regional conferences

[Cerebus]

Updated:

[wardly]

I didn't mean literally create a new conference. What I meant was for CUSA and The Belt to reshuffle the deck geographically to become more regional but retain separate conferences as to not lose automatic NCAA bids.Several problems would have to be overcome. First,when Big 12 adds 2 schools, Houston will probably be one of them . If I am AAC I would add Rice to replace them. Second,La. Tech will not be in same conference as ULM.Third would be convincing La. Tech ,UAB,and  So. Miss to play in the "Western Conference" instead of "Eastern Conference". I sure there are other issues to overcome, but those 3 just jumped out at me.

[Cerebus]

1 minute ago, wardly said:

Several problems would have to be overcome. First,when Big 12 adds 2 schools, 

B12 isn't adding schools.  B12 is already at the 10 team CFB payout cap.  No team that could be added would offset the loss brought about by having to split the pie more ways.   The only team that MIGHT be able to do it is BYU, and they are an independent.  

In fact, there are more schools in power conferences now than there will be in 10 years.  There is fat to cut.  

[untjim1995]

23 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

B12 isn't adding schools.  B12 is already at the 10 team CFB payout cap.  No team that could be added would offset the loss brought about by having to split the pie more ways.   The only team that MIGHT be able to do it is BYU, and they are an independent.  

In fact, there are more schools in power conferences now than there will be in 10 years.  There is fat to cut.  

They will if it gives them the extra billion dollars from their tv contract that supposedly exists if they add 4 teams...

[GangGreen]

I guess. But, how do you split the divisions in both conferences?

Edit: This was in response to oldguystudent.

Edited June 15, 2016 by GangGreen

[GrayEagle]

31 minutes ago, oldguystudent said:

My beautifully rendered map is thwarted once again as it has 12 in the east and 11 in the west without Coastal.  Gotta move one more team west.  Southern Alabama?

The West could just add New Mexico State and voila!...12 in each conference.  

Having said that, I'm not sure how much longer ULM can hang in there if the stakes keep getting raised.  They have the lowest revenue (by far) of the FBS and, I believe, the lowest enrollment of public FBS institutions.  Louisiana has even talked about merging institutions.  If that happened they'd likely become part of Louisiana Tech.

Unless concessions or adjustments can be obtained from the NCAA, I believe that the two conferences are stuck where they are.

[NorthTexan95]

1 hour ago, Ben Gooding said:

Going to divisions? We are in divisions. There is no reason for us to go play in Carolina or Florida or for them to come play us. We need to disband and become something else. Create a Texas, Arkansas, and Louisiana conference for all I care. Every game aside from UTEP would be very accessible in this event. 

We are not in divisions in many sports where the travel costs are an issue. Football going east for one or two games a year isn't an issue. 

[Ben Gooding]

16 minutes ago, NorthTexan95 said:

We are not in divisions in many sports where the travel costs are an issue. Football going east for one or two games a year isn't an issue. 

I see and agree.

[foutsrouts]

A ten team TX, LA, AR conference with the subtraction of Monroe and the addition of S. Miss and NMSU would work for me. We could call ourselves Big 12 Lite.

[wardly]

We need to create regional rivals.

[NorthTexan95]

9 minutes ago, wardly said:

We need to create regional rivals.

According to Vito we have one in UTSA.  I don't think anyone is buying that, though. 

[Arkstfan]

3 hours ago, Cerebus said:

Here is the current CUSBAC map:

The real issues as I see them

1) No one can be left out.

2) No one is leaving, makes no sense for the P5 conferences to expand, they will probably contract.

3) SBC is going to have to be talked into reducing their per team CFB payout by taking more than 10 teams.

4) Both conferences have to be happy with the mix of teams they get.

 

So, what are the two new lineups that can be made out of this?

 

ETA: Also someone has to take UALR and UTA and BB only schools.

All you gotta do is hire a timeshare salesman to handle it. Then no one looks at the fine print.

Sun Belt is at 10 football in 2018, 12 hoops starting July 1. CUSA is 13 football 14 hoops with UAB pending.

26 total teams to deal with... maybe.

