ETSU has dropped football!

The latest rumblings (out of the mouth of the Sun Belt Commissioner) are that a TBD Louisiana school will be added as an all-sports member in January. Also, he didn't mention Idaho or Denver in the picture he painted of the 2005 SBC.

What to take from his statements:
- UNT isn't going to the WAC
- Once the MWC makes its move, Idaho is going to the WAC
- Denver is being shopped around to Western conferences
- If TCU doesn't go to the MWC or TCU does go, but a school besides LA Tech gets the C-USA invite, then LA Tech becomes a SBC member and ULM would not get an all-sports invite (and might not have their two-year optional football-only contract renewed)
- If TCU goes to the MWC and LA Tech gets the C-USA invite, then ULM will get the all-sports invite from the SBC.


2005 Sun Belt Football:
North Texas
Middle Tennessee
Arkansas State
Troy State
Florida International
Florida Atlantic
Louisiana-L
LA Tech/ULM

2005 Sun Belt Basketball:
EAST:
WKU
MTSU
FIU
FAU
USA
Troy St

WEST:
ASU
UALR
UNT
LA Tech/ULM
UL(-L)
UNO

KPCaj,

This makes a LOT of sense! :)
I never understood Denver in the Belt. ???
Strikes me somebody was thinking of a ski vacation when they were originally asked. ;D
8-)

I like it too, KPcaj. I wonder though how easy it will be to get La.Tech from the WAC if they don't go to C-USA. I could see a lot of fighting going on between the SunBelt and WAC over La. Tech. and N. Texas, especially if the MWC takes more than one from the WAC, and definitely fierce fighting going on if they take 3. The WAC's very survival will depend on it.

If just for fun's sake, lets assume La. Tech and N. Texas play in the same conf. in 2005. Which one has more upside for them as a tandem? I think if they put themselves out there as a "package deal" thier negotiating power increases dramatically. Thoughts?

In my opinion, La Tech needs to get away from the WAC, It stretches from Hawaii, to Louisiana, and that makes about as much sense as Idaho playing in the Sun Belt, which now stretches from Idaho down to Southern Florida...Maybe the WAC and Sun Belt can strike a deal, a trade maybe, i know La Tech does not want to be in the SBC, but I think it will be a really good conference for them to be in...

With that said, this should be the new Sun Belt:

La. Tech
North Texas
Arkansas State
UL-Monroe
UL-Lafayette

Mid TN State
Troy State
Florida International
Florida Atlantic

This makes a good Southern Conference...If the SBC can get it's overall wins up...then they can swing another Bowl, Maybe with a MAC #4 or #5 team

What ever happened about the talk of South Alabama and New Orleans starting football. Stadiums shouldnt be a problem for either with South Alabama playing at Ladd-Pebbles Stadium in Mobile and New Orleans could play at Tad Gormley Stadium where Tulane has played some games in the past. Also a school that should start football is Arkansas-Little Rock. The Trojans could play their games at War Memorial Stadium in Little Rock. If those schools decide to start football then the Sun Belt Conference could have that all important championship game on ESPN2. ;D Also I have heard that Texas State is moving up to D-1. They would also be a good member for the Sun Belt, especially if Western Kentucky decides to bolt to the MVC if they choose the non-D1 football route.

Sun Belt Conference

East
Arkansas-Little Rock
Arkansas State
Florida A&M
Florida Atlantic
Florida International
Troy State

West
Louisiana-Lafayette
Louisiana-Monroe
South Alabama
New Orleans
North Texas
Texas State

The deal is Tech comes in. Monroe gets the axe.

Look for another bowl in a couple of years at the Orange bowl.

South Alabama ran a ticket drive and didn't get enough support so they dropped the idea. I never heard of UNO thinking about fb.

Texas State - San Marcos also dropped the idea in the wake of the uncertain economic future given the awful situation of the State of Texas budget (about $2 billion in the red after the "quick fixes" end in 2005)

Economics puts Louisiana and North Texas in the WAC only in the court of last resort. The problem with the WAC is that the core members want out ASAP.

I don't think that UNT alone will go to the WAC as a partner to Louisiana Tech unless it becomes necessary to remain in a 1-A football league. I think UL will take any opportunity that includes both UNT and LTU if presented.

If I had to guess on LTU's future, it would be CUSA. If they don't get into CUSA and UNT doesn't join the WAC I can't see LTU being able to oust UL Monroe as a precondition to their joining. However, ULM is vulnerable because they are a football-only member. They had a chance to join for all sports in 2002 but their president wouldn't commit at that time.

Evidently the Mountain West folks either can't get enough votes for any expansion candidate or TCU is trying to negotiate for more concessions because of their remote geographic location. I really don't understand the wisdom of a TCU-MWC partnership from either side. If I were the MWC I would take Fresno State and Boise State due to the enthusiastic fan support.

I wish this could get settled soon because it seems like so many are adversely affected when one or two conferences decide they want to better themselves.

The rationale for TCU to the MWC is as follows:

for MWC, it is a market outside their footprint (Dallas-Ft. Worth) and opens the state up to recruiting. MWC puts out a quality product, but no one is watching. What do they have, San Diego? That's it. Granted, Salt Lake City and Las Vegas are growing metropolises, but still nothing like DFW.

for TCU, it's a step up from the reconstituted CUSA and a chance to be seen on something other than Fox or ESPN (MWC has a limited number of games on ABC on the west coast/mountain time zone).

Admittedly, the benefit is not as great for TCU as it is for the conference, which may be why this hasn't happened yet.

Boise State is a logical choice and is by no means precluded by TCU's ultimate decision. However, it brings almost no TV sets with it, and may or may not bring the H Bowl.

Fresno State would also seem logical, in that it delivers part of NoCal (inland) and has managed to schedule top 25 teams year in and year out. National exposure.

But if MWC expands, there's no sense in going for 11 if you can have 12 (Nevada/Hawaii). And the MWC has given no indication that they're interested in expanding beyond 10.

I agree that this their rationale. Too bad its based on a faulty view of that TV market. When it comes to TV, TCU is way behind Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma in viewership. I would argue that it is also behind Texas Tech and Oklahoma State, given the number of alumni in town, but that may be up for debate.

How much viewership are they really going to get from the #4 to #6 most popular team in the metro area?

Similar agument on recruiting. Kids aren't going to go to Utah just because they play TCU. If they can't get onto a state team, they would be better off heading to CUSA or the Big 12 since they'll be back in Texas (and neighbors Oklahoma & Louisiana) much more often.

Absolutely Boise would "take" the bowl game with them.
The people behind the bowl are the same ones who are the big monetary supporters of the football team.

This also the case with the bowls held in Hawaii's, Fresno State's and TCU's stadiums.

It may not be "officially true," but it's a given that where the home school goes, the bowl will follow. All 4 of these bowls were created specifically to get those institutions a national TV game.

Heck, that's probably a big reason why those seem to be their top 4 choices. If they grabbed those 4 teams/bowls and kept the 3 they already have (a tall order), they would have more tie-ins than each of the Pac 10, the Big East and the ACC!

EarthX, the Silicon Valley Classic isn't in Fresno. It's in San Jose. Fresno happens to be close (2.5 hour drive), but Stanford and Cal are closer. I don't think Fresno could take the bowl with them as long as San Jose State remains in the WAC.

My mistake. You're probably right about that one.