Remaining G5s Reality

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 10, 2016

Two will go to the Big 12; although, it may still implode.

It doesn't matter. From budgets, to TV deals, etc. it is clear that the AAC and MWC may survive to compete for the sliver of a hope to be somehow eligible for the College Football Playoff...it will never happen, but they will be the closest to touching it of the G5s.

So, what does everyone else do? The answer is: face reality.

We are not going to get a good TV deal.
We are probably not going to have all the bowl contracts re-upped.

Sun Belt, C-USA, and MAC need to sack up and admit reality. Actually, I think MAC already has. Although not as respected as the MWC or AAC, they've had less moving parts coming and going in the past. They're probably fine how they are.

The schools of the Sun Belt and C-USA simply need to divide up into two conferences that make the most sense regionally, and move on.

Western Based Leftovers Conference
Arkansas State
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech (if they don't go to AAC)
North Texas
Rice
Southern Miss
Texas State
ULM
UTEP
UTSA

Eastern Based Leftovers Conference
North
Appalachian State
Charlotte
Marshall
Middle Tennessee
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky

South
FIU
FAU
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy

I haven't included New Mexico State. I'm sorry for that. I think their fate might mirror Idaho's. Stick them in the Western Based Leftovers if you feel like it; I don't.

No matter how you slice it, the remaining G5 conferences are simply the birds who are not the early birds who got the worms. I don't know what to call them. The late birds, I guess.

We lose.

By the way, I think if any school is bailed out in a miracle, it will be Rice, and solely based on academic reputation.

VideoEagle · May 10, 2016

Again I point out that IF a school works on attendance, building contributors and building fans then a TV contract at the AAC level isn't needed for money. You build both yourself and build competition so all the schools in the conference at least mostly want to play each other more than play someone two time zones away. Much like the MWC did before all of the Big East craziness started. We have the basis of this by concentrating on CUSA West. We don't have to completely start over yet again with new conferences.

wardly · May 10, 2016

I certainly agree with the concept. However,LA. Tech will drop football before they play in the same conference as UL Monroe.Also, I didn't see UAB, and don't know their feelings about Troy or South Alabama.UTEP would not want NMSU included.I would drop ULM from your list, have 9 schools, and play a round robin with 3 out of conference opponents.

Ben Gooding · May 10, 2016

I kind of disagree. Though the MWC and AAC may be ahead of CUSA in dollars, most of them are not that are ahead and some are behind. CUSA as a conference needs to nut up and push standards within the conference. Manipulate scheduling as a conference. Don't let AD's dictate what is and what isn't. May regulations and heavily enforce them for the betterment of the conference. The G5's are a swinging pendulum right now and CUSA better do what it takes to be included rather than excluded. The time is literally right now to make a significant push.

ValleyBoy · May 11, 2016

Remember as of July 1, Coastal Carolina is a member of the Sun Belt conference.

Wag Tag · May 11, 2016

14 hours ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Two will go to the Big 12; although, it may still implode.

It doesn't matter. From budgets, to TV deals, etc. it is clear that the AAC and MWC may survive to compete for the sliver of a hope to be somehow eligible for the College Football Playoff...it will never happen, but they will be the closest to touching it of the G5s.

So, what does everyone else do? The answer is: face reality.

We are not going to get a good TV deal.
We are probably not going to have all the bowl contracts re-upped.

Sun Belt, C-USA, and MAC need to sack up and admit reality. Actually, I think MAC already has. Although not as respected as the MWC or AAC, they've had less moving parts coming and going in the past. They're probably fine how they are.

The schools of the Sun Belt and C-USA simply need to divide up into two conferences that make the most sense regionally, and move on.

Western Based Leftovers Conference
Arkansas State
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech (if they don't go to AAC)
North Texas
Rice
Southern Miss
Texas State
ULM
UTEP
UTSA

Eastern Based Leftovers Conference
North
Appalachian State
Charlotte
Marshall
Middle Tennessee
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky

South
FIU
FAU
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy

I haven't included New Mexico State. I'm sorry for that. I think their fate might mirror Idaho's. Stick them in the Western Based Leftovers if you feel like it; I don't.

No matter how you slice it, the remaining G5 conferences are simply the birds who are not the early birds who got the worms. I don't know what to call them. The late birds, I guess.

We lose.

