CUSA defectors doing poorly

UNT90 · September 29, 2014

Aren't Idaho joining the Sun Belt Conference? I thought this year they were a Sun Belt team and last year they were in no-mans-land til the Sun Belt contract came into effect.

Idaho is a football only member of the Belt.

forevereagle · September 29, 2014

I honest to God believe that the Mountain West Conference has done best for itself during these perilous conference-shifting years.

Which had a lot to do with geography. There is one P5 conference that is likely to raid them for teams. They took the teams from the WAC they wanted and moved one with little imminent threat of the PAC-12 expanding through them, which is exactly what they will do if they ever get the itch. I can't give the MWC much credit for being stable through the shift since they were not in great demand. I can give them credit for removing they best competition from the mix.

SilverEagle · September 29, 2014

Tulsa will always think of itself as a basketball school first. That's just where their old money is. It's uncanny, and I've discussed it before. I can assure you that none of their old, deep pocket basketball-first alumni are shedding tears about the shape of the football program. Sad, but true. There is a reason Donald W. Reynolds gave millions to the Tulsa basketball program and millions to the Arkansas football program and not the other way around.

When Connecticut, Cincinnati, and Memphis get pulled out of the American Athletic Conference, we need to be standing on the doorstep with UTSA to get into it to pull it up to a good, even, ten team conference.

We should not care what Banowsky does. We should not wait on him. He's done nothing but turn the C-USA into another Sun Belt. There is no way the same bowl contracts with be renewed.

The thing is we - and, by we I mean our administration and athletic directors - need to be out ahead of the game here.

The MWC surprised the WAC in 1999 by having the best programs at that time defect and form the MWC. We have to be planning the same type of "us-first" move.

We cannot - please, please, please - be caught in yet another reactive situation and get stuck back with more former Sun Belts, former DIIs, and upward FCS schools.

We accept that UTSA has more to offer than any of those, accept that they do have a market where they can be viable to the citizenry, and put up a united front to get into the American Athletic once their best schools are peeled away from them.

So, until last year, Tulsa used to beat our ass just about every time we played them in football.......and yet they don't even consider themselves a football school?

Damn! we've been more pathetic than I realized........geezzz.

Edited September 29, 2014 by SilverEagle

untjim1995 · September 29, 2014

Tulsa will always think of itself as a basketball school first. That's just where their old money is. It's uncanny, and I've discussed it before. I can assure you that none of their old, deep pocket basketball-first alumni are shedding tears about the shape of the football program. Sad, but true. There is a reason Donald W. Reynolds gave millions to the Tulsa basketball program and millions to the Arkansas football program and not the other way around.

When Connecticut, Cincinnati, and Memphis get pulled out of the American Athletic Conference, we need to be standing on the doorstep with UTSA to get into it to pull it up to a good, even, ten team conference.

We should not care what Banowsky does. We should not wait on him. He's done nothing but turn the C-USA into another Sun Belt. There is no way the same bowl contracts with be renewed.

The thing is we - and, by we I mean our administration and athletic directors - need to be out ahead of the game here.

The MWC surprised the WAC in 1999 by having the best programs at that time defect and form the MWC. We have to be planning the same type of "us-first" move.

We cannot - please, please, please - be caught in yet another reactive situation and get stuck back with more former Sun Belts, former DIIs, and upward FCS schools.

We accept that UTSA has more to offer than any of those, accept that they do have a market where they can be viable to the citizenry, and put up a united front to get into the American Athletic once their best schools are peeled away from them.

I don't see us in the AAC with SMU there, so it would take them giving up football for that to occur. Most likely, when UConn leaves, they will replace them with them with the best market available for them that has a decent team and support. To me, without any doubt whatseover, that is UTSA. SMU, UH, Tulane, and Tulsa will all be in favor of them, and I imagine that the other southern schools would like them, too, except for ECU. The good news to me, at least on that front, is that you have the easiest replacement for them in Texas State, so not much changes there for CUSA if this all comes down. If Cincy or Memphis leaves, that is when I can see MUTS replacing them. And if they lose one of UCF/USF, then they will replace them with one of the F_Us. It won't be Marshall, Southern Miss, Western Kentucky, or Louisiana Tech--they offer no market for TV. It won't be Rice or UNT since we are duplicates in their markets already covered with SMU and UH there. UTEP, UAB, ODU, and Charlotte are longshots, at best, for many different reasons to ever move up to the AAC if someone left.