Let's say I'm Wood Selig or Chris Massaro at ODU or MTSU. I convince all of CUSA East to follow me into the newly announced Seaboard League (borrowing the legendary name for the league that never was that would have been the Big East before the Big East) and get this done on July 3rd (because tomorrow's our Independence Day! We shall not quietly). Sun Belt votes 9-3 to expand with the 7 schools (the bare minimum vote).

The press release announces the formation of the "new" Seaboard League. The seven CUSA east schools are confirmed as members with the details being ironed out, or maybe it goes ahead and lists App State, Coastal Carolina, GaSo, and GaSt.

Who is in the Seaboard League? Everyone in the Sun Belt plus 7 CUSA teams. That's 17 football and 19 hoops, not a very good deal but it's temporary.

It won't start competition until the 2018-19 academic year because the departing league rules mandate proper notice.

Meanwhile the 6 football / 7 hoops CUSA is needing members. AState and ULL easy picks. TXST maybe some gruff but probably works out, basically have to choose between forcing NMSU down UTEP's throat or TXST down someone else's. The difference being that if UTEP launches the escape pod to the surface of planet MWC, do you want NMSU as your far outlier? So no on NMSU. South Alabama's a nice fit they didn't make Camellia Bowl feel disappointed and they are in the home town of the GoDaddy.

Seaboard has a quick meeting waiving departure fees if a member goes to a conference that agrees to waive departure fees for schools coming to the Seaboard, and also waives entry fees.

So CUSA has 10 football and 11 hoops pending UAB's return.

Now cut back to the east.

They've "lost" to their joy, AState, ULL, TXST and USA. The Seaboard League is now at 13 football and 15 hoops. A bit more manageable.

You need to have another Seaboard meeting. You have a meeting and conduct it under the Sun Belt bylaws. You take a vote and by a 12-3 vote you make FBS football a core sport, one all members must offer and give UTA and UALR until the end of the 2017-18 academic year to be reclassified FBS, heck be generous, give them until then to start reclassifying, either way they can't meet the requirement and they are out.

Another twist to the Sun Belt bylaws. Any member may be expelled by a 75% vote of the members (with the considered team not voting).

So even counting UALR and UTA, there are 14 voters with ULM not getting to participate in voting. That means 11 votes are needed to expel and by a 12-2 vote (ULM not voting, UALR and UTA casting eff you votes) ULM is expelled at the end of the 2017-18 academic year and is entitled to 1/15th of the league's assets as a lovely parting gift.

Come 2018 football season the Seaboard League plays its first ever season even though as far as the NCAA and CFP are concerned it is the Sun Belt.

The CUSA brand now is worthless as CUSA 3.x becomes 4.x so the members tweak the nose of their beloved neighbors (Houston, SMU, Memphis, and Tulane) and announce the formation of the new conference, The National Athletic Conference which starts play in 2018 and is still CUSA for all NCAA and CFP care.

Not every one gets to come along but the two league charters are preserved.

[outoftown]

Assuming we cannot get rid of anyone here is how I would see it:

C-USA West Texas:

UTEP

UTSA

UNT

Tx State

Rice

ULM (because that way Lat Tech at least doesn't have em in division). An alternative would have ULL here

 

C-USA East (From Louisiana to Alabama):

La Tech

ULL. An alternative would have Ark State here

Southern Miss

UAB

Troy

South Alabama

 

Seabord North

ODU

Charlotte

Marshall

WKU

MTSU

Ark State. An alernative would have ULM here. to make La Tech happy.

 

Seabord South (4 Move ups and the Floridas)

FaU

FiU

Georgia Southern

Georgia State

Ap State

Coastal Carolina

 

1 hour ago, Arkstfan said:

All you gotta do is hire a timeshare salesman to handle it. Then no one looks at the fine print.

Sun Belt is at 10 football in 2018, 12 hoops starting July 1. CUSA is 13 football 14 hoops with UAB pending.

26 total teams to deal with... maybe.

Let's say I'm Wood Selig or Chris Massaro at ODU or MTSU. I convince all of CUSA East to follow me into the newly announced Seaboard League (borrowing the legendary name for the league that never was that would have been the Big East before the Big East) and get this done on July 3rd (because tomorrow's our Independence Day! We shall not quietly). Sun Belt votes 9-3 to expand with the 7 schools (the bare minimum vote).