By the way, I think if any school is bailed out in a miracle, it will be Rice, and solely based on academic reputation.

Bring in the Southwest Conf. This is exactly right! Before tv it was regional competition selling out stadiums. I would add start a playoff system between the conf. This is how you make more money! F the bowl games!

TreeFiddy · May 11, 2016

A conference setup/schedule that has 9 conference games might be worth looking at. It allows the teams to only have to schedule 3 OOC games per year and every other year the conference gives you 5 home games.

One body bag game on the road every other year plus three ongoing H/H series. In the even years two OOC home games, in the odd years one body bag plus one OOC home game.

It would eliminate the embarrassing performances against FCS teams and make scheduling less complicated. The net dollars should work out to the same as a body bag game plus buying a game each year.

Arkstfan · May 11, 2016

In athletics, I'm a member of the Church of the Pragmatic. In eschatology and sports I'm a pan-millennialist, It'll all pan out in the end.

There are things to sweat and things to not sweat.

If the president at Rice were to say, "I'm tired of this effin BS" and wanted to realign geographically pretty much everything would work out. Phone calls placed to UTSA, UNT, UTEP, maybe Tech and USM as well. "I'm taking Rice to the Sun Belt, we are going to rename it and declare that it's a new conference. You can come with us or explain to your fans why the best regarded academic program with the longest major history dumped you."

Into the Belt, press conference announcing the "new" conference and in the meantime what's left in CUSA shores up their numbers. Think ULL, TXST, ULM or AState is ditching the Belt if Rice is coming on board? CUSA starts picking up people like GaSt, GaSo, App, maybe some of the Alabamas.

Before the dust settles, the new group sets its membership policy and gives schools 0 to 5 years to comply or be expelled (remember that happened to Denver and UNO). ULM issue resolves one way or the other. They find another $8 million for the budget or they find a new home. Tech chooses to pout rather than join? Fine they've done the outlier thing before and can do so as long as the rest of CUSA doesn't care.

Or maybe Wood Selig gathers the eastern CUSA schools together walks to the Sun Belt and says let us in. Sun Belt says yes because saying yes means CUSA West gotta fix the numbers issue that will arise. Same story different direction.

Get enough shifting going around and waiving entrance and exit fees becomes no big deal.

All it takes is one or two key players and boom.

5 hours ago, TreeFiddy said:

A conference setup/schedule that has 9 conference games might be worth looking at. It allows the teams to only have to schedule 3 OOC games per year and every other year the conference gives you 5 home games.

One body bag game on the road every other year plus three ongoing H/H series. In the even years two OOC home games, in the odd years one body bag plus one OOC home game.

It would eliminate the embarrassing performances against FCS teams and make scheduling less complicated. The net dollars should work out to the same as a body bag game plus buying a game each year.

Sound like Georgia Southern.

Eight is the magic number. Equal number of home and away league games, no one has to climb the five conference road game mountain to become champion.

One spot for a bag game, one spot for an FCS tune-up, two spots for home/home vs. other G5.

If you are going to contend for an access spot you need more non-conference wins rather than a larger league schedule pulling you toward .500 overall.

Edited May 11, 2016 by Arkstfan

TreeFiddy · May 11, 2016

36 minutes ago, Arkstfan said:

In athletics, I'm a member of the Church of the Pragmatic. In eschatology and sports I'm a pan-millennialist, It'll all pan out in the end.

There are things to sweat and things to not sweat.

If the president at Rice were to say, "I'm tired of this effin BS" and wanted to realign geographically pretty much everything would work out. Phone calls placed to UTSA, UNT, UTEP, maybe Tech and USM as well. "I'm taking Rice to the Sun Belt, we are going to rename it and declare that it's a new conference. You can come with us or explain to your fans why the best regarded academic program with the longest major history dumped you."

Into the Belt, press conference announcing the "new" conference and in the meantime what's left in CUSA shores up their numbers. Think ULL, TXST, ULM or AState is ditching the Belt if Rice is coming on board? CUSA starts picking up people like GaSt, GaSo, App, maybe some of the Alabamas.

Before the dust settles, the new group sets its membership policy and gives schools 0 to 5 years to comply or be expelled (remember that happened to Denver and UNO). ULM issue resolves one way or the other. They find another $8 million for the budget or they find a new home. Tech chooses to pout rather than join? Fine they've done the outlier thing before and can do so as long as the rest of CUSA doesn't car.

