(10-31-2023 01:53 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Staying at ten is just not a good long term plan come 2024. There is just too much turnover in conferences.

We fundamentally disagree about this.

Play it out -

No unnecessary additions:
CUSA(10) for however many years, call it 5. Then you lose 2. So you end up with CUSA(10) - 2 + 2028 versions of two of your unready/undesirable except in a pinch schools.

Maybe, what? Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU for 5 years and then Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference.

Ok, that's not great. You're probably losing two teams you'd prefer not to (either because on how they've been on the field, or let's not kid ourselves probably just the biggest two markets/fanbases regardless of performance, but that still isn't great for the conference, at least for the next media deal).

And if nobody leaves in 5 years you can continue on with just the ten, or if two teams have become more desirable, there you go.

Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU + UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever if you want.


Now compare that to the defensive addition approach:

CUSA (10) + 2 unready/undesired teams. Then you lose 2 in 2028 and add 2 more (or not).

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference for five years and then Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever.

Still not great. Probably just in the same place as losing 2 from CUSA(10), but 2 of those teams have been FBS/in CUSA for 5 more years which might make them better in 2028 than otherwise (but they've also been teams you had to play/split money with before you had to - and just to end up in the same place).

And if you don't lose anyone - well now you've just split your money farther and traveled farther and maybe weakened your overall conference strength, and for what? Just in case you had to end up in the same place anyway? But 2 schools have a few years of CUSA/FBS under their belts?

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference


How are the red groups more preferable to the blue ones?

I’m sure most of you have seen the Matt Brown Tweet about the proposal for the PAC/MW pro/reg conferences. It is on multiple boards and threads. Several CUSA and UCA teams on listed as possible teams in the new conferences, including Tarleton.

After reading several posts on this thread, I have a couple of questions.
1. What does it take for an FCS school to be “ready” for an FBS invite?
2. Were Jax State, Kennesaw and Sam Houston ready for an invite or where they the three closest to being ready?

(10-31-2023 03:47 PM)TexanFan Wrote:  I’m sure most of you have seen the Matt Brown Tweet about the proposal for the PAC/MW pro/reg conferences. It is on multiple boards and threads. Several CUSA and UCA teams on listed as possible teams in the new conferences, including Tarleton.

After reading several posts on this thread, I have a couple of questions.
1. What does it take for an FCS school to be “ready” for an FBS invite?
2. Were Jax State, Kennesaw and Sam Houston ready for an invite or where they the three closest to being ready?

There is no such thing as being ready. Georgia State and South Alabama were not even playing football when they were deemed worthy of the Sunbelt.

A lot depends on who wants to play you. Georgia State was a big school in Atlanta that meant a lot of easy wins for the SEC. I'm not sure what the attraction for South Alabama was except that they were probably not going to be as tough to beat as North Alabama.

In the case of Jacksonville State, Sam Houston and Kennesaw that was all about capability and school size. Jacksonville State could be counted on to play well.

Tarleton would have been a strong candidate but was not quite up to speed for the conference. They needed schools ready to compete straight away.

(10-31-2023 04:47 PM)R40 Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 03:47 PM)TexanFan Wrote:  I’m sure most of you have seen the Matt Brown Tweet about the proposal for the PAC/MW pro/reg conferences. It is on multiple boards and threads. Several CUSA and UCA teams on listed as possible teams in the new conferences, including Tarleton.

After reading several posts on this thread, I have a couple of questions.
1. What does it take for an FCS school to be “ready” for an FBS invite?
2. Were Jax State, Kennesaw and Sam Houston ready for an invite or where they the three closest to being ready?

There is no such thing as being ready. Georgia State and South Alabama were not even playing football when they were deemed worthy of the Sunbelt.

A lot depends on who wants to play you. Georgia State was a big school in Atlanta that meant a lot of easy wins for the SEC. I'm not sure what the attraction for South Alabama was except that they were probably not going to be as tough to beat as North Alabama.

In the case of Jacksonville State, Sam Houston and Kennesaw that was all about capability and school size. Jacksonville State could be counted on to play well.

Tarleton would have been a strong candidate but was not quite up to speed for the conference. They needed schools ready to compete straight away.

