Arkstfan

Don't get me wrong. I believe in scheduling attractive opponents but that isn't and can't be a program lifeblood. Back when ASU was drawing 15,000 with ease in I-AA I looked at I-A attendance and one of the things that leapt out at me was Rice. Their attendance over a several year period averaged within a couple 100 of ASU. The difference was that ASU didn't host Texas, didn't host TAMU, didn't host Arkansas who traditionally was one of Rice's better attended games. We poured it all down the drain. Anyone remember when CUSA formed? A school that wanted in and couldn't get in was East Carolina. Louisville was adamant at keeping the league at six for football. It took a threat to kick Louisville out to get the deal done. Why were the others willing to boot Louisville to make it happen? Because the Liberty Bowl had told them that if they weren't invited they would reserve the right to take the CUSA champion -OR- ECU. The Pirates had value. They had the second largest average attendance of that group of schools and the largest season ticket base. They sold 17,000 tickets for the 1994 Liberty Bowl game. They've managed to squander a lot of that. CUSA in basketball. They have three teams rated 250 or worse, the Belt has four. The big difference is at the top. They have four top 100 compared to only two for the Sun Belt. Now I could cheat and compare top 50 where CUSA has 1 and the Sun Belt has two but I've consistently said the two most important numbers are being top 100 and not being 250 or worse. The Sun Belt has a grand opportunity. Football is coming off its best year ever and doesn't lose a ton of talent. Basketball made strides but it is up to each campus to build it better. ASU took a step in that direction after being dazzled by a mediocre coach who had little on his resume other than having won the conference tournament once. Half the schools played lousy non-conference slates. The thinking has been backwards. In football where strength of schedule doesn't mean anything we tend to play hard non-conference slates, even though the system is geared more toward wins than the quality of those wins. In basketball where strength of schedule is huge we tend to play weak schedules even though as USA and WKU have shown a solid schedule opens the door to success.

Didn't say we've pulled it off but you can't build a program on the backs of others (ie. visitor attendance) because if you do, the folks carrying you will leave you on the side of the road to die.

Compared to the WAC it is regional. The improvement of the Sun Belt makes it more possible that the day will come that the Sun Belt and CUSA realign roughly geographically. Neither alignment is ideal. With the NCAA Tournament that the Big East is having, they aren't likely to break up any time soon. They got a record 8 in, seven advanced past the first day and three made the Sweet 16. That gives the 18 units even if they lose all three Sweet 16 games. That's $3.4 million just from the NCAA for this season for the next six years before you consider the increased television value it should create.

Correction. Your fans still don't care enough about North Texas to show up for those games. Texas had no trouble getting 84,000 to show up for Arkansas State. Tennessee had no trouble getting 102,000 to show up for Arkansas State. Alabama sold 92,000 tickets for ULM. Georgia had no problem getting 92,000 for Troy. If your attendance is merely a function of your opponent you are nothing more the SWC version of Rice or SMU. Building a fan base takes time and you can draw a better crowd with names, but how many of the people who came to the Baylor or Navy games are likely to return?

WKU's run MIGHT help the league. Obviously it is two thirds of a nearly $600,000 per year windfall for the next six years. That's a big difference from the bowl world where most games are break-even at best and even a BCS windfall is just for one year. The Sun Belt now has cash it can tap into for SIX YEARS to make improvements. It hopefully raises expectations of what can be accomplished. Way too many fans around this conference and I think administrators as well considered a great year to be one where you won the conference tournament and went home the first day of the NCAA Tournament. People have said repeatedly that this is a one bid league. USA proved it wrong. They demonstrated that if you play a decent schedule (doesn't have to be a full time BCS road show) and you win, you get an at-large berth. WKU has demonstrated that we can go and win a game and another game. Before the tournament began, the chancellor at ASU said in an interview concerning the coaching search that he didn't see any reason ASU couldn't be like Memphis in basketball. That's the sort of targeting it takes. No we don't have the corporate money or history but Gonzaga didn't either when they started their NCAA run. That targeting had ASU going after Nolan Richardson and John Brady and talking to Rob Evans and Jeremy Cox. Unless you get lucky, you never get any better than what you target and believe you can achieve. Hoop fans around this conference may ramp up the pressure. UALR went 20-11 this year and a number of their fans were grumbling at the end of the season about having such a low RPI that they weren't on the radar of the NIT or CBI with 20 wins. They were questioning what should be realistic goals. I think we have a better idea of what those can be now. That's the biggest impact WKU's Sweet 16 run or USA's at-large berth can have on the league. Raising the standard for what is acceptable job performance.