Or maybe Wood Selig gathers the eastern CUSA schools together walks to the Sun Belt and says let us in. Sun Belt says yes because saying yes means CUSA West gotta fix the numbers issue that will arise. Same story different direction.

Get enough shifting going around and waiving entrance and exit fees becomes no big deal.

All it takes is one or two key players and boom.

Sound like Georgia Southern.

Eight is the magic number. Equal number of home and away league games, no one has to climb the five conference road game mountain to become champion.

One spot for a bag game, one spot for an FCS tune-up, two spots for home/home vs. other G5.

If you are going to contend for an access spot you need more non-conference wins rather than a larger league schedule pulling you toward .500 overall.

Are you are contending that a schedule with an FCS team on it gives you a better chance at access spot than 12 FBS teams? How about a schedule that history shows is pretty much a guaranteed loss every year?

And I think recent history has shown that FCS games are not necessarily tune ups.

Edited May 11, 2016 by TreeFiddy

GrandGreen · May 11, 2016

All g5's are in the same boat. The differences between the conferences is insignificant went compared to the P5's.

Geographic alignment makes sense and really should be done. However, it is a minor part of what college football needs to survive. There are a handful of college football teams that actually generate income. The rest are in a race to see who can lose the most money. This is a model that can not be sustained long term in particular with the current emphasis on reducing college costs.

The NCAA has to be taken over by the majority of Universities who relish fair competition and heed the team to reduce athletic costs and abuse. The UT's and Alabama's of the college football world are going to have to chose if they want in or form their own association.

TreeFiddy · May 11, 2016

The part about losing money is more of a headline grabber IMO. Sure the schools technically show a loss on their athletic program, but on the flip side the schools use their athletic programs as a way to attract new students and generate giving (present company excluded, of course).

It is essentially a marketing expense.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 11, 2016

5 hours ago, ValleyBoy said:

Remember as of July 1, Coastal Carolina is a member of the Sun Belt conference.

Ugh. Left out UAB and Coastal. Yuck. See what I mean? Reality is, these are just empty faces to the rest of the college football world. UAB? Who cares. Coastal Carolina? Who cares? Stick the Carolina school in the North bracket, UAB in the South.

I think La Tech and, possibly, Rice can go AAC, replacing Houston and Cincinnati if those two are taken by the Big 12...which will eventually lose OU and Texas and just be another Big East. I also think Kansas, because of basketball and academics, is an attractive addition to the Big Ten or ACC.

So, honestly, someone answer me this: when OU and Texas leave the Big 12, why wouldn't there be a push for a new Southwest Conference-type conference?

Possibly future Big 12, minus OU, KU, and UT :
Baylor
Cincinnati
Houston
Iowa State
Kansas State
Oklahoma State
TCU
Texas Tech
West Virginia

It just doesn't look good for the Big 12 if OU and Texas bolt, as well as Kansas. It's why I'm in the "There will someday only be the Big 4" crowd: ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12, and SEC.

To get back to 10, I think OU/KU/UT-less Big 12 would invite Rice. Either way, you are looking at a terrible hodge podge of former SWC and Big 8 schools, plus the mongrels no one really wants among the Big Boys...looking at you, West Virginia and Cincy.

Texas will call the dance, OU will follow along; Kansas is awfully quiet, but has the most chips on the table behind the 'Horns and Sooners.

Edited May 11, 2016 by MeanGreenMailbox

GrandGreen · May 11, 2016

1 hour ago, TreeFiddy said:

The part about losing money is more of a headline grabber IMO. Sure the schools technically show a loss on their athletic program, but on the flip side the schools use their athletic programs as a way to attract new students and generate giving (present company excluded, of course).

It is essentially a marketing expense.

Maybe, maybe not. Most college students care very little for collegian athletics, so I doubt they pick their schools on that basis. If they do, they certainly would stay clear of NT. There is no technically about it. NT and most of their peers lose millions on athletics. While there is no doubt that college athletics greatly helps a University's name recognition; is it really worth the millions spent? It is a convenience argument but I doubt it can ever be proven on an analytical basis for most colleges.

ValleyBoy · May 11, 2016

18 hours ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

The schools of the Sun Belt and C-USA simply need to divide up into two conferences that make the most sense regionally, and move on.