South Alabama was already a member of the Sun Belt in all sports and had been for decades. That was a no brainer.

(10-31-2023 04:47 PM)R40 Wrote:  I'm not sure what the attraction for South Alabama was except that they were probably not going to be as tough to beat as North Alabama.

USA had been a member of the conference already for like 35+ years.

That first round or two of SB football included a lot of schools already in the league either moving over from FBS independent status, starting football, or transitioning up from what we now call FCS.


You're "ready" for FBS when you are willing to move up and meet the requirements. If one of the requirements is to join a league, you have the added step of finding one who is interested (or suing).

(10-31-2023 05:01 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 04:47 PM)R40 Wrote:  I'm not sure what the attraction for South Alabama was except that they were probably not going to be as tough to beat as North Alabama.

USA had been a member of the conference already for like 35+ years.

That first round or two of SB football included a lot of schools already in the league either moving over from FBS independent status, starting football, or transitioning up from what we now call FCS.


You're "ready" for FBS when you are willing to move up and meet the requirements. If one of the requirements is to join a league, you have the added step of finding one who is interested (or suing).

No, that is NOT how it works. You are "ready" when you get an invitation to move up. North Dakota State and UC-Davis would love to move up. Nobody is interested. One day maybe the Mountain West will be and they will get their chance.

You can go renegade and go independent but that is not a profitable road.

(10-31-2023 02:31 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 01:53 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Staying at ten is just not a good long term plan come 2024. There is just too much turnover in conferences.

We fundamentally disagree about this.

Play it out -

No unnecessary additions:
CUSA(10) for however many years, call it 5. Then you lose 2. So you end up with CUSA(10) - 2 + 2028 versions of two of your unready/undesirable except in a pinch schools.

Maybe, what? Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU for 5 years and then Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference.

Ok, that's not great. You're probably losing two teams you'd prefer not to (either because on how they've been on the field, or let's not kid ourselves probably just the biggest two markets/fanbases regardless of performance, but that still isn't great for the conference, at least for the next media deal).

And if nobody leaves in 5 years you can continue on with just the ten, or if two teams have become more desirable, there you go.

Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU + UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever if you want.


Now compare that to the defensive addition approach:

CUSA (10) + 2 unready/undesired teams. Then you lose 2 in 2028 and add 2 more (or not).

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference for five years and then Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever.

Still not great. Probably just in the same place as losing 2 from CUSA(10), but 2 of those teams have been FBS/in CUSA for 5 more years which might make them better in 2028 than otherwise (but they've also been teams you had to play/split money with before you had to - and just to end up in the same place).

And if you don't lose anyone - well now you've just split your money farther and traveled farther and maybe weakened your overall conference strength, and for what? Just in case you had to end up in the same place anyway? But 2 schools have a few years of CUSA/FBS under their belts?

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference


How are the red groups more preferable to the blue ones?

I think that possibly you missed my main point.

Delaware/ Missouri St./ UMASS>>> Tarleton, SFA, etc. (at this time)

IMO those first three ARE READY enough.

The second two Are UNREADY (today).

You take one or two (yes 11 could work) of that first group--Now.

Then... in five years IF they leave--you add from the second group who have had time to be prepared or even a new stronger candidate who has moved to the top.

EKU is also>>>>Tarleton, SFA, etc..

(10-31-2023 08:30 AM)bleedmaroon Wrote:  There has been some big news coming out of the EKU area and from what I've heard, it is what is being used as a pitch for EKU to join the CUSA and wanted to pass along the info.

Richmond KY is going to announce that major manufacturing plant is going to be built in town very soon bringing in a ton of new jobs and population. It's all over the news currently. On top of that, exits 104 and 108 in Lexington (EKU is exit 90) around 2k acres were approved for housing development last week. Projections are that within 25 miles of EKU's campus, population could grow between 30-50k over the next 4-8 years cause of these new developments.

The massive renovation to the bball arena starts in a few months. The President of EKU also just announced that they are currently raising money for a convention center/football stadium rebuild.