The other strong possibility for down the road is that the Big XII implodes, which I do think will happen. Its my belief that when that happens, Baylor, TCU, and Iowa State are gonna be looking at G5 status when that happens. I think WVU and KSU could be, too, but I think they will find a home, somewhere in the P5. When it happens, the Big XII will go the way of the Big East, I mean the AAC. The leftovers will keep the name and start issuing invites to the best of the AAC, MWC, CUSA, and even the MAC. Again, though, its all about reorganizing the deck chairs on the same little boat--some of them may think they should be on the suite level and that others should be steerage, but the sooner that they all realize that the G5 needs to be like the FCS is right now and have everyone pull the same rope, the ship won't sink--hell the voyage could still be very enjoyable. But we gotta get some of these old passengers, who think the Large Luxury SWC Cruise Ship they used to enjoy is coming back to pick them up someday, to realize that they are stuck on the same tugboat that we are all on. Hey SWC royalty, the thing failed because of you--you don't offer enough because you are too small for big time football, no matter how much $$$ you have. Sure, you used to own that liner, but your money is no good anymore. You're the widow of the rich guy who died and left his fortune to his girlfirend, Barbie...you can either come to grips with it or you can keep fighting, but that is gonna drain you of even more resources that you don't have.

Eagle1855 · September 29, 2014

I mean, we talked a lot of trash about C-USA while in the SBC, comparing OOC wins, etc... until we got the call -- then we couldn't get away from the SBC fast enough.

I assume we'd do the same if the AAC ever came calling.

Hating on something because we were left out of it is weak. Far as I know, we still control our own destiny and had as much a chance as anyone to be undefeated to this point in the season -- which would have done more for our program than any other conference affiliation this side of the P5.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Eagle1855

Eagle1855 · September 29, 2014

I've already done the business of pointing out that its a false sell that FIU/FAU means owning or even getting a good share of the "Miami market"; and, ditto Houston/Rice for the "Houston market."

It doesn't mean you own it, but the reality is, there are still more UNT alums than any other school in the Metromess and more UH alums than any other school in Houston -- by a long shot. Neither school is anywhere close to owning their respective market for several reasons, primarily that 1) neither committed the kind of money it took at the right time to become a serious player (and was therefore left behind in the important conference shifts) and because of that 2) their fans saw no reason to commit the kind of money and time it takes to be a serious player and household brand.

The "market" is there (the potential is great). But there's honestly no compelling reason for anyone to buy into either program the way people do at A&M, UT, Texas Tech, et al. (as there's no interesting conference affiliation or winning tradition of note at either school), and because of that, hundreds of thousands of UH and UNT alums sit at home every weekend each fall because they just dont care.

And the rest of us sit here and talk about wanting these things... because we see the potential, what could have been and what could still be... but deep down inside, we know that ship has probably sailed because the administration wasn't willing to go all-in when it mattered most.

untjim1995 · September 29, 2014

It doesn't mean you own it, but the reality is, there are still more UNT alums than any other school in the Metromess and more UH alums than any other school in Houston -- by a long shot. Neither school is anywhere close to owning their respective market for several reasons, primarily that 1) neither committed the kind of money it took at the right time to become a serious player (and was therefore left behind in the important conference shifts) and because of that 2) their fans saw no reason to commit the kind of money and time it takes to be a serious player and household brand.

The "market" is there (the potential is great). But there's honestly no compelling reason for anyone to buy into either program the way people do at A&M, UT, Texas Tech, et al. (as there's no interesting conference affiliation or winning tradition of note at either school), and because of that, hundreds of thousands of UH and UNT alums sit at home every weekend each fall because they just dont care.

And the rest of us sit here and talk about wanting these things... because we see the potential, what could have been and what could still be... but deep down inside, we know that ship has probably sailed because the administration wasn't willing to go all-in when it mattered most.

+100000000

The Fake Lonnie Finch · October 1, 2014

It doesn't mean you own it, but the reality is, there are still more UNT alums than any other school in the Metromess and more UH alums than any other school in Houston -- by a long shot. Neither school is anywhere close to owning their respective market for several reasons, primarily that 1) neither committed the kind of money it took at the right time to become a serious player (and was therefore left behind in the important conference shifts) and because of that 2) their fans saw no reason to commit the kind of money and time it takes to be a serious player and household brand.

The "market" is there (the potential is great). But there's honestly no compelling reason for anyone to buy into either program the way people do at A&M, UT, Texas Tech, et al. (as there's no interesting conference affiliation or winning tradition of note at either school), and because of that, hundreds of thousands of UH and UNT alums sit at home every weekend each fall because they just dont care.