I feel like this is one thing that the Sun Belt conference accomplished with the addition of Coastal Carolina. Like for conference members to be close but not too close that it looks like that they are on top of each other such as most of the MAC conference. Yes the Sun Belt conference stretches from the Carolina's to Texas with some gap's in-between. From next years Sun Belts men's and women's basketball team I would like to know what the travel cost saving to each member will be in comparison to last years cost. In next years schedule Texas State and UTA only have to send their teams to Alabama 1 time. They play both Troy and USA during that one trip. Only have to travel to Georgia one time. Play Georgia Southern and Georgia State both during that one trip. Only one trip to the Carolina's where they will play both AppSt and Coastal Carolina.

Arkstfan · May 11, 2016

4 hours ago, TreeFiddy said:

Are you are contending that a schedule with an FCS team on it gives you a better chance at access spot than 12 FBS teams? How about a schedule that history shows is pretty much a guaranteed loss every year?

And I think recent history has shown that FCS games are not necessarily tune ups.

Absolutely. Among the data the selection committee receives is six different power ratings that take into account winning percentage and I know several if not all factor in FCS games. An FCS win doesn't perfectly balance a P5 loss in those but reduces the sting.

The critical element though the non-conference FBS games.

You play a 9 game schedule, most years you are going to play a money game and an FCS. That leaves one "peer" game. In a 12 team league that means you play 12 peer games total most years.

Breaks out like this:

12 Money

12 FCS

12 peer

54 intra-conference which means a conference winner and conference loser in every game. If the conference goes 4-8 vs. money, 12-0 vs FCS and 8-4 vs. peer net winning percentage is .5417

Take that same league on an 8 game schedule.

12 money going 4-8

12 FCS going 12-0

24 peer with same winning percentage of 16-8

48 intra-conference

You get a winning percentage of .5555

Nine game conference schedules are bad for gaming the computers, that's why the consultants told the Big XII that 12 playing an 8 game schedule would increase their chances of the playoff roughly 5% vs 10 playing a 9 game schedule.

As for FCS games. AState hasn't played one that needed less than four TD's to win at the final horn since 2003, so yeah I take them for granted.

croatan · May 11, 2016

21 hours ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Two will go to the Big 12; although, it may still implode.

It doesn't matter. From budgets, to TV deals, etc. it is clear that the AAC and MWC may survive to compete for the sliver of a hope to be somehow eligible for the College Football Playoff...it will never happen, but they will be the closest to touching it of the G5s.

So, what does everyone else do? The answer is: face reality.

We are not going to get a good TV deal.
We are probably not going to have all the bowl contracts re-upped.

Sun Belt, C-USA, and MAC need to sack up and admit reality. Actually, I think MAC already has. Although not as respected as the MWC or AAC, they've had less moving parts coming and going in the past. They're probably fine how they are.

The schools of the Sun Belt and C-USA simply need to divide up into two conferences that make the most sense regionally, and move on.

Western Based Leftovers Conference
Arkansas State
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech (if they don't go to AAC)
North Texas
Rice
Southern Miss
Texas State
ULM
UTEP
UTSA

Eastern Based Leftovers Conference
North
Appalachian State
Charlotte
Marshall
Middle Tennessee
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky

South
FIU
FAU
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy

I haven't included New Mexico State. I'm sorry for that. I think their fate might mirror Idaho's. Stick them in the Western Based Leftovers if you feel like it; I don't.

No matter how you slice it, the remaining G5 conferences are simply the birds who are not the early birds who got the worms. I don't know what to call them. The late birds, I guess.

We lose.

By the way, I think if any school is bailed out in a miracle, it will be Rice, and solely based on academic reputation.

An excellent and sober analysis of the current state of college sports,especially football. I am an ECU fan and believe that we are holding on for dear life in the AAC. In reality the MWC and the AAC represent as you stated, the last bit of hope, small as it is, at remaining somewhat relevant in college football. If the AAC were to fold, ECU would need to join a regional conference and resign itself to playing a different brand of football than it is now.

CUSA, SunBelt and MAC need each other. The MWC and AAC need each other. This is a fight to death and unfortunately most of us will see our beloved football teams playing a levels that we never dreamed possible. We really are now looking at worst case scenarios. Wish it was not so, but I believe it is. Cheer.

