More Conference Change Stuff -muts/a S U Boards

MeanGreen61 · July 19, 2007

FWIW Off season realignment stuff. Thread from the Muts board high lighting an Arkstfan post & thread from the ASU board.

Muts board thread

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?S=349#S=349&a...88&T=734344

ASU board thread

http://www.arkst.com/board/index.php?topic=30143.0

Arkstafan post

It will happen like this.

In CUSA

Eight schools are going to get sick and tired of four schools bellyaching and sniffing about how great they would be if the lowly state schools would use the same academic standards they use.

Four schools are going to get sick of being the only ones really serious about basketball.

Meanwhile in the Sun Belt

Denver will move to a more western conference. UNO will be unable to fund Sun Belt caliber athletics and move elsewhere. UALR and USA seeing the Sun Belt roster is now 2 non-football and 9 football will hedge their bets and move elsewhere as well. (a new alliance of some Mid-Con and Southland non-football schools maybe?).

Eventually

A group of dissatisfied CUSA schools will talk about breaking away to form a new league but realize that the new NCAA structure makes forming a new I-A conference nearly impossible. They will realize that the CUSA TV contracts and bowl contracts are coming up for renewal and will contact the Sun Belt and cut a deal to join, while at the same time some current Sun Belt schools will prefer to align with the schools remaining in CUSA and will cross-over to join them. La.Tech will get to leave the WAC and join one of the two "new" leagues.

galojah · July 19, 2007

FWIW Off season realignment stuff. Thread from the Muts board high lighting an Arkstfan post & thread from the ASU board.
Muts board thread
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?S=349#S=349&a...88&T=734344
ASU board thread
http://www.arkst.com/board/index.php?topic=30143.0
Arkstafan post
It will happen like this.
In CUSA
Eight schools are going to get sick and tired of four schools bellyaching and sniffing about how great they would be if the lowly state schools would use the same academic standards they use.
Four schools are going to get sick of being the only ones really serious about basketball.
Meanwhile in the Sun Belt
Denver will move to a more western conference. UNO will be unable to fund Sun Belt caliber athletics and move elsewhere. UALR and USA seeing the Sun Belt roster is now 2 non-football and 9 football will hedge their bets and move elsewhere as well. (a new alliance of some Mid-Con and Southland non-football schools maybe?).
Eventually
A group of dissatisfied CUSA schools will talk about breaking away to form a new league but realize that the new NCAA structure makes forming a new I-A conference nearly impossible. They will realize that the CUSA TV contracts and bowl contracts are coming up for renewal and will contact the Sun Belt and cut a deal to join, while at the same time some current Sun Belt schools will prefer to align with the schools remaining in CUSA and will cross-over to join them. La.Tech will get to leave the WAC and join one of the two "new" leagues.

It all reads well, I just don't see, honestly, why a team would leave the C-USA for the Sun Belt. Just don't see it.

KAjunRaider · July 19, 2007

It all reads well, I just don't see, honestly, why a team would leave the C-USA for the Sun Belt. Just don't see it.

You say "potato", I say "potatoe". The possible shuffle teams will certainly want to go to Coosa, just because of the name. Even if they split both conferences down the middle, I would think the "Sun Belt" name would draw resistance.

Maybe we can get the Belt going strong before a split occurs.

UNTflyer · July 19, 2007

Gotta do something. We are the only conference with an all-time losing record against every single Div I-A conference.

Arkstfan · July 20, 2007

It all reads well, I just don't see, honestly, why a team would leave the C-USA for the Sun Belt. Just don't see it.

Look at the Sun Belt and CUSA on a map. There is no similar overlap of similar teams. The WAC used to look like a doughnut with the MWC and Sun Belt filling the hole. That isn't as true now since the western belt left but the MWC is pretty compact for a western league. You have the front range schools, the Utah schools, UNLV, SDSU, and TCU. Very compact for the west except for TCU. If you live in Denver you could drive to 6 schools easily for a game and come back home that night. The MWC schools are on the same page. The WAC schools are more spead out but mostly on the same page and for the most part a WAC school can't be added to improve the MWC's fit.

