Big East may target Tulsa

[wardly]

By my count the Belt is down to 7 schools,plus Georgia State coming on board to move to 8. Thjey may have to add NMSU in self defense,but bets are that Idaho move football to Big Sky where it belongs.

[wardly]

If Tulsa moves to Big Eastand SDSU rejoins MWC,the "new"CUSA could look something like this: WEST:UTEP,UTSA,RICE,UNT,La.Tech.,SO.Miss EAST: Marshall,ODU,UNCC,FAU,FIU,MTSU,UAB. If SDSU stays in BIG EAST, then UTEP could move to MWC. We then need to add 2 teams in the West instead of one. My picks would be A-State and ULL,which effectively kills the Belt.They probably could survive the loss of one of those by adding NMSU,but if they lose 2 more school to CUSA then the Belt is done. If I were Marshall I would look long and hard at rejoining the MAC.

[emmitt01]

The five "mid major" conferences remind me of the guys I used to interrogate after a drug warrant. Each of them, in a separate room, could be convinced that there was only one who could "save" him/herself by cooperating. Each an every time they sold eachother out...and all still went to jail. Often times, if they'd all just kept their mouths shut, they'd have all been ok.

[PlummMeanGreen]

If Tulsa moves to Big Eastand SDSU rejoins MWC,the "new"CUSA could look something like this: WEST:UTEP,UTSA,RICE,UNT,La.Tech.,SO.Miss EAST: Marshall,ODU,UNCC,FAU,FIU,MTSU,UAB. If SDSU stays in BIG EAST, then UTEP could move to MWC. We then need to add 2 teams in the West instead of one. My picks would be A-State and ULL,which effectively kills the Belt.They probably could survive the loss of one of those by adding NMSU,but if they lose 2 more school to CUSA then the Belt is done. If I were Marshall I would look long and hard at rejoining the MAC.

ww, good post with a believable scenario.

CUSA survives no matter what--we may not be the Big 12, but neither will the Big Least who will also never be confused for the B12,

GMG!

Edited January 9, 2013 by PlummMeanGreen

[Harry]

The five "mid major" conferences remind me of the guys I used to interrogate after a drug warrant. Each of them, in a separate room, could be convinced that there was only one who could "save" him/herself by cooperating. Each an every time they sold eachother out...and all still went to jail. Often times, if they'd all just kept their mouths shut, they'd have all been ok.

Great analogy!

[cdizzle86]

The five "mid major" conferences remind me of the guys I used to interrogate after a drug warrant. Each of them, in a separate room, could be convinced that there was only one who could "save" him/herself by cooperating. Each an every time they sold eachother out...and all still went to jail. Often times, if they'd all just kept their mouths shut, they'd have all been ok.

As someone who watches The First 48 often, I can understand this analogy.

[VideoEagle]

The five "mid major" conferences remind me of the guys I used to interrogate after a drug warrant. Each of them, in a separate room, could be convinced that there was only one who could "save" him/herself by cooperating. Each an every time they sold eachother out...and all still went to jail. Often times, if they'd all just kept their mouths shut, they'd have all been ok.

I never thought of "the prisoner's delima" in relatiion to conference changes but it is perfect fit! Emmitt is a wise man, but we already knew that.

[UNTexas]

The five "mid major" conferences remind me of the guys I used to interrogate after a drug warrant. Each of them, in a separate room, could be convinced that there was only one who could "save" him/herself by cooperating. Each an every time they sold eachother out...and all still went to jail. Often times, if they'd all just kept their mouths shut, they'd have all been ok.

Aren't they pretty much screwed if the dope was in the house with them anyway? Title 21 is great that way, well, not for the dopers. Just kidding anyways... Funny analogy.

Edited January 9, 2013 by UNTexas

[JesseMartin]

With so many possible scenarios being discussed, I won't hit every one since a lot of it is a vicious cycle. A couple of things though:

1) If Houston does NOT go to the Big East, Rice is a very wise choice, both for the school and for the conference.

2) Tulsa will be fine regardless. They aren't in that much of a major media market power play, so any conference (other than the B12) that has them will gain marginal new viewership. Regardless of perennial team power, it seems to be a toss-up between them and UTEP as far as regional match-up and television rights go.

3) Many of these points lead only 1 or 2 years ahead. I know some here believe that everything in sports needs to be evaluated on a single-year basis, but if a payout to leave a conference is likely to garner considerably higher revenue sharing over the course of any given number of years (other than one), then it is a rational choice, all other things held equal.

