So when the TV / media model changes what does that mean for the Power 5? It's hard to imagine them not being at the top of the food chain in terms of TV / media revenue. In fact I'm 99% sure they always will be. I'd imagine a new model could possibly help close the gap for the Go5.

(04-10-2013 10:08 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  So when the TV / media model changes what does that mean for the Power 5? It's hard to imagine them not being at the top of the food chain in terms of TV / media revenue. In fact I'm 99% sure they always will be. I'd imagine a new model could possibly help close the gap for the Go5.

As long as they share and share alike they stay as they are, but if Bama says why should Miss State get the same share when the data shows we are making the money... hell breaks loose.

(04-08-2013 08:08 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:02 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 07:41 PM)AtlantaEagle Wrote:  Count me in. C-USA is toast. Looks like Banowsky's main interest is not in the conference, but in his position. Always has been.
Further additions just consolidates his power.
Sixteen teams are way too unwieldy, & there's going to be a split.
A group with vision, influence, & connections could make this SWC idea a reality.

Who would be in? USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... LaTech ... ULALA ... UTSA ... UNT ... UNM (??? with a UTEP concurrence only though) ...

Personally, if it's a 9 team conference I'd prefer it be a bit different....

Include the old C-USA teams - given for me...

USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... Marshall ... UAB ... add LaTech ... WKU ... MTSU ... ODU or ULALA or Appy State or Charlotte or USA....but not all, just one. UTEP would remain an outlier and when they depart for MWC go with one of the previously left out of ODU, ULALA, USA, Charlotte and Appy State (only FCS I personally think there should be any interest in).

More like.
UTEP, UNT, UTSA, Rice, LA Tech, Ark St., Louisana, Tx. St., USM...to start. Maybe add NMSU if UTEP doesn't mind to get to a 10 team conference.

More like the texas schools, southern miss, uab and la tech for starters. Do not ever expect ulala or arky state to be in the same league as la tech.

(04-10-2013 10:08 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  So when the TV / media model changes what does that mean for the Power 5? It's hard to imagine them not being at the top of the food chain in terms of TV / media revenue. In fact I'm 99% sure they always will be. I'd imagine a new model could possibly help close the gap for the Go5.

Of course they will be at the top of the food chain ~ they are there because of the size of the collective national and local fan bases of the schools that are the anchors of each of the Big Five conferences. A more competitive market that makes it harder to convert fan interest into revenue means less money overall, but not a catastrophic collapse in total money. And the differences in national fan bases will still translate into differences in revenue opportunities.

(04-08-2013 08:08 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:02 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 07:41 PM)AtlantaEagle Wrote:  Count me in. C-USA is toast. Looks like Banowsky's main interest is not in the conference, but in his position. Always has been.
Further additions just consolidates his power.
Sixteen teams are way too unwieldy, & there's going to be a split.
A group with vision, influence, & connections could make this SWC idea a reality.

Who would be in? USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... LaTech ... ULALA ... UTSA ... UNT ... UNM (??? with a UTEP concurrence only though) ...

Personally, if it's a 9 team conference I'd prefer it be a bit different....

Include the old C-USA teams - given for me...

USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... Marshall ... UAB ... add LaTech ... WKU ... MTSU ... ODU or ULALA or Appy State or Charlotte or USA....but not all, just one. UTEP would remain an outlier and when they depart for MWC go with one of the previously left out of ODU, ULALA, USA, Charlotte and Appy State (only FCS I personally think there should be any interest in).

More like.
UTEP, UNT, UTSA, Rice, LA Tech, Ark St., Louisana, Tx. St., USM...to start. Maybe add NMSU if UTEP doesn't mind to get to a 10 team conference.

I think that would be very close to the membership if CUSA splits but with two reasonably regional divisions, there really isn't a great need to do that. But if it does split then the new conference in the southwest would likely be:

UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, Texas St, ASU, LTU, ULL, USM. That's 9 members and no need for more. 8 conference games in football, 16 in mbb for double round robin. The problem would be that if someone, lets say USM, is poached then you're at the minimum of 8 for an fbs conference and would need to add 1. Probably NMSU.

