NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Thu Nov 27, 2014 4:28 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5241 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330 ... 350  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 4:45 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:45 am
Posts: 225
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Speaking of homes, where do you see Cincinnati and/or Houston heading to (if these teams manage to find success, and in case the AAC might reach to serious jeopardy)?


I see Cincinnati ending up in the ACC. The have an ACC feel to me. Honestly, people disagree, but I think adding Cincinnati with Memphis would be a good idea for the ACC. 2 major markets, rivals with Louisville, and strong basketball.

Houston on the other hand has 2 ways out in my opinion. The XII would be Houston's ultimate choice, but I would only see that happening if the XII expanding to 14 or 16 because they wouldn't want a 5th team in the state. It would help open the Houston market that Texas A&M essentially took with them to the SEC. However, if the XII said "no" to Houston, I would see them finding a home in the Mt West. I would see the Mt West expanding to 14 with SMU and Houston, then 16 with UTEP and Tulsa.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:28 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1152
Memphis wants to be in the SEC or Big XII. It took them long enough to even get into the Big East/AAC, and I think Louisville is partly to blame for that. They won't support Memphis for ACC membership. I have to wonder if they'll even campaign for Cincy.

I agree with Cincy-ACC, though. I think the ACC's made some mistakes the past couple of years, and WVU and Cincy being overlooked are two of the biggest ones, with ND's special arrangement being right up there. The way Cincinnati is reinvesting in some of their facilities, though, like that significant overhaul of the football stadium, I think they know their ticket is getting punched one of these days, and probably very soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:35 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 318
Location: Austin, Texas
BePcr07 wrote:
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Speaking of homes, where do you see Cincinnati and/or Houston heading to (if these teams manage to find success, and in case the AAC might reach to serious jeopardy)?


I see Cincinnati ending up in the ACC. The have an ACC feel to me. Honestly, people disagree, but I think adding Cincinnati with Memphis would be a good idea for the ACC. 2 major markets, rivals with Louisville, and strong basketball.

Houston on the other hand has 2 ways out in my opinion. The XII would be Houston's ultimate choice, but I would only see that happening if the XII expanding to 14 or 16 because they wouldn't want a 5th team in the state. It would help open the Houston market that Texas A&M essentially took with them to the SEC. However, if the XII said "no" to Houston, I would see them finding a home in the Mt West. I would see the Mt West expanding to 14 with SMU and Houston, then 16 with UTEP and Tulsa.



Sorry to disagree. But, I don't see a way for UH to get into the Big 12. Rice would get the call before UH.
Also, A&M doesn't carry the Houston market. Sure, there are a crap ton of fans in Houston that love A&M...but, that doesn't mean they carry the whole market. I really don't think there is any market in Texas that is carried by one school. Even Austin, where I live, there are tons of Tech and A&M fans in this city. Texas just loves fb....and everybody tunes in to watch each State School. I think much of that stems from the SWC...when these schools developed such strong rivalries. We all just got used to watching all the other schools.

One thing that did disappoint me....A&M could have taken another Texas school with them to the SEC. But chose not to. If, they would have grabbed UH, SMU or Rice....then they really could have had a major impact on locking down a full market in the Houston or Eastern part of the State.

Your idea of the MWC grabbing some Texas schools is interesting. I could possibly see the MWC take UTEP, N. Tx, UTSA, and Rice....for a nice piece of Texas. All these schools are in major metro areas...which makes travel easy. The MWC could then split into 8 team divisions...which should also help lower travel. Seems like a pretty good idea. I just don't know if SMU and UH will be involved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 2:45 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1152
I agree about the Rice vs. Houston thing. Rice's ceiling is higher than Houston's, but, you know...you have to actually care a little about your sports to get into these major conferences. Because Rice hasn't, there they still sit...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 2:50 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1044
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
Back to the expansion part of the AAC, anyone has yet to find an additional 12th member (for full membership status, and putting a bit aside from Navy)? At least in a basketball perspective (in case division alignment play is needed also).