The press release announces the formation of the "new" Seaboard League. The seven CUSA east schools are confirmed as members with the details being ironed out, or maybe it goes ahead and lists App State, Coastal Carolina, GaSo, and GaSt.

Who is in the Seaboard League? Everyone in the Sun Belt plus 7 CUSA teams. That's 17 football and 19 hoops, not a very good deal but it's temporary.

It won't start competition until the 2018-19 academic year because the departing league rules mandate proper notice.

Meanwhile the 6 football / 7 hoops CUSA is needing members. AState and ULL easy picks. TXST maybe some gruff but probably works out, basically have to choose between forcing NMSU down UTEP's throat or TXST down someone else's. The difference being that if UTEP launches the escape pod to the surface of planet MWC, do you want NMSU as your far outlier? So no on NMSU. South Alabama's a nice fit they didn't make Camellia Bowl feel disappointed and they are in the home town of the GoDaddy.

Seaboard has a quick meeting waiving departure fees if a member goes to a conference that agrees to waive departure fees for schools coming to the Seaboard, and also waives entry fees.

So CUSA has 10 football and 11 hoops pending UAB's return.

Now cut back to the east.

They've "lost" to their joy, AState, ULL, TXST and USA. The Seaboard League is now at 13 football and 15 hoops. A bit more manageable.

You need to have another Seaboard meeting. You have a meeting and conduct it under the Sun Belt bylaws. You take a vote and by a 12-3 vote you make FBS football a core sport, one all members must offer and give UTA and UALR until the end of the 2017-18 academic year to be reclassified FBS, heck be generous, give them until then to start reclassifying, either way they can't meet the requirement and they are out.

Another twist to the Sun Belt bylaws. Any member may be expelled by a 75% vote of the members (with the considered team not voting).

So even counting UALR and UTA, there are 14 voters with ULM not getting to participate in voting. That means 11 votes are needed to expel and by a 12-2 vote (ULM not voting, UALR and UTA casting eff you votes) ULM is expelled at the end of the 2017-18 academic year and is entitled to 1/15th of the league's assets as a lovely parting gift.

Come 2018 football season the Seaboard League plays its first ever season even though as far as the NCAA and CFP are concerned it is the Sun Belt.

The CUSA brand now is worthless as CUSA 3.x becomes 4.x so the members tweak the nose of their beloved neighbors (Houston, SMU, Memphis, and Tulane) and announce the formation of the new conference, The National Athletic Conference which starts play in 2018 and is still CUSA for all NCAA and CFP care.

Not every one gets to come along but the two league charters are preserved.

Decent senario, more realistic than most, but if a league is down to 7 members it will not look attractive to anyone.

Edited June 15, 2016 by outoftown

[MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF]

6 hours ago, TreeFiddy said:

The MAC has already aligned geographically.  Same with the MWC.  I don't think there are any other G5 teams in either of their footprints.  

It's just the AAC, CUSA, and SBC that are having trouble with the concept.

AAC is probably good like it is because you have schools there who were too late to the Facilities Upgrade Era that began in the early 1990s, but not as late as those of us stuck in the C-USA and Sun Belt.

The problem with the C-USA and Sun Belt is like the drunk guy at the bar at closing time - no one looks bad enough to say "no" to! 

So, we've let these start-ups and jump-ups into the conference that no one in the college football world has Soever heard of. Now, they're pregnant and we're kind of stuck with the consequences of our actions.

So, the long and short of it is, we get what we got because our conference and school leaders weren't smart enough to keep it in their pants until they sobered up a little.

 

Edited June 15, 2016 by MeanGreenMailbox

[wardly]

CUSA gets Ark.State, Seaboard South keeps ULM. Now both ULL,ULM and La. Tech should all be happy.

[Arkstfan]

I think any cognizant observer looks and says the final result looks pretty crappy, but the final result was the product of several independent decisions, not a coherent strategy.

Adding UNT, UTSA, Tech, ODU, Charlotte, FIU was the decision making of 8 schools to respond to losing four. To get expansion approved meant that 6 of the 8 had to concur. I believe based on conversations with people engaged that ECU, UAB, Marshall were prepared to block unless the eastern needs were met.