Normally coaches handle their own scheduling in basketball. MTSU's RPI didn't hurt USA and kept them alive in the hunt for an at-large. If MTSU had beaten WKU in the finals, USA might have been knocked out because it would have reduced the quality of their sweep of WKU.

Dollars to the conference so far for this year's basketball performances. CUSA - $570,000 WAC - $190,000 Sun Belt - $760,000 The NIT, CBI, WNCAA, and WNIT are cover expenses at best propositions.

It is expected that a unit will be worth $190,000 this year. At the end of the year (fiscal year I think) each conference gets a check based on the number of units earned the past six years. We would have received $1,140,000 if this had been like every other season of late. Because we were one and done all those years. USA's at-large bid raised that to $1,330,000. WKU's win over Drake raised it to $1,520,000. WKU's win over San Diego raised it to $1,710,000. So even if WKU loses the next game and we go back to being one and done and the value of units does not increase, the Sun Belt will receive just under $600,000 more per year for six years. Over the next six years, this season's performance will be worth $3.4 million for the Sun Belt.

A Cessna Citation left Jonesboro for Fayetteville this morning and was scheduled to have already returned but weather in Fayetteville has grounded the plane.

As a visit to arkst.com will demonstrate there's not many people outside Denton worried about this game. We've got a coach to hire and the rumormongers say it may happen as early as tomorrow.

See: ASU vs. UNT in Lafayette last year.

To put it mildly there has been a little bit of discussion of Nolan among ASU fans. I'd like to compare somethings. Nolan asked about his legacy created a stir when he said that if he were white they'd have built a statute of him. By contrast, Bobby Knight demanded that the Basketball Hall of Fame remove his name from consideration when he didn't make it on the first ballot (they ignored him and put him in the next year). Nolan sued Arkansas and the trial was ugly as Frank Broyles and two board of trustee members had to admit under oath the use of racial slurs and jokes. He lost his trial but the judge said that there was ample reason to believe bias but failed to prove it was why he was fired. Knight sued Indiana, his case was dismissed before trial by the judge because the case was insufficient.

Shouldn't have even had to take the time to answer that question. Tech's budget is middling of the Sun Belt despite gaining about a million more from their conference and they play more money games in football and basketball than most Sun Belt schools. Without the conference revenue and without the heavy reliance on money games their budget would be one of the smallest in the Sun Belt if not the smallest. Expense wise they surely don't know what a bus is when it comes to conference road trips. There are some WAC jobs that could be a better situation but Tech isn't one of them. The next AD there faces an even tougher struggle than RV faces at UNT.

Actually most estimates are that Plus One will increase revenue 50% because the current five game (four site) arrangement only assures one significant match-up, the Championship game. The other four games rely purely on having teams there is great interest in playing an interesting opponent. Plus One brings one more game (five bowl games plus the championship game) but assures three significant games: 1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3 and the championship. You move from one guaranteed significant game out of five played to three out of six.