21 hours ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Two will go to the Big 12; although, it may still implode.

It doesn't matter. From budgets, to TV deals, etc. it is clear that the AAC and MWC may survive to compete for the sliver of a hope to be somehow eligible for the College Football Playoff...it will never happen, but they will be the closest to touching it of the G5s.

So, what does everyone else do? The answer is: face reality.

We are not going to get a good TV deal.
We are probably not going to have all the bowl contracts re-upped.

Sun Belt, C-USA, and MAC need to sack up and admit reality. Actually, I think MAC already has. Although not as respected as the MWC or AAC, they've had less moving parts coming and going in the past. They're probably fine how they are.

The schools of the Sun Belt and C-USA simply need to divide up into two conferences that make the most sense regionally, and move on.

Western Based Leftovers Conference
Arkansas State
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech (if they don't go to AAC)
North Texas
Rice
Southern Miss
Texas State
ULM
UTEP
UTSA

Eastern Based Leftovers Conference
North
Appalachian State
Charlotte
Marshall
Middle Tennessee
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky

South
FIU
FAU
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy

I haven't included New Mexico State. I'm sorry for that. I think their fate might mirror Idaho's. Stick them in the Western Based Leftovers if you feel like it; I don't.

No matter how you slice it, the remaining G5 conferences are simply the birds who are not the early birds who got the worms. I don't know what to call them. The late birds, I guess.

We lose.

By the way, I think if any school is bailed out in a miracle, it will be Rice, and solely based on academic reputation.

An excellent and sober analysis of the current state of college sports,especially football. I am an ECU fan and believe that we are holding on for dear life in the AAC. In reality the MWC and the AAC represent as you stated, the last bit of hope, small as it is, at remaining somewhat relevant in college football. If the AAC were to fold, ECU would need to join a regional conference and resign itself to playing a different brand of football than it is now.

CUSA, SunBelt and MAC need each other. The MWC and AAC need each other. This is a fight to death and unfortunately most of us will see our beloved football teams playing a levels that we never dreamed possible. We really are now looking at worst case scenarios. Wish it was not so, but I believe it is. Cheer.

Arkstfan · May 11, 2016

First @croatan that's an AWESOME screen name!!!

Second, yes there will be changes.

The intercollegiate athletics ecosystem has always been dynamic and changing.

UChicago and University of the South stepped off the insanity of athletics in their era. The Ivies scaled back what they were doing. Numerous schools have given up football over the years.

Circumstances change.

When more reliable busses and better highways came along, leagues no longer looked at how hard it was to take a train to play someone. Then air charter became reliable and affordable.

The NCAA for a time did little but create a national framework and scholarship limits if they existed were determined by conferences so was bowl eligibility and people who didn't like the answers from their conference went indy or broke off to form the SEC, ACC, and Big 8.

TV was once controlled by the NCAA and there was a cap on national appearances by a school. Leagues like the Pac-8 and SWC saw it make sense to add Arizona, Arizona State and Houston to tap into the TV and get around the caps, while independence made great sense.

Then the oil strike in hoops money made basketball important. Here comes the Big East, Metro, Sun Belt, A10.

TV value was measured first in markets, then ratings share, then it became whether you had fans that would tell Comcast to shove it if they didn't carry your team's games and later your school's TV network.

I have no fear of the NCAA legislating schools out of FBS and very little fear of the elites taking their ball and going somewhere else to play.

What I worry about is we are nationally going to see flat to declining numbers enrolling in college for several years to come. State legislators no longer fear backlash and being voted out if they vote to cut higher ed funding. Some schools will curtail athletic funding to cover state funding shortfalls. Lower enrollments at some schools means fewer fee dollars to subsidize athletics. The pressure and strain on the student loan program from an economy that no longer rewards "a degree" with a decent paying Monday-Friday job with paid vacation not always being there means greater difficulty paying off loans, less free time to attend the alma mater's games and fewer spare dollars to donate and buy tickets.

Maybe Idaho is the iceberg and it's just an ice cube in a glass and maybe we see schools no longer able to fund high level athletics and give it up.

Maybe we change how we pay for college and fees are no longer a viable option and transfers of funds to athletics harder to do.

Those things are far more likely than getting ordered out by the elites.

