(03-08-2013 12:54 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  blazr's "western group" is the MWC. His "Eastern group" is some hodge-podge of the A12/nBE fallout + select members from CUSA. I have no idea how the pieces are supposed to come together after that and whether it's one league or a scheduling / TV deal Alliance or what. None of it makes a lot of sense to me to be honest.

Maybe this is more fantasy. I'd certainly be hoping for the A12 to fail miserably if I'm Marshall, UAB or USM. There is literally NOTHING attractive about CUSA for me personally at this point, sans USM.

Bottom line is that if Tulsa chooses to join, it should tell us a lot about where we really are regarding fantasy and reality.

Tulsa will join because they think SMU is the end all/be all. There's no question that Conference.NET is vastly superior to CUSA, though.

(03-08-2013 12:11 PM)billetingman1 Wrote:  Funny thing is, as disfunctional as the conference is, UAB would join in a second if asked.

The problem is they would have to ask Bama for permission. They have little to no say on how their athletic dept is run

(03-08-2013 10:20 AM)blazr Wrote:  Now that the sausage-making process has, by necessity, been exposed to public eyes, I hope you can objectively understand that THIS is why so many people think the schools still planning and hoping to be part of the A-12 are following through on monumentally terrible decisions. For very little gains they are jumping into a flaming, quicksand, acid, alligator, shark pit...and doing so, still, with eyes, ears, and mouths covered. I'm trying to think of more insulting ways Marinatto, Aresco, and the ever-changing cast of your potential new all-sports home could have exploited you with hollow promises, shifting goalposts, and straight-out lies by omission (does anyone still honestly dispute that the C7 were on their way out the door as far back as 2011), but it's actually quite difficult...which is frightening.

What has been going on this calendar year, and is only escalating at this point, is not the exception as to how this conference, and quite clearly the one intended to follow, operates. The seeds being sown now will tear the new entity apart just as those sown at the beginning of the Cartel and during the '06 realignment did the old BE. Hence, why there will eventually be a Western group and Eastern group...do it now and save a potentially crippling amount of money, or do it later when your schools still haven't broken even - in real terms - on the net negative this move would be...either on 2013-14 or 2014-15 budgets.

The only possibly positive development from this week is a tick up in the possibility that Tulsa will sign on, and that would at least save the rest of the planned newcomers from being the dumbest rock in the quarry.

Problem is your failing to see one simple thing. Even if it's a little bit better it makes no sense to voluntarily make things worse for yourself. The Big East teams signed a 22million a year TV deal with pretty good exposure. Most people probably have not ever seen a conference USA game on TV unless it was moved to ESPN.

And be honest with yourself, UCF and USF are light years ahead of FIU and FAU same goes for Memphis-MTSU, Houston/SMU-UNT, etc. Why doesn't UAB go and play with the University of West Alabama or Jacksonville State because that's what your pretty much asking them to do.

Also back to money I find this ironic. For years conference USA fans hung the fact that they almost made 1 million a year over the head of Sun Belt fans. And now with more teams and worst teams at that you have that same TV deal. When ODU and UNCC join will conference USA teams even be making 800k per team?

Yes, schools in the Western half of CUSA will have to move to the Western conf when this comes to pass in order to balance the numbers. Whatever schools that had left CUSA West at that point would join the Western conf as well. The Eastern conf would then be CUSA East + Eastern A12 schools (former or prospective) + others. The "others" will depend on many factors. There will be a scheduling and championship agreement for football between the two conferences as well as a packaging of TV/media rights.

It's not clear that any similar agreement would be necessary (i.e., profitable) in basketball. That will mostly depend on where the two conferences wind up number-wise...I've heard 12, 14, or 16 each (early on I heard each conference could handle up to 24, and the explanation of why made sense, but my contacts at schools - as opposed to conf - have never seemed enthused about going above 16).

To the poster above (can't see previous posts in Tapatalk) who continues to add up current MWC and CUSA schools plus incoming schools plus the old BE 3 to prove that the numbers don't work, I've answered that your assumption that everyone in that collection of schools will be involved is not necessarily correct. There are many developments to come between here and then. The largest of those is the inevitable move to 16 by the B1G, SEC, PAC, and some Big XII/ACC entity. As opposed to the other info, no one I've talked to can give more than a guess at when that last development will shake out, but everyone has been certain 4x16 will happen and that it won't be another 7 years like between the '06 and current realignment...it will be sooner and quicker than publicly expected because the pressure is of the "Mexican standoff" kind so no one wants to be the last to shoot.

So some schools could have moved up from the A12/MWC/CUSA mix when the two groups form in addition to the consideration of whether every school in the mix now will be included - particularly new invites to CUSA. In the meantime, if schools are determined to spend the money to exit current conferences and to enter, then create, a new one it's their money.

Well hopefully UAB can actually build a football stadium or you'll probably not be allowed in whatever your new proposed super crap conference is.

Blazr, you may be right about the "4 X 16" model. I would like to think that it would be more like a "4 X 18" model, but what do I know.

