<<Bullet, you can show me all the statistics you want, however, as a supporter of a playoff it shows on the field. Likewise conference comparison is proven on the field.>>
Lash, first, I follow the Big 12 and SEC closest, NOT CUSA. Stats are objective, especially when they cover long periods of time, while looking at one week is not objective. The stats compared the top teams. I don't remember now whether they used the polls or BCS, but the facts were that there was not much difference between the NBE, MWC and CUSA.
And as far as opinions, looking at the last 5 years, not just 1 week, ranking the NBE and New CUSA teams (IMHO-and based on memory, which unfortunately is not 100% reliable anymore):
2. Southern Miss
3. NBE Louisville
4. NBE Pitt
5. NBE WVU
9. NBE Cincinnati
12. NBE Syracuse
17. NBE USF (they've only been I-A 3 years)
19. NBE UConn
20. NBE Rutgers
And there's not a lot of ground between 4th and 14th as all of the schools have had some bad years recently, notably Syracuse who probably has the strongest program historically in the NBE.
<<Let alone the fact that the other 5 BCS conferences especially SEC and ACC want not part of Conf USA in the BCS. Many of those fans will be voting each week in the polls and will not cut Conf USA any slack. Conf USA will have to earn every vote.>>
The same could be said about the BE.
<<I dont see how taking on SMU, Rice, Tulsa, and UTEP is helping the image of your conference at all. With East Carolina crashing, Marshall on the decline, Tulane one step from dropping football, the bottom half of the new Conf USA is going to pull the top half down.>>
Taking on Cincinnati and USF isn't helping the BE image. With Syracuse crashing, Pitt on the decline, Rutgers one step from dropping football....The NBE faces many of the same issues. They do have a definite advantage on attendance, but that doesn't mean they don't have issues there. They have 4 of the bottom 6 BCS teams.
<<Additionally Conf USA is basically a new conference with a lot of logistics to overcome including new rivals that will need to be inforced to create TV and fan attenance interest.>>
There is a lot of new, but it is a familiar group. 4 of the schools were together in the WAC and they join UH who was in the same conference with 3 of them in the past and Tulane who played Rice, SMU and Tulsa fairly frequently. Tulsa also regularly played Memphis and USM in the past. 4 of the eastern members were together and Marshall has a history in the Southern Conference with ECU. Only UCF has limited exposure to the other schools. 6 of the 12 are new as 5 schools have left, but most of the new schools have a history with each other and the remaining schools.
The NBE is even more a new conference as 4 of their 8 members are leaving. They are adding 2 new I-A schools in UConn and USF who have little history with the other 6. UL and UC have not historically played many eastern schools. I would be surprised if it took 2 hands to count the number of games UL played prior to the last 10 years against the 4 remaining BE schools.
<<Remember to get a BCS bid, SOS is included in the computer rankings. The computer rankings are one third of the overall BCS rankings. >>
With margin of victory removed from the computer rankings (IMO done primarily as a direct result of Fresno's run at the BCS), the BCS conferences shot themselves in the foot. The non-BCS schools were actually higher in the computers than in the polls. SOS has been diluted in the computers. TCU had Five 3 point wins, often over mediocre teams, and they were as high as #3 in some of the computer polls. The good news for the NBE is that Pitt and WVU won't be hurt too badly if Rutgers doesn't repeat their Mich. St. performance, UConn and USF don't compete well with tougher schedules, Syracuse continues their nose dive, and Cincinnati stays consistent with their history.
<<Just for argument sake, less say the Big East is currently equal to Conf USA, the next few years you are going to see both conferences going in seperate directions and its has nothing to do with BCS and everything to do with taking on 12 teams when half aren't close to BCS material.>>
I agree whole-heartedly the BE should not have gone to 12 yet, although I did think they should have split and gone to 10. The BE is taking a gamble with USF, UConn and Cincinnati. None have ever done anything in football. Louisville isn't a gamble, but they had not done anything prior to the 90s. I totally disagree that the bottom half hurts the top half. Look at the MAC. The bottom half is REALLY bad, but the top half has done well lately and some of the clowns on ESPN seem to think they are anything other than the 10th best conference. Rutgers, Temple and Pitt (who was really bad in the 90s) didn't hurt Miami any. I will also disagree that the bottom half of the new CUSA is that bad. UTEP, Tulsa and SMU, yes, but the rest, no. Perception may hurt TV ratings, but it is not reality. UTEP, Tulsa and SMU add other things than fb and UTEP and SMU both have potential (see USF and Cincinnati).
If the conferences diverge, it will be because of TV exposure and the halo effect from basketball that will be the biggest factors.