New C-USA versus AAC: A USM Fan' s Comparison

[PlummMeanGreen]

So it's now the off-season for major varsity sports at North Texas hence.... The below most interesting thoughts from a USM fan, ie, cyc46, on the CUSAbbs board:

"Well there are several things that the AAC members need to keep in mind when trashing CUSA.

First we (new CUSA) are getting MORE BCS revenue than ever before with the new Go5 agreement.

2nd our contract has not changed (the AAC's has drastically and not in a good way). Your marketing plan failed, your commissioner failed (oh how many times I heard how Arsenco was going to get you BIG money) and CUSA isn't starting over from a marketing perspective. Do you think the average fan of the Big 10 even knows what the AAC is yet? For better or worse CUSA has 15 years of name recognition and the AAC doesn't even have a months worth yet. The AAC has no accomplishments sure the teams within the AAC has accomplishments but none of those are under the AAC banner. Also don't forget SMU Tulsa Memphis UCF - CUSA to a large part helped build you. CUSA will do just as well with FAU FIU UTSA North Texas Charlotte and ODU heck in some cases a few years down the road it may even be much better for them than you.

But just in case some of you don't believe me here is a short version of everything previously claimed by defector schools: You all continually talked about how you were going to remain in the Big 6 (now Big 5), you guys continually claimed how you were going to get 100 Bazillion dollars for tv revenue, you guys continually claimed that your basketball was going to be helped out by playing teams like Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette etc, you guys continually claimed you would keep the Big East name, you guys continually claimed you would keep your marque bowls. Those are just a few from the greatest hits library. Truth is you got 2 million per team, a brand new conference, no traditional Big East basketball schools to play, and from all indications a reduced bowl line up.

Basically the difference is the new CUSA knows where it is and what its market is. The AAC thought it had a market, basically it finds out its on the same footing as CUSA. Bigger step up for the Sunbelt schools to CUSA than it was for the CUSA schools to the AAC and I think that in the long run is where you will see the most improvement is from the Sunbelt and IAA schools in CUSA versus the CUSA schools to the AAC because you've maxed your potential and moving from CUSA 2 to CUSA 1 isn't going to be the great boom many of you claimed it would be.

I'd also like to point out just because I am in a snarky mood today that those Big East Time Squares Banners are pretty freaking hilarious now."

[Christopher Walker]

Huzzah!

[GrandGreen]

Yes and just like the Belt to CUSA and CUSA to AAC stampede, every team now in CUSA would most likely bolt for the AAC at a minute notice.

There is a hierarchy to conferences and all this talking about overtaken a better situated conference is just that nothing but talk. The problem with all this CUSA teams will get better and bypass AAC scenarios is that as soon as a team get that strong they will most likely be off to the better perceived league.

[ragpicker]

When seven thousand or so fans are showing up for most of your home football games, which is the case with SMU, whatever conference you are in seems basically irrelevant. Highland Park High School draws as many fans when they play at Ford as SMU does for many of its games and it is unlikely that most of the AAC teams that come to Dallas will improve those rather bleak attendance figures.

Of course, our attendance figures are not that great for the size of our school and alumni base, but winning can change that. We just have to win games regardless of conference affiliation.

[Eagle1855]

This.

...every team now in CUSA would most likely bolt for the AAC at a minute notice.

[UNT90]

Yes and just like the Belt to CUSA and CUSA to AAC stampede, every team now in CUSA would most likely bolt for the AAC at a minute notice.

There is a hierarchy to conferences and all this talking about overtaken a better situated conference is just that nothing but talk. The problem with all this CUSA teams will get better and bypass AAC scenarios is that as soon as a team get that strong they will most likely be off to the better perceived league.

Dead on. The post by the USM fan was just feel good Bulsh. USM would be off to the AAC in a split second if offered, and that fan would then proclaim the greatness of USM's new conference. Edited April 22, 2013 by UNT90

[meangreener]

I don't think USM would leave. There's no benefit besides schools they were with before. USM has a chance to be with schools with higher upside instead of schools like Tulsa and UH that have hit their ceiling.

[UNT90]

I don't think USM would leave. There's no benefit besides schools they were with before. USM has a chance to be with schools with higher upside instead of schools like Tulsa and UH that have hit their ceiling.

Take a look at the CUSA East. You honestly think they wouldn't bolt in a second?

No doubt they would.

No doubt that we would, either.

[outoftown]

Take a look at the CUSA East. You honestly think they wouldn't bolt in a second?

No doubt they would.

No doubt that we would, either.

I am honestly not sure that at 5 million $ exit and entry fees and more costs for travel, I would really want to do that.