Using the AP poll. The BCS system left #7 Missouri for the Cotton Bowl. The Georgia 8 plan would have had #7 Missouri in the playoff, Cotton would have pulled #17 Texas up from the Holiday Bowl, unranked Texas Tech then would have ended up playing #12 Arizona State. TAMU would have then been pulled up from the Alamo and gone to the Gator to play #21 Virginia, Oklahoma State would have moved from the Insight to Alamo, Colorado would have moved up from the I-Bowl leaving it vacant. Illinois left out of the Georgia 8 would have gone to the Capital One pushing Michigan to the Outback, that would push Wisconsin to the Alamo, pushing Penn State to Champs Sports, pushing Michigan State to the Insight, pushing Purdue out. Hawaii out of the Sugar Bowl would stay home to play moving Boise back to Boise and sending Fresno to New Mexico, sending Nevada home to watch television. The I-Bowl would then either grab TCU from Texas sending Purdue to Texas or Shreveport would take Purdue. We get even lousier bowl match-ups, less access to the high profile games for the sisters of the poor and one less bowl slot for one of the sisters of the poor. Can't imagine WHY the Georgia president likes the idea.

Pick a playoff size. 2 (like now), 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32. Regardless of what size is picked there will always be at least two teams grousing that they should have been in over one or more teams that made it. Playoff does not end the controversy. Based on the analysis of several high caliber marketing firms and consulting firms, the consensus is that four teams is the maximum that can be done at neutral sites. Three neutral site road trips in 30 to 40 days is considered to be difficult for significant numbers of fans. Note that Plus One will hit that limit if teams from the SEC, Big 12, or ACC championship games make the championship in Plus One. If Plus One passes it will be fascinating to see the long term attendance trends for those leagues in the games. I think Plus One has a great chance of passing simply because it can be done without hurting the bowls. The Georgia 8 plan quite likely cannot because it means either double hosting or taking some games out of the open rotation. The Georgia 8 plan will be a major blow to the other leagues. First under the auspices of the NCAA revenue distribution is not guaranteed to us nor is there any guarantee that the NCAA will turn back funds anywhere near as efficiently as the BCS does. Since the BCS was created there have only been two times when a non-team was in the top 8. Hawaii this year would have been left out and in turn we would have received less money under the BCS deal, under the normal formulas the NCAA applies there would be no shared pool that pays us if one of the uncool kids gets an invite unless they are from our conference. Plus One if adopted will likely add the Cotton Bowl to the mix of bowls. 1 will face 4 in one game, 2 will face 3, then the other three bowls will fill their slots basically like the BCS does now. 1. The six highest rated leagues over the past two years get auto berths for their champions 2. The highest rated champion from outside those six leagues gets in if rated 12 or better or at 15 or better if a champion from one of the six leagues is rated 16 or worse. 3. Maximum of one at-large per conference. The Sun Belt is no worse off, we can still get a team into one of the rich bowls but we get 50% more money if Plus One is adopted.

Let's say you are a member of the chamber of commerce, a small bar owner in Knoxville, TN and a big Vols fans. Do you want the Vols to play a first round playoff game in Detroit or Knoxville? Which one helps your business? Which one can you attend?

That won't work. A typical NCAA first round site has roughly 18,000 seats. Each of the 8 schools get around 1,500 tickets so that leaves 6,000 tickets. The corporate folks get a cut and the local community gets a cut. It is not unheard of for a first round site to not sell out. Now if many schools struggle to sell 1,500 tickets on short notice what happens with a football playoff? Of the 79,000 seats at the Superdome for the Sugar Bowl 16,000 go to each of the two schools with a month or more to sell tickets. We've seen consistently that many schools struggle to sell even 7,000 tickets with three to four weeks lead time. Most infamously UTEP sold less than 1,000 tickets to members of the public for the game in Boise with almost a full month lead time. Why would you play Arizona State vs. Rutgers in Mobile with say a two week lead time you are going to have dreadful crowds and two teams paying travel expense. If Arizona State thinks they will win the game and the next week is in Las Vegas, maybe they hold off on the Mobile trip because its too much burden to make consecutive trips. The more logical option is play in Tempe and only Rutgers has travel cost and the tickets sell easily.

