If SDSU goes to the Big East

shaft · January 14, 2013

If SDSU goes to the Big East, I think the Big East will also add Tulsa.

The Big East would need a western team to get to 12. Tulsa has a strong relationship with Tulane and SMU. It would be a strategic move to weak CUSA.

If Tulsa leaves I think the MWC would grab UTEP. The MWC wants BYU put isn't going to get them. and they need one more to get to 12 and UTEP fits the footprint.

That would mean the Big East, MWC, and CUSA all have 12.

CUSA would be:

CUSA West: UNT, UTSA, Rice, LA Tech, S Miss, UAB

CUSA East: Marshall, ODU, MTSU, UNC-C, FIU, FAU

So would CUSA need to expand? Would you be happy with this?

mgfan · January 14, 2013

I am happy with that no need to expand. It isn't like other conferences are biting at the bit to get sunbelt teams, they will be there.

UNT86 · January 14, 2013

Very happy.

I would hope that this group could maintain all the current bowl tie-ins.

I suspect that we would not, but I don't think we would lose all of them.

Three other Texas schools would be about the right number.

We could still drive to some out of town conference games.

The students would recognize our conference opponents.

The only negatives are the number of schools that are moving up and the perception that we are in a little better version of the Sun Belt.

At least the former Sun Belt teams that come with us would be in the other half of the conference.

I would be all for it.

Mean Green Scrappy · January 14, 2013

I am fine with this. 12 members is a good number and always works best for scheduling.

Mean Green 93-98 · January 14, 2013

"Happy" is probably not the word, but I could live with it. C-USA West would still be better than our current arrangement in the Sun Belt.

C-USA East on the other hand . . . :headache:

UNTexas · January 14, 2013

I think it would be fine for us. We need to win first and everything else will fall into place.

On a side note, everyone here always speaks about UTEP being very desirable as a conference addition elsewhere. Outside of geographic location, why? They're football program is historically worse than ours (ouch because we have been pretty rough) and their basketball glory days are behind them. The Haskins era was great but those days are gone. Academics aren't stellar in general either. The rest of their sports are average as well. Everyone of my friends and family who went there are very disappointed with the university and athletics. Just wondering why the assumptions of their departure outside of rumor or speculation. (Not bagging on them either because I will enjoy us playing them in the Fall.)

No matter who ends up with us doesn't matter either way if we continue to lose. WIN!!!

Edited January 14, 2013 by UNTexas

North Texas Shep · January 14, 2013

I read this article below a few days ago. It sounds to me like they will stay in MWC, or at least they are leaning that way.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865570302/Mountain-West-Conference-SDSU-likely-to-rejoin-conference-more-competitive-for-Aggies.html?pg=all

Edited January 14, 2013 by North Texas Shep

North Texas Shep · January 14, 2013

I think it would be fine for us. We need to win first and everything else will fall into place.
On a side note, everyone here always speaks about UTEP being very desirable as a conference addition elsewhere. Outside of geographic location, why? They're football program is historically worse than ours (ouch because we have been pretty rough) and their basketball glory days are behind them. The Haskins era was great but those days are gone. Academics aren't stellar in general either. The rest of their sports are average as well. Everyone of my friends and family who went there are very disappointed with the university and athletics. Just wondering why the assumptions of their departure outside of rumor or speculation. (Not bagging on them either because I will enjoy us playing them in the Fall.)
No matter who ends up with us doesn't matter either way if we continue to lose. WIN!!!

Win and win and win. Lots of that for sure.

NM Green · January 14, 2013

UTEP has excellent attendance when they are winning which they have done in the past decade. They also will bring good solid sized crowds to Denton on gameday. Lots of Miners in the Metroplex. They have won a national championship and a recognized name.

GMG

shaft · January 14, 2013

UTEP's draw to the MWC is their time zone & market size, strength of program is secondary, history of the program is third (but that's been the case in almost every realignment decision).

I agree that the possible 12 team CUSA line up would be better than our current SBC set up, but I would still prefer a 14 team conference for the simple reason of 6 divisional games, and two intra-divisional games. The less trips to the Eastern Time Zone the better as far as I'm concerned.

One of the biggest challenges with being in the Sun Belt has been the travel. Playing an annual game in Miami hasn't help us when we can't reasonably recruit the market. Regular games in West Virgina and North Carolina aren't going to do alot to help us build our program. Under a 14 team, 2 intra-divisional game format we would only visit the far away teams once every 7 years instead of once every 4 years.

Eppie96 · January 14, 2013

I am also excited about playing the Miners- I think the have a pretty good football program and lots of alumni in the metroplex.

