University of Tulsa football: Will the Hurricane’s conference change?

Harry · February 9, 2012

Think about that. The state of Louisiana alone has mid-majors in three conferences: the WAC, Conference USA and the Sun Belt. The state of Texas has mid-majors in the same three conferences.

Isn’t it about time we had some conference realignment based on geography? I know, there’s a world of difference between Tulsa and New Mexico State, in terms of commitment to football. Between Tulsa and Texas State.

But wouldn’t it make a lot more sense for TU to be in a league with Arkansas State and North Texas and Louisiana Tech, than in a league with Marshall and East Carolina and San Jose State?

An Oklahoma/Texas/Arkansas/Louisiana league — heck, include Southern Miss, too — would be a decent football conference. Tulsa, North Texas, Texas-San Antonio (which just finished its first year of football), Texas State, Louisiana Tech, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, Tulane and Arkansas State.

That’s not like the 1990s, when Tulsa joined a revamped WAC that included the likes of Utah and Brigham Young. But it’s not half bad. And it makes a ton more sense economically.

Read more: http://blog.newsok.com/berrytramel/2012/02/08/university-of-tulsa-football-will-the-hurricanes-conference-change/

Eastwood Eagle · February 9, 2012

I like.

PlummMeanGreen · February 9, 2012

Can't remember ever quoting myself from an older post but I posted what the Tulsa reporter is alluding to back on November 22, 2011 (and have made a few alterations from that post)

Addendum: Tulsa U, Tulane U, Rice U and USM would have to lead the way to make this happen because without them it would all be a moot point and still basically be the, uh, Sun Belt Conference. In a nutshell, this conference really needs to be their idea but some here and at other message boards planting a few seeds one can never know the end result. I hope the Tulsa reporter expands on the upside of such a league in another column and will tweak his membership list some, too.

Posted 22 November 2011 - 08:15 PM

Obviously, just killing time watching the debates... :rolleyes:

The Sun Belt Conference as Wright Waters has envisioned it might as well be called the South Belt Conference. Nothing wrong with Wright, but for a non AQ league it really is too far spread out IMHO.

Folks, we are not going to make much in TV revenues now or anytime soon, so regionalize into a new conference with a few metro areas in it.

I know we lose more in basketball points, but the Big Boy are on the verge of really making us lose more than just points.

A consortium of college presidents at some (or all ) of the schools listed below would hire a good "experienced with conference TV packages"" associate commisioner to be this league's new commish' (probably one who is presently employed in an established conference)............. then............. turn him loose.

He (she) might then get a consortium of schools in a 4 or 5 state region (Texas, La, NM, Ark, ???). If Wright Waters can get the SBC a bowl game in its 1'st year, I think history can repeat itself in doing that again with a strong, new commissioner. (Maybe one of our new schools already has a bowl in its city or could get a 2'nd bowl a la New Orleans Bowl)?

Conference Name? The name "Southwest Conference" is not available and is now housed or headquartered at the Texas Sports Hall of Fame, Waco.

YOU NAME THE CONFERENCE AND WHAT CRITERIA THAT EACH SCHOOL IN IT SHOULD FOLLOW WITH FACILITIES, ACCESS TO AIRPORTS, ATTENDANCE STANDARDS, ETC, ETC, ETC

The ___________________Conference

(1) UTSA

(2) NMSU

(3) Ark State

(4) La Tech

(5) U of Louisiana

(6) Rice University

(7) University of North Texas

(8) Tulsa University

(9) Tulane University

(10) University of Southern Miss

I know starting a new league has not been the thing to do of late, but what do non AQ programs have to lose at this point in time or in the near future?

Edited February 9, 2012 by PlummMeanGreen

GrayEagle · February 9, 2012

First, let me say this...I'd prefer to be in a conference with Tulsa over anyone else that that is not a current (or soon to be) AQ member. They always have good competitive football and basketball and are only a couple of hundred miles away. Win...win for us. It worked out well the last time that we were in a conference with them and should happen again.

As to Tramel's conference, I'd add Rice and drop Louisiana-Monroe. Louisiana Tech would likely insist on that anyway and Louisiana-Lafayette could finally be referred to as just Louisiana.