Wasting your time on here Maroon. We could build the Taj Mahal of athletic facilities, it would not move the proverbial "needle" for some people on this site.. You will find many/most dodge almost any statements regarding EKU altogether on here. Most times IF someone mentions EKU as the next logical school to move up, you will find some either say NO to EKU, or they would rather have Timbuktu U, or they completely ignore it altogether. If I hear one more time, we need someone who is "ready", when someone is "ready", who will be ready in 5-6 years, wait until Tarleton is "ready, hey, maybe the National College of Business will be "ready" soon, after all they have lots of students (this is said to be oh so important!) located in Louisville, Nashville, Dayton..now there's a thought...30 campuses (another criteria, makes no difference if they have a fan base at all). Seriously, as if any of the people on here have inside knowledge on EKU or anyone else for that matter.
And you can call me out as being "upset", no I'm not upset, but just tired of the passive-aggressive posts on here. At the end of the day, and I know this, it's a speculation anyway. But if (Let's Go) Peay and UCA's purple field is the new criteria for FBS (re: Matt Brown's Tweet today for the 24 team league), guess we misjudged what it takes to be "ready"!

(10-31-2023 06:55 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 02:31 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 01:53 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Staying at ten is just not a good long term plan come 2024. There is just too much turnover in conferences.

We fundamentally disagree about this.

Play it out -

No unnecessary additions:
CUSA(10) for however many years, call it 5. Then you lose 2. So you end up with CUSA(10) - 2 + 2028 versions of two of your unready/undesirable except in a pinch schools.

Maybe, what? Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU for 5 years and then Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference.

Ok, that's not great. You're probably losing two teams you'd prefer not to (either because on how they've been on the field, or let's not kid ourselves probably just the biggest two markets/fanbases regardless of performance, but that still isn't great for the conference, at least for the next media deal).

And if nobody leaves in 5 years you can continue on with just the ten, or if two teams have become more desirable, there you go.

Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU + UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever if you want.


Now compare that to the defensive addition approach:

CUSA (10) + 2 unready/undesired teams. Then you lose 2 in 2028 and add 2 more (or not).

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference for five years and then Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever.

Still not great. Probably just in the same place as losing 2 from CUSA(10), but 2 of those teams have been FBS/in CUSA for 5 more years which might make them better in 2028 than otherwise (but they've also been teams you had to play/split money with before you had to - and just to end up in the same place).

And if you don't lose anyone - well now you've just split your money farther and traveled farther and maybe weakened your overall conference strength, and for what? Just in case you had to end up in the same place anyway? But 2 schools have a few years of CUSA/FBS under their belts?

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference


How are the red groups more preferable to the blue ones?

I think that possibly you missed my main point.

Delaware/ Missouri St./ UMASS>>> Tarleton, SFA, etc. (at this time)

IMO those first three ARE READY enough.

The second two Are UNREADY (today).

You take one or two (yes 11 could work) of that first group--Now.

Then... in five years IF they leave--you add from the second group who have had time to be prepared or even a new stronger candidate who has moved to the top.

EKU is also>>>>Tarleton, SFA, etc..

Tarleton is far more ready than EKU. Why do you say Tarleton is not ready? They average 19,000 fans a game. Their facilties are better than EKU and they are constantly building. They have a soaring enrollment, unlike EKU.

(10-31-2023 07:22 PM)LexColonel Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 08:30 AM)bleedmaroon Wrote:  There has been some big news coming out of the EKU area and from what I've heard, it is what is being used as a pitch for EKU to join the CUSA and wanted to pass along the info.

Richmond KY is going to announce that major manufacturing plant is going to be built in town very soon bringing in a ton of new jobs and population. It's all over the news currently. On top of that, exits 104 and 108 in Lexington (EKU is exit 90) around 2k acres were approved for housing development last week. Projections are that within 25 miles of EKU's campus, population could grow between 30-50k over the next 4-8 years cause of these new developments.

The massive renovation to the bball arena starts in a few months. The President of EKU also just announced that they are currently raising money for a convention center/football stadium rebuild.

