CUSA Futures Planning Committee

[Hunter Green]

3 hours ago, wardly said:

Well, we could take an from  old name,"GULF COAST CONFERENCE", and create something new like the American Athletic Conference did. I would include UNT,UTSA, Rice, Texas State, LA. Tech ,ULL , Ark. State, So.Miss, and UAB, which would give you a base of 9 programs, 6 from CUAS and 3 from SBC.You would then determine if you want to go to 10 or 12 schools, drawing from Troy, USA, and UTEP. If you went to 12,  add UTEP to other 4 Texas programs plus Ark. State for a Western Division, Troy and USA with La. Tech, ULL, So. Miss., and UAB for Eastern Division [Ark. State and ULL could go either way] . This gives you 8 CUSA programs, 4 SBC programs, and a new conference with a new name. If you went to 10 I would add either Troy or USA., as UTEP is in the same geographic boat as New Mexico State.I realize that some of us might look at this as putting lipstick on a pig, but if you look at existing makeup of CUSA it is basically SBC 2. Just an old man's opinion.

You and I have the same thoughts, but I say lets form a brand new conference with a smaller footprint.  Adding Troy, Charlotte UAB still extends us too far east. I say keep UTEP in the fold if for no other reason their history and name recognition. Maybe add NMSU for them as well as a travel partner? And what the hell, lets call it the SWC! That would stick it to all of the old timers who destroyed that great, old conference. We could be the new breed with familiar names.

Edited May 8, 2020 by Hunter Green

[Jonnyeagle]

2 hours ago, wardly said:

Well, we could take an from  old name,"GULF COAST CONFERENCE", and create something new like the American Athletic Conference did. I would include UNT,UTSA, Rice, Texas State, LA. Tech ,ULL , Ark. State, So.Miss, and UAB, which would give you a base of 9 programs, 6 from CUAS and 3 from SBC.You would then determine if you want to go to 10 or 12 schools, drawing from Troy, USA, and UTEP. If you went to 12,  add UTEP to other 4 Texas programs plus Ark. State for a Western Division, Troy and USA with La. Tech, ULL, So. Miss., and UAB for Eastern Division [Ark. State and ULL could go either way] . This gives you 8 CUSA programs, 4 SBC programs, and a new conference with a new name. If you went to 10 I would add either Troy or USA., as UTEP is in the same geographic boat as New Mexico State.I realize that some of us might look at this as putting lipstick on a pig, but if you look at existing makeup of CUSA it is basically SBC 2. Just an old man's opinion.

I like the name but disagree with some of the schools you are adding. I am ok with a couple of Belt schools but not as manmy as you list. 

[GrayEagle]

14 hours ago, Hunter Green said:

You would add Ga. State and Tx. State, but drop La.Tech and S. Miss??

If it has to happen, form a new SWC (call it the NSWC) with the following 9 schools and schedule 3 OOC each year. Top two finishers play a Championship game. Done!

UNT

La. Tech

S. Miss

Rice

UTEP

UTSA

Ark. St.

Louisiana

Tx. State

I have a question about taking another conference name.  Would we lose the automatic bid to the national tournament and have to go through a three year(?) waiting process?  

Barring a new name that could be agreed upon why not agree to keep CUSA as the conference name?  It had more good years under that name than what it has now become.

I would rather have UAB than UTEP in the new conference.  I have nothing against the Miners except being 600 miles from their nearest conference rivals.  

[Hunter Green]

1 hour ago, GrayEagle said:

I have a question about taking another conference name.  Would we lose the automatic bid to the national tournament and have to go through a three year(?) waiting process?  

Barring a new name that could be agreed upon why not agree to keep CUSA as the conference name?  It had more good years under that name than what it has now become.

I would rather have UAB than UTEP in the new conference.  I have nothing against the Miners except being 600 miles from their nearest conference rivals.  

That's a question for the higher authority (WB). I wonder if Fox Sports SW would be eager to pick up the games of this mythical conference?  I hear ya about the distance to El Paso, I just hate trowing UTEP under the bus for those upstarts at UAB.

