
UNT
LT
USM

Sun Belt

Tx St
Ark St
ULL
ULM
Troy
USA
UTA (non-FB)
UALR (non-FB)

They'd have some difficult choices. NMST is available but they'd both need some more FB schools so would they rather play each other or raid the Southland? We could try to bring in Troy and USM or Ark St to go to 14 and that would almost certainly do it.
06-02-2020 09:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.