[UNT90]

I am honestly not sure that at 5 million $ exit and entry fees and more costs for travel, I would really want to do that.

5 million and travel expenses would be a drop in the bucket compared to what we would stand to gain in alumni involvement and contributions.

Why do we ALWAYS think this way?

[JesseMartin]

With the new AAC being on shaky ground (hell, its very existence and name is due to having been on shaky ground for a while now), I would think that many schools with level-headed admin and ADs (which we have, to an extreme) would be reticent to jump on board that leaky ship. Better to grow a bit with CUSA and then eventually hope for something with the MWC or *gasp* Big 12.

I doubt the SMiss fans, or many others at this juncture, would be clamoring for a move to the AAC if offered (which is unlikely now but in the next year or two, who knows). Part of this is because I think everyone following what has been going on would be skeptical of not only the conference's overall footing, but also the likelihood that the teams they thought they would be playing will stick around. Again, this may change in a couple of years after things settle a bit and we see how sturdy the new conference alignments are, but for the time being I doubt many would want to waste an opportunity to move up in leagues just to see it fall apart and end up without a conference "home".

My gut feeling is that most o the remaining mid-majors want to solidify and grow not only their own programs, but also their conferences. The MAC has shown considerable improvement and I can see the rest doing so as well. Parity is on the rise and though it's still rare for any of us to be very competitive with the Bama/Michigan/OU/etc elites, continuing to develop could eventually lead to making OOC games a real fight every time.

Another big plus is that there is likely to be little or no expansion among the power conferences in the near future, so if any moves take place they will most likely be between mid-majors and with few exceptions (us to the MWC, as I and others have mentioned) most of those sorts of moves wouldn't even make sense.

So really, aside from the AAC variable (will it last, who else might join, etc), there isn't likely to be a whole lot of movement any time soon.

Of course, no one seems to be discussing the "elephant in the room" that I've pondered...could the B1G, SEC, etc become "umbrella conferences" with each division becoming a conference of its own? It may sound unlikely, but so did many of the developments in conferences, schedules, championships, playoffs, etc. Am I the only one who has wondered whether there have been quiet discussions about something like that?

[outoftown]

5 million and travel expenses would be a drop in the bucket compared to what we would stand to gain in alumni involvement and contributions.

Why do we ALWAYS think this way?

No it is not a drop in the bucket. There is nothing guaranteeing that loads of almni would return because we play memphis instead of ECU. I personally believe that is a pipe dream. To me, what will make them come is winning and (local) rivals, no matter what conference.

Also unless we get this by donations if we are making about 1 to 1.5 million per year more in revenue (I don't know if that number is accurate but from what I see from TV contract etc it seems ballparkwise ok to me), then it takes us half a decade or more just to break even, while we are competing cash strapped against (slightly) better competition. And that is in the best case scenario, where the conference will stay stable; recent history tells us that this is not exceedingly probable.

Edited April 22, 2013 by outoftown

[Arkstfan]

Yeah the USM AD and President are going to pull out charts and graphs showing why the AAC doesn't make sense, and announce to the fan base they've turned down the chance to re-unite with their most played rival (Memphis), the chance to play a team located less than 2 hours away in New Orleans and their fifth most played rival ECU. Sure they've played La. Tech 44 times, slightly more times than they've played ECU (38 times) but they've played Tech 2 times in the past two decades.

Funny thing is Tech fans talk about that great old rivalry with USM but ULL has played USM 50 times with 8 in the last 20 years.

Nope they are going to accept. The money doesn't matter, the chance to play schools that are more of their "class" and "stature" will throw economic analysis out the windown because the fans will revolt otherwise.

[PlummMeanGreen]

The new CUSA has and should continue to accentuate its positives no matter how recent or not so recent, ie, the very things that constitutes a league's historical legacy such as:

(1) UTEP.....won an NCAA national championship in basketball plus a great Tinsel Town-produced movie about that feat, too.

(2) UNC-Charlotte.....once was a March Madness NCAA Final 4 participant; they will be a force in the new CUSA

(3) Old Dominion.....an NCAA name basketball school. Most of us here in the Southwest know about ODU because of their fine basketball past, too.

(4) La Tech.....in the Top 25 just last Fall in football; has a great legacy with its womens basketball program as well.

(5) Marshall.....a former MAC school that is still finding its CUSA legs and will be a leader in the new CUSA.. Some of the NFL's finest talent played their college football for the Herd.

(6) Rice University.....a storied history in the old Southwest Conference, a top of the heap academic school no matter what conference they'd be in plus a strategic

and very important city to be in the new CUSA...Houston, Texas, America!