Wasting your time on here Maroon. We could build the Taj Mahal of athletic facilities, it would not move the proverbial "needle" for some people on this site.. You will find many/most dodge almost any statements regarding EKU altogether on here. Most times IF someone mentions EKU as the next logical school to move up, you will find some either say NO to EKU, or they would rather have Timbuktu U, or they completely ignore it altogether. If I hear one more time, we need someone who is "ready", when someone is "ready", who will be ready in 5-6 years, wait until Tarleton is "ready, hey, maybe the National College of Business will be "ready" soon, after all they have lots of students (this is said to be oh so important!) located in Louisville, Nashville, Dayton..now there's a thought...30 campuses (another criteria, makes no difference if they have a fan base at all). Seriously, as if any of the people on here have inside knowledge on EKU or anyone else for that matter.
And you can call me out as being "upset", no I'm not upset, but just tired of the passive-aggressive posts on here. At the end of the day, and I know this, it's a speculation anyway. But if (Let's Go) Peay and UCA's purple field is the new criteria for FBS (re: Matt Brown's Tweet today for the 24 team league), guess we misjudged what it takes to be "ready"!

IMO-- EKU remains in the highest group of candidates-- FAR above/ahead of SFA, Tarleton, etc..

Anything can happen--who thought the PAC would die?

If more MAJOR dominoes fall the Colonels are well positioned.

However, If there is only one spot--the University Presidents might go for budget, enrollment, media market.

But--hey-- don't blame me-- I just post here.

(10-31-2023 07:35 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 07:22 PM)LexColonel Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 08:30 AM)bleedmaroon Wrote:  There has been some big news coming out of the EKU area and from what I've heard, it is what is being used as a pitch for EKU to join the CUSA and wanted to pass along the info.

Richmond KY is going to announce that major manufacturing plant is going to be built in town very soon bringing in a ton of new jobs and population. It's all over the news currently. On top of that, exits 104 and 108 in Lexington (EKU is exit 90) around 2k acres were approved for housing development last week. Projections are that within 25 miles of EKU's campus, population could grow between 30-50k over the next 4-8 years cause of these new developments.

The massive renovation to the bball arena starts in a few months. The President of EKU also just announced that they are currently raising money for a convention center/football stadium rebuild.

Wasting your time on here Maroon. We could build the Taj Mahal of athletic facilities, it would not move the proverbial "needle" for some people on this site.. You will find many/most dodge almost any statements regarding EKU altogether on here. Most times IF someone mentions EKU as the next logical school to move up, you will find some either say NO to EKU, or they would rather have Timbuktu U, or they completely ignore it altogether. If I hear one more time, we need someone who is "ready", when someone is "ready", who will be ready in 5-6 years, wait until Tarleton is "ready, hey, maybe the National College of Business will be "ready" soon, after all they have lots of students (this is said to be oh so important!) located in Louisville, Nashville, Dayton..now there's a thought...30 campuses (another criteria, makes no difference if they have a fan base at all). Seriously, as if any of the people on here have inside knowledge on EKU or anyone else for that matter.
And you can call me out as being "upset", no I'm not upset, but just tired of the passive-aggressive posts on here. At the end of the day, and I know this, it's a speculation anyway. But if (Let's Go) Peay and UCA's purple field is the new criteria for FBS (re: Matt Brown's Tweet today for the 24 team league), guess we misjudged what it takes to be "ready"!

IMO-- EKU remains in the highest group of candidates-- FAR above/ahead of SFA, Tarleton, etc..

Anything can happen--who thought the PAC would die?

If more MAJOR dominoes fall the Colonels are well positioned.

However, If there is only one spot--the University Presidents might go for budget, enrollment, media market.

But--hey-- don't blame me-- I just post here.

Not aiming at you, but I do see this kind of stuff everyday. BTW, I have watched a ton of FCS and FBS games on ESPN and ESPN+ this Fall. I do think our stadium is going to have to be changed. I have seen some that are worse, for different reasons (old like RK Stadium, a track around the field, etc.). RK Stadium is a great place to watch a game, but it does not pass the eye test when compared to others.
BTW, WKU's stadium looks great, watched one of your games the other night. Does the train still go by during games? I remember when the visitors sat on the one side near the railroad tracks. Lots of memorable games in BG vs EKU..was there for the opening game in 1968..btw, EKU won that one!