It should be pointed out that Texas Western won the men's basketball championship. Most people outside of Texas do not know that Texas Western became UTEP.

UNTexas · January 14, 2013

I think more people than you realize know UTEP BB from back in the day, even after winning a national title. Hardaway, Greg Foster, Antonio Davis, ect. They were really good well after the 60s. Haskins was awesome for that school. The football team under Price did okay for a bit but folks got a tired of failures. It's a tough recruiting situation for them, especially in football. They do get butts in seats early in the year but the numbers do drop after bad performances. Sounds familiar...

I will enjoy playing them. The Miner fans I know aren't thrilled about recruiting against us, being double their size in the Metroplex, and straight up hate UTSA being in San Antonio while being up against them. They'll need slick snake oil salesmen to out recruit several conference mates if they stay.

Edited January 14, 2013 by UNTexas

Harry · January 14, 2013

I think more people than you realize know UTEP BB from back in the day, even after winning a national title. Hardaway, Greg Foster, Antonio Davis, ect. They were really good well after the 60s. Haskins was awesome for that school. The football team under Price did okay for a bit but folks got a tired of failures. It's a tough recruiting situation for them, especially in football. They do get butts in seats early in the year but the numbers do drop after bad performances. Sounds familiar...
I will enjoy playing them. The Miner fans I know aren't thrilled about recruiting against us, being double their size in the Metroplex, and straight up hate UTSA being in San Antonio while being up against them. They'll need slick snake oil salesmen to out recruit several conference mates if they stay.

I think they have a very good staff hired (former alum and NFLer head coach) and I'm sure Lefty will be their point guy as he knows our weak spots having been here for so long. They hired Todd Whitten who is a great recruiter and so I suspect they will not be an easy win in the recruiting field. Their biggest issue has always been El Paso -- this goes back to Dickey days..

Arkstfan · January 14, 2013

If SDSU goes back to the MWC, they have 12 for football and can get to 12 in all-sports merely by calling Hawaii who is already in for football and having to subsidize travel for the Big West.

If you look at CUSA, you have the eastern corridor of Marshall, ODU, Charlotte, FIU, FAU. You have UAB who has to be thrilled with Charlotte and ODU but likes USM for football and is looking forward to MTSU for hoops.

Then you have Tulsa, UNT, UTSA, Rice, UTEP. Sitting in the gap between the SW group and the eastern group you have USM, La.Tech, and MTSU.

If Tulsa goes (and I expect they will if offered) I think you see CUSA seriously consider borrowing a page from Big East in the wake of the Miami, VT, BC raid. Going large to appease the divergent interests while setting the stage for an eventual split. Before they got the call from Big East, ECU was rumored to want to take CUSA to 18 so that football did not play intra-divisional games and could eventually split.

When the Alliance was still on track, the plan was for Bankowsky to serve as special assistant to Thompson to finish out his contract and then semi-retire.

I wouldn't be even mildly shocked if at some point after Tulsa's departure if CUSA were to go to 16 looking at ASU, ULL, James Madison, Texas State, Appalachian State, Georgia State with eye to splitting in 2019 right around the time Bankowsky would be 59.

NorthTexan95 · January 14, 2013

C-USA East on the other hand . . .

Yeah, I'm thinking the Marshall folks would absolutely hate that division.

wardly · January 14, 2013

Regardless of what SDSU does,Tulsa is out of here. Also,if I am Marshall,returning to MAC might look appealing.The Eastern division of CUSA is a joke.

CurveItAround · January 14, 2013

If SDSU goes back to the MWC, they have 12 for football and can get to 12 in all-sports merely by calling Hawaii who is already in for football and having to subsidize travel for the Big West.

If you look at CUSA, you have the eastern corridor of Marshall, ODU, Charlotte, FIU, FAU. You have UAB who has to be thrilled with Charlotte and ODU but likes USM for football and is looking forward to MTSU for hoops.

Then you have Tulsa, UNT, UTSA, Rice, UTEP. Sitting in the gap between the SW group and the eastern group you have USM, La.Tech, and MTSU.

If Tulsa goes (and I expect they will if offered) I think you see CUSA seriously consider borrowing a page from Big East in the wake of the Miami, VT, BC raid. Going large to appease the divergent interests while setting the stage for an eventual split. Before they got the call from Big East, ECU was rumored to want to take CUSA to 18 so that football did not play intra-divisional games and could eventually split.

When the Alliance was still on track, the plan was for Bankowsky to serve as special assistant to Thompson to finish out his contract and then semi-retire.