Rice Stadium has hosted one Super Bowl, the Houston Oilers for 2 years and was once home of the annual Bluebonnet Bowl game before it moved to the Astrodome.

(7) Southern Miss.....without a doubt be one of CUSA's flagship programs.

(8) North Texas.....won 4 NCAA Division One national championships in golf--yes, a few decades ago, but (still) how many FBS level schools today can

say they have won any NCAA national championship? Many CUSA member schools posters have said on other boards...... "watch out for UNT once they start winning again

and because of their huge DFW constituency start drawing superb crowds in their newly opened stadium."

(9) All the newbie SBC schools now in CUSA bring tremendous upside with their locations and athletic programs albeit they've not been members of the NCAA's highest division all that long. When North Texas' Abner Haynes was taking his Mean Green team to the 1959 Sun Bowl many of the SBC (now CUSA) schools were members of other NCAA classifications.

GMG!

.

Edited April 22, 2013 by PlummMeanGreen

[UNTLifer]

5 million and travel expenses would be a drop in the bucket compared to what we would stand to gain in alumni involvement and contributions.

Why do we ALWAYS think this way?

You were a fan of joining the WAC, weren't you?

[Eagle1855]

5 million and travel expenses would be a drop in the bucket compared to what we would stand to gain in alumni involvement and contributions.

Why do we ALWAYS think this way?

Because we're never invited, so we're forced to rationalize why our present situation is "better anyhow,"

[PlummMeanGreen]

Not sure if the Go5 conference social climbing aspects will ever cease, but doesn't it still really boil down to what the individual school does.......Casepoint: Boise State?

When the BSU Broncos beat OU in that exciting Fiesta Bowl classic anyone recall fans saying: "Boyhowdy, that WAC is one powerful juggernaut of a conference or how much that national win did for that league? (I stand to be corrected, but last I recall the WAC will soon be disbanding).

In 2002 North Texas beat not the #2, not the #3 or the #4 CUSA team at the NO's Bowl when 15-16,000 of you most impressively traveled to the Big Easy for a Tuesday night game, but rather Coach DD's Mean Green team beat CUSA's Co-Champion, ie, the U of Cincinnati Bearcats.

Moral of all that above sentence? Did that Mean Green bowl win do much for the Sun Belt Conference's reputation in only the league's 2'nd year of football operation? No, I don't think so because the national sports media seemed unimpressed.

Addendum: The new CUSA still has enough of its original members as to create a scenario as to if any present Sun Belt school (and I do mean any) were invited they'd ask "how soon can we join up?" . Yes, most would do the same for the upstart AAC, but for North Texas we are still in a conference divisional set-up that truly benefits our athletic program and will also benefit us at Apogee's Stadium's turnstile numbers because of our new CUSA West Division rivals.. With the new AAC, it will still be "business as usual" as (for the most part) they keep playing the same schools. Wonder if that is going to change some of their "low draw" school's attendance numbers?

GMG!

Edited April 23, 2013 by PlummMeanGreen

[GL2Greatness]

When seven thousand or so fans are showing up for most of your home football games, which is the case with SMU, whatever conference you are in seems basically irrelevant. Highland Park High School draws as many fans when they play at Ford as SMU does for many of its games and it is unlikely that most of the AAC teams that come to Dallas will improve those rather bleak attendance figures.

Of course, our attendance figures are not that great for the size of our school and alumni base, but winning can change that. We just have to win games regardless of conference affiliation.

um news flash here.....sitting around blowing smoke up your ass about SMU and what SMU does and does not do or has done and will get done or not done has not worked for the last 5 decades and it won't work for the next 5 decades either

you can accuse SMU of making up attendance all you wish, but it is clear as day and a proven fact that north Texas does the same exact thing and it was proven the last game of the first season in Apogee and it was proven many times before that in fouts and it has happened in Apogee since that last game of 2011 as well

no one that is of any consequence (and really no one outside this message board) buys your crap about SMU and fewer and fewer even on this message board buy your sleeping giant and they will come of we win crap as well......north Texas could not even fill the stands in the first game at a new stadium against UH (a Texas team that evARyone was wanting to play and be ina conference with because then "the fans would show up").....so pumping green sunshine up your butt while trying to bag on SMU just makes you look silly because bagging on SMU and talking about sleeping giants has not paid off in 5 decades and it will not pay off in the future either....SMU was picked for CUSA back when that mattered and SMU was picked for the BE/AAC and teams walked away (ran away) from the CUSunbelt as fast as they could and even after SMU was a member of the BE/AAC and even after it was clear the BE/AAC was having issues

so here is a clue try a new tactic for a change because trying the same old failed one seems to be failing in a major way and try mixing in a winning season and a bowl game every so often as well before you get all sleeping giant and "upside" on anyone especially when talking about a team that is always one step ahead even when they are in the dumps and a dozen steps behind everyone else they wish to be compared to