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:19 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1482
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
I agree about the Rice vs. Houston thing. Rice's ceiling is higher than Houston's, but, you know...you have to actually care a little about your sports to get into these major conferences. Because Rice hasn't, there they still sit...

People outside of Texas don't care about Rice, and likely wouldn't know much about Rice nor consider them for realignment scenarios (other than purely geographical ones) if it wasn't for their AAU status.

People inside Texas have a fondness for Rice, like most did about TCU. Their band, their baseball, their stadium, hosting one of the early Super Bowls, JFK's why does Rice play Texas speech, and many other aspects have endeared them to the people of Texas that outsiders don't realize.

Houston is looked down upon, it is almost the quintessential commuter college. Other than Phi Slama Jama, Andre Ware, and recently Case Keenam, Houston as been an after thought in Texas sports. They have little fan support or media coverage, but still that's 10 times more than what Rice has.

But that doesn't mean Rice doesn't care about sports, they are an elite baseball school, and are now the CUSA football champs thought their fb history is sporadic at best, but they've never been a basketball school, and likely never will be.

Rice is, to most Texas realignment aficionados, our legacy pick. The one we wished had made it in like Duke, Vandy, Northwestern, and Stanford were able to. But it likely won't happen, and even if it did, it would only be for the short term.

But I dispute your assertion that Rice doesn't care about sports. They just have a smaller budget, a small student body, and high academic standards, all of which makes it more difficult to complete with a large commuter school which has many student, a larger budget (from spending less per student as a commuter schools and also receiving state funding), and far lower academic standards, plus some name recognition from their little history I mentioned above. They try to compete, and sometime do, however they (like many smaller private schools) are continuously behind that eight ball.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:30 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:45 am
Posts: 225
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Back to the expansion part of the AAC, anyone has yet to find an additional 12th member (for full membership status, and putting a bit aside from Navy)? At least in a basketball perspective (in case division alignment play is needed also).


For AAC expansion, my candidates would be: Massachusetts, Buffalo, and Marshall

For football:

South: Central Florida, South Florida, Tulane, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Memphis
North: East Carolina, Cincinnati, Navy, Massachusetts, Buffalo, Temple, Connecticut

Marshall in replace of Massachusetts or Buffalo if either say no


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:28 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 754
Location: Columbus, OH
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Back to the expansion part of the AAC, anyone has yet to find an additional 12th member (for full membership status, and putting a bit aside from Navy)? At least in a basketball perspective (in case division alignment play is needed also).


As many of you know I am a huge advocate for adding UTSA--decent market and the only major competition for them in terms of following are the Spurs. The Roadrunners don't bring much to the table as far as basketball goes but their addition would allow for reasonable divisions.

UMass would add a lot to basketball but their football simply isn't ready and might never be. If they were added to the American I would make their football program wait a few years until they were actually ready to compete at this level because as it stands now they can't even compete in the MAC.

SUNY Buffalo would add a lot of academic prestige but they don't have a very storied sports history. If the Buffalo Bills were to relocate that might create a void that Buffalo could exploit.

I'm not a huge fan of Marshall being in the expansion discussion. Sure they are geographically close to Cincinnati and in the general vicinity of Temple but they have never won a C-USA football title--in fact I don't think they ever won C-USA East. They also don't offer much of a market.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:38 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1044
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
fighting muskie wrote:
I'm not a huge fan of Marshall being in the expansion discussion. Sure they are geographically close to Cincinnati and in the general vicinity of Temple but they have never won a C-USA football title--in fact I don't think they ever won C-USA East. They also don't offer much of a market.


Actually, Marshall DID win a C-USA East Division title this past season, which failed to win the C-USA title vs. Rice. Doesn't that count?

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:44 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 754
Location: Columbus, OH
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
fighting muskie wrote:
I'm not a huge fan of Marshall being in the expansion discussion. Sure they are geographically close to Cincinnati and in the general vicinity of Temple but they have never won a C-USA football title--in fact I don't think they ever won C-USA East. They also don't offer much of a market.