MAC pretty compact and on the same page.

But CUSA... that's a different world. SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, Rice fundamentally look at athletics differently from the other 8. Marshall, ECU, UCF, and USM basically play basketball because they have to. They fundamentally look at their athletic programs differently from the other 8. Memphis, UTEP, UAB and to a lesser degree Houston understand playing high level basketball, get them cornered and the fans and administration at Memphis and UAB, and probably UTEP and maybe Houston would choose a Final Four appearances over top 10 in football. Any two of those groups can likely find enough common ground to co-exist, all three, not likely. How different are they? The four privates campaigned against 12 game seasons in football the other 8 were strong advocates. Memphis and UAB argued against going to 12 when TCU bailed and actually advocated going to 9 rather than 12. Only bringing UTEP into the mix appeased them. The Sun Belt / CUSA competitive gap is narrowing, if not for a really strong Memphis this year the two were fairly close in basketball last year and if not for the FIU disaster football was close. If those gaps continue to narrow the question of why are are putting up with people we don't get along with will be asked and the question of why are we playing someone hundreds and hundreds of miles away when someone just as good is close enough to bus to will be asked and a shake-up is the next logical step.

July 20, 2007

If the Big East should decide to increase by one to nine then realignment of the Sun Belt and CUSA would make sense. It would save many thousands of travel cost per year.

My preference for North Texas would be in a 9-team "New Southwest" Conference:

UTEP

Tulsa

North Texas

SMU

Rice

Houston

Louisiana (Lafayette)

Louisiana Tech

Tulane

Advantages: Close-knit conference with only El Paso off of the beaten path but it would be far better for them than their current situation. Fairly competitively balanced in the major sports. Improved attendance at several schools and little or no loss at the others.

Disadvantages: Pretty weak basketball conference. Large percentage of private schools (disadvantage to state schools only). Smaller TV contract? The six CUSA colleges have not been playing together long enough to get NCAA revenue immediately.

Biggest winner: Louisiana Tech

Biggest Loser: None, really. If I have to pick, I'd say Tulane.

This would only work if UCF was the one to leave because of matchups and separating ULM from Louisiana Tech (one of the big drawbacks to La Tech leaving the WAC according to others). More on the eastern conference on another post.

Spaceraider · July 20, 2007

Look at the Sun Belt and CUSA on a map. There is no similar overlap of similar teams. The WAC used to look like a doughnut with the MWC and Sun Belt filling the hole. That isn't as true now since the western belt left but the MWC is pretty compact for a western league. You have the front range schools, the Utah schools, UNLV, SDSU, and TCU. Very compact for the west except for TCU. If you live in Denver you could drive to 6 schools easily for a game and come back home that night. The MWC schools are on the same page. The WAC schools are more spead out but mostly on the same page and for the most part a WAC school can't be added to improve the MWC's fit.
MAC pretty compact and on the same page.
But CUSA... that's a different world. SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, Rice fundamentally look at athletics differently from the other 8. Marshall, ECU, UCF, and USM basically play basketball because they have to. They fundamentally look at their athletic programs differently from the other 8. Memphis, UTEP, UAB and to a lesser degree Houston understand playing high level basketball, get them cornered and the fans and administration at Memphis and UAB, and probably UTEP and maybe Houston would choose a Final Four appearances over top 10 in football. Any two of those groups can likely find enough common ground to co-exist, all three, not likely. How different are they? The four privates campaigned against 12 game seasons in football the other 8 were strong advocates. Memphis and UAB argued against going to 12 when TCU bailed and actually advocated going to 9 rather than 12. Only bringing UTEP into the mix appeased them. The Sun Belt / CUSA competitive gap is narrowing, if not for a really strong Memphis this year the two were fairly close in basketball last year and if not for the FIU disaster football was close. If those gaps continue to narrow the question of why are are putting up with people we don't get along with will be asked and the question of why are we playing someone hundreds and hundreds of miles away when someone just as good is close enough to bus to will be asked and a shake-up is the next logical step.

