cusa/sbc

[wardly]

In the near future[5 years or so] it would appear that CUSA and the SBC would join together and reconfigure into two more geographic friendly conferences. As T.V. money goes away, travel expense reduction become more important.While I personally find that appealing, it does come with its own set of problems. First, its a given that no one wants ULM . Second, the Western Conference would have 5 Texas programs, plus A-State,ULL, and hopefully La. Tech.NMSU might come into play as a 9th member,as I see no reason why So.Miss or any of the 3 Alabama schools would want to go West and play in basically a Texas Conference. In fact, I would be concerned whether or not La. Tech would want to stay west.The Western Conference should consider UTA and UALR as non football playing members.The bottom line is that by combining conferences The Eastern Conference looks more appealing to me than the Western, but that' just an old man's opinion.What is yours?

[Cr1028]

33 minutes ago, wardly said:

In the near future[5 years or so] it would appear that CUSA and the SBC would join together and reconfigure into two more geographic friendly conferences. As T.V. money goes away, travel expense reduction become more important.While I personally find that appealing, it does come with its own set of problems. First, its a given that no one wants ULM . Second, the Western Conference would have 5 Texas programs, plus A-State,ULL, and hopefully La. Tech.NMSU might come into play as a 9th member,as I see no reason why So.Miss or any of the 3 Alabama schools would want to go West and play in basically a Texas Conference. In fact, I would be concerned whether or not La. Tech would want to stay west.The Western Conference should consider UTA and UALR as non football playing members.The bottom line is that by combining conferences The Eastern Conference looks more appealing to me than the Western, but that' just an old man's opinion.What is yours?

My opinion is that a Texas division of the new conference would be phenomenal. That'd be away game heaven for me.

[Cerebus]

I've been preaching this for years.  With the collapse of cable, and the ESPN subsidy everyone was forced to pay, the P5(4?) will be the only ones raking in TV money.

The non P? FBS leagues will go back to gate revenue models.  Travel (remember, for all sports) will be the major reason conference realignment happens.  

 

Now, the important thing for us to remember is that this isn't just going to effect the SBC/CUSA schools.  I'm 90% sure schools like UH and SMU will also be in the have nots.  There will be stratification post TV money.  We need to build our program so that we are at the highest level of that stratus.  In other words, if there are two "new SWCs"  and one of them has teams like UH in it, and the other has teams like ULM in it, I know which one I want us to be in.

The other thing to remember is that (IMHO) P5 contraction is going to happen.  There is a good chance schools like Baylor, Iowa State, Texas Tech etc are left out in the cold.  Again, make sure we are in the mix of the higher regarded schools.  

[UNTLifer]

And this is why we need baseball.

[untjim1995]

33 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

I've been preaching this for years.  With the collapse of cable, and the ESPN subsidy everyone was forced to pay, the P5(4?) will be the only ones raking in TV money.

The non P? FBS leagues will go back to gate revenue models.  Travel (remember, for all sports) will be the major reason conference realignment happens.  

 

Now, the important thing for us to remember is that this isn't just going to effect the SBC/CUSA schools.  I'm 90% sure schools like UH and SMU will also be in the have nots.  There will be stratification post TV money.  We need to build our program so that we are at the highest level of that stratus.  In other words, if there are two "new SWCs"  and one of them has teams like UH in it, and the other has teams like ULM in it, I know which one I want us to be in.

The other thing to remember is that (IMHO) P5 contraction is going to happen.  There is a good chance schools like Baylor, Iowa State, Texas Tech etc are left out in the cold.  Again, make sure we are in the mix of the higher regarded schools.  

I tend to agree with you.

What I believe will happen is that the Big XII's two private schools, as well as Iowa State, are just flat-out screwed. K-State, Tech, OSU, and WVU, in that order, are who are on thinner ice. UT has the most options, OU and KU are next. Somehow, I think WVU, OSU, and TT will find a Power home. I am not sure about K-State, though.

The MWC is the league that is in good shape for accepting new teams that fit their footprint nicely. They can get Texas teas in TCU and Baylor, as well as adding in K-State and Iowa State, fairly easily. If they get BYU back, Hawaii will get dropped as a football-only member. If the MWC added these teams to their league, it would be very strong again. Not Power League strong, but with enough teams and states that the Power Leagues will continue to throw them a bone to play them in both OOC and in bowls, with even a BCS spot still available to them, just not a playoff spot.

The MAC is a lot like the MWC, a very regionalized league, with a decent following among fans. It is a low-level league, like CUSA and the SBC, but they have the right setup for cost and gate receipts.