Then two more left and depending on who you believe either the 6 remaining plus 6 newcomers voted or the 6 remaining voted but accepted input for the incoming. If only six voted then five affirmative were needed or if all 12 then 9 votes were needed in theory all new plus 3 existing or all existing plus 3 new could have carried the vote.

Then Tulsa left and either it was 5 voting with four needed to approve or it was 13 voting with 10 needed to approve.

The path was shaped in part not by the command or dictate of the commissioner but by advice he provided. It was apparent the Big East situation had the possibility of spiraling in crazy directions, He had survived a major raid and taken a big hit in television, and for those reasons probably did advise bigger is better. But we also know ECU and Marshall wanted more eastern schools and both believed a Florida presence was vital. UAB and USM both recruited Florida and likely agreed.

I tend to suspect that had ECU's number come up before the vote to expand to six that it would have been far more difficult to secure the votes to get both of ODU and Charlotte and might not have gotten both. FAU might well have come in with FIU. I also suspect that had Tulane's number been called sooner that Louisiana Lafayette would have been higher on the selection list. If MWC hadn't advised that they were about to take a significant portion of the WAC that UTSA wouldn't have been quite as heavily considered and have been led to believe that had the league not taken all of ODU, Charlotte, and FIU that UTSA may have sat that one out.

The sequencing of the departures and who was in at each point shaped each decision, there was no planned path to this alignment and the reality is there is RARELY a planned path to a conference alignment.

Those who hung around the Sun Belt board in those days after CUSA was first raided may recall I handicapped CUSA's moves like this. If going to 9, UNT, if going to 10 UNT and FIU, if going to 12 I thought La.Tech, MTSU, and FAU were in play. When ECU and Tulane left, I posted congratulations to MTSU and FAU because I felt at that point the powers that be had made the decision to "own" 14 as the number. When Tulsa rumors emerged I congratulated WKU. What I missed completely was UTSA, Charlotte, and ODU being in the conversation because I misjudged ECU and Marshall's desires.

During the wait for the six team add, the only thing I thought could derail the expected path would ECU and USM, a charter and near charter member slamming a fist on the table with an eruption of profanity declaring that they were sick of adding large market schools that were no better or inferior to them when added using the league as an incubator to move on and demanding members more like them. ECU's geography concerns were greater than that and USM as I recall was in the midst of leadership turmoil and probably not very effective.

WAC16 is one of the nearer examples of what happened. They were poised to go to 12 to better their positioning with ABC (remember ESPN wasn't the ESPN we know and ESPN2 was being touted for youth oriented sports like BMX). SWC blew up. The Metro and Great Midwest were talking football and there was general instability. They went in the room to get to 12 and came out with 16. Eventually the question was asked "What have we gotten into?" Of the 10 WAC members pre-16, the four remaining charter members left. Of the first expansion of two, one would go MWC (UTEP left out), of the next rounds added San Diego State and Air Force would go MWC as well. Fresno the 10th member added and Hawaii the 8th would be passed over. Out of the six added to get to 16 only UNLV would be brought along. They didn't re-form the old WAC culling UTEP, Hawaii and almost old WAC Fresno as well as 5 of the group added to get to 16. They turned the WAC map into a giant doughnut. With five in Texas and Oklahoma and two California and one Hawaii school.

Take the USM beat writer's suggestion. He tosses out a league of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, and Kentucky as "right". That creates a southern version of the WAC doughnut putting vast distance between CUSA-Texas and CUSA-Eastern Time Zone.Now I don't have a problem uniting with our US49 school in Mississippi and all the rest are reasonably handy but it creates another layer of instability. 

The throttle preventing such is the NCAA autobid and CFP signatory situations.

[VideoEagle]

I frequently see rumors posted here that the MWC is going to expand and take UTEP and how NT will be left behind again. I just don't see a reason for the MWC to expand. They are happy and successful. You only expand is it grows the pie enough to keep the slices the same size and UTEP nor any other G5 school reasonable close to the MWC does that. Of course you can also grow a conference pie by building attendance, but again MWC has enough schools. I don't see the core group wanting to recreate the WAC16 again as it will again hurt the core schools ability to play each other every year.  

When you are talking about organizations of schools are not the product of grand plans but rather the result of making choices at the time they are required. 