I don't think USM would leave. There's no benefit besides schools they were with before. USM has a chance to be with schools with higher upside instead of schools like Tulsa and UH that have hit their ceiling.

how on earth have Tulsa and UH "hit their upside" especially UH.....they have stronger fan support and always have ina city that has less NCAA competition for fan support, they have a much stronger history (much much stronger) and they have a much stronger recent past as well.....they have already been declared a prefered team for the AAC by the media partners and one of the teams that brought dollars instead of taking them for nothing.....they have a larger athletics budget that will only grow larger with their new stadium fee, they have much better spare sports and a much better spare sport history, they had a better stadium until the last 2 years and they are building a better and larger stadium that they were able to raise mmany more private dollars for and are still working on naming rights as well......so when it came time to put up actual dollars they were miles ahead.....also 99.99% of UH fans are behind the move to the AAC and the .01 that are not are irrelevant as are the stupid thoughts about a team that has done more for decades having a lesser upside than a team that has pretty much never done much of anything....especially when that "upside" is based on being a new conference that is pretty much the same as the old conference

Tulsa has had 2 losing seasons out of the last 10 with 3 different head coaches VS having 2 winning seasons in the last 10 with 3 different head coaches and they also have a larger athletics budget....and even in 2001 and 2002 when Tulsa won a single game each season they still averaged 19,508 and 18,985 which is higher than the all time single greatest north Texas attendance evAR (with the faked head count for at least the last game) of 18,864 and in 2001 Fresno State was the biggest name they had at home and in 2002 they had OU at home, but isn't getting the other teams fans to fill the stadium a GMG mantra and part of the "get in a regional conference" chant....you know let everyone else carry the freight (but call out other teams that are actually able to make that happen in reality VS talking about it)

so again with two terrible single win seasons in a row in 2001 and 2002 Tulsa still drew more fans at home than the best all time evAR season for attendance with north Texas even with the faked last game attendance count

so really the predictions of the demise of Tulsa and UH or of the limits of their upside being reached are laughable in light of the fact that they still draw as well or better even when having horrible seasons and they are still able to attract teams like OU to play there and their fans show up to see "names" like Fresno State while other fans just talk about everyone would show up if we could ever get those teams at home.....or they will show up if we do

[UNT90]

You were a fan of joining the WAC, weren't you?

Nope.

[UNT90]

Because we're never invited, so we're forced to rationalize why our present situation is "better anyhow,"

Lots of truth in this post.

[Greendylan]

I could be wrong, but I think the original writer's point was more about how the AAC isn't going to end up being THAT much better when all is said and done. Sure, USM would probably bolt if offered, as would we. But, there's not enough separation between the two conferences for affiliation alone to really make a difference. In either conference, the teams that regularly win will do just fine, build (or maintain) fan bases, make money, and get exposure. The teams in either conference that don't regularly win will wallow in college football irrelevance.

[UNT90]

We are seeing the hierarchy of college football redefined. It means that now you have the big 5, then a step down you have MWC/AAC, a step down from there you have CUSA, a sligtht step down you have the MAC/Belt, with the lowest rung being the WAC.

It used to be big 6, a step down to MWC/CUSA, then a step down to WAC/Belt/MAC.

So, in essence, we are no closer to the top of college football, but have taken 2 steps up from the bottom rung (1 1/2 steps, really).

Progress?

[meangreener]

I think MWC/CUSA/AAC are all equal. This whole "anyone would leave" stuff is nonsense. Tulsa left because they wanted to be with their old buddies.

I think the MWC/CUSA/AAC are top, then SBC/MAC on the bottom. MAC, like the Belt, had a great year. Sustainable?

[UNT90]

I think MWC/CUSA/AAC are all equal. This whole "anyone would leave" stuff is nonsense. Tulsa left because they wanted to be with their old buddies.

I think the MWC/CUSA/AAC are top, then SBC/MAC on the bottom. MAC, like the Belt, had a great year. Sustainable?

ANY team in CUSA would leave for the AAC or the MWC.

[Harry]

ANY team in CUSA would leave for the AAC or the MWC.

AAC probably because it offers Houston and SMU but not MWC. No interest in heading out west against teams like Wyoming and no Texas teams.