2015 C-USA Divisions Discussion

Harry · May 1, 2014

2014 Conference USA Football Divisions

East Division (7)

Florida Atlantic

FIU

Marshall

Middle Tennessee

Old Dominion

UAB

Western Kentucky

West Division (6)

Louisiana Tech

North Texas

Rice

Southern Miss

UTEP

UTSA

In 2015 Charlotte joins the East making it an 8-6 split. I would assume you would then move UAB to the West putting it at 7-7 and even at 14.

Having recently driven thru Alabama and Mississippi, I tend to think they would be a better geographic fit in the East. Why not consider adding ULL (potentially a top 25 team this season) and an improving Texas State with good facilities to the West? That would give us two more drivable games and give us a Texas majority and strengthen Louisiana. That would get C-USA to 16 and allow just one crossover game to get to 8 C-USA games in a season.

This season we have Southern Miss, and both FIU and FAU - in my scenario we would only have one cross over and add Lafayette and San Marcos to the schedule -- both easily drivable games.

I realize La. Tech wouldn't like it and probably neither UTSA. Or would they? Both would benefit from an attendance/rivalry standpoint if we added ULL and Texas State. This season we play 8 C-USA games with 2 crossovers. Also it would help remove the complaining about who gets the lucky cross division straws every year.

I know we have some La. Tech and UTSA fans on here and I would be interested in their thoughts as well.

Another option would be Arkansas State. They aren't as close but certainly would bring a good football program into the mix. They don't seem happy in the Belt and would bring a loyal group of fans. Having the #2 program in Arkansas isn't a bad thing.

For those that say no more Belt adds, I sense that perception is already a part of the new C-USA. Why not add the best programs and geographical teams now as opposed to later? I have no ill will towards the Belt, but the AAC formation forces our hand to a certain extent. If we leave the Belt alone, it allows them to remain closer to us in perception. The other thing adding a couple of Belt teams does is helps us to protect C-USA long term against future AAC poaching.

GTWT · May 1, 2014

No more Sun Belt. We left the Belt behind for a reason. Let's not turn cUSA into the new reincarnated SBC. It was a mistake to include FAU, FIU, MTSU, & WKY, let's not compound that mistake.

Texas State I can take. I'm not happy about adding one more sub-par school (in terms of perception) but at least they're a Texas school & they are a growing university.

untjim1995 · May 1, 2014

I would defintiely add ULL, without thinking about it--and Arkansas State, too. But I wouldn't add Texas State, since they dont provide any new footprint for the conference, since UTSA is already there. ULL and Arkansas State would be nice adds to the league, in my opinion. I have no interest in playing anyone in the east, at all, except for MUTS or Marshall. If you have 16 teams in league, you get 7 games in your division, all of which are driveable, then add in two games in the other division and 3 OOC games. It would be a pretty good deal for us to have games against Arky State, Southern Miss, La Tech, ULL, Rice, UTSA, and UTEP every year, with a sprinkling of just two east teams, say MUTS and F_U, each year. Costs go down, attendance goes up, and you can build rivalries easier.

Edited May 1, 2014 by untjim1995

MeanGreenTexan · May 1, 2014

No more Sun Belt. We left the Belt behind for a reason. Let's not turn cUSA into the new reincarnated SBC. It was a mistake to include FAU, FIU, MTSU, & WKY, let's not compound that mistake.

Texas State I can take. I'm not happy about adding one more sub-par school (in terms of perception) but at least they're a Texas school & they are a growing university.

It was definitely not a mistake to include MT, and I don't think WKY is a bad addition either.

GTWT · May 1, 2014

Do you really want our rivalries to be with Sun Belt teams? I would rather have Rice, Southern Miss, or even UTSA as rivals. Rivals are, in one sense, equals. Ark State & ULL are not our equals.

Damn. That sounded arrogant.

GTWT · May 1, 2014

It was definitely not a mistake to include MT, and I don't think WKY is a bad addition either.