The AAC is the true question mark. UConn and Cincy are Power Teams that are stuck right now. Teams like Memphis, USF, UCF, Temple, East Carolina, Navy, and Houston are all power level programs when they are good, both in following and in markets to provide for TV. The problem, though, is the distance between Houston/Dallas/Tulsa/New Orleans to go to Connecticut/Maryland/Philly/Cincy will catch up. Most of the AAC schools won't accept the idea of having to play in a conference with teams in CUSA, except for Rice, Marshall, and USM. And they have enough money, for now, to get around here, because the NCAA Basketball money they generate at the gate and from TV, still is huge for these AAC schools, which is completely different from the other G5 conferences.

This is why the eventual SBCUSA realignment has to happen. The costs are too high for UTSA and Texas State to not play in a conference together, while still playing teams in the same geographic area in Old Dominion and Appy State. It would help our cause greatly if we were only traveling as far east as Arkansas or Mississippi, with the clear majority of our conference games being in Texas and Louisiana.

[wardly]

To me a problem is getting enough teams to join a Western Conference. I see La.Tech. as a maybe, and again see no reason for southeastern universities such as So.Miss. or UAB to play in a "Texas League" that might include New Mexico State.

[TIgreen01]

While we're at it, why don't we raise up SFA, Sam Houston, etc.  We need at least 20 D1 FBS schools to compete for recruits with inside of Texas alone.

[MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF]

We have a thread on this every year, and I always advocate for it because it just makes more sense in many different way:

(1) Are FAU and FIU really all that much more competitive/different than ULM and Louisiana?  I don't think so.
(2) Arkansas State is as good as anyone in the C-USA, and closer than many of the start-ups or jump ups they've paired us with in the C-USA
(3) The cost of all other sports not named football for conference would be lower
(4) There really just isn't a difference in competition level or facilities for a broad swath of the schools.

So again, as posted every spring and summer when we have these discussions, here's how I would break it down to make the most sense:

Us'n Conference
Arkansas State
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech
Middle Tennessee (or, Southern Miss, SEE BELOW)
North Texas
Rice
Texas State
ULM
UTEP
UTSA

Your'n Conference I - The North
Appalachian State
Charlotte
Coastal Carolina
Georgia State (or, Middle Tennessee, SEE BELOW)
Marshall
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky

Your'n Conference II - The South
FAU
FIU
Georgia Southern
South Alabama
Southern Miss (or, Georgia State, SEE BELOW)
Troy
UAB

New Mexico State can go screw itself because they haven't cared for years.  Idaho is already moving down to FCS.

Middle Tennessee and Southern Miss are tweeners.  You could trade them, if you like, putting Southern Miss with Us'n, sticking Middle Tennesse in Your'n North, and moving Georgia State to Your'n South for the Southern Miss trade to Us'n.

It's the same thing.  My preference for Middle Tennessee is just on the basis of history with them.  But, it does make more geographic sense for them to be in Your'n North.  I could take them or leave them if the conferences would just bite the f*cking bullet and do this.

The fact of the matter is, no average fan on the street is going to know anymore about ULM than they are about FIU.  It's just that simple.  So, why the f*ck?  How many of our fans realistically road trip to FAU or FIU as opposed to ULM, Louisiana, or Arkansas State?  And, vice versa.

If I'm living in Texas, I'm more likely to have relatives from Louisiana and Arkansas than I am from Alabama, Florida, or Georgia...or North Carolina, or South Carolina, etc. And, vice versa.

I just don't get the mindset of any commissioner who still really believes C-USA is the same as C-USA post expansion...when the rreal C-USA then fled and became the AAC.  

At some point, don't you stare reality in the face, accept it, and plan accordingly?  Or, do we just continue to shell out excess cash for travel expense for all teams to far flung Southeastern schools, when there are schools on the same competition and facilities level in neighboring states?

 

Edited February 24, 2017 by MeanGreenMailbox

[MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF]

***CAVEAT***

I really do not think that Marshall even belongs in the C-USA or whatever comes after it.  It has more history/geography with the MAC, and should return to it.

In that case, you slam dunk Middle Tennessee into Your'n North, Georgia State to Your'n South, and Us'n survives with nine members, allowing us to have four OOCs per season; and, therefore, in a like manner, increasing the odds of having more home games. 
 

 

Edited February 24, 2017 by MeanGreenMailbox

[Cr1028]

22 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

And this is why we need baseball.

I still don't see why we need it right now if these teams don't have baseball:

Colorado, Colorado State, Idaho, Boise State, Iowa State, SMU, Syracuse, Temple, Tulsa, UTEP, Utah State, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

 

I agree baseball would be nice to have but being competitive in the football and basketball must come first. Otherwise, we are just spreading our limited resources even thinner, making us worse off all the way around.

23 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Us'n Conference
Arkansas State
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech
Middle Tennessee
North Texas
Rice
Texas State
ULM
UTEP
UTSA
 

I like the Us'n.

[MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF]

1 minute ago, Cr1028 said:

I still don't see why we need it right now if these teams don't have baseball:

Colorado, Colorado State, Idaho, Boise State, Iowa State, SMU, Syracuse, Temple, Tulsa, UTEP, Utah State, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

 

I agree baseball would be nice to have but being competitive in the football and basketball must come first. Otherwise, we are just spreading our limited resources even thinner, making us worse off all the way around.

Baseball is my favorite pro sport, but I agree with you - for us the important thing for the next several years should be pumping up the football and basketball programs.

Want local baseball?  Dallas Baptist and TCU already field pretty strong teams.  DBU is D-I, and almost annually challenges for a spot in the NCAA.  They bitch slapped Rice 8-4 earlier this week, and annually do quite well against Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and other regionals.

Baseball at North Texas?  Yes, eventually.  But, football and basketballs first.

 

[MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF]

With baseball, if Tulsa can survive without it, we can.  TU used to have one of the best programs in the country, going to the NCAAs and finishing runner-up one year...to Arizona State, who had a great run of championships back then with USC.

TU was coached by a Westsider, Gene Shell, who brought a lot of talent from his alma mater Webster where my dad and several older cousins went to high school and played with the future 'Cane and MLBers like Carl Morton, Steve Bowling, and Jerry Tabb.  The Calmus brothers, Dick and Myrle were also Webster ballers.  Although neither played at TU, Dick scratched out a couple of seasons with the Dodgers and Cubs, and Mryle played a few minor league seasons.

Myrle's oldest son, Lance also starred for Jenks in the 90s, then had a lengthy minor league career.  His younger son, Rocky, carved out a place in OU football history, then had a cup of coffee in the NFL.

The Bowling family of the West produced dad, Steve, graduating from Webster, then playing for TU, then appearing for the Brewers and Blue Jays in 76 and 77.  Son, Ben, played for Oklahoma State for a bit, but was something of a wild child.

The best known TU baseball grad was Steve Rogers who had a decent career with the Expos in the mid 70s to mid 80s.

So, anyway, if TU can survive without baseball, we surely can.  They had a nice history and dropped it.

Edited February 24, 2017 by MeanGreenMailbox

[UNTLifer]

With baseball our offseason isn't full of conference alignment and uniform talk. That was my point, plus I am a big baseball fan. 

[Army of Dad]

2 hours ago, Cr1028 said:

baseball would be nice to have but being competitive in the football and basketball must come first.

Sir, this is North Texas. Those goals are probably a bit lofty. See the last five seasons if there is any doubt.

[TreeFiddy]

2 hours ago, Cr1028 said:

I still don't see why we need it right now if these teams don't have baseball:

Colorado, Colorado State, Idaho, Boise State, Iowa State, SMU, Syracuse, Temple, Tulsa, UTEP, Utah State, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

 

 

All, but 2 of those schools share 1 pretty big thing in common.  There is still snow on the ground when normal baseball season starts.  If they only had an indoor baseball stadium they would be set.

[Cr1028]

1 hour ago, TreeFiddy said:

All, but 2 of those schools share 1 pretty big thing in common.  There is still snow on the ground when normal baseball season starts.  If they only had an indoor baseball stadium they would be set.

Seems several had programs that were killed in the 80s and 90s. Some title 9 casualties, too.

1 hour ago, Army of Dad said:

Sir, this is North Texas. Those goals are probably a bit lofty. See the last five seasons if there is any doubt.

 

2 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

With baseball our offseason isn't full of conference alignment and uniform talk. That was my point, plus I am a big baseball fan. 

3 good responses

[wardly]

La. Tech refuses to play ULM or even recognize that they exist. A few years ago they turned down the Independence Bowl in Shreveport because their opponent would be ULM.

[southsideguy]

No to NMSU, their program has no money and the state of new mexico is not much better.  They are the step child to UNM.  One thing I will give them they seem to find qb's who can pass.

[oldguystudent]

On 2/24/2017 at 10:01 AM, MeanGreenMailbox said:

 

Want local baseball?  Dallas Baptist and TCU already field pretty strong teams. 

 

And by pretty strong, he's talking about how TCU is presently the #1 ranked team in the country. 

[Wag Tag]

On 2/24/2017 at 9:35 AM, MeanGreenMailbox said:

We have a thread on this every year, and I always advocate for it because it just makes more sense in many different way:

(1) Are FAU and FIU really all that much more competitive/different than ULM and Louisiana?  I don't think so.
(2) Arkansas State is as good as anyone in the C-USA, and closer than many of the start-ups or jump ups they've paired us with in the C-USA
(3) The cost of all other sports not named football for conference would be lower
(4) There really just isn't a difference in competition level or facilities for a broad swath of the schools.