Actually, Marshall DID win a C-USA East Division title this past season, which failed to win the C-USA title vs. Rice. Doesn't that count?


That's right. I forgot about this past season. Then again, had UCF still been in the conference it would be a different story.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 7:39 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1044
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
fighting muskie wrote:
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
fighting muskie wrote:
I'm not a huge fan of Marshall being in the expansion discussion. Sure they are geographically close to Cincinnati and in the general vicinity of Temple but they have never won a C-USA football title--in fact I don't think they ever won C-USA East. They also don't offer much of a market.


Actually, Marshall DID win a C-USA East Division title this past season, which failed to win the C-USA title vs. Rice. Doesn't that count?


That's right. I forgot about this past season. Then again, had UCF still been in the conference it would be a different story.


Well then, I would agree with your point, now that you mentioned Central Florida; otherwise the Golden Knights (if they had stayed in C-USA) would had eventually brought a C-USA team "cleanly" into a BCS game (putting aside the well-accomplished 98-99 Tulane season led by Tommy Bowden).

But I believe that Marshall should re-join the MAC (in the MAC East. and have UMass for all-sports), so that Bowling Green would return to the MAC West, to offset even divisions; just in case if the Thundering Herd are not into consideration for being a future candidate in the AAC. After all, Marshall won its final national title (in the FCS level in the 96-97 season as a SoCon member) before re-joining the MAC for a 2nd time to upgrade to the FBS level. Plus, they had tremendous seasons at the time, including an undefeated season in the 99-2000 season, plus being ranked in the BCS standings in their earlier days.

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 10:04 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1152
tkalmus wrote:
But I dispute your assertion that Rice doesn't care about sports. They just have a smaller budget, a small student body, and high academic standards, all of which makes it more difficult to complete with a large commuter school which has many student, a larger budget (from spending less per student as a commuter schools and also receiving state funding), and far lower academic standards, plus some name recognition from their little history I mentioned above.


I think very highly of Rice, and have raised their case for inclusion in a lot of the major conferences based on their many upsides, but their own administrators said they simply won't invest certain resources into some of these programs.

While I don't equate football or basketball success to caring, I do believe that to actually care about your programs, certain resources must be consistently devoted to the maintenance and upkeep of programs as they stand in amongst. It's okay if Rice's athletics serve a different mission than those at other Division 1 peer institutions (Stanford, Northwestern, Duke, etc.), but their vision isn't congruent with Division 1 and the FBS level.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:58 am 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 11:27 am
Posts: 1
One thing that did disappoint me....A&M could have taken another Texas school with them to the SEC. But chose not to. If, they would have grabbed UH, SMU or Rice....then they really could have had a major impact on locking down a full market in the Houston or Eastern part of the State.

This is 100% inaccurate. aTm opted in, but the SEC was driving the bus regarding who and when schools would be admitted and would not have considered any other Texas school aside from UT-Austin. This move was all about expanding the conference footprint within which it can charge $1.35/household for the new SEC Network without significantly watering down the brand athletically. If there was a secondary consideration it was academics. As one of the marquee teams in college sports and a fine university to boot, UT-Austin is the only school for which the footprint expansion strategy would have been modified by the presidents of the SEC schools.

aTm alone already brings in all of Texas' markets while Mizzou brings in St. Louis and KC. Texas is now the most populous state in the SEC while Missouri is the fifth. There is no way that whatever benefits a limited-appeal school like Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech, Houston, etc. could offer would have been enough to offset the advantages of bringing another whole state containing two major-league markets under the SEC umbrella. Market redundancy is the reason FSU and Clemson, despite their success, remain locked out of the SEC while UNC, UVA and VATech essentially control their own destinies if/when they ever decide it is time to leave the ACC. Unless there was some unexplored avenue by which they could have forced their brethren in Austin to make the jump with them, any disappointment you feel toward aTm over this matter is completely unwarranted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:32 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 318
Location: Austin, Texas
jma019 wrote:
One thing that did disappoint me....A&M could have taken another Texas school with them to the SEC. But chose not to. If, they would have grabbed UH, SMU or Rice....then they really could have had a major impact on locking down a full market in the Houston or Eastern part of the State.