I understand MT has one of the nation's top programs in long-haul trucking. Fine university.

forevereagle · May 1, 2014

I would defintiely add ULL, without thinking about it--and Arkansas State, too. But I wouldn't add Texas State, since they dont provide any new footprint for the conference, since UTSA is already there. ULL and Arkansas State would be nice adds to the league, in my opinion. I have no interest in playing anyone in the east, at all, except for MUTS or Marshall. If you have 16 teams in league, you get 7 games in your division, all of which are driveable, then add in two games in the other division and 3 OOC games. It would be a pretty good deal for us to have games against Arky State, Southern Miss, La Tech, ULL, Rice, UTSA, and UTEP every year, with a sprinkling of just two east teams, say MUTS and F_U, each year. Costs go down, attendance goes up, and you can build rivalries easier.

If you are going to argue the need to add footprint, then you have to throw out ULL as they don't add footprint either. I hate the idea of needing to add footprint. I understand the concept that it would theoretically add potential TV money, but if we are honest with ourselves, it will not do much to make us more money. Our TV contract isn't going to be significantly improved by adding ASU to get out of the current footprint. This conference should be looking to reduce travel expense for teams to reduce costs and fans to increase attendance. This is a better revenue fix than to attempt a TV play. Given that, I think Harry is spot on with his picks, if the conference is to expand. Personally, I don't think it is needed at this point. No reason to split the pot further.

As far as the way that the conference has divided the teams, if you think that UAB is going to move to the West division, why wouldn't you go ahead and make the move now? They can go ahead and begin developing any rivalries with the new divisional opponents. Seems to be an odd decision to me.

TIgreen01 · May 1, 2014

ULL should have been added long before several of the other Belt teams that we brought along with us. They are top 5 nationally in baseball and somehow have managed to hold on to a great coach in football---all while still keeping that unbelievable tailgating attendance going and bringing 50k to the New Orleans bowl. In my opinion, they get shafted more than any other school outside of UAB by in-state politics.

untjim1995 · May 1, 2014

If you are going to argue the need to add footprint, then you have to throw out ULL as they don't add footprint either. I hate the idea of needing to add footprint. I understand the concept that it would theoretically add potential TV money, but if we are honest with ourselves, it will not do much to make us more money. Our TV contract isn't going to be significantly improved by adding ASU to get out of the current footprint. This conference should be looking to reduce travel expense for teams to reduce costs and fans to increase attendance. This is a better revenue fix than to attempt a TV play. Given that, I think Harry is spot on with his picks, if the conference is to expand. Personally, I don't think it is needed at this point. No reason to split the pot further.

As far as the way that the conference has divided the teams, if you think that UAB is going to move to the West division, why wouldn't you go ahead and make the move now? They can go ahead and begin developing any rivalries with the new divisional opponents. Seems to be an odd decision to me.

With Tulane leaving, I still think Southern Louisiana is worth having a presence. When I say footprint, in terms of our league's affiliation, I think about it in terms of recruiting and travel for the schools and fans. I agree with you completely on the TV part, though. ULL would be a great conference mate again.

Edited May 1, 2014 by untjim1995

forevereagle · May 1, 2014

With Tulane leaving, I still think Southern Louisiana is worth having a presence. When I say footprint, in terms of our league's affiliation, I think about it in terms of recruiting and travel for the schools and fans. I agree with you completely on the TV part, though. ULL would be a great conference mate again.

I agree, if we have to add, ULL is a great add. I just don't see ASU as being as good. They have had some success, but unless we are looking to make the conference more regionally palatable for MT, they don't bring what we need. TSU is a better fit for that.

MeanGreen13 · May 1, 2014

ULL and Arky State would be the best additions. ASU has shown the ability to recruit and they have decent facilities. ULL and their bowl game attendance speak for itself. I would not want Texas state in there because they are another team that is new to the fbs level. ULL is something that needs to happen. arky state would just be a nice bonus.

10Eagle10 · May 1, 2014

C-USA is currently sitting on 2 $35 million contracts with CBS sports and Fox. Combined they pay $14 million annually which breaks down to $1 million/school in TV revenue. By going back up to 16, the TV contracts don't have to increase the payout so I say wait until contract renegotiation comes back around. I think the current contracts run through 2016, two years from now. As contract negotiation is going on, Banowsky should discuss with the networks if adding two schools would increase revenue, if not, I say stick at 14. There's no reason to get a smaller piece of pie

The bad thing about mega-conferences is that you would only see Marshall, MUTS and Southern Miss in Denton once every 14 years under that scenario. I'm perfectly fine with not having to go to some of the East schools very often, but 14 years between visiting destinations would be a long time and would stink for growing our brand in the east.