4) If all else is not held equal, then yes, it is important to consider annual in-state or close regional match-ups...but similar to the "Rice vs. Houston to the Big East" point, these need to be evaluated both case-by-case and as a whole. Having any given two or three teams be a part of each series of rivalries can be good or bad depending upon the combination, so both the number of schools and the combination of which schools provides a considerable number of variables, of which there is not necessarily only one perfect answer, so the key is to not press for one specific combination of match-ups, but rather any combination that would provide nearly equal benefits to one's favorite choice combination.

[untjim1995]

The issues with conference alignment involve a lot of problems, but the biggest of them is really simple: perception. For decades, the university literally didn't care about athletics, the students and faculty followed suit, along with the locals. That mindset easily floated down to the Metroplex, whose media always cared about SWC schools, anyway, but the few times we mattered on the sports page, it was treated like an after thought. I-aa, as I have argued for so many years, was the real killer here. No matter what happened after the SWC said no to any overtures to admitting us in the late 70s and Fry leaving once the writing was on the wall, we should have never late i-aa happen. Sure, we had some great games and players back then, but it just killed the one thing that UNT did have on its side--history as a i-a school. Even with a poor following and non-existant administrative support, North Texas still played at the highest level of football--until 1982. After that, there was literally no way that any 1-a school was going to ever consider UNT as a potential conference mate if they were in this region of the country. Even after we moved up to i-a in 1995 and played in the Big West, no one cared at all. In 2001, the Sun Belt throws our program a literal lifeline, but again, it was the flimsiest of conferences, with all of its teams playing multiple bodybag games to SEC and Big XII powers most of the time. North Texas ran the damn conference as the king for four straight years, only to see the next conference up the foodcahin, CUSA, with all of its Texas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma ties, basically agree that we weren't really a good fit for them, even with a bigger enrollment and football success than SMU had at the time. Now, SMU had other private schools again, just like they did in the SWC days, to band together and sway their conference leadership. It still goes on today. It might be the sad flipside to being in the Metroplex that no one ever really brings up--that we really don't have any DFW sway in the local media, so all of these conference look the otehr way when considering possible schools for membership. Any other school, with the size of ours that was located anywhere else in the state, where they arent two other golden choldren from days gone by, would never have had to endure what we have had to. Much of that is on us, but much of it on the fact that we cannot use our location to our conference benefit. To most of us, that's the most frustrating reality that we probably know will always be in place, even if we somehow miraculously stay at the FBS level in the next decade.

[ragpicker]

Poor old North Texas. I am beginning to feel like we are the ugly girl at the prom with whom nobody wants to dance. We were established years before there were such schools as Houston and Texas Tech and played our first intercollegiate football game a year before there was an SMU. We were competing in and winning in a D! conference (Missouri Valley) when some schools that are way ahead of today were still junior colleges or did not exist at all. What incredibly goofy decisions, careless missed opportunities and half-witted mistakes have we committed down the corridor of years to finally find ourselves in such a loveless and forlorn bottom of the barrel position.

[NM Green]

No self pity/doubt allowed. We have a fine University who simply needs to get to work. If we all do something to contribute to funds, attendance, exposure, influence, we will continue to do wonderful things in the future.

GMG

[ragpicker]

Poor old North Texas. I have begun to feel that we are the ugly girl at the prom with whom no one wants to dance.

NT was established at least a generation before either Texas Tech or The University of Houston, and we still have very good football records against those schools. We played our first intercollegiate football game (TCU) the year before SMU came into being. We were successful in D1 football (Missouri Valley) when many schools that have passed us by were junior colleges and, in many cases, did not yet even exist.

What incredibly foolish decisions, what myopic policies and what mindless planning were conjured up down the corridor of years that would have us, well into our third century, loveless, forlorn and near the bottom of the athletic barrel?

My heart goes out to you, Scrappy (...bird thou never wert"!). You don't deserve this crap.

[eulessismore]

Poor old North Texas. I have begun to feel that we are the ugly girl at the prom with whom no one wants to dance.

NT was established at least a generation before either Texas Tech or The University of Houston, and we still have very good football records against those schools. We played our first intercollegiate football game (TCU) the year before SMU came into being. We were successful in D1 football (Missouri Valley) when many schools that have passed us by were junior colleges and, in many cases, did not yet even exist.

What incredibly foolish decisions, what myopic policies and what mindless planning were conjured up down the corridor of years that would have us, well into our third century, loveless, forlorn and near the bottom of the athletic barrel?

My heart goes out to you, Scrappy (...bird thou never wert"!). You don't deserve this crap.

Aw, come on; we'll git'er done.