We don't know what the next model of paying to see games on video will look like. Maybe the carriage fee model dies and it becomes subscription or maybe you pay a subscription and schools only get paid for the actual views of games out of that subscription fee.

Maybe the USC's Alabama's Texas' and Michigan's of the world feel they no longer need their conference as an economic unit and go independent or use that threat as leverage to make conferences return to being a method of efficient game scheduling, compiling stats, sponsoring title events, and handing out awards to players.

Or maybe the Big 10 becomes the Big 32 or 48 and teams put all their income generation in the league's hands make their own schedules and post-season events.

Maybe a school can weather the changes but no longer has enough like-minded and like-funded peers within their region to make it worth their time to stick around. Yale met I-A criteria but opted to move with their peers. McNeese did likewise. Wichita State found it no longer viable with all of the Valley but them Tulsa and NMSU relegated down and NMSU hit the road for the Big West. NMSU only found a home there because budget problems in California made it no longer viable for schools like Long Beach and Fullerton to fund I-A football.

There is plenty of danger out there but the ebb and flow of intercollegiate athletics is a constant force.

TreeFiddy · May 11, 2016

On 5/11/2016 at 2:17 PM, Arkstfan said:

Absolutely. Among the data the selection committee receives is six different power ratings that take into account winning percentage and I know several if not all factor in FCS games. An FCS win doesn't perfectly balance a P5 loss in those but reduces the sting.

The critical element though the non-conference FBS games.

You play a 9 game schedule, most years you are going to play a money game and an FCS. That leaves one "peer" game. In a 12 team league that means you play 12 peer games total most years.

Breaks out like this:

12 Money

12 FCS

12 peer

54 intra-conference which means a conference winner and conference loser in every game. If the conference goes 4-8 vs. money, 12-0 vs FCS and 8-4 vs. peer net winning percentage is .5417

Take that same league on an 8 game schedule.

12 money going 4-8

12 FCS going 12-0

24 peer with same winning percentage of 16-8

48 intra-conference

You get a winning percentage of .5555

Nine game conference schedules are bad for gaming the computers, that's why the consultants told the Big XII that 12 playing an 8 game schedule would increase their chances of the playoff roughly 5% vs 10 playing a 9 game schedule.

As for FCS games. AState hasn't played one that needed less than four TD's to win at the final horn since 2003, so yeah I take them for granted.

The hypothetical I laid out eliminated the FCS games entirely. 9 conference games, 3 OOC games per year, no FCS.

Money game every other year (the year with 5 home conference games). Every other year you play 3 'peer' OOC (2 home/1 away) plus 9 conference games (4 home/5 away) and in the other years you play 2 'peer' (1 home/1 away) and 1 P5 (away) plus 9 conference games (5 home/ 4 away).

edit: keep in mind my goal would not be to game the system in hopes of getting the access slot, but rather to improve the quality of home games for the G5's while lessening the P5 beat downs, and in turn help improve attendance via better home opponents. Oh, and world peace.

Edited May 12, 2016 by TreeFiddy

untjim1995 · May 12, 2016

On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 5:34 PM, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Two will go to the Big 12; although, it may still implode.

It doesn't matter. From budgets, to TV deals, etc. it is clear that the AAC and MWC may survive to compete for the sliver of a hope to be somehow eligible for the College Football Playoff...it will never happen, but they will be the closest to touching it of the G5s.

So, what does everyone else do? The answer is: face reality.

We are not going to get a good TV deal.
We are probably not going to have all the bowl contracts re-upped.

Sun Belt, C-USA, and MAC need to sack up and admit reality. Actually, I think MAC already has. Although not as respected as the MWC or AAC, they've had less moving parts coming and going in the past. They're probably fine how they are.

The schools of the Sun Belt and C-USA simply need to divide up into two conferences that make the most sense regionally, and move on.

Western Based Leftovers Conference
Arkansas State
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech (if they don't go to AAC)
North Texas
Rice
Southern Miss
Texas State
ULM
UTEP
UTSA

Eastern Based Leftovers Conference
North
Appalachian State
Charlotte
Marshall
Middle Tennessee
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky

South
FIU
FAU
Georgia Southern
Georgia State
South Alabama
Troy

I haven't included New Mexico State. I'm sorry for that. I think their fate might mirror Idaho's. Stick them in the Western Based Leftovers if you feel like it; I don't.