It surprises me that other conferences haven't looked at UL, they sit in one of the most fertile per capita NFL states and should probably actually be number two in that state if they were ever funded properly by TV revenues, etc. Tulane and La Tech have more past prestige, but the Cajuns have more potential. They also have a larger, more rabid fan base than the other two.

fan19740 · May 1, 2014

I realize La. Tech wouldn't like it and probably neither UTSA. Or would they? Both would benefit from an attendance/rivalry standpoint if we added ULL and Texas State. This season we play 8 C-USA games with 2 crossovers. Also it would help remove the complaining about who gets the lucky cross division straws every year.

Actually, UNT will have three crossover games in 2014....In my humble opinion, C-USA should have been content with 12 teams. Replace Tulane, Tulsa, and East Carolina with WKU, then call it a day. That gives us two 6-team divisions, allowing for 5 division, plus three crossover games per year. The three crossover games allows us to play each team out East twice over a four year period.

Arkstfan · May 1, 2014

Facilities wise AState is currently in the process of $33+ in facility upgrades. New indoor practice facility is under construction. Press box will be renovated from 5000 square feet to 40,000+ with suites, tv production studio and control room, indoor/outdoor club seating. Both expected to be open by the start of the 2015 season (actually indoor may be ready by spring drills), then new offices, weight room, meeting room locker room, sports medicine facility etc.

But CUSA cannot afford to expand unless the new TV deal warrants it or it can make a difference in CFP money. First year the top rated conference will receive almost $6.7 million in performance money. Second $5.3 million, Third about $4 million, Fourth about $2.66 million. Fifth $1.33 million.

League making the access bowl will snag another $6 million.

The big question is the G5 distribution in later years. It will rise about 50% from year 1 to year 12.

If the conference per team pool remains constant (favored by AAC and MWC) the performance pool will rise dramatically as all new money will flow into the performance pool. If that happens 1st will be $21,25 million, second will be $17 million, third $12.75, fourth $8.5, last $4.25

On the TV side, unlikely that TV will make expansion worthwhile.

The CBS deal was signed before losing 7 schools to AAC. ESPN has a large telecast requirement with the AAC deal and is sublicensing content to CBSS (rumor is there is a deep discount involved). If CBS is getting AAC games more cheaply than CUSA games, and AAC is producing better ratings for them, not likely that CBSS is going to increase its CUSA offer.

Fox is the mystery. First they signed CUSA when the 7 where there but also before they obtained rights to distribute Big XII and Pac-12 nationally. Now they hold second tier national rights for Big XII and they have jointly obtained Pac-12 top rights in partnership with ESPN. The mystery comes from the Big 10. If they get Big 10 top tier alone they will suck deeply into the cash reserves. If they partner like they did for P12 it will be costly but not a bidding war with ESPN. But likely outcome is Fox adds Big 10 content.

The situation gets even messier. Fox used CUSA heavily on Thursdays. The NFL is now doing a full Thursday slate with half the games on CBS. Thursday ratings were already down because of the NFL Network limited schedule. Thursday will see ESPN and Fox either moving less attractive games there as filler or go to alternate programing (All-Star Bowling!).

Fox may then choose to move into Tuesday and Wednesday. Ratings have been pretty good in those slots. Fridays aren't that likely, Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany has already said they would strongly consider a Friday package. ESPN is carrying Pac-12, AAC, and MWC on Friday nights already.

Those factors make it highly unlikely TV is going to throw enough money on the table to make 16 workable.

untjim1995 · May 1, 2014

No more Sun Belt. We left the Belt behind for a reason. Let's not turn cUSA into the new reincarnated SBC. It was a mistake to include FAU, FIU, MTSU, & WKY, let's not compound that mistake.

Texas State I can take. I'm not happy about adding one more sub-par school (in terms of perception) but at least they're a Texas school & they are a growing university.