[Aquila_Viridis]

This 'regional rivals' is a terrible idea. If you want regional, go watch the HS games on Friday night. Small time. NT and others can find the money to play related opponents.  stAte, not NT, should be in a conference with LT an USM. Here's 10 teams that make some sense together: UTEP, UTSA, NT, Salabama, UAB, MT, FAU, GA State, Charlotte and ODU.

[mgfan]

No, no, no. We need to move up. Not side ways or down. Join with the sunbelt should never be an option. Let's set our goals high and go for them. If you fail then go down, but we have a new coach and will have a new AD. There is no need to look in the rear view mirror, just forward. 

[VideoEagle]

8 hours ago, Aquila_Viridis said:

This 'regional rivals' is a terrible idea. 

So the Mountain West Conference is a terrible idea? It was created because a group of school that were relatively close and had played each other often found they couldn't do that in a 16 team conference. The broke away and formed a compact conference that ignored markets and went to build rivalries. "Relatively" because of the distances between schools in the West. Until the collapse of the WAC, they only expanded slowly. It worked and build a strong conference. I think TCU is the only team to actually leave. 

[Aquila_Viridis]

1 hour ago, VideoEagle said:

So the Mountain West Conference is a terrible idea? It was created because a group of school that were relatively close and had played each other often found they couldn't do that in a 16 team conference. The broke away and formed a compact conference that ignored markets and went to build rivalries. "Relatively" because of the distances between schools in the West. Until the collapse of the WAC, they only expanded slowly. It worked and build a strong conference. I think TCU is the only team to actually leave. 

The MWC geography is not comparable. I have been in favor of MWC for a long time if ever available to us. But short of that, I am not interested in being joined with TX State, Rice or any of those schools in Louisiana and MS and not NMSU either. I don't think there is long term upside in it. We have to look forward at what has potential to grow into something.

[wardly]

If La. Tech. So. Mississippi, and UAB push for a Southern CUSA / Sun Belt Conference, we may find ourselves with a big hole between Denton and whoever is left from the eastern schools.

[Ben Gooding]

21 minutes ago, wardly said:

If La. Tech. So. Mississippi, and UAB push for a Southern CUSA / Sun Belt Conference, we may find ourselves with a big hole between Denton and whoever is left from the eastern schools.

Doubt it. UNT, Rice, and nutsack will be going with based on markets alone. 

[VideoEagle]

21 minutes ago, Aquila_Viridis said:

The MWC geography is not comparable. I have been in favor of MWC for a long time if ever available to us. But short of that, I am not interested in being joined with TX State, Rice or any of those schools in Louisiana and MS and not NMSU either. I don't think there is long term upside in it. We have to look forward at what has potential to grow into something.

Joining the Mountain West makes no sense for NT. But understanding how the Mountain West was build is important. The idea was to find a core group of schools that wanted to play each other every year and build significant rivalries. The idea was to build fan bases that would come out to see their team play no matter who the opponent happened to be. While CUSA was building based on TV markets, the MWC built on schools. With the restructuring of the sports TV marketplace, building on schools is the better way to go. 

You must play the same core group of teams every year to build rivalries. Rivaliers build attendance. Depending on "playing teams people have heard"of once or twice every five years does not. 

[Cerebus]

12 hours ago, Arkstfan said:

The throttle preventing such is the NCAA autobid and CFP signatory situations.

Yes, the autobid means that you have to convince the majority of two conferences to go along with a particular plan.  The CFP distro means that the SBC is going to need a hell of a lot of sweet talking for the members to go above 10 and take a cut.

 

11 hours ago, VideoEagle said:

I frequently see rumors posted here that the MWC is going to expand and take UTEP and how NT will be left behind again. I just don't see a reason for the MWC to expand. They are happy and successful.

Agreed.  Adding more teams just dilutes the CFP money, it also dilutes the TV money and may even trigger a contract restructure at a time that it would be horrible to go into negotiations.  No P5 team is adding any G5 teams at this point, with the possible exception of  BYU.  The AAC, Boise, etc are just dead out of luck.  

The P5 are not going to expand, in fact they will probably contract to the P4.  You think UT cares at all about Iowa St?  Or LSU about Vandy?  Or USC about Utah?  Or any P5 about 3/4ths of the ACC? Fat. to. cut.