NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 9:20 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 169 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 4:30 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811
The conference doesn't form until 2013, but we'll stay ahead of the curve here.

For all things pertaining to the yet un-named Conference USA and Mountain West merged conference (technically, both are folding and a new conference will emerge)...post them here.

If you would like to review what we will one day call the "historical archives" or these two conferences who were just on the cusp of the big time, you can do so here:

CUSA Thread: 2003-2012
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1453&start=465

Mountain West thread: 2003-2012
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2401&start=450

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 4:34 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 882
Hahaha. I was just going to say "Should we merge these threads, since everything is going to apply to both now?"

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 4:51 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7439
Here is ESPN article discussing the new conference at http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story ... ources-say


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:24 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 9:02 pm
Posts: 1472
Location: Richmond, Virginia
The university presidents pledged support for a new conference that would include 18 to 24 members.

The schools would participate in a football championship format that includes semifinal games.

The leagues also would compete in a basketball tournament and play regular season games within divisions. This would likely minimize the travel burden for schools stretched from coast to coast.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c ... 3572.story


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:06 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:47 pm
Posts: 252
The conference members are still subject to change pending dominoes that are yet to fall with Big 12, Big East and possibly even ACC expansion.

There are a lot of possibilities that exist as to which teams in this soon to be MWCUSA that could depart for the Big East, should their membership get raided by the Big 12 and ACC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:58 am 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811
diabsoule wrote:
The conference members are still subject to change pending dominoes that are yet to fall with Big 12, Big East and possibly even ACC expansion.

There are a lot of possibilities that exist as to which teams in this soon to be MWCUSA that could depart for the Big East, should their membership get raided by the Big 12 and ACC.


Though, seems like Temple is a likely replacement for a BE departure like Louisville to the big 12. Based on the available schools, even if Uconn and Rutgers left, I'm not so sure "all sports" members would be the initial target. Marshall? Tulsa? UAB? USM? for all sports? Not so sure all parties would dig that when you can just grab a UNLV (gotta think looking at the CUSA/MWC merger that UNLV would change their stance), NEvada, etc would be FB candidates for the BE.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:00 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7439
Blog article out of San Antonio with speculation regarding possible future expansion targets of this new league at http://blog.mysanantonio.com/utsa/2012/ ... ons-remain


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:53 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 10:30 am
Posts: 1372
Location: Baltimore, MD
I get the 16 team, 2 division setup. The concept of "18 to 24" is ludicrous.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:07 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1572
The merger is an expected reaction, considering the impact of raids and the struggle for security, clout per bowls, tv exposure, etc.
On a simple visual level, I can where their leaders may see it as a safe, practical, uncomplicated, and face-saving move.
One C-USA President was referring to the fact it would cover 5 time zones (with Hawaii), as if that was a desirable, pre-set goal, aspired by all.

The problems with the merger shall be multiple. Here is just a few of them.
(a) Stability: The new design will not assure this. As with C-USA, and the MWC to some extent, certain schools could get picked off as changes and additions happen with other conferences, particularly the BCS ones. This constantly is a factor in trying to promote and sustain cohesion as well as develop more long-term rivalries.
(b) Proven to be too big and far-flung: Remember the breakoff from the old 16-team WAC? Schools that carry their weight will start to get frustrated with those that become a drag, i. e. attendance figures, lack of success, etc. There's not the level of revenue compared to BCS conferences that keeps most afloat and competitive.
(c) Travel: This will be extensive, even for some in divisional play that includes all sports competition. These schools don't have the budgets of schools like Notre Dame and LSU. Fan travel to away game shall be further strained.
(d) BCS/AQ Appeal: The leadership of the merger shall hope, if not expect, that somehow their champion gets into the BCS via BCS/AQ revisions for more inclusiveness, or that most years a dominant team from the merger shall make the cut. Also, hoped for is a lucrative TV package (uhh, a proliferation of ESPN2 Tuesday & Thursday night games?).
Not sure the extent of broadcast rights have been promised (certainly there has been network talking); but the approach sounds more like "build and they shall come".

