2015 C-USA Divisions Discussion

[untjim1995]

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

You'd have to see SMU leave there first for that to even possibly happen. We sit directly in their TV footprint, which does matter for that far-flung league. I'd love it, too, but its not a possibility at all. Now, if you want to talk MWC, there's your road to pave...if TCU could do it out there, so could we. Seriously...

[MeanGreenTexan]

You'd have to see SMU leave there first for that to even possibly happen. We sit directly in their TV footprint, which does matter for that far-flung league. I'd love it, too, but its not a possibility at all. Now, if you want to talk MWC, there's your road to pave...if TCU could do it out there, so could we. Seriously...

Get ready for a bevvy of posts recalling our years in the Big West and how they were so horrible, asking if you want to go down that road again... since the Big West conference and the MWC are so similar.

[oldguystudent]

since the Big West conference and the MWC are so similar.

Seven current MWC members are former Big West members.

[MeanGreenTexan]

Seven current MWC members are former Big West members.

Right, and with the exception of San Jose State, all have improved their commitment to athletics and are competitive like UNT. The current MWC is nothing like the Big West of the late 90's - early 00's. The MWC has a great reputation. C-USA's reputation is going through an overhaul. Not saying it can't come out rosey, and I'm definitely not saying we're not better off here than before in the SBC.

[Arkstfan]

Most schools in the so-called G5 have changed conferences almost as often as they've changed football coaches. These leagues by their very nature are never stable because the marketplace is always evolving.

Since WWII, Colorado State has been in three conferences and indy once, New Mexico four conferences, Wyoming 3, UNLV four just since going I-A in 1978, SDSU is on their 6th status not counting the Big East.

In the AAC. UCF on status #4 since 1996, Cincy on #7 since WWII not counting BE and AAC as different. Houston on #7, Louisiville is moving to #8 not counting BE/AAC as different, Memphis #5, Rutgers headed to #6, USF #3 since 2001 not counting AAC/BE as different, SMU #4, Temple #8 treating AAC/BE as the same.

Current alignments are based on the rise of the carriage fee as an economic model for TV. When it changes (it will change, it always changes) the current leagues won't be the best alignments to deal with the change and the conferences will change again. They always do.

[untjim1995]

Right, and with the exception of San Jose State, all have improved their commitment to athletics and are competitive like UNT. The current MWC is nothing like the Big West of the late 90's - early 00's. The MWC has a great reputation. C-USA's reputation is going through an overhaul. Not saying it can't come out rosey, and I'm definitely not saying we're not better off here than before in the SBC.

This.

Boise State, Fresno State, Air Force, San Diego State, Nevada, and Hawaii have all been well-known commodities in college football for a long time now. Even Colorado State used to be a staple in the Top25 every year.

New Mexico, UNLV, Utah State, and now, SDSU, are solid college hoops programs, too.

There is no one in CUSA right now, other than the old USM teams, that can compare with the teams listed above in college football. Western Kentucky might be able to compete with them, but that's about it.

CUSA is fine, for now. Its the SBC 2.0 with CUSA leftovers that couldn't move to the AAC. But I don't see it ever being a better league than the MWC or AAC, respect wise. And with SMU in the AAC, we aren't ever going there until they leave, so the other option above us that has some appeal, at least to me, is the MWC. TCU showed us the blueprint to compete with those teams out west. Utah and BYU left, but they got replaced by Boise State and Fresno State, so its still about the same level of competition, in my opinion. I just think we could easily copy TCU if we were in a similar situation and took the same attitude that TCU did in competing with those MWC teams.

[Harry]

Right, and with the exception of San Jose State, all have improved their commitment to athletics and are competitive like UNT. The current MWC is nothing like the Big West of the late 90's - early 00's. The MWC has a great reputation. C-USA's reputation is going through an overhaul. Not saying it can't come out rosey, and I'm definitely not saying we're not better off here than before in the SBC.

I would prefer the geographical aspect of C-USA over the Mountain West... look at this season we have drivable games Rice (Houston) and UTSA (San Antonio). Even UTEP (El Paso) is an easy SW flight to get to. La. Tech (Ruston) is not a bad drive either. I get pumped about playing Rice, La. Tech and yes even UTSA. I like the Texas aspect of C-USA and until it loses that flavor I will always prefer it over Nevada, Utah State, UNLV etc...

C-USA is going through a transition but you have to think that programs like Southern Miss, La. Tech, UTEP will bounce back. Rice is on a roll and hell UTSA beat our ass last season so they will be a force to be reckoned with. Let's give this a couple of years and I bet you the rivalries will start to develop and take form. As someone else said just win and good things will happen.

[Ben Gooding]

Best case scenario for North Texas...get to the AAC ASAP OR hope that the ODU's, Charlottes, and UTEP'S make a name for themselves very quickly. Not trying to make North Texas sound high and mighty, but I have a certain amount of bias. I have a feeling that Rice is trying to jump ship, Marshal too.

