Arkstfan

I keep expecting to get an update saying, "ECU and USM wake up; realize merger is stupid and kill the deal". The MWC post-defection is pretty lousy and forced to replenish their ranks without the merger, their choices within their footprint are: raid UTEP, Utah State, San Jose State, Idaho and New Mexico State. That's it. They aren't very good and their potential replacements aren't compelling. UNT last year was 5th in the Sun Belt in BCS ratings but would have been fourth in CUSA. Arkansas State was higher rated than any of the remaining MWC. ULL ahead of all but Wyoming. Sun Belt #3 and #4 would be MWC #4 and #5. UNT would have been #6 in CUSA. ASU would have been #2 in CUSA, and USM, Tulsa and Marshall would have been the only ones ahead of ULL, FIU, or WKU. The remaining MWC has a worse average BCS ranking than the Sun Belt. Merging CUSA and Sun Belt straight up produces a stronger conference in the ratings than merging CUSA and MWC. ECU, Marshall, and USM pull out and start a new conference by inviting say Tulsa and UAB but omit Tulane, Rice and UTEP and then take seven schools from the Sun Belt and WAC to form a new league you end up with a league that is stronger and is more like the old CUSA than a cobbled up CUSA. I don't see that happening but it makes far more sense to cut some of the CUSA dead wood and start fresh with the best programs in the region than it does to hitch your wagon to a crippled MWC or just patch holes in CUSA and carry on.

My best guess as of today. Merger gets done within the next 90 days. Utah State gets invited to the western side as a full member. Temple goes to the east football only. League has 18 for football and 16 for all-sports and then they take a breath and try to figure out if they are safe or need to add a couple more to protect against more Big East raids.

Free market cannot solve every issue. Coaches want an over-abundance of bowl games because they are good for coaches. Athletic directors want an over-abundance of bowl games because they can go tell booster "we were successful" even if the program was in the bottom half of the country. Conferences want an over-supply as well because they want to tout their success (even success by teams with a losing record against peers). Without some sort of governor on the engine every school would go to a bowl game without regard to record. At first the NCAA was highly selective and you had to demonstrate a clear need. The Fiesta, Holiday, Indpendence, Las Vegas, Potato, and Motor Pizza only exist because a conference champion was guaranteed a home (the clear need). The NCAA got sick of the hassle and said pay $750,000 per team and you can have a bowl. So the bowls told conferences we will pay you $375,000 to come play in our game in player awards and real cash and $375,000 in tickets. So the NCAA said OK you have to win more than half of your games against other FBS schools. The schools didn't like that so an exception of counting an FCS once every four years was added. Then it became every year. Winning half your games became OK if it were to honor a contract. Then it became the standard. With 123 schools slated to play FBS by 2013, the market would go to 61 bowls absent control. Remember the Kickoff Classic? It was an extra game at the start of the season. Then they added the Pigskin Classic, then the Eddie Robinson Classic, followed by the Black Coaches Association Classic, then the Hispanic College Fund Classic, then the Jim Thorpe Classic and John Thompson Classic and finally the Black Coaches Association Bowl. In 20 years went from one to eight. We went from a bowl type game at a neutral site for the Kickoff Classic and Pigskin Classic to it just being an extra home game for 7 of the games with only the Kickoff Classic remaining neutral site.

You aren't SMU. First you churn out probably 3X as many alums and I suspect a higher percentage of alums remain within the region. So you've got more affinity base to tap into. Second having grown up in a community with a private college, I suspect the feelings I heard expressed by a segment of the population that felt disdain for "them rich kids" carries over even in a place like the metroplex where some people will never support SMU simply because it is a private school. The guy who didn't go to college and is making a good living driving a commercial vehicle or working as a pipe-fitter or is managing a retail store is much easier to lure to a UNT game than an SMU game. Third, you can tap into the Denton identity and get support that SMU cannot get because they aren't the community's program.

I had posted that before back when it took us two years to get 8 wins. In my lifetime we've gone from 7 win teams staying home being a regular thing on 10 and 11 game schedules (winning percentages of .700 and .636) to people getting mad about being mad about staying home at 6-6 (.500). I've seen us go from 11 bowls for around 180 schools to 35 for 120, from 12.2% making a bowl to 58.3% making a bowl. I don't want to see us go back to the 1970's but something closer to the 30% - 35% of the 80's would probably be a good thing.

I wouldn't write any checks based on that Air Force commitment to the Big East.

From what I've gathered. 20 was on the table. I have serious doubts that is still the case. Navy's entry into the Big East I believe will soon be followed by Air Force entering the Big East. That leaves Alliance West with Colorado State, Fresno, Nevada, UNLV, New Mexico, Wyoming and football only Hawaii. Alliance East has 9 schools counting UTEP. The Alliance will probably now look at the following models. 16. UTEP goes West each side has 8 in football, Hawaii either comes all sports or a non-football is added to the West. 18A. Add USU and SJSU to the West and stop. 18B. Add USU, UTEP moves West, one team added East, probably Temple.