It's somewhat unknown how much conversation has been undertaken with more regional conferences such as the Sunbelt as to other options.

One positive factor about the merger is that athletic compatibility across the board appears generally consistent. It should make for some exciting and often close fb games in different regions. No one particular school, at this time, may run the whole show for a long period of time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:21 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811
sec03 wrote:
The merger is an expected reaction, considering the impact of raids and the struggle for security, clout per bowls, tv exposure, etc.
On a simple visual level, I can where their leaders may see it as a safe, practical, uncomplicated, and face-saving move.
One C-USA President was referring to the fact it would cover 5 time zones (with Hawaii), as if that was a desirable, pre-set goal, aspired by all.

The problems with the merger shall be multiple. Here is just a few of them.
(a) Stability: The new design will not assure this. As with C-USA, and the MWC to some extent, certain schools could get picked off as changes and additions happen with other conferences, particularly the BCS ones. This constantly is a factor in trying to promote and sustain cohesion as well as develop more long-term rivalries.
(b) Proven to be too big and far-flung: Remember the breakoff from the old 16-team WAC? Schools that carry their weight will start to get frustrated with those that become a drag, i. e. attendance figures, lack of success, etc. There's not the level of revenue compared to BCS conferences that keeps most afloat and competitive.
(c) Travel: This will be extensive, even for some in divisional play that includes all sports competition. These schools don't have the budgets of schools like Notre Dame and LSU. Fan travel to away game shall be further strained.
(d) BCS/AQ Appeal: The leadership of the merger shall hope, if not expect, that somehow their champion gets into the BCS via BCS/AQ revisions for more inclusiveness, or that most years a dominant team from the merger shall make the cut. Also, hoped for is a lucrative TV package (uhh, a proliferation of ESPN2 Tuesday & Thursday night games?).
Not sure the extent of broadcast rights have been promised (certainly there has been network talking); but the approach sounds more like "build and they shall come".

It's somewhat unknown how much conversation has been undertaken with more regional conferences such as the Sunbelt as to other options.

One positive factor about the merger is that athletic compatibility across the board appears generally consistent. It should make for some exciting and often close fb games in different regions. No one particular school, at this time, may run the whole show for a long period of time.



Quite true.

Figure the MWC had another option: to just absorb the WAC football schools for all-sports:

MWC:
Air Force
Colorado St.
Wyoming
New Mexico
UNLV
* Nevada
* Fresno St.
*~Hawaii
With options of: UTEP, Utah St., San Jose St., Idaho, NMSU, UTSA, Texas St. to get to 12.

But they passed, instead opting for UTEP, Rice, Tulsa, Tulane, USM, UAB, ECU and Marshall.

One option was to stick in the region by adding all the non-Pac12 schools - BSU & SDSU. They passed. Instead, they went big country, coast to coast, southeast to northwest. So gotta assume the move is a way to merge, and then if more schools leave, be able to just pluck WAC/SB schools. Time will tell if it works for them.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 2:44 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 882
sec03 wrote:
The problems with the merger shall be multiple. Here is just a few of them.
(a) Stability: The new design will not assure this. As with C-USA, and the MWC to some extent, certain schools could get picked off as changes and additions happen with other conferences, particularly the BCS ones. This constantly is a factor in trying to promote and sustain cohesion as well as develop more long-term rivalries.
(b) Proven to be too big and far-flung: Remember the breakoff from the old 16-team WAC? Schools that carry their weight will start to get frustrated with those that become a drag, i. e. attendance figures, lack of success, etc. There's not the level of revenue compared to BCS conferences that keeps most afloat and competitive.
(c) Travel: This will be extensive, even for some in divisional play that includes all sports competition. These schools don't have the budgets of schools like Notre Dame and LSU. Fan travel to away game shall be further strained.
(d) BCS/AQ Appeal: The leadership of the merger shall hope, if not expect, that somehow their champion gets into the BCS via BCS/AQ revisions for more inclusiveness, or that most years a dominant team from the merger shall make the cut. Also, hoped for is a lucrative TV package (uhh, a proliferation of ESPN2 Tuesday & Thursday night games?).
Not sure the extent of broadcast rights have been promised (certainly there has been network talking); but the approach sounds more like "build and they shall come".