[untjim1995]

I would prefer the geographical aspect of C-USA over the Mountain West... look at this season we have drivable games Rice (Houston) and UTSA (San Antonio). Even UTEP (El Paso) is an easy SW flight to get to. La. Tech (Ruston) is not a bad drive either. I get pumped about playing Rice, La. Tech and yes even UTSA. I like the Texas aspect of C-USA and until it loses that flavor I will always prefer it over Nevada, Utah State, UNLV etc...

C-USA is going through a transition but you have to think that programs like Southern Miss, La. Tech, UTEP will bounce back. Rice is on a roll and hell UTSA beat our ass last season so they will be a force to be reckoned with. Let's give this a couple of years and I bet you the rivalries will start to develop and take form. As someone else said just win and good things will happen.

I agree with all you say here, but I also just think of how big time TCU got by winning in a league full of well-respected football programs. If they could do that, I believe we could, too. Now, the best way to go out there is to go with UTEP and UH or UTSA.

[Ben Gooding]

I would prefer the geographical aspect of C-USA over the Mountain West... look at this season we have drivable games Rice (Houston) and UTSA (San Antonio). Even UTEP (El Paso) is an easy SW flight to get to. La. Tech (Ruston) is not a bad drive either. I get pumped about playing Rice, La. Tech and yes even UTSA. I like the Texas aspect of C-USA and until it loses that flavor I will always prefer it over Nevada, Utah State, UNLV etc...

C-USA is going through a transition but you have to think that programs like Southern Miss, La. Tech, UTEP will bounce back. Rice is on a roll and hell UTSA beat our ass last season so they will be a force to be reckoned with. Let's give this a couple of years and I bet you the rivalries will start to develop and take form. As someone else said just win and good things will happen.

Yeah, winning will cure everything. If we win then the conference affiliation and alignment will be an afterthought. Winning 10 games is a great goal, but consistently just winning more games than we lose will put us on the map. I could accept a string of 7-5 seasons with 1 or 2 10 win seasons sprinkled in there over the next decade would be success. And I for one would happily take that.

[MeanGreenTexan]

I agree with all you say here, but I also just think of how big time TCU got by winning in a league full of well-respected football programs. If they could do that, I believe we could, too. Now, the best way to go out there is to go with UTEP and UH or UTSA.

I also agree with Harry. Having all of these Texas schools is great, although I wish it wasn't set up to be feast/famine scheduling (all 3 TX schools at home 1 yr, then all 3 on the road the next). UNT is in a great spot right now. Could it be better? Maybe.

And who knows? 5 years from now, C-USA could have a team or two in the top 25 and be looked upon as leapfrogging the MWC as the best non-AQ conference.

But, as it stands right now, the college fb world sees the MWC (thanks in most-part to Boise) as the top-dog for the non-AQ conferences. TCU's wayward journey to the Big12 may have been a dumb stroke of luck, but it's one that I wouldn't mind trying to copy. Even if it doesn't wind up with a Big12 invite, it ends up well.

[Arkstfan]

On the matter of the AAC, it is also worth noting that AAC's television deal produced about one-third of the revenue that had been projected when they were first in vacuum mode adding new members.

I've never been able to confirm, but I think the evidence strongly suggests that their television consultant failed to understand the current marketplace with a market first principle. Why would a market driven idea produce one-third of the projected revenue?

Markets are far less relevant, this is a carriage fee economy and to demand big dollars you need schools that have fans who will drop direct for Dish if direct doesn't carry their team, or will drop Time-Warner for Verizon Fios, or will just come to the conclusion they can cut the cord since they can't get the product they want.

That doesn't mean well supported market teams don't have value, the AAC's deal is new and produces more than any other G5 league but their consultant mis-read the market value.

Guessing the future is mostly futile who saw the first iPod and said this will change how we make calls, interact with others, access the web, read and buy books, watch video, and interact with others? Yet that's exactly what happened.

10 years from now we may see G5 leagues following the Facebook/Google model of give us your personal info and we will give you personalized ads based on that information via apps on TV and other devices.

We might have a freemium model where you get one conference game a week from but have to subscribe for others and get other add-on data like real-time stats, interactive control of replays where you select angles.

We might have an in-app purchase system where you can buy tickets, merchandise, etc live within the app.

It could be a subscriber model.

It might be a carriage model where internet providers pay a fee for free distribution in certain markets, rather than cable sat providers.

The best thing anyone can do is develop their market. Not their TV market but rather their market of people interested in viewing and attending games because odds favor those being key metrics.