No matter how you slice it, the remaining G5 conferences are simply the birds who are not the early birds who got the worms. I don't know what to call them. The late birds, I guess.

We lose.

By the way, I think if any school is bailed out in a miracle, it will be Rice, and solely based on academic reputation.

I've been saying this for awhile. The Big XII is just the SW version of the old Big East. In time, the best parts will get bought off, leaving behind leftovers that cannot keep enough prestige to make it a power league anymore. It will be another version of the AAC or MWC and those three leagues will still stay at the level of play that can be allowed to play the power conferences in OOC and get a spot in a non-playoff BCS bowl. That will completely protect the biggest schools from government intervention or punitive damages because they will say they still allow these schools to compete and its up to those leagues to determine if another school can get admitted into their leagues.

We blew our chances a long time ago. Even if you don't want to blame it completely on allowing the program to fall back down to I-aa in 1983 for 12 years, the fact that we brought our program back up to I-A in 1995 only because we could make more money from the whore games and we kept our budget woefully low, causing us to continually play in our toilet bowl of a stadium was the death knell of the program's chances at FBS legitimacy. From 1995 until 2008, SMU literally sucked ass at football...and we couldn't do one thing to move up above them in the eyes of the sports media or college football fans. It was there for the taking and we blew it, allowing SMU to STILL be able to dictate what conference affiliation we could and couldn't be a part of. If we jump over them, as we should have, the MWC takes us when TCU leaves. Or we move up to the now AAC before they did. Instead, they go into CUSA and block us from ever having any chance of joining a league with teams that people have heard of over the years, keeping us in the dreg of FBS, the SBC, until the Big East calls them to join their league with everyone else that we always wanted to join with in what is know the AAC. Now, we move up to SBC 2.0, and the league just isn't good enough to garner any mention or interest in being like the AAC or MWC anymore.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 12, 2016

13 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

I've been saying this for awhile. The Big XII is just the SW version of the old Big East. In time, the best parts will get bought off, leaving behind leftovers that cannot keep enough prestige to make it a power league anymore. It will be another version of the AAC or MWC and those three leagues will still stay at the level of play that can be allowed to play the power conferences in OOC and get a spot in a non-playoff BCS bowl. That will completely protect the biggest schools from government intervention or punitive damages because they will say they still allow these schools to compete and its up to those leagues to determine if another school can get admitted into their leagues.

We blew our chances a long time ago. Even if you don't want to blame it completely on allowing the program to fall back down to I-aa in 1983 for 12 years, the fact that we brought our program back up to I-A in 1995 only because we could make more money from the whore games and we kept our budget woefully low, causing us to continually play in our toilet bowl of a stadium was the death knell of the program's chances at FBS legitimacy. From 1995 until 2008, SMU literally sucked ass at football...and we couldn't do one thing to move up above them in the eyes of the sports media or college football fans. It was there for the taking and we blew it, allowing SMU to STILL be able to dictate what conference affiliation we could and couldn't be a part of. If we jump over them, as we should have, the MWC takes us when TCU leaves. Or we move up to the now AAC before they did. Instead, they go into CUSA and block us from ever having any chance of joining a league with teams that people have heard of over the years, keeping us in the dreg of FBS, the SBC, until the Big East calls them to join their league with everyone else that we always wanted to join with in what is know the AAC. Now, we move up to SBC 2.0, and the league just isn't good enough to garner any mention or interest in being like the AAC or MWC anymore.

Yep. Agree 100%. So, therein lies the part about accepting reality.

Think about what is happening right now with the Big 12. Even though it will obviously crater if OU and/or Texas leavers, Memphis is begging to get in to the tune of a $500 million offer by FEDEX to pay the the conference to let the Tigers in.

Let that sink in, folks: $500 million being offered by a corporation on behalf of a University, just for sports.

That is what we are up against. Not just us, every G5 school. It's now an open-bidding process. And, look...face reality, Memphis just had a pretty great year in football, has some basketball history, and still has to try to bribe it's way into the P5 conference most likely to implode!

That is where college athletics is today. I don't care who our athletic director is or was, we don't have a donor, or even a collection of donors, who will shell out $500 million+ for anything.

Go ahead and say the words, half a billion dollars! And, that's just to get your foot in the door. Imagine the cost of trying to keep up once you are in!