Tarleton not done transitioning from D2 to FCS.

How many Top 25 FCS wins does Tarleton have?

I'm sure EKU has Several Dozen-- probably more.

Also those attendance figures have been strongly challenged by MANY message board posters with photos for proof.

Just ask posters here--majority opinion is EKU>>Tarleton.

(10-31-2023 07:30 PM)Turtle Power 98 Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 06:55 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 02:31 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 01:53 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Staying at ten is just not a good long term plan come 2024. There is just too much turnover in conferences.

We fundamentally disagree about this.

Play it out -

No unnecessary additions:
CUSA(10) for however many years, call it 5. Then you lose 2. So you end up with CUSA(10) - 2 + 2028 versions of two of your unready/undesirable except in a pinch schools.

Maybe, what? Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU for 5 years and then Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference.

Ok, that's not great. You're probably losing two teams you'd prefer not to (either because on how they've been on the field, or let's not kid ourselves probably just the biggest two markets/fanbases regardless of performance, but that still isn't great for the conference, at least for the next media deal).

And if nobody leaves in 5 years you can continue on with just the ten, or if two teams have become more desirable, there you go.

Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU + UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever if you want.


Now compare that to the defensive addition approach:

CUSA (10) + 2 unready/undesired teams. Then you lose 2 in 2028 and add 2 more (or not).

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference for five years and then Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever.

Still not great. Probably just in the same place as losing 2 from CUSA(10), but 2 of those teams have been FBS/in CUSA for 5 more years which might make them better in 2028 than otherwise (but they've also been teams you had to play/split money with before you had to - and just to end up in the same place).

And if you don't lose anyone - well now you've just split your money farther and traveled farther and maybe weakened your overall conference strength, and for what? Just in case you had to end up in the same place anyway? But 2 schools have a few years of CUSA/FBS under their belts?

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference


How are the red groups more preferable to the blue ones?

I think that possibly you missed my main point.

Delaware/ Missouri St./ UMASS>>> Tarleton, SFA, etc. (at this time)

IMO those first three ARE READY enough.

The second two Are UNREADY (today).

You take one or two (yes 11 could work) of that first group--Now.

Then... in five years IF they leave--you add from the second group who have had time to be prepared or even a new stronger candidate who has moved to the top.

EKU is also>>>>Tarleton, SFA, etc..

Tarleton is far more ready than EKU. Why do you say Tarleton is not ready? They average 19,000 fans a game. Their facilties are better than EKU and they are constantly building. They have a soaring enrollment, unlike EKU.

Take Tarleton’s attendance numbers at face value and sure, they look like an appealing candidate immediately. In reality, about half of those fans are actually at the game on weekends. And definitely less than what EKU gets. Their president is known to make outrageous claims…

Tarleton is constantly building, to the point where their fans are complaining about their facilities looking ugly or being rushed. Their new end zone seating, which increased stadium capacity to 24k, is never full and looks hideous quite frankly. EKU will soon upgrade their facilities as well.

EKU has a tradition of success at the D1 level and seems to have re-committed to their athletics. Tarleton doesn’t. EKU>>>TSU

Between Tarleton and EKU, easy choice EKU,

Certainly not an unpopular opinion for a Sam fan, but would much rather see SFA find their way into CUSA than Tarleton. And think it would be a better addition as well.

Not nearly as aggressive as Tarleton with FBS talk but slowly building as well. Joined the UT system just months ago.

Think the Texans get mentions because they were an option at the forefront when CUSA really needed bodies in 2021. CUSA told them “no thanks”, even back then. It can be a bit more picky now. Same can be said for McNeese.

(10-31-2023 07:30 PM)Turtle Power 98 Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 06:55 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 02:31 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 01:53 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Staying at ten is just not a good long term plan come 2024. There is just too much turnover in conferences.

We fundamentally disagree about this.

Play it out -

No unnecessary additions:
CUSA(10) for however many years, call it 5. Then you lose 2. So you end up with CUSA(10) - 2 + 2028 versions of two of your unready/undesirable except in a pinch schools.

Maybe, what? Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU for 5 years and then Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference.