[LongJim]

I would prefer the geographical aspect of C-USA over the Mountain West... look at this season we have drivable games Rice (Houston) and UTSA (San Antonio). Even UTEP (El Paso) is an easy SW flight to get to. La. Tech (Ruston) is not a bad drive either. I get pumped about playing Rice, La. Tech and yes even UTSA. I like the Texas aspect of C-USA and until it loses that flavor I will always prefer it over Nevada, Utah State, UNLV etc...

C-USA is going through a transition but you have to think that programs like Southern Miss, La. Tech, UTEP will bounce back. Rice is on a roll and hell UTSA beat our ass last season so they will be a force to be reckoned with. Let's give this a couple of years and I bet you the rivalries will start to develop and take form. As someone else said just win and good things will happen.

Completely agree.

Look, you want people to be able to drive to your games. You want opposing teams fans at your games. You want their bands at your games. You want the families of the players/bands at your games. You want your players families at your games--away and home. You want the paper to be able to occasionally get a near-the-front story on your team's results because the game was in the same time zone.

You have to grow your program, develop rivalries, and develop the market and fan base, and therefore, the season ticket/donation base. The current UNT position is much more favorable for that now.

For the time being, CUSA is perfect for UNT because it (IMO) can deliver a lot of those objectives.

I still feel like the MWC is a terrible fit for UNT.

[Arkstfan]

Completely agree.

Look, you want people to be able to drive to your games. You want opposing teams fans at your games. You want their bands at your games. You want the families of the players/bands at your games. You want your players families at your games--away and home. You want the paper to be able to occasionally get a near-the-front story on your team's results because the game was in the same time zone.

You have to grow your program, develop rivalries, and develop the market and fan base, and therefore, the season ticket/donation base. The current UNT position is much more favorable for that now.

For the time being, CUSA is perfect for UNT because it (IMO) can deliver a lot of those objectives.

I still feel like the MWC is a terrible fit for UNT.

The better question is what could MWC offer that CUSA doesn't?

Most MWC bowls aren't readily accessible to UNT fans, no current MWC team is easily reachable for fans wanting to follow the team.

We already know that if you want NCAA basketball respect, you have to pile up decent non-conference wins as MTSU did the season before last in the Sun Belt, that a uniform patch won't give you a free pass (C-USA hoops this year). We've not seen the CFP selection for the access bowl in action but we know from the BCS period that the system is likely to favor teams that win more games than the teams they are up against and SOS won't save an 11-2 AAC from being passed by 13-0 MAC. MWC offers about a million more in TV money but honestly that's nothing when you haul teams all over the known universe to compete in MWC.

In general, the G5 schools aren't going to fill anyone's stadium on the star power of their name, it comes down to regional relevance and whether the home team is a product people want to see.

MWC's brand just doesn't mean that much unless you are NMSU or Idaho stuck in MWC country and not in MWC.

[NM Green]

I can't imagine CUSA or MWC poaching each other's programs. They seem more interested in protecting each other versus improving at each other's expense. I don't think we should spend too much energy trying to get into AAC. The DFW market is covered with SMU. Rather our attention should focus on building a top 25 program that becomes interesting to the ACC. We have better football, SMU has better hoops. Football drives the bus and we have market unlike Boise ever had the luxury of having as a power. Heck if we position ourselves right how smart would it be for the ACC to invite a Houston and UNT to penetrate the Texas market. At a minimum if we continue building a solid football program we will be on radars when changes happen to AAC, ACC and Big 12.

GMG

[Ben Gooding]

GMG!!

[GreenFlag]

The MAC is the only G5 that has it pretty much correct for a long time now. The MWC is now the MAC of the west. The AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt need to figure some things out. It's just crazy to have so much geographical crossover between the three. Count me in the group that has absolutely no problem with schools like Texas State. I wish we would just break away with UTEP, UTSA, Texas State, Rice, La. Tech, ULL, and Ark. St. Maybe someday SMU, Houston, Tulane, and Tulsa come back into the fold when they are done chasing their tails.

[Harry]

The MAC is the only G5 that has it pretty much correct for a long time now. The MWC is now the MAC of the west. The AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt need to figure some things out. It's just crazy to have so much geographical crossover between the three. Count me in the group that has absolutely no problem with schools like Texas State. I wish we would just break away with UTEP, UTSA, Texas State, Rice, La. Tech, ULL, and Ark. St. Maybe someday SMU, Houston, Tulane, and Tulsa come back into the fold when they are done chasing their tails.

As Arkstfan correctly pointed out the rub will be the new TV contract for C-USA which I believe happens after the 2015 season. Until we know if the money stays the same, increases or decreases it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to consider new adds. I am hopeful that the TV money keeps going up but we won't know that for some time.

In the meantime we need our teams to win. Compelling stories will only help this conference build momentum.

[Ben Gooding]

I think if we latch ourselves to Rice we will be alright. Because of their fine academics and annual better than average baseball team they will be the next to jump ship.