If money were the issue we would have adopted a playoff back when ISL threw a ton of money out there. There is no reason for the Sun Belt and MAC to merge. If we want to get to 12 there are ample WAC schools and quality schools wanting to move to FBS that could take the Sun Belt to 16 without taking everyone available. There just isn't a benefit to it. Once the WAC dies and the foolish Alliance gets approved we are down to 9 conferences. Once again assuming the throne as emperor of college football my solution at that point is a 12 team playoff with 9 league champs and 3 at-large. Rate the champs 1-9. Top four get a first round bye. Next four get home field in the first round. The remaining champ and three at-large are then seeded to go on the road.

Personally I thought the old 7 wins, 6 as an exception wasn't awful but just dropping it to 6-6 was bad. If I were emperor of college sports bowl eligibility would be based on 8 wins with 7 win teams only available to fill in once all the 8's were placed and no bowl for 6-6.

There is no incentive for Alliance West to support ANY team in Texas for recruiting reasons because they will NEVER play any football games against the eastern schools in conference play. The Alliance is designed to have zero football interaction prior to conference title game. That's not lawyer speak. That's just common sense. The idea that Air Force would support UNT or a western aligned UTEP would support UNT for the east for recruiting reasons is just flat ignorant of what the Alliance set-up is. The western Alliance schools have only two interests in the eastern expansion. 1) Will it improve the overall rating of the conference. 2) Will the team generate enough dollars to make them worth adding? As I've noted in other posts, I think it is likely that USM and Memphis would support adding UNT because they would actually get game exposure in the region. Based on what I know of Rice and Tulane, I don't believe either small private school will favor adding a large public institution in an area they need to recruit. Tulsa, I'm agnostic on their attitude. They have historically voted with Tulane and Rice but seem to often think more like a public when it comes to athletics. ECU and Marshall aren't going to support UNT over FIU because their interest is in shoring up Florida presence and east coast presence. UAB is liable to vote with them because they are likely to prefer shoring up Florida presence over Texas.

Tulsa may be more pragmatic. I don't believe for a minute that Rice or Tulane are.

Based on his time at UNT, you would think people would want him for defensive coordinator. I hope he has two highly unsuccessful games as an assistant. Second game of this year at ASU Stadium and whenever ASU faces them in Memphis in 2013.

UNT isn't likely to get in if UTEP stays in the eastern part of the Alliance because they aren't likely to add any teams this way if they do. There isn't room for UNT unless UTEP shifts west and if that happens UTEP isn't likely to support adding a Texas team to recruit against when they aren't playing any games in the eastern half of Texas. Remember Tulsa, Tulane, and Rice are private schools and probably not favorable to adding a large public in the middle of an area they recruit. Memphis and USM probably would support UNT. UAB, Marshall, and ECU probably prefer FIU. None of the western schools really care. The point of the Alliance is that each division will exist independently and will not play cross-over games in football. UNT does nothing for the Texas recruiting of any western school other than to create an additional school in the region that can offer players a chance to play in the league and hurt their recruiting because they cannot offer the chance to play close to home by playing Rice or UNT.

East Carolina has publicly campaigned for the Big East for decades. Wonderful strategy. I wonder how many FAU recruits have been handed laminated copies of FAU to Big East statements by Howard and told to look at how trustworthy he was. This is a presidential level decision. Public campaigns for membership exist solely for the fans of the school to get people to shut the hell up on message boards and talk radio and to create the impression of activity. They serve no legitimate purpose in reaching the desired goal. If they don't work then the cost is people bitching about the league they were already in. By all reasonable speculation, the Alliance is either going to be an 18 or 20 team league. The math is really simple here. There are 9 CUSA and 7 MWC schools (8 in football and 8 all-sports if Hawaii eventually goes all-sports). If they choose to go to 18, there is one slot and it is almost certainly in the west. USU sits in the middle of a big hole in the MWC. If they go to 20 then they might take 2 central or eastern time zone schools. Sitting on top of the wish list is Temple. High caliber hoops, revived football, and in the fourth largest TV market in the country. The other spot becomes interesting. La.Tech because they are easy to take (ie. no harm to any viable league)? UNT to get back into the 5th largest TV market? FIU to get into the 16th largest TV market and stay connected with Florida? It becomes as much about who is against you as who is for you. My money says Tulane will oppose La.Tech and I'm not positive Rice or Tulsa will support UNT. FIU has no natural opposition. UAB sits almost halfway between UNT and FIU and they are much more likely to support a Florida school because they are more likely to sign Florida kids than Texas kids. You can go in figuring ECU, UAB, Marshall are going to favor FIU. The question is who is the advocate for UNT?

From an NCAA standpoint, it doesn't really matter if it is a new league or a merged league. They will have sufficient continuity of membership to get auto bids in the various sports. Question is whether the NCAA basketball units will be paid to the new league or to the schools earning the units, and chances are they will require everyone to assign their units to the new league so that is merely a minor paperwork hurdle. This is a unique response to a raid. Normally you lose teams toward the top of your league and bring in top teams from the league below you to raise your quality from where it was post-raid but not back to where it was(ie. top team in lower conference is usually good enough to be top 1/3rd of your league pre-raid). This reduces the level of the lower league and maintains the quality gap. They are choosing to cement in where they are post-raid. The raid has narrowed the gap between the Sun Belt (and MAC) and CUSA/MWC and they are apparently doing nothing to restore the gap by merely merging.