It's crazy. It's dysfunctional. It's Big Boy college athletics, 21st Century.

TreeFiddy · May 12, 2016

Fedex isn't paying $500 million without any expectation of return. They are willing to commit $500 million in advertising/sponsorship in exchange for Memphis getting in AND Fedex getting at least $500 million in advertising value.

Don't act like the Big12-2 is the only conference with a bunch of hangers-on. Each of the other conferences have their share of laggards. In reality, each conference could easily cut 30% from their ranks and not blink. The Big12-2 could easily do the same.

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 12, 2016

1 minute ago, TreeFiddy said:

Fedex isn't paying $500 million without any expectation of return. They are willing to commit $500 million in advertising/sponsorship in exchange for Memphis getting in AND Fedex getting at least $500 million in advertising value.

Don't act like the Big12-2 is the only conference with a bunch of hangers-on. Each of the other conferences have their share of laggards. In reality, each conference could easily cut 30% from their ranks and not blink. The Big12-2 could easily do the same.

The hangers on aren't the problem with the Big 12 - the problem is the constant threat of Texas and/or OU leaving.

There is no threat in the SEC of Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, LSU, Auburn, or Georgia leaving.
There is no threat in the Big Ten of Michigan or Ohio State pulling up stakes.
There is no threat in the Pac-12 of USC, UCLA, or Oregon leaving.
There is no threat in the ACC of Miami, Clemson, or North Carolina leaving.

The Big 12 is the only conference with the threat of its bell cows leaving; and, the cost of joining their herd could be half a billion dollars. We aren't there. We never have been, nor will we be any time soon.

MeanGreenTexan · May 12, 2016

2 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

The hangers on aren't the problem with the Big 12 - the problem is the constant threat of Texas and/or OU leaving.

There is no threat in the SEC of Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, LSU, Auburn, or Georgia leaving.
There is no threat in the Big Ten of Michigan or Ohio State pulling up stakes.
There is no threat in the Pac-12 of USC, UCLA, or Oregon leaving.
There is no threat in the ACC of Miami, Clemson, or North Carolina leaving.

The Big 12 is the only conference with the threat of its bell cows leaving; and, the cost of joining their herd could be half a billion dollars. We aren't there. We never have been, nor will we be any time soon.

You don't think if the SEC extended an invite to Miami/Clemson/UNC they wouldn't jump on it in a heartbeat?

MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF · May 12, 2016

1 minute ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

You don't think if the SEC extended an invite to Miami/Clemson/UNC they wouldn't jump on it in a heartbeat?

Of course they might. But, it's not as likely or threatening to their conference as OU or Texas leaving the Big 12.

Ben Gooding · May 12, 2016

3 hours ago, untjim1995 said:

I've been saying this for awhile. The Big XII is just the SW version of the old Big East. In time, the best parts will get bought off, leaving behind leftovers that cannot keep enough prestige to make it a power league anymore. It will be another version of the AAC or MWC and those three leagues will still stay at the level of play that can be allowed to play the power conferences in OOC and get a spot in a non-playoff BCS bowl. That will completely protect the biggest schools from government intervention or punitive damages because they will say they still allow these schools to compete and its up to those leagues to determine if another school can get admitted into their leagues.

We blew our chances a long time ago. Even if you don't want to blame it completely on allowing the program to fall back down to I-aa in 1983 for 12 years, the fact that we brought our program back up to I-A in 1995 only because we could make more money from the whore games and we kept our budget woefully low, causing us to continually play in our toilet bowl of a stadium was the death knell of the program's chances at FBS legitimacy. From 1995 until 2008, SMU literally sucked ass at football...and we couldn't do one thing to move up above them in the eyes of the sports media or college football fans. It was there for the taking and we blew it, allowing SMU to STILL be able to dictate what conference affiliation we could and couldn't be a part of. If we jump over them, as we should have, the MWC takes us when TCU leaves. Or we move up to the now AAC before they did. Instead, they go into CUSA and block us from ever having any chance of joining a league with teams that people have heard of over the years, keeping us in the dreg of FBS, the SBC, until the Big East calls them to join their league with everyone else that we always wanted to join with in what is know the AAC. Now, we move up to SBC 2.0, and the league just isn't good enough to garner any mention or interest in being like the AAC or MWC anymore.

You give the MWC waaaay too much credit. They are not what you make them out to be.