Some interesting suggestions by ECU's AD in a radio interview on Thursday. His suggestions probably don't have support, but the interview reveals a huge gulf between certain schools within c-usa... Thread on GoMiddle.com has the information:

proposal by a c-usa AD...add Middle Tennessee and wku

Arkstfan · July 20, 2007

Space I've commented on your post on Beltboard so I won't rehash here.

Gray I keep having a hard time figuring the Big East situation out. I think a 9th football member is important. Come 2009 every FBS conference except the Big East will play an 8 or 9 game conference schedule except the Big East who will play 7. That makes non-conference scheduling difficult and it gives you the 3/4 split which is pretty lousy.

I see the Big East going one of two ways.

1. Split football and basketball and that would likely mean adding a full member and probably would also mean that Notre Dame would follow as a non-football member. That would give them 10 hoops and 9 football and that's about as sweet as it gets (18 game double round robin in basketball, 8 game round robin in football). If that were the case, I think Temple is a solid front-runner because the value of the Big East basketball TV contract would take a huge hit for the football schools with no New York, Chicago, or Philadelphia (three of the four largest TV markets) adding Temple helps that despite their awful football and absent stretching all the way to Memphis no other candidate brings credible basketball. If the Big East does that, there is no impact and the CUSA/Sun Belt/Tech group is still 22 mis-aligned schools that can be reformed into a 12 and a 10 team conference each more regional.

2. Count the dollars and find that Big East 16 works (and that is quite possible) in that case add a football only member. Only Temple, Army, Navy, and Notre Dame could join Big East football and not lose their basketball conference membership. Notre Dame won't and Army and Navy have said no. Temple as football only doesn't make sense. So who else would consider it and be potentially viable? East Carolina, Marshall, and Central Florida. UAB and Memphis wouldn't do it. If the Big East took that plan of action then CUSA could lose UCF, ECU or Marshall, one but not all. That still leaves CUSA, Sun Belt, Tech as 21 misaligned schools that can be reformed into a 9 and and 12 team conference each more regional.

When you look at the map two groups naturally align together due to geography or affinity. In the west UTEP, SMU, Rice, Houston, UNT, Tulsa, Tulane, ULL. In the east Marshall, ECU, UCF, FIU, FAU, Troy, UAB, MTSU, WKU. The remaining schools, Tech, ULM, ASU, Memphis, USM due to where they are easily can plug into either group. ASU for example would happily align with SMU, Rice, Houston because we are the only folks outside of Texas who have a market that still regards those schools as having name value due to Arkansas's SWC membership, yet we would just as happily align east with Memphis and USM because Memphis is our oldest series and we are only 70 miles apart and USM is well regarded here, ASU would consider itself to have won the realignment war if it ended up with the former SWC schools or if it ended up with Memphis. USM could easily go west with nearby Tulane or east with UAB and Memphis. Memphis is like ASU at cross-roads between the two and could go either direction though I suspect they would go east if one of the east schools went Big East because it gives better basketball prospects. Tech and ULM likewise are geographically suited to go either direction.

It's that middle flexibility of who goes where that makes this appealing. The core eastern and western groups come out feeling like winners because they have shed those folks so dang far away and there are positives to each group for the central group so that they can walk away from such a realignment feeling like they have won as well.

Eagle1855 · July 20, 2007

The possible shuffle teams will certainly want to go to Coosa, just because of the name. Even if they split both conferences down the middle, I would think the "Sun Belt" name would draw resistance.

It's not just the name, it's also the fact that CUSA has more bowl tie-ins and more national coverage.

Arkstfan · July 20, 2007

It's not just the name, it's also the fact that CUSA has more bowl tie-ins and more national coverage.