(04-12-2013 11:32 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  I think that would be very close to the membership if CUSA splits but with two reasonably regional divisions, there really isn't a great need to do that. But if it does split then the new conference in the southwest would likely be:

UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, Texas St, ASU, LTU, ULL, USM. That's 9 members and no need for more. 8 conference games in football, 16 in mbb for double round robin. The problem would be that if someone, lets say USM, is poached then you're at the minimum of 8 for an fbs conference and would need to add 1. Probably NMSU.

Part of the driving to 12 is for an FBS conference that wants to maximize its chances to be the Group of Five rep school in the Access Bowl system. 12 is as far as the $1m per school from the Access Bowl payout to the FBS conferences go. If there are no cross-division rivalries, you can play a divisional round robin FB and see the other division schools at a frequency of no worst than 2on/2off with 8 conference games, higher frequency with 9.

In BBall, 12 is a complete single round robin with a second game against 1/3 of the conference with 16, or 1/2 of the conference with 18, so there's a lot of flexibility to decide between 16 or 18 conference games.

(04-12-2013 12:15 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-12-2013 11:32 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  I think that would be very close to the membership if CUSA splits but with two reasonably regional divisions, there really isn't a great need to do that. But if it does split then the new conference in the southwest would likely be:

UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, Texas St, ASU, LTU, ULL, USM. That's 9 members and no need for more. 8 conference games in football, 16 in mbb for double round robin. The problem would be that if someone, lets say USM, is poached then you're at the minimum of 8 for an fbs conference and would need to add 1. Probably NMSU.

Part of the driving to 12 is for an FBS conference that wants to maximize its chances to be the Group of Five rep school in the Access Bowl system. 12 is as far as the $1m per school from the Access Bowl payout to the FBS conferences go. If there are no cross-division rivalries, you can play a divisional round robin FB and see the other division schools at a frequency of no worst than 2on/2off with 8 conference games, higher frequency with 9.

In BBall, 12 is a complete single round robin with a second game against 1/3 of the conference with 16, or 1/2 of the conference with 18, so there's a lot of flexibility to decide between 16 or 18 conference games.

With the 12 Team thing, does it need to be 12 football playing schools or could it be 10/12 (10 football, 2 basketball schools).

(04-12-2013 12:15 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-12-2013 11:32 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  I think that would be very close to the membership if CUSA splits but with two reasonably regional divisions, there really isn't a great need to do that. But if it does split then the new conference in the southwest would likely be:

UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, Texas St, ASU, LTU, ULL, USM. That's 9 members and no need for more. 8 conference games in football, 16 in mbb for double round robin. The problem would be that if someone, lets say USM, is poached then you're at the minimum of 8 for an fbs conference and would need to add 1. Probably NMSU.

Part of the driving to 12 is for an FBS conference that wants to maximize its chances to be the Group of Five rep school in the Access Bowl system. 12 is as far as the $1m per school from the Access Bowl payout to the FBS conferences go. If there are no cross-division rivalries, you can play a divisional round robin FB and see the other division schools at a frequency of no worst than 2on/2off with 8 conference games, higher frequency with 9.

In BBall, 12 is a complete single round robin with a second game against 1/3 of the conference with 16, or 1/2 of the conference with 18, so there's a lot of flexibility to decide between 16 or 18 conference games.

Championship is a statistical crap shoot.

30-40% of the time your top team is going to lose and get knocked out of contention unless you have two contenders like the MAC did this year, but CUSA lost out in that situation in 2011.

You run the risk that if the divisions aren't relatively similar in strength, the winner can actually lose ground in the computers, that happened at times in the Big XII. While the computers no longer control, the committee will have that data.

(04-12-2013 12:33 PM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(04-12-2013 12:15 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-12-2013 11:32 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  I think that would be very close to the membership if CUSA splits but with two reasonably regional divisions, there really isn't a great need to do that. But if it does split then the new conference in the southwest would likely be:

UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, Texas St, ASU, LTU, ULL, USM. That's 9 members and no need for more. 8 conference games in football, 16 in mbb for double round robin. The problem would be that if someone, lets say USM, is poached then you're at the minimum of 8 for an fbs conference and would need to add 1. Probably NMSU.