That's just it...the old CUSA is now the AAC. The new CUSA is just the best of the old SBC. Its just how the ladder goes. If you think any of those AAC teams want anything to do with us, your crazy. Some, UH and SMU, never wanted us in a league to begin with. The others that could leave as soon as possible, ECU, Tulane and Tulsa, did. You have to replace those teams with someone. To me, having two teams in south Florida wasn't too smart, but WKU replaced East Carolina, we replaced SMU, UTSA replaced UH, F_U replaced UCF and USF, and MUTS replaced Memphis. To me, the biggest mistake was taking Charlote and ODU, two teams that should be in the SBC, immediately because ECU wanted them--only to then see ECU bolt out as soon as they could, which was clearly going to happen as soon as possible.

the green rokemi · May 2, 2014

No more Sun Belt. We left the Belt behind for a reason. Let's not turn cUSA into the new reincarnated SBC. It was a mistake to include FAU, FIU, MTSU, & WKY, let's not compound that mistake.

Texas State I can take. I'm not happy about adding one more sub-par school (in terms of perception) but at least they're a Texas school & they are a growing university.

Agree completely. WKy I could be okay with and I understand the argument for UL but I prefer teams our fans and students care about or even have heard of.

Ben Gooding · May 2, 2014

ULL would have been the better choice compare to the ones entering the conference. Better tradition, fan base, football team etc. There's really no comparison. I mean ODU? Charlotte? WKU? In my mind ULL trumps all of them, considerably.

oldguystudent · May 2, 2014

ULL would have been the better choice compare to the ones entering the conference. Better tradition, fan base, football team etc. There's really no comparison. I mean ODU? Charlotte? WKU? In my mind ULL trumps all of them, considerably.

I never got to go to a ULL road game, and I've heard they were the absolute best. I'd take them just for that.

Harry · May 2, 2014

Lafayette is an awesome town. Great food and fans.

tylermeangreen · May 2, 2014

Do you really want our rivalries to be with Sun Belt teams? I would rather have Rice, Southern Miss, or even UTSA as rivals. Rivals are, in one sense, equals. Ark State & ULL are not our equals.

Damn. That sounded arrogant.

ULL is definitely our equal - in both programs and fan support, and maybe more-so in the latter!

Ben Gooding · May 2, 2014

I don't care about any of this to be honest. Just win. Win more than you lose every year and things will take care of themselves.

DeepGreen · May 2, 2014

I'll go out on a limb here. UNT should make every effort to join the American Athletic Conference. Seriously.

forevereagle · May 2, 2014

C-USA is currently sitting on 2 $35 million contracts with CBS sports and Fox. Combined they pay $14 million annually which breaks down to $1 million/school in TV revenue. By going back up to 16, the TV contracts don't have to increase the payout so I say wait until contract renegotiation comes back around. I think the current contracts run through 2016, two years from now. As contract negotiation is going on, Banowsky should discuss with the networks if adding two schools would increase revenue, if not, I say stick at 14. There's no reason to get a smaller piece of pie

The bad thing about mega-conferences is that you would only see Marshall, MUTS and Southern Miss in Denton once every 14 years under that scenario. I'm perfectly fine with not having to go to some of the East schools very often, but 14 years between visiting destinations would be a long time and would stink for growing our brand in the east.

It surprises me that other conferences haven't looked at UL, they sit in one of the most fertile per capita NFL states and should probably actually be number two in that state if they were ever funded properly by TV revenues, etc. Tulane and La Tech have more past prestige, but the Cajuns have more potential. They also have a larger, more rabid fan base than the other two.

I agree with you on this. One of the big questions I have for the conference is when are we going to follow what the other conferences of our size are doing and look at a nine game conference schedule? There are some disadvantages for us doing this given that we would have fewer out of conference games and those could be games that are attendance draws, but it seems like fewer of those are going to be home games with most of the P5 conferences going to nine game conference schedules. They are going to be very hesitant to schedule an away game with a non-P5 opponent when their conference dictates that they have to play one P5 every year. It just makes sense to get more good conference match ups and fewer out of conference opportunities and drive up the price for the SEC, ACC, and Big 12 to get those games. Just my opinion, but it would be nice to have more conference games that are entertaining and winnable.

golfingomez · May 2, 2014

why aren't we trying to bring back Houston?

MeanGreenTexan · May 2, 2014

ULL would have been the better choice compare to the ones entering the conference. Better tradition, fan base, football team etc. There's really no comparison. I mean ODU? Charlotte? WKU? In my mind ULL trumps all of them, considerably.

Too bad the Bubas Cup standings never reflected that.