This is 100% inaccurate. aTm opted in, but the SEC was driving the bus regarding who and when schools would be admitted and would not have considered any other Texas school aside from UT-Austin. This move was all about expanding the conference footprint within which it can charge $1.35/household for the new SEC Network without significantly watering down the brand athletically. If there was a secondary consideration it was academics. As one of the marquee teams in college sports and a fine university to boot, UT-Austin is the only school for which the footprint expansion strategy would have been modified by the presidents of the SEC schools.

aTm alone already brings in all of Texas' markets while Mizzou brings in St. Louis and KC. Texas is now the most populous state in the SEC while Missouri is the fifth. There is no way that whatever benefits a limited-appeal school like Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech, Houston, etc. could offer would have been enough to offset the advantages of bringing another whole state containing two major-league markets under the SEC umbrella. Market redundancy is the reason FSU and Clemson, despite their success, remain locked out of the SEC while UNC, UVA and VATech essentially control their own destinies if/when they ever decide it is time to leave the ACC. Unless there was some unexplored avenue by which they could have forced their brethren in Austin to make the jump with them, any disappointment you feel toward aTm over this matter is completely unwarranted.


In your argument...you seem to be speaking from the SEC point of view. I can completely understand what you wrote.

But, I was speaking from an A&M point of view....or a Texas(state of) point of view. So, if A&M said they would only enter the SEC with one other Texas school. That is what I am saying. I wasn't planning on giving the SEC much of a choice. Take both or don't take any.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 04, 2014 1:17 pm 
Offline
Sophomore
Sophomore

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:01 pm
Posts: 63
mozilla wrote:
jma019 wrote:
One thing that did disappoint me....A&M could have taken another Texas school with them to the SEC. But chose not to. If, they would have grabbed UH, SMU or Rice....then they really could have had a major impact on locking down a full market in the Houston or Eastern part of the State.

This is 100% inaccurate. aTm opted in, but the SEC was driving the bus regarding who and when schools would be admitted and would not have considered any other Texas school aside from UT-Austin. This move was all about expanding the conference footprint within which it can charge $1.35/household for the new SEC Network without significantly watering down the brand athletically. If there was a secondary consideration it was academics. As one of the marquee teams in college sports and a fine university to boot, UT-Austin is the only school for which the footprint expansion strategy would have been modified by the presidents of the SEC schools.

aTm alone already brings in all of Texas' markets while Mizzou brings in St. Louis and KC. Texas is now the most populous state in the SEC while Missouri is the fifth. There is no way that whatever benefits a limited-appeal school like Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech, Houston, etc. could offer would have been enough to offset the advantages of bringing another whole state containing two major-league markets under the SEC umbrella. Market redundancy is the reason FSU and Clemson, despite their success, remain locked out of the SEC while UNC, UVA and VATech essentially control their own destinies if/when they ever decide it is time to leave the ACC. Unless there was some unexplored avenue by which they could have forced their brethren in Austin to make the jump with them, any disappointment you feel toward aTm over this matter is completely unwarranted.


In your argument...you seem to be speaking from the SEC point of view. I can completely understand what you wrote.

But, I was speaking from an A&M point of view....or a Texas(state of) point of view. So, if A&M said they would only enter the SEC with one other Texas school. That is what I am saying. I wasn't planning on giving the SEC much of a choice. Take both or don't take any.


Yes, but it was Texas A&M that wanted out of the Big 12 and into the SEC. Something about beggars can't be choosers. If A&M had tried to play the card you are talking about, they probably would have won the Big 12 the last two years because they certainly would not have gotten an invite from the SEC.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5241 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330 ... 350  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group