It seems the conference could meet anywhere. It's not like KSU or their fans are going to be driving the the conference offices each week.

I would make there be no non-Division I teams on the basketball schedules. Any currently scheduled is fine but no new ones added.

Have the basketball schedules adjusted to have the top teams play each other most frequently whether through divisional alignment or through home/home games throughout the season. Better match ups lead to better media product which leads to better media deals and more money and exposure for us. Better match ups lead to better seeds in the NCAA tournament which leads to better chances to upset someone.

Have the conference tournaments be 10 teams, top 2 get byes until the semifinals (regardless of divisions so the top 2 could be in the same division). The idea is to get the best teams into the NCAA tournament at the highest seed they can achieve. Now the regular season matters more so you either get to skip two games and only need to win two to make the NCAA tournament or you can't finish in the bottom 4 or you get left out. Normally I think everyone should get a shot in the conference tournament but our bottom is so bad that playing them hurts the other team's metrics and we definitely don't want the turds to win.

I would look to start a challenge with another conference. The Big South makes sense with our football connection but I'd prefer someone slightly more prestigious. Maybe the MAC or someone like them. I wouldn't want someone who overlaps our footprint because I'd like to get us out there in new areas while also having the chance to vault us above a higher conference that is winnable unlike the Big Ten or something.

As for football, I would attempt to get one or two football-only members. I would try to be creative for this since they aren't full members. I don't have anyone in mind but adding a pair of California schools or something crazy isn't a negative to me. Just find someone who is held back by their current conference.

Maybe look to add some sports such as men's lacrosse.

Overall, the idea would be to elevate the conference on the field, court, or whatever. Give ourselves the best chance with the things we can control like scheduling and media deals (to a point) while leaving the on field performance up to the schools and reward those who boost the conference. I'm debating whether I would want to tweak the conference payouts to benefit those who earned the tournament credits or showed up on TV more or if they should be distributed evenly and can be influenced either way so I won't change whatever it is we do.

(02-15-2021 05:15 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I would make there be no non-Division I teams on the basketball schedules. Any currently scheduled is fine but no new ones added.

Have the basketball schedules adjusted to have the top teams play each other most frequently whether through divisional alignment or through home/home games throughout the season. Better match ups lead to better media product which leads to better media deals and more money and exposure for us. Better match ups lead to better seeds in the NCAA tournament which leads to better chances to upset someone.

Have the conference tournaments be 10 teams, top 2 get byes until the semifinals (regardless of divisions so the top 2 could be in the same division). The idea is to get the best teams into the NCAA tournament at the highest seed they can achieve. Now the regular season matters more so you either get to skip two games and only need to win two to make the NCAA tournament or you can't finish in the bottom 4 or you get left out. Normally I think everyone should get a shot in the conference tournament but our bottom is so bad that playing them hurts the other team's metrics and we definitely don't want the turds to win.

I would look to start a challenge with another conference. The Big South makes sense with our football connection but I'd prefer someone slightly more prestigious. Maybe the MAC or someone like them. I wouldn't want someone who overlaps our footprint because I'd like to get us out there in new areas while also having the chance to vault us above a higher conference that is winnable unlike the Big Ten or something.

As for football, I would attempt to get one or two football-only members. I would try to be creative for this since they aren't full members. I don't have anyone in mind but adding a pair of California schools or something crazy isn't a negative to me. Just find someone who is held back by their current conference.

Maybe look to add some sports such as men's lacrosse.

Overall, the idea would be to elevate the conference on the field, court, or whatever. Give ourselves the best chance with the things we can control like scheduling and media deals (to a point) while leaving the on field performance up to the schools and reward those who boost the conference. I'm debating whether I would want to tweak the conference payouts to benefit those who earned the tournament credits or showed up on TV more or if they should be distributed evenly and can be influenced either way so I won't change whatever it is we do.

I would like to see the ASUN vs the SoCon, even though there is some overlap.

If we go by overlap, that limits some chances with some conferences.

ASUN vs A-10
ASUN vs MVC
ASUN vs CAA

(02-15-2021 05:15 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I would make there be no non-Division I teams on the basketball schedules.
—————————————————————————————————————
I would look to start a challenge with another conference.
———————————————————————————————————-—-
Maybe look to add some sports such as men's lacrosse.
—————————————————————————————————————
I'm debating whether I would want to tweak the conference payouts to benefit those who earned the tournament credits or showed up on TV more or if they should be distributed evenly and can be influenced either way so I won't change whatever it is we do.

These are some great ideas.
- I totally agree about stop scheduling lower Div teams.
- A challenge with another conference sounds great. I’m thinking maybe WAC, A10, or C-USA, mostly WAC.
- Adding sports is always a good idea.
- providing incentives for success is a good idea as well.

https://twitter.com/ASUNCommish/status/1...64322?s=20

I know dropping all non-D1 games sounds great when you say it out loud, but there are reasons most mid-majors don't so that. You'd be effectively sacrificing several home games per year because there aren't any D1 programs you can realistically buy out of the return game.

It's also nice to have a few tune-up, easy win kind of games to get the ball rolling.