Not only do you lose a vote, you are losing an auto bid in every sport. Personally, I hope they merge, I think it is good for the Sun Belt if it happens but it is the stupidest idea to come down the pike in a long time.

Dyer and Chizik blew up before Malzahn came to ASU. The Auburn boards were claiming Dyer was leaving before Malzahn got the job. Frazier by all accounts is happy at Auburn and isn't leaving. I don't know what the deal is with Dyer and Chizik but a positive pot test is an NCAA suspension. People I've talked to tell me Dyer has no suspension to serve and unless Auburn notifies ASU that Dyer is ineligible due to a failed drug test, I remain skeptical.

As the unreviewable spot. Absolutely botched by the ACC referee. NCAA Football Rule 12.3.3(e) listing reviewable plays e. Ball carrier’s forward progress with respect to a first down. The muffed punt? Previous drive Dwayne Frampton (he scored the last TD vs UNT this year) tore his MCL. He is our punt returner so they subbed in and it didn't work obviously. While I am extremely unhappy that a crew that was "rewarded" for good performance during the regular season missed a basic rule of the game, we have no way of knowing what would have happened next. We might have fumbled or thrown a pick six after stopping them and the momentum may have swung even worse to NIU. But you do expect FBS officials, especially those who get to go to a bowl to get the rules right.

Winston pretty well covered it. State law caps what can be spent in university funds, rest has to come from the booster club. If we were in a conference that paid out $30 million a year, none of that could be spent salary above the cap amount. While I hear a lot of talk about money coming in from the NW corner of the state, I've yet to confirm it. I was told the university approached 50 people asking for $50,000 committment. I know five of them. Two from NE Arkansas, one from Central Arkansas, two from out-of-state. I was told the biggest parcel of the money came from a University of Arkansas alum who owns a few large businesses in Jonesboro. By history he has been very generous to ASU when ASU presents a plan for a donation or sponsorship that will result in a big step forward to improving the school and the local community. I believe that this year the bump in attendance and the way it helped make the six game days busy in Jonesboro helped him to believe than a large investment in ASU football would be an investment in helping the overall community.

It shrinks the supply of money games so that is bad but it gives fans several good early season match-ups and that is good.

As the ACC learned with Boston College, it is bad for the long-term health of a league to leave a school out completely isolated (imagine Louisiana, ULM, and UALR out of the Sun Belt). The Big XII needs another school in the region and Louisville is the best of what is left and they actually sell tickets so I'm guessing they also draw a few eyeballs for TV.

The whole thing is weird from the get-go. I really think Big XII is going to pick up two more before July 1 and I would bet Louisville is team #11. I just don't know if Cincinnati, Rutgers or South Florida is team #12. This all has the makings of getting messy.

Made me feel better. I knocked The Den offline for a few hours last week installing new anti-spam contronls.

It actually is a factor. Will they take a goose when they could get the one that lays golden eggs just to save a league? No. But when the Sun Belt put the Big West out of business, everyone was too squeamish to kill a league without offering a home to everyone left out. MWC backed off killing the WAC before because they didn't have the stomach to do it. If they had UTSA and TexSt would still be talking about hoping to start the process to move.

La.Tech I believe is headed to the Alliance and I don't think it is based on market (obviously) nor is it based on any accomplishments they have put forward, nor is it based on their facilities, attendance or any other measure. The Alliance needs a team east of the giant void between UTEP and the rest of the world. La.Tech can be taken without harming a viable conference because the WAC is not viable to remain FBS. It is simply about a warm body that is already FBS that can be taken without harming the MAC or Sun Belt. There are only two reasons that CUSA holds any value for UNT. Rice and Tulsa. The TV deal? It works out to $580,000 per school IF Fox doesn't reduce the money in the wake of losing SMU, Houston, and UCF (three large markets that Fox is strong in). The net dollar difference in the CUSA and Sun Belt deals is $480,000 that works out to roughly a 4,000 tickets per football game with no new donations. Opening Apogee generates more revenue for UNT than the CUSA TV deal and that's if it isn't reduced. If UNT isn't selected. Long-term adding UTSA to the Sun Belt drives nearly the same dollars to UNT as being in CUSA. That's if CUSA doesn't collapse. If CUSA collapses and Tulsa and or Rice gets left behind and one or both become part of the Sun Belt or whatever name emerges, UNT comes out ahead. Amazon isn't in the business of selling Kindles. They sell Kindles because they've got hard numbers showing that Kindle users at least double their spending with Amazon for books and such compared to when they didn't own Kindles. The Alliance and New Big East aren't built around the concept of selling tickets. They are built around the concept of TV dollars. If CUSA tripled their TV dollars that would be $1.75 million. They can make more by increasing ticket sales by $300,000 per home game in football. They are doomed to collapse because they've forgotten they are in the business of selling books and movies and aren't in the business of selling Kindles.