UCF has much more work to do to get up to CUSA standards - even after big names (and big spenders) TCU, UofL, UC, and USF left:

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/8003989.htm

(Text of article follows with qualifiers)


Posted on Fri, Feb. 20, 2004

UCF ranks near bottom of Conference USA schools

BY ALAN SCHMADTKE

The Orlando Sentinel

ORLANDO, Fla. - (KRT) - For nearly a decade, UCF teams competed in the Atlantic Sun Conference with the league's biggest budgets, sport by sport.

That likely ends in 2005.

An examination of operating expenses in 2002-03 Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act reports shows the Golden Knights at or near the bottom of the schools headed toward re-formed Conference USA - UCF's future home.

UCF is 11th out of 11 schools in game-day spending for men's and women's basketball and eighth out of nine schools in game-day spending in baseball, reports show.

Game-day spending includes uniforms, travel, officials and security but does not include salaries or recruiting. EADA analysts consider the operational numbers some of the best apples-to-apples financial comparisons in the reports.

"We have some ground to make up. We know that," UCF Athletic Director Steve Orsini said. "The other side of the coin is we're fortunate that we have room to grow, and we will."

UCF leaves the Mid-American Conference (in football) and A-Sun (in Olympic sports other than rowing) for C-USA on July 1, 2005.

"We've talked for some time about the fact we have to grow our budgets, so that's not new," UCF President John Hitt said. "Our goal is to be extremely competitive in Conference USA, and to do that we have to make the commitment - and we will."

Orsini identified men's and women's basketball as two sports in which the Knights must make up the most financial ground in C-USA. For instance, Memphis spent four times as much as UCF in men's basketball, and Rice spent three times as much as UCF in women's basketball.

Marshall, which leaves the Mid-American Conference in all sports to join C-USA at the same time as UCF, is in the same boat at the Knights. It trails in financial investments in basketball, baseball and other Olympic sports.

UCF is ninth in overall revenues ($14.2 million) reported and 10th in football revenues ($2.1 million) reported for 2002-03 in the reconfigured C-USA. But Orsini, like many athletic directors, is hesitant to put much stock in those figures.

"We know exactly what we are reporting. We don't know exactly what other schools are reporting," he said.

---

© 2004, The Orlando Sentinel (Fla.).

Visit the Sentinel on the World Wide Web at http://www.orlandosentinel.com. On America Online, use keyword: OSO.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

I see that UCF has a basketball arena that only holds 5100 people...couldn't they possibly move their men's basketball games to the Arena that the Orlando Magic play?? i'm sure they could work it out with the Magic and the Knights to play some of their games in the Arena in Orlando.... Just a thought...

Posted on Fri, Feb. 27, 2004
C-USA ponders expansion options
BY ALAN SCHMADTKE
The Orlando Sentinel
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/8060472.htm

Appreciate seeing the UCF recent articles, BirdistheWord and Cybercat.

I get the idea that if C-USA goes into Ohio or maybe even with Temple, 14 may be the number. Toledo, for example, is quite attractive, except for geography. Toledo borders the State of Michigan, and much of C-USA is real deep South. For football, it may not be such a huge problem, but it may be for other components of "all sports" and women's competition.

LA Tech and North Texas don't come across as alluring and novel potential additions, but they do have some practical features to them.

My guess, and only a guess, the C-USA Presidents will come down on the side of one addition and make 12, to secure the potential of a fb championship game and to allow for divisions, to help with the travel issue. At 14, revenue sharing issues become enhanced, and it does not seem the reconfigured C-USA may, in the end, reach agreement on 14 and who 3 new additions would be. But, who knows what compromises yield. Also, at 14, it could cut keep deep into another conference(s) membership again (but is that their worry). Maybe C-USA, the WAC, the Sun Belt, and the MAC could all get together and sort out turf, etc. and resolve matters like where LA Tech, Idaho, etc. need to be. Of course, that is asking for cooperation and collegiality at unrealistic levels in a big money era. But, horse-trading never completely goes out of style.

I think it would be a mistake for CUSA to go to 14 (or more). I'll bet that only a few people other than us on these boards can even name the 11 members of CUSA. The conference needs to create some stability.

my guess is 14, because I think the SMU and RICE additions, while nice from a market perspective, give nothing from the perspective of money sports. I think they will have to add 2 more schools to squeeze a decent contract out. there just isn't enough there right now---IMO.

One thing I have wondered is if there will ever come a point where someone suggests appointing a panel of former presidents/ADs/conference commissioners, etc. with nothing to gain or lose from their decision to meet and recommend such an alignment. It's gotten to be nearly impossible to work an arrangement out that is mutually agreeable and we wait, and wait, and wait....... :-/

I really wish that CUSA would hurry up all ready! I don't think it takes that long to evaluate schools. Maybe 30 days, and they've had some time to decide.