One of the Cajun fans has long touted 24 teams and auto bids for everyone. It actually makes a lot of sense. First all conference champions are in. It still leaves 13 at-large spots open. The top 8 have the incentive of hosting and a first round bye. But what I like about the idea is this: In a 16 team playoff odds are against anyone from the MWC, Sun Belt, MAC, CUSA, or WAC hosting a game and unlikely that two would ever host. In a 24 team playoff teams seeded 9-16 will host a first round game. Using the BCS standings, Hawaii would have hosted and BYU would have been very close to hosting this year. Last year Boise would have hosted and had a bye. 2004 Utah would have hosted and had a bye and Boise would have hosted. 2000 TCU would have hosted. 1999 Marshall would have hosted and 1998 Tulane would have hosted. Imagine what it would do for a program to get a home playoff game even if this year for example it would have probably been FAU at Hawaii playing for the right to go to play USC. Last year you would have probably had Troy at Auburn playing for the right to go to Boise.

WHY would anyone want the NCAA to run the event???? The NCAA only turns back about half of the revenue from the cash cow NCAA Basketball Tournament to Division I schools. The BCS turns back over 97%.

The Sugar Bowl rumor has been brewing for some time. What does it mean? In my opinion it means good news. 1. While the Greater New Orleans Sports Foundation has been a great partner their ranks were hit hard by Katrina and an annual event such as a bowl game was never part of their purpose nor vision. They exist to go after the home runs like Super Bowls, Final Fours, etc. 2. The Sugar Bowl Committee is very strong and they have tons of volunteers, the biggest bowls like the Sugar have more potential workers for most events than they really have work for them to do. Taking over the New Orleans Bowl means they gain a training ground for those people. The message they give the volunteers is simple, if you want to be able to rub elbows with coaches, AD's, and players at the big Sugar Bowl and BCS championship events you are going to have to prove your worth and pay your dues working the New Orleans Bowl. We get highly motivated folks working for the game. 3. The Sugar Bowl as I understand it has closed off its waiting list for local tickets. The equation for them becomes this. You want to be in line for Sugar Bowl tickets, you are going to have to buy New Orleans Bowl tickets to get that chance to wait for Sugar Bowl tickets. 4. Combining forces allows the Sugar Bowl to offer combination sponsorship deals. Spend X with the Sugar Bowl and they'll throw in New Orleans. ATT for example is a big sponsor of the Sugar, what if Verizon wants in? Right now the Sugar tells them no, but if they agree to do a small sponsor package for the New Orleans Bowl, they get the right to bid against ATT for the Sugar down the road or the right of first refusal if ATT elects to end their deal. Might the Sugar divert some of the sponsor money to make sure they have the funds to remain in the BCS? Of course but chances are the New Orleans Bowl still ends up with more money than it gets under the current arrangement. 5. Credibility. While GNOSF is a very credible organization (I suspect Myles Brand and Roger Goodell return their calls promptly) it does not have the contacts and respect in the college football community that the Sugar Bowl has. There is not a conference commissioner in the nation that wouldn't drop what they are doing if they find out that Sugar Bowl president is calling. That credibility and clout gives the game a serious leg up in finding a team from one of the six rich conferences to come play.

We Indian fans have mixed emotions.

Bet someone throws some big money at him.

A couple juco's could make your defensive coordinator look better based on what I saw last night.

Here's the ASU take on the final UNT possession. http://www.arkst.com/board/index.php?topic=33513.0 It was similar to a situation ASU had at NC State in 2000. We opted to go for it on fourth and didn't make it. They got into FG range and sent the game to double OT and we lost. Despite the out come I still think we made the right call out there because Phillip Rivers was HOT in the second half and had no trouble covering the ground needed for the tying FG, NC State actually got a tad conservative and didn't push for the end zone on the final drive because they knew their odds in OT being at home were very good.