So again, as posted every spring and summer when we have these discussions, here's how I would break it down to make the most sense:

Us'n Conference
Arkansas State
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech
Middle Tennessee (or, Southern Miss, SEE BELOW)
North Texas
Rice
Texas State
ULM
UTEP
UTSA

Your'n Conference I - The North
Appalachian State
Charlotte
Coastal Carolina
Georgia State (or, Middle Tennessee, SEE BELOW)
Marshall
Old Dominion
Western Kentucky

Your'n Conference II - The South
FAU
FIU
Georgia Southern
South Alabama
Southern Miss (or, Georgia State, SEE BELOW)
Troy
UAB

New Mexico State can go screw itself because they haven't cared for years.  Idaho is already moving down to FCS.

Middle Tennessee and Southern Miss are tweeners.  You could trade them, if you like, putting Southern Miss with Us'n, sticking Middle Tennesse in Your'n North, and moving Georgia State to Your'n South for the Southern Miss trade to Us'n.

It's the same thing.  My preference for Middle Tennessee is just on the basis of history with them.  But, it does make more geographic sense for them to be in Your'n North.  I could take them or leave them if the conferences would just bite the f*cking bullet and do this.

The fact of the matter is, no average fan on the street is going to know anymore about ULM than they are about FIU.  It's just that simple.  So, why the f*ck?  How many of our fans realistically road trip to FAU or FIU as opposed to ULM, Louisiana, or Arkansas State?  And, vice versa.

If I'm living in Texas, I'm more likely to have relatives from Louisiana and Arkansas than I am from Alabama, Florida, or Georgia...or North Carolina, or South Carolina, etc. And, vice versa.

I just don't get the mindset of any commissioner who still really believes C-USA is the same as C-USA post expansion...when the rreal C-USA then fled and became the AAC.  

At some point, don't you stare reality in the face, accept it, and plan accordingly?  Or, do we just continue to shell out excess cash for travel expense for all teams to far flung Southeastern schools, when there are schools on the same competition and facilities level in neighboring states?

 

Would like to see us in a MWC... Southwest Division. Adding UNT, Rice, UTEP, UTSA and maybe La Tech TO UNM, CSU, AFA, Wyoming 

[wardly]

First, we must become competitive in our existing conference in both football and men's basketball, which will take another 3 to 5 years.Next, if CUSA and SBC combine and realign, I just don't think its a given that La.Tech and schools east of them are going to want to join a conference with 5 Texas universities, which is why we might need NMSU .In addition, if football programs in G5 conferences basically become gate revenue sports the last think UNT needs is another expensive non revenue producing program such as baseball. We just can't afford it.Just an old man's opinion.

[VideoEagle]

Arkstfan had some analysis a while back on NMSU. The short version is other the thier return to the SBC, the last several previous conferences to take only did so because there were no other choices. The WAC didn't want either Idaho or NMSU, but everyone else they asked said no. The Belt early on was in a continuous battle to keep the minimum number of football schools. I don't rember the exact details, but he showed the Big West,, Mo Valley and even the old Border conference settled on NMSU out of necessity rather than actually wanting them. 

[wardly]

I completely agree. However, sometimes old ugly is better than old nothing. I just don't think having 5 Texas schools in a conference is a great attraction for CUSA and SBC schools in the southeast, beginning with La.Tech.

[MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF]

On 2/27/2017 at 10:11 AM, wardly said:

First, we must become competitive in our existing conference in both football and men's basketball, which will take another 3 to 5 years.Next, if CUSA and SBC combine and realign, I just don't think its a given that La.Tech and schools east of them are going to want to join a conference with 5 Texas universities, which is why we might need NMSU .In addition, if football programs in G5 conferences basically become gate revenue sports the last think UNT needs is another expensive non revenue producing program such as baseball. We just can't afford it.Just an old man's opinion.

My realignment cuts out the eastern schools and has them form a conference with schools closer to them. 

Us'n is like an ArkLaTex (apologies to Jerry Jones) Conference, with the possibility of Middle Tennessee or Southern Miss...or neither. 

Plus, there's already an ArkLaTex wikipedia page:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ark-La-Tex.  This ArkLaTex conference would really heat up recruiting in East Texas. 

Your'n Conference North has the mainly Carolina area schools together; and the Your'n Conference South has the Florida, Alabama, Georgia (sometimes regionally called the Tri-States) area schools together.

 

 

[wardly]

I don't see how you can make 3 conferences out of 24 schools. In a perfect world the 5 Texas programs + La. Tech ,ULL,[ULM is pushed out] and Ark. State is a good start with 8 schools.However, I just can't see So. Miss. or any of the 3 Alabama schools wanting to go west. You need at minimum 9 programs, so NMST may be in play.It will never hapen anyway because it makes sense to combine these two bottom feeding conferences.