I think that they should take LaTech. Someone should. Being in the WAC makes very little sense. If CUSA took some MAC schools, then what happens to LaTech? And Idaho? I think that the WAC would be forced to expand into the central time zone (North Texas?, Middle Tennessee?, Arkansas State?). Except for North Texas, none of those schools sounds very Western to me. Idaho sure is though! ;) I really think that CUSA should add LaTech as they would fit nicely with Tulane, Tulsa, Rice, SMU, etc. They are close to Florida.

I also think they would be a nice addition to the SunBelt. If the WAC and SunBelt made a switch Idaho for LaTech. But, LaTech wants nothing to do with the SunBelt. I think that they are worried about what it was and they don't like the other Louisiana schools there (Monroe and Lafayette).

Idaho wants in the WAC so bad! It would be excellent because we would be in a league with Boise State, Utah State, New Mexico State and Nevada-Reno, all schools that were in the Big Sky and Big West when we played there. I would love to see the WAC as a conference with Idaho and then look to expand later by inviting some other old Big Sky teams (Montana, Montana State, Eastern Washington, Portland State, Sacramento State?) to get to 12 members, entirely western conference. I think it would work well.

Right on. I think the only thing of lasting value is geographical realignment. Idaho is a natural fit for the WAC. I'd love to see LA Tech join the Sun Belt, but it will be their court of last resort. LTU does deserve the CUSA invite because the had the cajones to risk the super expensive move to the WAC in order to posture themselves for something better in their region such as CUSA.

Good luck to you. This endless stringing out of a decision is an unwelcome distraction and it's time to get on with it!

The UL president has delayed interviews on the local radio station, so maybe something is still in the works.

I expect much of the delay is due to there being no agreement among the 11 as to whom to invite. The other being, they have time available to them to make a decision.

FYI... many Herd fans suspect nothing is going to happen until the April NCAA meeting, b/c at that meeting we should learn what is going to happen w/ regard to attendance requirements and how hard that line is going to be drawn... to wit, right now there's a standard, but there's no process that says what happens when a school doesn't meet that standard.

This is important so that CUSA can plainly see all of the cards that are on the proverbial table... in particular, that could have an effect upon the MAC's future, and if it cuts deeply enough and hard enough, there are schools that would have to consider CUSA a more attractive option.

But even in that event, I think the bottom line that they're wrestling with is that they have stated they want to add a school or schools that add value to the conference... and plainly, no offense intended, there is no school available that can everyone agrees would "add value."

No one's asked me, but it appears they have two choices -- either stick at 11, or add enough schools in a region in which they currently are not as visible to create a new market for their product... ie, if you can't add value in one school, perhaps you could w/ 3... but, to my mind, that's not even valid... they would have to go to 5, and they'd have to target the region where the money is... the northeast.

See my post and follow-ups in the CUSA general realignment thread: http://collegesportsinfo/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1453&action=display&start=91

Why did Marshall move to CUSA? With all the shifting, and three ranked football teams in the MAC last season, I was wondering if they might have the brighter future at this point. You weren't one of those ranked teams, but probably pretty soon you would make a fourth.

Marshall basically joined CUSA for one reason...Bowl Berths...no longer do they have to fight all season for 1 of 2 bowl berths in the MAC, when they can fight for 1 of 5 bowl berths in CUSA, and i believe CUSA will keep their 5 bowls...but they are looking at who they can compete with and beat in order to go to a bowl...

The "value" additions and whether it be remaining at 11, or going to 12 or 14 have been in newspaper articles for a month or more. No official, public announcement has been made on firming up a number or new invitiations. That suggests agreement has not been reached, which possibly differs from saying there is controversy. Being that it is approaching early spring, and the desire to wait 30 to 60 days before announcing, implies there is opportunity not to rush a decision. Now if other par conferences are competing for transition, versus "holding on" or status quo, that would imply a element of urgency. Unless the timetable is pressuring for future scheduling, TV contracts, and bowl agreements, then take due time. Apparently C-USA believes it has a month or two for its decision.

Where fans are anxious for a decision, encompasses speculation about the potential an depth of the ripple effect.

MU Pres Dan Angel wrote a column not long after the announcement, and the gist of it was that it was a marketing decision, not just a football one. In the MAC, Marshall gets exposure in mainly Ohio and Michigan; in CUSA, Marshall is exposed across the South. Marshall's alumni base is decidedly more skewed toward VA, NC, SC, GA and FL than to parts north.

There is a philosophical difference that cannot be overlooked, as well. MAC schools are content to be MAC schools... they are not driven to gain a national stage, but rather kind-of accept that it happens every couple of years or so, depending on the sport. CUSA schools are not so cushy... moreso than not, each desires bigger and better visibility.

Once the beancounters understood what the CUSA vs. MAC payouts would automatically be -- and apparently Marshall and the other new members will get to reap some of the rewards left behind by departing members -- there wasn't much discussion left to be had.

Hello CUSA, goodbye MAC.

(Fwiw, for the longest time, I was fully in the corner of staying in the MAC, and wasn't well liked among Herd Nation for my contention. But even I was eventually won over to the idea for the reasons above, and a few more.)