Edited May 8, 2020 by Hunter Green

[NM Green]

Utep and New Mexico State should be in this league. Both programs have a good amount of alumni in DFW.
 

GMG

Edited May 8, 2020 by NM Green

[wardly]

5 hours ago, Hunter Green said:

You and I have the same thoughts, but I say lets form a brand new conference with a smaller footprint.  Adding Troy, Charlotte UAB still extends us too far east. I say keep UTEP in the fold if for no other reason their history and name recognition. Maybe add NMSU for them as well as a travel partner? And what the hell, lets call it the SWC! That would stick it to all of the old timers who destroyed that great, old conference. We could be the new breed with familiar names.

To me the biggest problem is attracting programs to the East of us, which is why I didn't include UTEP or NMSU. Just seems like a bridge too far. You must  include the Alabama schools to get to 9 or more members.

[El Paso Eagle]

19 hours ago, Hunter Green said:

You would add Ga. State and Tx. State, but drop La.Tech and S. Miss??

If it has to happen, form a new SWC (call it the NSWC) with the following 9 schools and schedule 3 OOC each year. Top two finishers play a Championship game. Done!

UNT

La. Tech

S. Miss

Rice

UTEP

UTSA

Ark. St.

Louisiana

Tx. State

I would add NMSU as a travel partner with UTEP . Historically good Basketball and would help offset the travel for the non-revenue sports

[NM Green]

I just think NMSU brings good enough 🏀 basketball and utep wants to be aligned with the Texas schools. They really aren’t in a position to look negatively on the aggies. They need a travel partner and if New Mexico isn’t available (why not ask even though a ridiculous long shot) those 2 should be included. Utep won’t stay down forever and some competition from the school across the state line would get them in order fast. 
 

UTSA Texas state 

UNT La Tech 

Rice ULL

Ark State Southern Miss

UAB South Alabama 

or a real SWC resurrect:

Houston Rice 

SMU UNT

Texas State UTSA

Arkansas State Memphis 

La Tech Southern Miss 

GMG

[Aquila_Viridis]

20 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

 

 Adding Ga St and eliminating two closer and long time rivals in La Tech and USM is very questionable. 

A conference with just large state schools does not accomplish anything.  What appeals to students is playing good known teams, it has absolutely nothing to do with playing like universities.   By the way, I also have a problem with thinking that students are different at different schools.  Students pick schools based on prestige, location and cost, not some student population analysis. 

A more regional conference is what everyone says they want.  Problem, no one seems to be actually working to accomplish this. 

All students are not the same. The one who can get into North Texas (but not TX or a$m) can also get into Texas Tech, yet some choose North Texas while some choose TT. The ones who go to Denton are looking for something different than the ones who go to Buttock.  Here's another example: Charlotte and Appalachian.  The same student who couldn't get into NC or NC State can get into either Charlotte or Appalachian.  Boone is a cool place but it's in the boondocks. Charlotte there is a lot to do and you can easily get to a lot of other places.  The students who stay in the urban areas want to preserve other interests while in school, not just university life. That definitely affects the level of connection with the university and its sports programs.

We need to not look so much at what relative winning tradition a school brings to our conference. It's not going to do anything good for us. It will mainly benefit that school to continue its existing tradition. We're so far out of the loop, do y'all really think having LT and USM makes any real difference for us?  We should avoid Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana. It's closer, but it's not better for us. Unfortunately Birmingham is the next marginally decent place east. 

Sure a lot of big-time programs are in the middle of nowhere but the ship has already sailed on those. These other ones aren't going to help us to the big time, or even be good competitors for us in the long run.

[GrandGreen]

1 hour ago, Aquila_Viridis said:

All students are not the same. The one who can get into North Texas (but not TX or a$m) can also get into Texas Tech, yet some choose North Texas while some choose TT. The ones who go to Denton are looking for something different than the ones who go to Buttock.  Here's another example: Charlotte and Appalachian.  The same student who couldn't get into NC or NC State can get into either Charlotte or Appalachian.  Boone is a cool place but it's in the boondocks. Charlotte there is a lot to do and you can easily get to a lot of other places.  The students who stay in the urban areas want to preserve other interests while in school, not just university life. That definitely affects the level of connection with the university and its sports programs.