Part of the driving to 12 is for an FBS conference that wants to maximize its chances to be the Group of Five rep school in the Access Bowl system. 12 is as far as the $1m per school from the Access Bowl payout to the FBS conferences go. If there are no cross-division rivalries, you can play a divisional round robin FB and see the other division schools at a frequency of no worst than 2on/2off with 8 conference games, higher frequency with 9.

In BBall, 12 is a complete single round robin with a second game against 1/3 of the conference with 16, or 1/2 of the conference with 18, so there's a lot of flexibility to decide between 16 or 18 conference games.

With the 12 Team thing, does it need to be 12 football playing schools or could it be 10/12 (10 football, 2 basketball schools).

Flip it ~ its 12 for football, it could easily be 10 all-sports teams, 2 FB-only schools.

(04-12-2013 11:32 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:08 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:02 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 07:41 PM)AtlantaEagle Wrote:  Count me in. C-USA is toast. Looks like Banowsky's main interest is not in the conference, but in his position. Always has been.
Further additions just consolidates his power.
Sixteen teams are way too unwieldy, & there's going to be a split.
A group with vision, influence, & connections could make this SWC idea a reality.

Who would be in? USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... LaTech ... ULALA ... UTSA ... UNT ... UNM (??? with a UTEP concurrence only though) ...

Personally, if it's a 9 team conference I'd prefer it be a bit different....

Include the old C-USA teams - given for me...

USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... Marshall ... UAB ... add LaTech ... WKU ... MTSU ... ODU or ULALA or Appy State or Charlotte or USA....but not all, just one. UTEP would remain an outlier and when they depart for MWC go with one of the previously left out of ODU, ULALA, USA, Charlotte and Appy State (only FCS I personally think there should be any interest in).

More like.
UTEP, UNT, UTSA, Rice, LA Tech, Ark St., Louisana, Tx. St., USM...to start. Maybe add NMSU if UTEP doesn't mind to get to a 10 team conference.

I think that would be very close to the membership if CUSA splits but with two reasonably regional divisions, there really isn't a great need to do that. But if it does split then the new conference in the southwest would likely be:

UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, Texas St, ASU, LTU, ULL, USM. That's 9 members and no need for more. 8 conference games in football, 16 in mbb for double round robin. The problem would be that if someone, lets say USM, is poached then you're at the minimum of 8 for an fbs conference and would need to add 1. Probably NMSU.

Potential Conference


Fox Sports Southwest covers this entire area (from Eastern New Mexico to the Florida Panhandle) with programming. Rebranded FS San Antonio, FS Houston, FS Oklahoma, FS New Orleans depending on your region
This puts teams
#5 Dallas (UNT)
#10 Houston (Rice)
#36 San Antonio (UTSA and TXST)
#41 OKC ... No team in market, but UNT is 2 hours from OKC and receives FSSW
#45 Austin (TXST)
#49 Memphis (Ark State)
#51 New Orleans (both UL and USM are within 2 hours)
#56 Little Rock (Ark State)
#60 Mobile ... No Team but Southern Miss is within 2 hours and it gets FSSW
#82 Shreveport (LaTech)
#86 Rio Grande Valley [Southern Part of Texas along the Mexico Border] ... No Texas based team, but TXST and UTSA get large amounts of students from this area and receives FSSW
#91 El Paso (UTEP)
#93 Jackson, MS (LATech and SoMiss are within 2 hours)
#94 Baton Rouge (UL)

(04-12-2013 01:42 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Championship is a statistical crap shoot.

30-40% of the time your top team is going to lose and get knocked out of contention unless you have two contenders like the MAC did this year, but CUSA lost out in that situation in 2011.

In the gaming between The American and the Mountain West, your top team losing 30%-40% of the time and winning 60%-70% of the time is worth the game.

But for CUSA, the MAC and the Sunbelt, the opening is most likely to be if the top teams of The American and the Mountain West both lose, which on random odds would be 9% to 16% of the time.

If one of the Sunbelt, MAC and CUSA elects to do without a CCG, they are conceding the inside track to the other two on grabbing the brass ring in the event that the top teams from both The American and the Mountain West both stumble and there is an opening.

If the favorite team will stumble in the CCG 30% to 40% of the time, then the top team from all four other Mid-Major conferences will stumble 0.8% to 2.6% of the time, so the winner take all nature of the G5 rep favors going for broke over playing it safe.