(02-15-2021 06:55 PM)army56mike Wrote:  

(02-15-2021 05:15 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I would make there be no non-Division I teams on the basketball schedules.
—————————————————————————————————————
I would look to start a challenge with another conference.
———————————————————————————————————-—-
Maybe look to add some sports such as men's lacrosse.
—————————————————————————————————————
I'm debating whether I would want to tweak the conference payouts to benefit those who earned the tournament credits or showed up on TV more or if they should be distributed evenly and can be influenced either way so I won't change whatever it is we do.

These are some great ideas.
- I totally agree about stop scheduling lower Div teams.
- A challenge with another conference sounds great. I’m thinking maybe WAC, A10, or C-USA, mostly WAC.
- Adding sports is always a good idea.
- providing incentives for success is a good idea as well.

Great ideas. I like the conference challenge. Perhaps a trophy game between conferences.
Incentives seems a must.

(02-15-2021 07:04 PM)EKUSteve Wrote:  https://twitter.com/ASUNCommish/status/1...64322?s=20

Sounds like no team six this year. Maybe a little closer to desperation.

(02-15-2021 09:16 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  

(02-15-2021 07:04 PM)EKUSteve Wrote:  https://twitter.com/ASUNCommish/status/1...64322?s=20

Sounds like no team six this year. Maybe a little closer to desperation.

That's the feeling I'm getting too. It's a little disappointing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still excited about the move, but getting those 6th/7th football teams this year would have been a nice sign that the plan here is concrete. It feels little now like they're just kind of hoping this works as opposed to having a strong sense that it actually will.

We'll ultimately be able to get those 6th/7th teams even if they have to come in the form of D2 call ups, but I'm not just concerned with the idea of getting teams. I want teams that you can at least envision being on board with an FBS-type move when and if that becomes an option.

That's why the whole UTM rumor bummed me out. UTM does a lot with their relatively few resources. They've had some really nice teams over the last decade and a half at various points since they recommitted to a full scholarship allotment. They've beaten us a few times, and we were lucky to block that field goal in 2008 on the final play of the regular season to take the OVC title.

But it's not just about where a program is now. It's about what their foreseeable ceiling is. UTM is darn close to maxing out already. I think that is considerably less true for most if not all of the current ASUN football schools.

As Michael Jordan put it..."the ceiling is the roof!":lmfao:

(02-16-2021 11:26 AM)eku05 Wrote:  

(02-15-2021 09:16 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  

(02-15-2021 07:04 PM)EKUSteve Wrote:  https://twitter.com/ASUNCommish/status/1...64322?s=20

Sounds like no team six this year. Maybe a little closer to desperation.

That's the feeling I'm getting too. It's a little disappointing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still excited about the move, but getting those 6th/7th football teams this year would have been a nice sign that the plan here is concrete. It feels little now like they're just kind of hoping this works as opposed to having a strong sense that it actually will.

We'll ultimately be able to get those 6th/7th teams even if they have to come in the form of D2 call ups, but I'm not just concerned with the idea of getting teams. I want teams that you can at least envision being on board with an FBS-type move when and if that becomes an option.

That's why the whole UTM rumor bummed me out. UTM does a lot with their relatively few resources. They've had some really nice teams over the last decade and a half at various points since they recommitted to a full scholarship allotment. They've beaten us a few times, and we were lucky to block that field goal in 2008 on the final play of the regular season to take the OVC title.

But it's not just about where a program is now. It's about what their foreseeable ceiling is. UTM is darn close to maxing out already. I think that is considerably less true for most if not all of the current ASUN football schools.

As Michael Jordan put it..."the ceiling is the roof!":lmfao:

It says Minimum of 4... hes not going to tell everything. And even if we get 1 or 2 more schools, they may not be able to join until 2022.

Right, but I'm not saying I'm getting that feeling because additions aren't on the list. I'm getting that feeling because partnerships ARE on the list. Obviously those are only necessary if we don't add another school this year.

But I'm with you...there could well just be moves that are delayed by a year. Frankly, I'm surprised that ours came together so quickly though it sounds like the initial discussions started over a year ago.

I get the feeling there is a football only member coming for this season.

For what it's worth, Ted just tweeted back at the Maroon Nation message board that while the list of items for the 23rd will grow, they won't be discussing new members at that time.

Sounds like no one is joining for 21

FWIW, the SoCon charges a higher exit fee ($1.25M vs $1M) for teams leaving with less than one year's notice.

So if UTC (and/or the other two SoCon prospects) is interested, this could be a reason for the delay.

Of course, it also means we should hear something regarding their 2022 plans within the next couple months in order to meet that one year advance notice deadline.

Back to the OT: I'd love to be Gumbart for the day, just so I'd know who all is seriously considering being that 6th (or 7th... or 8th... or...) team. I wouldn't necessarily do anything different on that front. It'd just assuage my curiosity.

I love the idea of limiting sub-D-I games, but I don't know that I'd cut them out entirely without providing an alternative that removes the need for those games. I understand their place, but they can be abused. Those soft schedules ultimately hurt the entire conference by lowering RPI, and we need to focus on doing the exact opposite: raising our profile and becoming more than a single-bid mid-major.