I wouldn't be even mildly shocked if at some point after Tulsa's departure if CUSA were to go to 16 looking at ASU, ULL, James Madison, Texas State, Appalachian State, Georgia State with eye to splitting in 2019 right around the time Bankowsky would be 59.

Until a power conference goes to 16 and gets the semi final game waiver, I will be surprised to see any league to try 16 again. It failed miserably the first time it was tried and there has not been any conference show any serious interest since. I am not convinced that a Gof5 conference will be the first to re-enter the 16 memeber conference model.

Arkstfan · January 14, 2013

Until a power conference goes to 16 and gets the semi final game waiver, I will be surprised to see any league to try 16 again. It failed miserably the first time it was tried and there has not been any conference show any serious interest since. I am not convinced that a Gof5 conference will be the first to re-enter the 16 memeber conference model.

16 only works at any level if your intent to is to affiliate rather than associate with the other division. The nominal amount of cross-over is not designed to achieve anything other than what is for all intents two seperate leagues except for the rare cross-over and championships and for a joint marketing effort.

I don't believe the SEC will go to 16 because key rivalries essential to the conference identity have to end (as happened with WAC16).

The only reason it could be contemplated in CUSA is because of the mass apathy about games against the other division.

TIgreen01 · January 14, 2013

If SDSU goes back to the MWC, they have 12 for football and can get to 12 in all-sports merely by calling Hawaii who is already in for football and having to subsidize travel for the Big West.

If you look at CUSA, you have the eastern corridor of Marshall, ODU, Charlotte, FIU, FAU. You have UAB who has to be thrilled with Charlotte and ODU but likes USM for football and is looking forward to MTSU for hoops.

Then you have Tulsa, UNT, UTSA, Rice, UTEP. Sitting in the gap between the SW group and the eastern group you have USM, La.Tech, and MTSU.

If Tulsa goes (and I expect they will if offered) I think you see CUSA seriously consider borrowing a page from Big East in the wake of the Miami, VT, BC raid. Going large to appease the divergent interests while setting the stage for an eventual split. Before they got the call from Big East, ECU was rumored to want to take CUSA to 18 so that football did not play intra-divisional games and could eventually split.

When the Alliance was still on track, the plan was for Bankowsky to serve as special assistant to Thompson to finish out his contract and then semi-retire.

I wouldn't be even mildly shocked if at some point after Tulsa's departure if CUSA were to go to 16 looking at ASU, ULL, James Madison, Texas State, Appalachian State, Georgia State with eye to splitting in 2019 right around the time Bankowsky would be 59.

I'm of the mind that Banowsky should be run off now, not put on a 6 year paid retirement tour. CUSA East, as has been mentioned repeatedly, is an absolute joke. FAU getting added back so quickly when we already had the sh!t burger that is FIU was the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

Mean Green 93-98 · January 14, 2013

The issue is that CUSA cratered to ECU in making their round of adds to keep them happy.. They did so, and ECU left and the CUSA is saddled with ODU and UNCC now. That is the only real mistake so far.

Outside of that, the moves have been made out of necessity.

Necessity? Why did Banowsky have to keep ECU happy? He knew they had no other options than C-USA unless the Big East came calling, and if they did come calling he knew (or should have known) that they were gone anyway.

If C-USA had made no additions, or perhaps UNT and LaTech only, there would be a very real possibility of the Big East teams coming back to C-USA. But there's no possibility of that now. Banowsky acted rashly, and C-USA is suffering for it.

wardly · January 14, 2013

The issue is that CUSA cratered to ECU in making their round of adds to keep them happy.. They did so, and ECU left and the CUSA is saddled with ODU and UNCC now. That is the only real mistake so far.

Outside of that, the moves have been made out of necessity.

Actually long term ODU and UNCC may turn out to be very good moves. My bone to pick is that CUSA caved in to Marshall of all people and added both the F_ U's.

Arkstfan · January 14, 2013

If it were just Marshall or just ECU, the votes were there to ignore them.

Telling ya' UAB had to be in Marshall and ECU's corner.

CurveItAround · January 14, 2013

I thought there has been discussion where the general consensus was that CUSA was going to be ok with adding just UNT. Before that occurred, FIU started getting talked up from the eastern schools and it was decided that the 2 would be added. However, the MWC then decided to put the WAC out of business and asked for assistance from CUSA by taking LaTech and UTSA or TxSt. At that point, the eastern schools demanded 2 eastern schools to offset LaTech/UTSA. The result was ODU/Charlotte (but others were considered). And that is how CUSA went from potentially adding 1 school to adding 6.

At least that is the way that I have heard the story.