AUUUUUGGGGHHHHHHH

You have just proven yourself to be the new Craig Thompson. :angry:

When the Sun Belt and American South merged they opted for the Sun Belt name because the Sun Belt had better TV contracts. Guess what. They ALL EXPIRED WITHIN TWO YEARS AND DIDN'T GET RENEWED!

The people who run the GMAC bowl don't care whether they are contracted with a conference called CUSA, Sun Belt, or Dippity Doo. They want teams close enough to bring fans but far enough to rent hotel rooms, who will play an entertaining game.

When the Mountain West formed, people laughed and said they were in trouble because the WAC had all the TV and bowl contracts. Well TV said, we had a contract with a league that had these 16 members and 8 of them are gone and you've added a new team, renegotiate for less money or we will declare the contract breached. The WAC 16 sent teams to Las Vegas, Liberty, one of the Hawaii bowls and got lucky and snuck TCU into the Sun Bowl when the Big 10 was short but they had only two bowl deals. The WAC had three games under contract. The next year the MWC plays its first season locked into the Las Vegas Bowl, the Liberty Bowl and ended up with a team in the Motor City. That 8 team group had two contracts vs. the 3 the 16 team league had and sent another at-large.

Let's call the eastern alignment Sun Belt and western CUSA for the sake of argument and look at the bowls.

New Orleans. No change they'll still take SBC vs. CUSA.

Pappajohns. Currently Big East vs. CUSA, would become Sun Belt because of the eastern schools.

GMAC. Currently MAC vs. CUSA could go either direction based on who ends up in which group or might even dump the MAC and go SBC v. CUSA (I suspect Mobile is considering a second game so both could end up tied in along with the MAC, and either Big 12, Big East, or ACC)

Texas Bowl is Big 12 vs Big East/CUSA. With a more regional league could drop the Big East tie.

Liberty. CUSA v. SEC. Probably aligns with whichever side takes Memphis.

Armed Forces. CUSA v. Mountain West, aligns with the western schools.

So you would likely see the eastern Sun Belt aligned with New Orleans, Birmingham, Memphis and maybe Mobile and the western CUSA aligned with New Orleans, Houston, Fort Worth, and maybe Mobile.

As to television, a western CUSA is made for Fox SW in addition to whatever ESPN and CSTV deals can be cut. An eastern Sun Belt is probably ESPN, CSTV, and some mix of regionals.

Eagle1855 · July 20, 2007

AUUUUUGGGGHHHHHHH
You have just proven yourself to be the new Craig Thompson.

I have a lot of respect for your knowledge of college football and the insight you provide on this board, but are you really arguing with my point- which was made about C-USA's name relating to things as they currently stand (reality)- based on a bunch of hypothetical "what could be's"? Come on...

Currently, C-USA has more bowl tie-ins than the Sun Belt. It has more national coverage, it is a more nationally-respected conference (right or wrong, is inconsequential). Go ahead and cite the 4-3 record against them in football last year- it doesn't matter to me (or most college football fans outside the sunbelt). I'd still rather play SMU, UH, Rice and UTEP every season.

I'm not a proponent of building the 'belt with the current members and I never will be. ULL, ULM, FIU, FAU, etc, will never hold much interest to me outside of being another necessary step along the way to winning the conference- again. Outside of that, what they do is immaterial.

This Western C-USA and Eastern SBC talk is great. In fact, I'd love to see it. I think it WOULD be beneficial to all parties involved. But my allegiance is NT, first and foremost. If given a choice, ceteris paribus, I would go with C-USA every time.