Ok, that's not great. You're probably losing two teams you'd prefer not to (either because on how they've been on the field, or let's not kid ourselves probably just the biggest two markets/fanbases regardless of performance, but that still isn't great for the conference, at least for the next media deal).

And if nobody leaves in 5 years you can continue on with just the ten, or if two teams have become more desirable, there you go.

Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU + UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever if you want.


Now compare that to the defensive addition approach:

CUSA (10) + 2 unready/undesired teams. Then you lose 2 in 2028 and add 2 more (or not).

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference for five years and then Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever.

Still not great. Probably just in the same place as losing 2 from CUSA(10), but 2 of those teams have been FBS/in CUSA for 5 more years which might make them better in 2028 than otherwise (but they've also been teams you had to play/split money with before you had to - and just to end up in the same place).

And if you don't lose anyone - well now you've just split your money farther and traveled farther and maybe weakened your overall conference strength, and for what? Just in case you had to end up in the same place anyway? But 2 schools have a few years of CUSA/FBS under their belts?

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference


How are the red groups more preferable to the blue ones?

I think that possibly you missed my main point.

Delaware/ Missouri St./ UMASS>>> Tarleton, SFA, etc. (at this time)

IMO those first three ARE READY enough.

The second two Are UNREADY (today).

You take one or two (yes 11 could work) of that first group--Now.

Then... in five years IF they leave--you add from the second group who have had time to be prepared or even a new stronger candidate who has moved to the top.

EKU is also>>>>Tarleton, SFA, etc..

Tarleton is far more ready than EKU. Why do you say Tarleton is not ready? They average 19,000 fans a game. Their facilties are better than EKU and they are constantly building. They have a soaring enrollment, unlike EKU.

After the enrollment downturn from 2015 -2021 EKU's enrollment has increased the last two years. Just under 15k this fall.

(10-31-2023 08:10 PM)EatEmUp11 Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 07:30 PM)Turtle Power 98 Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 06:55 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 02:31 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 01:53 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Staying at ten is just not a good long term plan come 2024. There is just too much turnover in conferences.

We fundamentally disagree about this.

Play it out -

No unnecessary additions:
CUSA(10) for however many years, call it 5. Then you lose 2. So you end up with CUSA(10) - 2 + 2028 versions of two of your unready/undesirable except in a pinch schools.

Maybe, what? Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU for 5 years and then Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference.

Ok, that's not great. You're probably losing two teams you'd prefer not to (either because on how they've been on the field, or let's not kid ourselves probably just the biggest two markets/fanbases regardless of performance, but that still isn't great for the conference, at least for the next media deal).

And if nobody leaves in 5 years you can continue on with just the ten, or if two teams have become more desirable, there you go.

Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU + UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever if you want.


Now compare that to the defensive addition approach:

CUSA (10) + 2 unready/undesired teams. Then you lose 2 in 2028 and add 2 more (or not).

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference for five years and then Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever.

Still not great. Probably just in the same place as losing 2 from CUSA(10), but 2 of those teams have been FBS/in CUSA for 5 more years which might make them better in 2028 than otherwise (but they've also been teams you had to play/split money with before you had to - and just to end up in the same place).

And if you don't lose anyone - well now you've just split your money farther and traveled farther and maybe weakened your overall conference strength, and for what? Just in case you had to end up in the same place anyway? But 2 schools have a few years of CUSA/FBS under their belts?

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference


How are the red groups more preferable to the blue ones?

I think that possibly you missed my main point.

Delaware/ Missouri St./ UMASS>>> Tarleton, SFA, etc. (at this time)

IMO those first three ARE READY enough.

The second two Are UNREADY (today).

You take one or two (yes 11 could work) of that first group--Now.

Then... in five years IF they leave--you add from the second group who have had time to be prepared or even a new stronger candidate who has moved to the top.

EKU is also>>>>Tarleton, SFA, etc..

Tarleton is far more ready than EKU. Why do you say Tarleton is not ready? They average 19,000 fans a game. Their facilties are better than EKU and they are constantly building. They have a soaring enrollment, unlike EKU.