Those teams...Tulsa, Southern Miss, North Texas, Rice, Louisiana, Louisiana Tech, Tulane, Texas State, UTSA and Arkansas State would form a rather compact ten-team conference where each member is within a day's drive of each other. Each team should be capable of averaging at least 20,000 attendance for a starter. The downside would be the waiting period for AQ in basketball.

I'm beginning to warm to this idea better than the coast to coast to coast conference even if we should be included. Okay, who is going to champion this league?

Edited February 9, 2012 by GrayEagle

PlummMeanGreen · February 9, 2012

First, let me say this...I'd prefer to be in a conference with Tulsa over anyone else that that is not a current (or soon to be) AQ member. They always have good competitive in football and basketball and are only a couple of hundred miles away. Win...win for us. It worked out well the last time that we were in a conference with them and should happen again.

As to Tramel's conference, I'd add Rice and drop Louisiana-Monroe. Louisiana Tech would likely insist on that anyway and Louisiana-Lafayette could finally be referred to as just Louisiana.

Those teams...Tulsa, Southern Miss, North Texas, Rice, Louisiana, Louisiana Tech, Tulane, Texas State, UTSA and Arkansas State would form a rather compact ten-team conference where each member is within a day's drive of each other. Each team should be capable of averaging at least 20,000 attendance for a starter. The downside would be the waiting period for AQ in basketball.

I'm beginning to warm to this idea better than the coast to coast to coast conference even if we should be included. Okay, who is going to champion this league?

Jack, tell me it gets better with age? But for the life of me, I left Rice U out of my original list (which I just corrected).

I wish all these schools would form their own alliance and tell that "sea to shining sea" Alliance to take a hike.

GMG!

KoldBeer · February 9, 2012

First, let me say this...I'd prefer to be in a conference with Tulsa over anyone else that that is not a current (or soon to be) AQ member. They always have good competitive football and basketball and are only a couple of hundred miles away. Win...win for us. It worked out well the last time that we were in a conference with them and should happen again.

As to Tramel's conference, I'd add Rice and drop Louisiana-Monroe. Louisiana Tech would likely insist on that anyway and Louisiana-Lafayette could finally be referred to as just Louisiana.

Those teams...Tulsa, Southern Miss, North Texas, Rice, Louisiana, Louisiana Tech, Tulane, Texas State, UTSA and Arkansas State would form a rather compact ten-team conference where each member is within a day's drive of each other. Each team should be capable of averaging at least 20,000 attendance for a starter. The downside would be the waiting period for AQ in basketball.

I'm beginning to warm to this idea better than the coast to coast to coast conference even if we should be included. Okay, who is going to champion this league?

What is the requirement to keep the bid for basketball. Isn't it 5 teams that have played together for an extended period. If that is the case, if you add UTEP then that'd give you 5 CUSA members. I don't think it'd ever happen b/c CUSA would have to dissolve. The western teams would form a new conference and the eastern teams would form a new conference. Both would pick best teams from Sun Belt and WAC. The leftovers would combine to form a new conference. It'd work out the best for everybody so that's why I don't think it'll happen.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · February 9, 2012

This is fine. Many of us have suggested something similar for years.

The problem is buttholes. Banowsky, C-USA commish, is a nice enough guy. But, his league has been picked clean, so I'm not sure he's all on the ball.

Tulsa, which you'd think would be happy just being included, as small as they are, fancies themselves a basketball school...although their absence from the NCAA for, what...a decade...says otherwise.

The Louisiana schools have the same hang ups SMU did about being in a conference with us. No one will admit that they're not big time.

The problem is always the same as we learned in law school:

-Middle-aged white men

-With money and

-In positions of power

-Unable to compromise

-Because they their egos (complexes about their small and/or ineffective penises).

So, while all of this makes sense to well-adjusted individuals and people as a whole, it will never make sense to athletic directors, university presidents, and rich donors who see themselves guardians of something that's not as important in the scheme of things as they think it is - college athletics.

Edited February 9, 2012 by The Fake Lonnie Finch