Edited July 20, 2007 by Eagle1855

Censored by Laurie · July 20, 2007

Space I've commented on your post on Beltboard so I won't rehash here.
Gray I keep having a hard time figuring the Big East situation out. I think a 9th football member is important. Come 2009 every FBS conference except the Big East will play an 8 or 9 game conference schedule except the Big East who will play 7. That makes non-conference scheduling difficult and it gives you the 3/4 split which is pretty lousy.
I see the Big East going one of two ways.
1. Split football and basketball and that would likely mean adding a full member and probably would also mean that Notre Dame would follow as a non-football member. That would give them 10 hoops and 9 football and that's about as sweet as it gets (18 game double round robin in basketball, 8 game round robin in football). If that were the case, I think Temple is a solid front-runner because the value of the Big East basketball TV contract would take a huge hit for the football schools with no New York, Chicago, or Philadelphia (three of the four largest TV markets) adding Temple helps that despite their awful football and absent stretching all the way to Memphis no other candidate brings credible basketball. If the Big East does that, there is no impact and the CUSA/Sun Belt/Tech group is still 22 mis-aligned schools that can be reformed into a 12 and a 10 team conference each more regional.

I'm not sure Im following your logic on the Big East split. Are you suggesting that the Big East cut ties with their non-football schools because that would never happen. The Big East is a basketball conference and Georgetown, St. Johns and Villanova are founding members and not going anywhere.

buff64 · July 20, 2007

Have not seen or read this but, wondering with Jacksonville Univ. ( Fla.) moving to D-I and North Fla. Univ. having moved to D-I recently , what is the possibilty that the Fla. Schools ( including Fla. International and South Fla. form their own league along with some other schools located nearer than the Sun Belt schools ? Or, including some of the closer Sun Belt schools.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · July 20, 2007

No school would possibly leave a conference with multiple bowl tie-ins to come to our conference. Insane. Why did this guy even write that?

Most likely is that Troy State goes CUSA along with Louisiana Tech. They regularly hang with the big name non-coference foes and occassionally knock one off. But any CUSA school coming down to the Sun Belt to compete for one guaranteed bowl spot? Very doubtful. It's all about money and we don't have any in our conference.

Arkstfan · July 20, 2007

Eagle you are missing the point.

Name means NOTHING.

Would you rather be in a Sun Belt that has all the CUSA Texas schools and call it the Sun Belt, or would you rather be in a conference called CUSA that had Marshall, ECU, UCF, FIU, FAU, Troy and none of the Texas CUSA schools?

There are two key players. TV execs and bowl organizers. The names mean nothing to them just who is in them. If CUSA membership dramatically changes the new CUSA will not keep the bowl ties or the TV merely because of the shoulder patch, those will be determined solely based on what value TV and bowls see in the new alignment.

I don't give tinkers damn what label applies to a conference. You can call that conference out west the WAC all you want but the bottom line is Arizona and Arizona State aren't there any more so the WAC is no longer tied to the Fiesta. UNLV isn't there any more so they are no longer tied to the Las Vegas Bowl, San Diego State isn't there any more so they are no longer tied to either bowl in San Diego. Those WAC shoulder patches didn't help them keep any of that.

As to building the conference. You damn well better care what the rest of the league is doing because if it is doing poorly it means a good UNT program can miss opportunities, UNT failed to improve in the early years of the Sun Belt and promptly went from winning 30 something games in a row to losing 10 out of 14 tries and did it with teams that were as good as some of the champion teams.

Don't feel like you are special because you are UNT fan first. Unless you are on the league payroll no SANE human is anything but a fan of their team first and foremost. When UNT is in non-conference play win 'em all because its good for the reputation of the league ASU is in. When you play ASU, UNT needs to go down in flames, and when playing anyone else in conference play my sole interest is in seeing the team win that makes my path to the title the simplest. Everyone feels that way if they've got even the barest capability to think beyond "me hungry".

If the egos and banty rooster strutting ever clear out of the way CUSA and Sun Belt for the sake of ALL the teams need to realign geographically. I don't care boo about FIU and FAU except as it directly relates to ASU. ECU has made it clear they don't care boo about SMU-Rice.