Take Tarleton’s attendance numbers at face value and sure, they look like an appealing candidate immediately. In reality, about half of those fans are actually at the game on weekends. And definitely less than what EKU gets. Their president is known to make outrageous claims…

Tarleton is constantly building, to the point where their fans are complaining about their facilities looking ugly or being rushed. Their new end zone seating, which increased stadium capacity to 24k, is never full and looks hideous quite frankly. EKU will soon upgrade their facilities as well.

EKU has a tradition of success at the D1 level and seems to have re-committed to their athletics. Tarleton doesn’t. EKU>>>TSU

Tarleton claimed 23k at homecoming and crowd pictures looked legit.

(10-31-2023 06:55 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 02:31 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(10-31-2023 01:53 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Staying at ten is just not a good long term plan come 2024. There is just too much turnover in conferences.

We fundamentally disagree about this.

Play it out -

No unnecessary additions:
CUSA(10) for however many years, call it 5. Then you lose 2. So you end up with CUSA(10) - 2 + 2028 versions of two of your unready/undesirable except in a pinch schools.

Maybe, what? Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU for 5 years and then Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference.

Ok, that's not great. You're probably losing two teams you'd prefer not to (either because on how they've been on the field, or let's not kid ourselves probably just the biggest two markets/fanbases regardless of performance, but that still isn't great for the conference, at least for the next media deal).

And if nobody leaves in 5 years you can continue on with just the ten, or if two teams have become more desirable, there you go.

Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, LU, KSU, FIU, JSU + UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever if you want.


Now compare that to the defensive addition approach:

CUSA (10) + 2 unready/undesired teams. Then you lose 2 in 2028 and add 2 more (or not).

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference for five years and then Tech, SHSU. NMSU, UTEP, WKU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Del/Tarrleton/whomoever.

Still not great. Probably just in the same place as losing 2 from CUSA(10), but 2 of those teams have been FBS/in CUSA for 5 more years which might make them better in 2028 than otherwise (but they've also been teams you had to play/split money with before you had to - and just to end up in the same place).

And if you don't lose anyone - well now you've just split your money farther and traveled farther and maybe weakened your overall conference strength, and for what? Just in case you had to end up in the same place anyway? But 2 schools have a few years of CUSA/FBS under their belts?

Tech, SHSU, NMSU, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, FIU, LU, KSU, JSU + (2 of) UMass/SFA/Tarrleton/Delaware/your preference


How are the red groups more preferable to the blue ones?

I think that possibly you missed my main point.

Delaware/ Missouri St./ UMASS>>> Tarleton, SFA, etc. (at this time)

IMO those first three ARE READY enough.

The second two Are UNREADY (today).

You take one or two (yes 11 could work) of that first group--Now.

Then... in five years IF they leave--you add from the second group who have had time to be prepared or even a new stronger candidate who has moved to the top.

EKU is also>>>>Tarleton, SFA, etc..

But.

But then instead of Tech/SHSU/NMSU/UTEP/FIU/LU/WKU/MTSU/JSU/KSU you have Tech/SHSU/NMSU/UTEP/FIU/LU/WKU/MTSU/JSU/KSU/Delaware.

Or Tech/SHSU/NMSU/UTEP/FIU/LU/WKU/MTSU/JSU/KSU/Delaware/UMass.


Or whatever. And Tech/SHSU/NMSU/UTEP/FIU/LU/WKU/MTSU/JSU/KSU is better than that.

And if you need them in five years maybe you are worse off or maybe not, and probably not by much.

Disagree IMHO.

The current (2024) TEN Plus----one or two of those three ( UD, UMASS, Mo St.)

IS BETTER than the current Ten alone.

Those schools would not detract from the conference--they would add strength, depth, and visibility.

Taking into account the Overall many solid aspects of those schools.

At least our positions are clear. Fair enough.

But--you do have a good argument and I totally "get it". I agree--to an extent.

Just feel we need to be more aggressive and not sit back.

A difference of opinion.

Yep, fair enough.

I disagree with every point you make here, and we can debate those points or not.

But the bottom line is that it's all just fun and games here on the ole internet. If history tells us anything, it is that I do not have exactly have my finger on the pulse of CUSA decision making. So disagreeing with my takes is probably a pretty safe bet that you'll get to see your preference come to pass.