I do know this: if ECU wants to continue playing at the highest level (D1 Bowl division) and actually have a shot at landing in whatever club may come of all of this, then we have to keep trying to improve our position. We have to be aggressive. If we're idle, we're doomed.

I've learned something in sales: I would rather be too aggressive and lose a deal than not be aggressive enough and never give myself a chance.

In the wake of all that's happened people are still doubting Blazr, unreal.

(03-08-2013 03:25 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  In the wake of all that's happened people are still doubting Blazr, unreal.

Nostradumbass himself. Hopefully UAB is left out of his new proposed league until they build a new stadium, which will be never.

(03-08-2013 03:25 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  In the wake of all that's happened people are still doubting Blazr, unreal.

I believe the basis for this entire series of Blzr posts was that the NCAA would never allow both conferences to have an autobid and the Big East would no longer be a conference. Your free to check the archives if you doubt it. That said, he was correct on the Catholic split--so, he certainly should get credit where credit is due. He nailed that one.

(03-08-2013 03:25 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  In the wake of all that's happened people are still doubting Blazr, unreal.

I don't necessarily doubt him. Hell, at some point it probably makes sense the way all the expansion non-sense is headed. I'm just really curious as to how this is supposed to happen logistically. USF/UCF are going to avoid association with FAU/FIU at all costs. Same with Memphis & MTSU. ECU and UNCC and so on and so on. Just like UAB will NEVER accept association with Troy and USA.

Bottom line is that there's going to be a bunch of pi$$ed off ex-SBC fans is the only way I can see this happening.

(03-08-2013 10:53 AM)WilsonPirate Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 10:27 AM)lazydawg58 Wrote:  Regardless of how bad the situation in the A12 is or becomes, for the old CUSA schools it is a matter of avoiding their athletic programs losing ground. To stay where they were is a downgrade, to move to the A12 is an upgrade or at the least a maintaining of where they are. Just because there are no really good options doesn't mean the best option is to do nothing. You have to take the best bad option.

This. When faced with two bad choices, we chose the lesser wrong.

This is not a fact just a perception. Go back and look at the performance on the field over the past 4 or 5 years and the teams in the SBC and in the new version of CUSA has more than held it's own against the teams in the NNNC or A-12. But if it makes you feel better to look down on others just to boost your ego then there is nothing anyone can do to help you.

(03-08-2013 12:11 PM)billetingman1 Wrote:  Funny thing is, as disfunctional as the conference is, UAB would join in a second if asked.

I can say 100% that this statement is false; and what do blazr's predictions have to do with UAB directly? Some buffoons will use every chance they get to slap at the Blazers.

The fact of the matter is that as badly as programs like UAB don't want to be associated athletically with the S. Alabama's and Troys of the world due to perception, and not reality (look at the track records of each football program closely during their respective existences), programs like SMU, Memphis, and UCF would rather not associate themselves conference-wise with the UNT's, FIU's, and MTSU's of the world. This type of thinking is not just at the BE ---> CUSA ---> Sun Belt level, but also at the Pac 12 ---> MWC level and the SEC ---> ACC level as well. This is not a unique stance made up by bitter BE schools trying to feel better about themselves. The crap just rolls downhill, and for schools like Houston and SMU, we had to climb a little higher to avoid getting knocked down even further behind other schools in our state. We may or may not have gained any ground during this round, but every alum and fan of both of these Texas schools will tell you that they would much rather have our current situation than what would have been waiting for us if we just stayed put in Sun Belt 2.0.

(03-08-2013 04:47 PM)Texas2Step Wrote:  The fact of the matter is that as badly as programs like UAB don't want to be associated athletically with the S. Alabama's and Troys of the world due to perception, and not reality (look at the track records of each football program closely during their respective existences), programs like SMU, Memphis, and UCF would rather not associate themselves conference-wise with the UNT's, FIU's, and MTSU's of the world. This type of thinking is not just at the BE ---> CUSA ---> Sun Belt level, but also at the Pac 12 ---> MWC level and the SEC ---> ACC level as well. This is not a unique stance made up by bitter BE schools trying to feel better about themselves. The crap just rolls downhill, and for schools like Houston and SMU, we had to climb a little higher to avoid getting knocked down even further behind other schools in our state. We may or may not have gained any ground during this round, but every alum and fan of both of these Texas schools will tell you that they would much rather have our current situation than what would have been waiting for us if we just stayed put in Sun Belt 2.0.

Oh, I agree that it is somewhat pervasive an attitude. I just disagree that is only to make themselves feel better. The President of Tulane and Tulsa said as much when they said we don't want to be associated with the people in CUSA we want to be associated with SMU, Tulane etc... Neither one of those schools has accomplished much of anything on the field or court in decades. The only thing to make them feel good is the "I am in a better conference than you" line that fans of bottom dwelling ACC, SEC, B1G and Big 12 teams constantly invoke.

Just go back to the old stockbrokerage firm's saying.."earn it". You do that by winning on the field and on the court.

(03-08-2013 03:54 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I believe the basis for this entire series of Blzr posts was that the NCAA would never allow both conferences to have an autobid and the Big East would no longer be a conference.