SMU and UNT need to be in the same league. Same goes for ASU and Memphis, same goes for FIU/FAU/UCF, same for UAB/Troy

Arkstfan · July 20, 2007

No school would possibly leave a conference with multiple bowl tie-ins to come to our conference. Insane. Why did this guy even write that?
Most likely is that Troy State goes CUSA along with Louisiana Tech. They regularly hang with the big name non-coference foes and occassionally knock one off. But any CUSA school coming down to the Sun Belt to compete for one guaranteed bowl spot? Very doubtful. It's all about money and we don't have any in our conference.

If bowl and television contracts never expired and were never renegotiated you would have a point. But they do. The Sun Belt and CUSA are two far flung collections that have little in common with the entire group. The two can realign east/west lower travel costs, cut regional bowl deals, and regional tv deals.

Think Fort Worth wants to ever be stuck with Marshall again? Imagine the horror in New Orleans if stuck with FAU playing UCF.

Realigning geographically allows for better bowl contracts for both because it reduces the risk of sending teams from far outside the region.

Arkstfan · July 20, 2007

I'm not sure Im following your logic on the Big East split. Are you suggesting that the Big East cut ties with their non-football schools because that would never happen. The Big East is a basketball conference and Georgetown, St. Johns and Villanova are founding members and not going anywhere.

There has been speculation that if the dollars don't look right that the Big East football schools would split and form a new league. There have been reports that it very nearly happened after the ACC raid and that the commissioner calmed them down enough to stay.

Eagle1855 · July 20, 2007

I'm not missing any points. In fact, I think you might have misunderstood what I was saying- and maybe I missed some of the original intent of the poster I commented on. I was merely commenting about why C-USA carries a bigger "name" than the Sun Belt.

I too could give a F about what the conference is called- if it contains ULL, ULM, FAU, FIU, etc and it has ONE bowl tie in, it's inferior to a any conference with UH, Southern Miss, Utep, etc, that has muliple bowl tie-ins and is full of schools that have more money/fan support, on average than the sun belt.

As it stands, C-USA has the bowl tie-ins. I'm not disputing whether or not that could change with a massive shakeup between conferences- schools aren't going to want to go to the Sun Belt without some guarantee it won't be all or nothing for a bowl berth. Otherwise, I cant imagine a single school from C-USA agreeing to such an exchange.

Now I'm going to drag my knuckles over to the kitchen (as soon as I stop scratching my head) to get me some food because "me work up big hunger after much read"

Edited July 20, 2007 by Eagle1855

July 20, 2007

Have not seen or read this but, wondering with Jacksonville Univ. ( Fla.) moving to D-I and North Fla. Univ. having moved to D-I recently , what is the possibilty that the Fla. Schools ( including Fla. International and South Fla. form their own league along with some other schools located nearer than the Sun Belt schools ? Or, including some of the closer Sun Belt schools.

Buff, I'm not sure that I follow you. Jacksonville U (FL) has been in D-1 for a number of years and is in the Atlantic Sun Conference. North Florida joined that conference when they moved to D-1 a couple of years ago. South Florida is a member of the Big East and is not about to join a regional conference. Florida International and Florida Atlantic are Sun Belt schools.

Could you be confusing Jacksonville State University (AL) with Jacksonville University (FL)? Jacksonville State is considering moving to D-1A from D-1AA. They are currently members of the Ohio Valley Conference.

All of the Florida schools are firmly entrenched in various conferences and I don't see any of them wanting to change.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · July 20, 2007

If bowl and television contracts never expired and were never renegotiated you would have a point. But they do. The Sun Belt and CUSA are two far flung collections that have little in common with the entire group. The two can realign east/west lower travel costs, cut regional bowl deals, and regional tv deals.
Think Fort Worth wants to ever be stuck with Marshall again? Imagine the horror in New Orleans if stuck with FAU playing UCF.
Realigning geographically allows for better bowl contracts for both because it reduces the risk of sending teams from far outside the region.