(04-11-2013 11:02 PM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:08 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:02 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 07:41 PM)AtlantaEagle Wrote:  Count me in. C-USA is toast. Looks like Banowsky's main interest is not in the conference, but in his position. Always has been.
Further additions just consolidates his power.
Sixteen teams are way too unwieldy, & there's going to be a split.
A group with vision, influence, & connections could make this SWC idea a reality.

Who would be in? USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... LaTech ... ULALA ... UTSA ... UNT ... UNM (??? with a UTEP concurrence only though) ...

Personally, if it's a 9 team conference I'd prefer it be a bit different....

Include the old C-USA teams - given for me...

USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... Marshall ... UAB ... add LaTech ... WKU ... MTSU ... ODU or ULALA or Appy State or Charlotte or USA....but not all, just one. UTEP would remain an outlier and when they depart for MWC go with one of the previously left out of ODU, ULALA, USA, Charlotte and Appy State (only FCS I personally think there should be any interest in).

More like.
UTEP, UNT, UTSA, Rice, LA Tech, Ark St., Louisana, Tx. St., USM...to start. Maybe add NMSU if UTEP doesn't mind to get to a 10 team conference.

More like the texas schools, southern miss, uab and la tech for starters. Do not ever expect ulala or arky state to be in the same league as la tech.

Educate yourself before making foolish statements.

Z

(04-15-2013 04:39 PM)zeebart21 Wrote:  

(04-11-2013 11:02 PM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:08 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:02 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 07:41 PM)AtlantaEagle Wrote:  Count me in. C-USA is toast. Looks like Banowsky's main interest is not in the conference, but in his position. Always has been.
Further additions just consolidates his power.
Sixteen teams are way too unwieldy, & there's going to be a split.
A group with vision, influence, & connections could make this SWC idea a reality.

Who would be in? USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... LaTech ... ULALA ... UTSA ... UNT ... UNM (??? with a UTEP concurrence only though) ...

Personally, if it's a 9 team conference I'd prefer it be a bit different....

Include the old C-USA teams - given for me...

USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... Marshall ... UAB ... add LaTech ... WKU ... MTSU ... ODU or ULALA or Appy State or Charlotte or USA....but not all, just one. UTEP would remain an outlier and when they depart for MWC go with one of the previously left out of ODU, ULALA, USA, Charlotte and Appy State (only FCS I personally think there should be any interest in).

More like.
UTEP, UNT, UTSA, Rice, LA Tech, Ark St., Louisana, Tx. St., USM...to start. Maybe add NMSU if UTEP doesn't mind to get to a 10 team conference.

More like the texas schools, southern miss, uab and la tech for starters. Do not ever expect ulala or arky state to be in the same league as la tech.

Educate yourself before making foolish statements.

Z

The world would be so much less fun without no nothing *********. This has to be mitch rodrique or Russel hanz

(04-16-2013 07:35 PM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  

(04-15-2013 04:39 PM)zeebart21 Wrote:  

(04-11-2013 11:02 PM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:08 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(04-08-2013 08:02 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  Who would be in? USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... LaTech ... ULALA ... UTSA ... UNT ... UNM (??? with a UTEP concurrence only though) ...

Personally, if it's a 9 team conference I'd prefer it be a bit different....

Include the old C-USA teams - given for me...

USM ... Rice ... UTEP ... Marshall ... UAB ... add LaTech ... WKU ... MTSU ... ODU or ULALA or Appy State or Charlotte or USA....but not all, just one. UTEP would remain an outlier and when they depart for MWC go with one of the previously left out of ODU, ULALA, USA, Charlotte and Appy State (only FCS I personally think there should be any interest in).

More like.
UTEP, UNT, UTSA, Rice, LA Tech, Ark St., Louisana, Tx. St., USM...to start. Maybe add NMSU if UTEP doesn't mind to get to a 10 team conference.

More like the texas schools, southern miss, uab and la tech for starters. Do not ever expect ulala or arky state to be in the same league as la tech.

Educate yourself before making foolish statements.

Z

The world would be so much less fun without no nothing *********. This has to be mitch rodrique or Russel hanz

You are dumber than a box of rocks... HAHA!! Go Latex.

Z