As for that alternative?

(02-15-2021 05:15 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I would look to start a challenge with another conference. The Big South makes sense with our football connection but I'd prefer someone slightly more prestigious. Maybe the MAC or someone like them. I wouldn't want someone who overlaps our footprint because I'd like to get us out there in new areas while also having the chance to vault us above a higher conference that is winnable unlike the Big Ten or something.

This.

I think your starting place would have to be schools in the tier we aim to reach. Playing the Big South or OVC would give us winnable games, but even if we swept the challenge, it wouldn't do much more than bump the ASUN above them in the rankings. If our goal is to raise the conference's competitive profile while keeping the games winnable, the next tier of mid-majors would be the place to look. The conferences in that tier who'd match up with 12 teams like the ASUN are the MAC and the Sun Belt.

Why not try for challenges with both? If you make each challenge home-and-away, that'd be four total games, including two home games. Something like this:

(Matchups are determined by ranking, not geography. Current NET rankings are shown.)

92 Liberty vs 146 Texas State
92 Liberty vs 71 Toledo

159 EKU vs 158 Georgia State
159 EKU vs 83 Kent State

161 Bellarmine vs 178 Coastal Carolina
161 Bellarmine vs 84 Buffalo

177 Jax State vs 188 Louisiana
177 Jax State vs 90 Akron

224 Lipscomb vs 188 Louisiana
224 Lipscomb vs 107 Ohio

262 Stetson vs 202 USA
262 Stetson vs 135 Bowling Green

266 FGCU vs 219 App State
266 FGCU vs 186 Ball State

298 UNF vs 228 Ark State
298 UNF vs 195 Miami-OH

301 JU vs 242 UT-Arlington
301 JU vs 280 Western Michigan

305 UNA vs 260 Ga Southern
305 UNA vs 294 Central Michigan

328 UCA vs 283 Troy
328 UCA vs 325 Eastern Michigan

338 KSU vs 300 ULM
338 KSU vs 332 Northern Illinois

I want nothing to do with the MAC. I think it is the most boring, rusty, uninspiring conference.

My idea is to revamp the FCS opening football game in Montgomery. A Week 0 event.

Using the "local" FBS schools against the ASUN. It would be a two game contract. One game in Montgomery and one game at the FBS school 3+/- years later. The money would have to be worked out with the City of Montgomery and the two schools.

Possible games.

UCA vs Middle Tennessee
EKU vs Georgia State
JSU vs South Alabama
UNA vs Southern Miss
KSU vs Georgia Southern

With expansion you could add:

UTC vs Troy
Tenn State vs UAB

Change those around how you like. These matchups would also sell tickets at the FBS school in the rematch 3+/- years later.

Quote:I love the idea of limiting sub-D-I games, but I don't know that I'd cut them out entirely without providing an alternative that removes the need for those games. I understand their place, but they can be abused. Those soft schedules ultimately hurt the entire conference by lowering RPI, and we need to focus on doing the exact opposite: raising our profile and becoming more than a single-bid mid-major.

Whupemall, I agree with almost your entire post except for this part. The RPI is no longer utilized with the NCAA having transitioned to the NET, but in either case sub D1 games don't count one way or the other. They are simply omitted from the formula.

What that means is...in terms of keeping those ratings strong you are actually better off playing a sub D1 team than a weak D1 team. A bad D1 team can hurt your ratings even if you win. A D2, D3, or NAIA team doesn't hurt.

(02-17-2021 01:42 PM)army56mike Wrote:  I want nothing to do with the MAC. I think it is the most boring, rusty, uninspiring conference.

I'm with you in the sense that I don't think they'd be the best fit for a "challenge" event, but I actually really admire the MAC for being a really stable, lower-level FBS conference. They understand their niche, and they fill it well. The MAC has long been my preferred destination for EKU.

(02-17-2021 02:58 PM)eku05 Wrote:  Whupemall, I agree with almost your entire post except for this part. The RPI is no longer utilized with the NCAA having transitioned to the NET, but in either case sub D1 games don't count one way or the other. They are simply omitted from the formula.

What that means is...in terms of keeping those ratings strong you are actually better off playing a sub D1 team than a weak D1 team. A bad D1 team can hurt your ratings even if you win. A D2, D3, or NAIA team doesn't hurt.

Ah... I stand corrected then. Thanks.

(02-17-2021 03:00 PM)eku05 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 01:42 PM)army56mike Wrote:  I want nothing to do with the MAC. I think it is the most boring, rusty, uninspiring conference.

I'm with you in the sense that I don't think they'd be the best fit for a "challenge" event...

I'm not suggesting we leave the ASUN for the MAC!!!!

But the MAC is ranked way above the ASUN in hoops right now (due entirely to the upper half of the conference -- the lower half sucks).

A challenge event would give ASUN schools the opportunity to beat these teams, and -- if we did -- climb higher in the NET rankings than we currently are.

And honestly ... I think we could do it. Their upper half is good, no doubt. But so is ours.