I'm having a hard time keeping up, but I'm going to assume that the America 12 conference got their autobid, right?

Also, I remember Blazr posting that the NCAA was extremely reluctant to give one out, not that they absolutely wouldn't.

(03-08-2013 08:06 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 03:54 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I believe the basis for this entire series of Blzr posts was that the NCAA would never allow both conferences to have an autobid and the Big East would no longer be a conference.

I'm having a hard time keeping up, but I'm going to assume that the America 12 conference got their autobid, right?

Also, I remember Blazr posting that the NCAA was extremely reluctant to give one out, not that they absolutely wouldn't.

don't think the NCAA had much of a choice...

Will be interesting to see the impact of this. Will NCAA expand the first four to maybe a first eight? Would now add 3 at larges. Also would make the 16 seeds all play in- making the entire tourney better- you'd start to see some pretty darn good 14 seeds out there and frankly even some 15's.

(03-08-2013 08:06 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 03:54 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I believe the basis for this entire series of Blzr posts was that the NCAA would never allow both conferences to have an autobid and the Big East would no longer be a conference.

I'm having a hard time keeping up, but I'm going to assume that the America 12 conference got their autobid, right?

Also, I remember Blazr posting that the NCAA was extremely reluctant to give one out, not that they absolutely wouldn't.

He called the conference a non-entity because it had no auto bid. He was adamant about that. Like I said, he was wrong on that and it was the basis for much of what he said. Still, he called the Catholic split.

The east-west conference thing pretty much can't happen until moves at the top are finished. At that point, when nobody has any hope of moving up, i can see where things that seem impossible now might could happen. But if that's where we end up, I'll probably just take up golf. I suspect theres a lot more people just like me. If they push the nonAqs out, a hunk of that big college tv audience will slowly melt away. I personally hope it's a big big hunk. The big east west thing Blazr envisions will be no more successful than the current little regional conferences that nobody cares about.

Its like everyone said you can't just rename a bunch of teams making 1 million a year and suddenly expect them to be worth a ton of money, Well this is just the Melliance version of the Big East. Have a 20 or 30 team conference if you like. They are still just one million dollar teams. I dont care how many you can cram into a VW bug, you still just have a bunch of one milion dollar a year schools packed in a clown car that you are selling. I don't see that being some big final solution that solves the myriad of issues the nonAqs face.

Does it really matter which conf is better? There are two types of conferences.
Type 1 includes:
SEC
PAC12
Big10
Big12
ACC

Type 2 includes:
A-12
MWC
CUSA
SunBelt
WAC

And in the world of college football, the gap is so large between the two types, it doesn't even matter to argue. It's a waste of time. And the argument about being in a position to move up doesn't hold much value to me. Bc before long, the type 1 conferences will have only 4 conferences of 16 teams each, and by my calculations, the current 5 type 1 conferences only need a 2 schools to reach that 64 team mark. Alot of hopefully schools are going to be left behind regardless.

My point, the gap between the A-12 and CUSA isn't NEARLY as important as the gap between the 2 types of conferences I listed above.

Having said that, I would still rather my school be in the A-12 (or whatever it's called) vs CUSA, simply bc of the schools we would be associated with. Nothing against CUSA schools, we just have way more in common and way more in history with A-12 schools. Just my opinion.

(03-08-2013 10:12 PM)MasMack Wrote:  Does it really matter which conf is better? There are two types of conferences.
Type 1 includes:
SEC
PAC12
Big10
Big12
ACC

Type 2 includes:
A-12
MWC
CUSA
SunBelt
WAC

That's what it all boils down to in the end...which is why the justification of spending millions of $$ to shuffle around the "Type 2" just doesn't exist any longer. But as has been consistently true from the beginning, once the prevailing logic (based on reality now vs. reality when plans were made way back when) jumps into the brainpans of schools officials it's almost impossible to predict what the outcome will be and actually impossible, for all intents and purposes, to ever surmise the deciding factors in their head (like I've said before, for some decision makers it could be the case of the deepest pockets holding a virtual gun to their head...more decisions in college athletics are made that way than most would like to admit - off the top of my head I'm reminded of Larry Brown as hoops coach at SMU and Mike Dubose as head football coach at UAT in the late-90s).

(03-08-2013 08:06 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  

(03-08-2013 03:54 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I believe the basis for this entire series of Blzr posts was that the NCAA would never allow both conferences to have an autobid and the Big East would no longer be a conference.

I'm having a hard time keeping up, but I'm going to assume that the America 12 conference got their autobid, right?

Also, I remember Blazr posting that the NCAA was extremely reluctant to give one out, not that they absolutely wouldn't.

The NCAA still is extremely reluctant. IF they create an additional auto-bid, that office - not A12 - will have the burden of pacifying all the groups that threaten to scream bloody murder when the makeup of NCAA bids is messed with. They'll have to do something other than just take away an at-large. We'll see what that "something" is, but it's certainly a bad start for group of teams to force the NCAA's hand when there is no need. As always, many developments to come....