We need to not look so much at what relative winning tradition a school brings to our conference. It's not going to do anything good for us. It will mainly benefit that school to continue its existing tradition. We're so far out of the loop, do y'all really think having LT and USM makes any real difference for us?  We should avoid Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana. It's closer, but it's not better for us. Unfortunately Birmingham is the next marginally decent place east. 

Sure a lot of big-time programs are in the middle of nowhere but the ship has already sailed on those. These other ones aren't going to help us to the big time, or even be good competitors for us in the long run.

Yes, schools differ in how hard they are to get into.

The rest of your comments are very murky to me.  Do you assume that most students at NT are there because they can't get into A&M or UT?   

Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi are not decent places for NT to play.   How did you come up with that one?  

Students do pick to go to colleges sometimes based on the location.   This IMO has almost no connection to sports.  

Just wondering what do you thing NT is urban or rural?   IMO, you could make a case for either one; so NT must be in a good position. 

[wardly]

Well, can someone come up with 10 G5 programs that in theory would form a new conference and not include Ark. State,ULL,.La.Tech, So. Miss, and UAB, because I can't. Plus, come up with why would these programs east of us want to join a conference that has 5 schools from Texas plus New Mexico State, because I can't. I just don't think it would be an easy sell. As far as automatic NCAA bids, the AAC is a new conference that was able to obtain them so I assume another new G5 conference would as well. Also, no way we are invited to the MWC or AAC. We are geographically undesirable for the MWC, and we bring nothing to the AAC table.

[wardly]

"Everything on the Table" was just posted which is a rough outline of the CUSA Futures Planning Committee Report, and I was underwhelmed to say the least. It would appear that instead of considering conference realignment to reduce travel expenses their idea is to try to schedule more regional games with AAC and SBC members in football as well as A10 in basketball , perhaps counting these as conference games. For example, ODU could replace UTEP with ECU, which would be a bus ride instead of an air flight, and may or may not count as a conference game.[ Maybe they would count it as a conference Win but as an OOC Loss, dependent on the outcome.] What a crock. 

[Rudy]

On 5/9/2020 at 1:48 PM, wardly said:

"Everything on the Table" was just posted which is a rough outline of the CUSA Futures Planning Committee Report, and I was underwhelmed to say the least. It would appear that instead of considering conference realignment to reduce travel expenses their idea is to try to schedule more regional games with AAC and SBC members in football as well as A10 in basketball , perhaps counting these as conference games. For example, ODU could replace UTEP with ECU, which would be a bus ride instead of an air flight, and may or may not count as a conference game.[ Maybe they would count it as a conference Win but as an OOC Loss, dependent on the outcome.] What a crock. 

No one should be surprised in the least. We. Need. Out. 

[wardly]

30 minutes ago, Rudy said:

No one should be surprised in the least. We. Need. Out. 

I am afraid we are all dressed up with no place to go.

[Hunter Green]

I think this may just be a holding pattern for us until TV contracts expire. I think WB is going to position us as best he can when real re-alignment happens in 2024.

[untjim1995]

12 hours ago, Hunter Green said:

I think this may just be a holding pattern for us until TV contracts expire. I think WB is going to position us as best he can when real re-alignment happens in 2024.

I think so, too. The question will be what things will look like in 2024-2025. The Big XII and Pac-12 are both the ones with the biggest question marks. The Pac-12 doesn't seem to care about athletics the way the other conferences do and they have a terrible network. The Big XII has some lots of other issues, including the LHN, two small privates, and far flung outposts that nobody else seems to want in WVU, ISU, and KSU. The MWC and AAC wait for the scraps to fall their way from that fallout. What happens beyond this is a crapshoot...

If the Big 12 somehow gets the Pac 12 southern teams to leave, USC, UCLA, Arizona, and ASU, I suspect the MWC as we know it will be decimated. Boise State, San Diego State, Nevada, and UNLV will get a nice promotion and the league might stay as a power conference. If the Pac-12 gets the Texoma Four to leave, the Big XII probably gets poached off.

How that affects us is very hard to know...it may not at all or it may be our ticket upwards finally.