Why would the CUSA care if the Sun Belt got a better bowl contract? It doesn't make any sense. They're already tied into the New Orleans Bowl, so combining with the Sun Belt does nothing in addition for them except to make an already big conference bigger...and more unwieldy.

Troy and Louisiana State are already within reasonable travel distances of current CUSA members. It makes far more sense that the CUSA would take them instead of combining with the Sun Belt. The WAC already tried to build a super conferece with over a dozen teams. It didn't work. CUSA will not go the same route.

In reality, the Sun Belt wouldn't fit into any CUSA change at all, except to lose Troy. CUSA already has a dozen football playing member schools. Even adding Troy in the Eastern Division and Louisiana Tech in the Western Division is tenuous at best because it makes for a 14 team conference. Both make plenty of sense geographically, but at some point it becomes too unweildy.

If they add anyone, they practically have two conferences within a conference.

Edited July 20, 2007 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

Arkstfan · July 20, 2007

Troy and ULL ain't going no where unless CUSA falls below 12 members.

East Carolina's AD has the bizarre 16 member idea, which would get one vote (his) if presented to the CUSA ADs.

His dissatisfaction though just backs up what I've been thinking all along. CUSA as it stands today was a shotgun marriage. It stretches from El Paso to Hunting, WV. The Sun Belt is a shotgun marriage that in football stretches from Denton to Miami. Both alignments were made quickly to calm down the members and avoid having the leagues collapse.

If you are Marshall fan a bowl game in Houston is a bad bad drive or you fly. If you are a Tulsa fan a bowl game in Birmingham is a very long hard drive.

We now have this added evidence of dissatisfaction but the off-the-wall solution of a 16 team league with no inter-divisional play isn't a solution its more gasoline on the embers.

There is only one solution and it is win-win all the way around. Either through a sane sit down meeting or by way of a group attempting to defect the two conferences shuffle their membership roughly east/west.

Look at the natural groupings.

All Texas schools and all privates. That gets you UTEP, UNT, Tulsa, Tulane, Rice, SMU, Houston. That's seven schools right there and you need to add between two and five to get your conference going.

Next natural grouping.

FIU/FAU/UCF/ECU/Marshall and arguably UAB and Troy. That's seven and again you need 2 to 5 more. Most logical next two are MTSU and WKU. Now you are at 9. That nine stick at 9 or they can try to court Memphis, USM, ASU, and the Louisiana schools to get to 10 or 12.

So you fill in those extra slots with ASU, Memphis, USM, MTSU, WKU, La.Tech, ULL, ULM.

Eagle1855 · July 20, 2007

This is all a great idea, I'm just not sure as to the feasibility of it. What are the odds of something like this taking place? Doesn't it seem to favor the current S.Belt schools more than C-USA?

And don't you think some of the geographic stretch of the conferences (in their current form) is desirable for recruiting purposes? I dont really know one way or the other, just curious as to other's thoughts.

Edited July 20, 2007 by Eagle1855

ccs178 · July 20, 2007

Marshall, ECU, UCF, and USM basically play basketball because they have to.

Normally I enjoy your posts because you do have a pretty good grasp of college sports, but I have to say you are dead wrong on this point. At least where you include USM. Basketball has a pretty strong tradition at Southern Miss. Admittedly, it was allowed to fall into some dark times, but the last couple of years we've been trying really hard to get back on track. Football has been king for as long as anybody can remember, but our administration has finally recognized the importance of being successful in basketball. Now, if we can just get the local fans to wake up we'd be doing quite well. It will take awhile longer before we become a regular threat for the conference championship or a regular participant in the big dance, but it is something we're striving for.

emmitt01 · July 20, 2007

For what it's work ArkStfan I feel your pain. To many on this board any conglomeration of schools, so long as it has the Sun Belt name, is satan. That you never suggested that the Sun Belt would have the exact same lineup it does today (and in fact stated that it would look drastically different) is inconsequential I guess.