[Mean Green 93-98]

I think if we latch ourselves to Rice we will be alright. Because of their fine academics and annual better than average baseball team they will be the next to jump ship.

How do we latch ourselves to Rice if they will be the next to jump ship? If they jump ship to a conference where we do not receive an invite, we will be unlatched immediately. We need to be looking for opportunities to improve our conference affiliation, and next to a P5 conference, the AAC would be ideal for us. The MWC wouldn't be as ideal, but it would certainly be a step up from the present C-USA.

In the meantime, let's win some games and help build the conference we're in.

[Ben Gooding]

Yes, I'm aware we can't just "latch" ourselves to Rice.

[Side Show Joe]

I don't think C-USA needs any more teams. I like the Texas teams in the west. We don't need Texas State. I like having Southern Miss in the west. They have historically been a strong program, and I believe they will turn it around in the near future. I'm fine with UAB moving to the west.

I really like the rivalries UNT, Rice, UTEP, and UTSA can build together. North Texas, Rice, and UTSA had a great race for the western title last season. We need to do more to generate regional media interest in these games. I wish the idea for a traveling Texas throphy would have been adopted last season. It would have provided a running storyline for the sports media in DFW, Houston, and San Antonio. I hope something gets put in place for the upcoming season.

[greenit]

No offense, but I hope USM continues to suck as hard as they have for the last couple of years. They were so high and mighty when we were joining CUSA, based primarily on our recent FBall history. Somehow, we were so unworthy of joining a conference with the likes of USM that we should have just gone back from whence we came. I hope we beat them just like last season for the next 10. Then, I might be ready for them to not completely suck.

UAB I also want to beat 10 times in a row, but we don't necessarily have to bet them as bad as USM, although I am ok with it if it occurs.

[NM Green]

I will never forget making our way to our section at the Rock last year and USM fans smack talking us,telling us we were going to be incredibly disappointed for traveling all that way to lose. My immediate thought was dang these fans are bold talking some smack with a like 20 game losing streak at the time.

After seeing them beat us in New Orleans to watching us ruin their homecoming in person, it was definitely one of my Mean Green highlights of the season. The Sunday Funday party on Bourbon the next day was just gravy.

GMG

[Arkstfan]

I don't think C-USA needs any more teams. I like the Texas teams in the west. We don't need Texas State. I like having Southern Miss in the west. They have historically been a strong program, and I believe they will turn it around in the near future. I'm fine with UAB moving to the west.

I really like the rivalries UNT, Rice, UTEP, and UTSA can build together. North Texas, Rice, and UTSA had a great race for the western title last season. We need to do more to generate regional media interest in these games. I wish the idea for a traveling Texas throphy would have been adopted last season. It would have provided a running storyline for the sports media in DFW, Houston, and San Antonio. I hope something gets put in place for the upcoming season.

The mistake the G5 was in how the $60 million is allocated. They intentionally or uninentionally created an artificial constraint on conference size.

Assuming the Sun Belt eventually adds a 12th football member, there is a pot $60 million tied to 62 schools and CUSA at 14 gets the smaller per team share.

The G5 leagues lack the leverage to extract significant revenues from the networks. MWC by measuring markets is a terrible pick for the networks but they offer all but one potential Pacific time zone late start (Idaho) and the Sun Belt will curfew them from offering a 7pm Pacific start. MWC offers all but two Mountain start times (UTEP/NMSU) and it is unlikely SBC or CUSA will be friendly toward an 8pm Mountain start.

MWC offers something novel and some good brands, Boise produces very good TV ratings.

MAC offers the only rust belt access and there are TV viewers there. NIU with their success is in the club with Boise, Houston, UCF, USF, and to a lesser degree Cincy producing good TV viewership, but Toledo and BGSU produce audiences of 3/4ths a million.

Across the Sun Belt, CUSA, AAC footprint, if a network doesn't offer one of the leagues they have a reasonable substitute. Can't get Houston, OK use Rice, can't get SMU OK use UNT. Can't get USM and UAB, use USA and Troy. Can't get UCF/USF, use FIU/FAU, can't get ECU? Use Charlotte or App.

The flaw of AAC, CUSA, SBC footprints is lack of critical mass to create a situation where there is no substitute for a product offered. An 18 team CUSA where football members play 8 games within division and don't care much if they play the other division has greater television leverage but the CFP money cap creates a barrier to entry for a league to go beyond 12. If championship deregulation passes you can even go to 20 assigning everyone 3 permanent rivals and let the AD's work out their own league schedules based on their needs and just pit the top 2 rated teams for the title.

The G5 would better served being the G4 to improve leverage with television but without solid TV numbers showing it offsets the CFP growth penalty who takes that risk, and after the fiasco of AAC projecting TV money who does it based on a market analysis?