And the rest of us sit here and talk about wanting these things... because we see the potential, what could have been and what could still be... but deep down inside, we know that ship has probably sailed because the administration wasn't willing to go all-in when it mattered most.

Yes. I agree, and said the same thing.

My point was, you cannot just look at FAU/FIU and say, "Wow! Hitching our cart to these guys will help us make a splash with them in the Miami market." I think several schools iin our position have been drawn offsides several times by the notion.

Same goes with Rice/Houston in Houston. The truth is, no one in Houston really gives a shit what Rice and Houston are doing. And, I'd wager that less than 5% of the population can even name which conference they play in.

And unfortunately, ditto for us. If we stuck someone on a sidewalk in Dallas or Fort Worth, or any of their suburbs, and asked random people about UNT and its conference affiliation, few would know. More would be able to tell you Texas and TCU are in the Big 12 and Texas A&M jumped to the SEC.

And, further I'd guess that less than 1 in 100 would be able to tell you who we are playing this weekend.

Like I wrote earlier - and you alluded to as well - the ship sailed in 1982/83. Kudos to RV for doing what he's done. But, it will never be enough to overcome the trajectory Division I-AA membership put us on.

untjim1995 · October 1, 2014

Yes. I agree, and said the same thing.

My point was, you cannot just look at FAU/FIU and say, "Wow! Hitching our cart to these guys will help us make a splash with them in the Miami market." I think several schools iin our position have been drawn offsides several times by the notion.

Same goes with Rice/Houston in Houston. The truth is, no one in Houston really gives a shit what Rice and Houston are doing. And, I'd wager that less than 5% of the population can even name which conference they play in.

And unfortunately, ditto for us. If we stuck someone on a sidewalk in Dallas or Fort Worth, or any of their suburbs, and asked random people about UNT and its conference affiliation, few would know. More would be able to tell you Texas and TCU are in the Big 12 and Texas A&M jumped to the SEC.

And, further I'd guess that less than 1 in 100 would be able to tell you who we are playing this weekend.

Like I wrote earlier - and you alluded to as well - the ship sailed in 1982/83. Kudos to RV for doing what he's done. But, it will never be enough to overcome the trajectory Division I-AA membership put us on.

That decision in 1982, and subsequent non-correction of that decision for over a decade, really put a ceiling on the program. Right now, as it should, we feel like we are about 100x farther along than we were 20 years ago this year--we were still i-aa, in the SLC with teams like SFA, SHSU, SWT, NLU, NWST, Nicholls State, and McNeese State, playing in a stadium that 3A schools wouldn't want to play in, and the SWC still existed. And, where we are today, as a FBS school in a conference people have heard of, with schools that people have heard of (for the most part), in a great stadium with a legitimate experienced head coach seems like we are light years of where we were then. But intrue UNT fashion, we half-assed the move back up to 1-A in 1995 by doing the bare minimum to move up to meet the criteria--add 10,500 of the worst seats ever put in a stadium, join a conference whose closest team to you was in another time zone and had absolutely no history whatsoever to try and draw any interest from playing, schedule every possible OOC game away from Denton to fund the entire athletic department, and put unknown assistants into the role of head coach because they were cheap.

In the end, we may have made the right decision, economically, because those schools that zoomed by us back then, Boise State, USF, and UCF really aren't terribly further up the food chain than we are now, especially with looming P5 split, but they have all enjoyed MUCH greater exposure because of football than we ever have in our history. But, I go back to this again--you cannot tell me that if we had just done what Tulsa, Louisiana Tech, and Arkansas State had done--not drop down or stay down at the i-aa level for very long, at the very worst, we would've been in the AAC or MWC today. A large, public school near DFW with some history would've been able to have connected into something like the WAC or CUSA before the SWC formally split. Would that make a huge difference today? I don't know, maybe--but it would put us higher on the totem pole than we were for so long. And, in my wildest dreams, we would've actually built up a program in the early 80s instead of basically trying to de-fund it, giving the folks in a little conference to the north of us, one without any Texas teams in it at the time, but wanted to get some badly, called the Big Eight, to consider doing something crazy, like adding us to their conference during the 80s. Imagine what that would've looked like for the Big Eight and for north Texas had that even remotely had a chance of happening? Those SWC public schools would have been laughed off the face of the earth if that had occurred, letting small enrollment, private institutions in SMU, TCU, and Baylor dictate that another big public school wouldn't be in the best interests of Texas, Arky, Tech, A&M, and UH. Oh well, it was just a pipedream...