I agree with a lot of those, however:

(A) The design won't assure "stability" in the sense that nothing changes. Nothing can. But it does protect them. It assures stability for those left behind the next time they get raided. Each conference was three members above the threshold for "in a world of hurt." If they get raided again, they'll have more members left after the raid than CUSA or the MWC has now. THAT'S the stability.

(B) too big and too far flung is based on what? The WAC experiment? The Big East has done fine with Marquette-Providence-Tampa and they don't have a division format.

The problem with the old WAC being far flung was because the 16-team league had so many close rivals that splitting into two eight-team divisions didn't work. This league does not have that problem. The league has a VERY clear divide. Rice was a WAC member out of necessity. Ditto Tulsa.

The only team with "rivals" in a different division is UTEP. And since they have the "Hawaii problem," a 16-team all-sports league with Hawaii being 17 in football would work perfectly:

Add Temple or North Texas to the C-USA side:
West: UNLV, Fresno, Nevada, Colo St, Air Force, Wyoming, New Mexico, Hawaii
East: ECU, Marshall, UAB, So Miss, Tulane, Rice, Tulsa, North Texas

Each of those teams plays 7 division football games. Put UTEP in either division and they play four from each group (similar to the MAC's 13-team setup.

C) In all sports, UTEP's in the West, which improves their travel (and really improves the East's travel).
In football, each team would have one trip to that's two time zones away... every other year. Not bad at all.
In all sports, it works fine. Sports that had a single-round robin before (soccer, baseball, softball) have virtually no change. You do your division once, and two cross-overs. With eight teams, you do travel partners. Instead of going to UTEP and SMU, C-USA teams go to UTEP and New Mexico, or CSU/AF, or Fresno/Nev. Or UNLV/Wyoming. For the MWC group, instead of the TCU trip, it's So Miss/Tulane.

They're going to play the same number of games as before, only one trip is a little longer than before. It's not like a traveling carnival covering all 17 teams.

D) This is the big one to me. The fact is, they've essentially relegated themselves to second-tier status (or third tier). But the boat sailed when Boise State and TCU left.

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:42 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1463
Just found this, I'd add UNT over LA Tech...and if Air Force/Temple joins the BE you can add SJSU/LA Tech
Image

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:14 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
Take out La Tech and Utah St. and that should be the conf., no need to add more mouths to feed and not have any cross over games otherwise you're looking at the West just being the Mt West and the East being CUSA with the conf title game being nothing more than a bowl match up.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 5:09 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1572
Utah State remains interesting simply because there would be no Utah school in the basic merger.

Another school seldom spoken about, but on the uprise, is Arkansas State from the Sunbelt---also a good location per this configuration and fairly close to the city of Memphis.

Do think Temple would be a nice catch, particularly if it involved all-sports (eventually?).

Going for FIU would get back in Fla. (C-USA).

One thing for sure, distance does not much matter anymore per BE & the MoutainUSA merger. But, location does, it may be assumed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 7:23 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 882
Honestly, I think Temple should turn down a C-USA/MWC invite for all sports.

Temple's ascension to the Big East is pretty much dependent on two things:
#1 - A football/basketball split that makes the Villanova strong-arm cease.
#2 - Being so good, the rest of the Big East says "screw you, we need them."

The MWC or MAC is immaterial for that. It would probably be easier to win the MAC than the MWCUSA.

While Temple could get some more dough because of this, they'd leave behind over $9 million in NCAA tournament revenue.

The only way it works for Temple is if they're seeing a MASSIVE increase in TV money.

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 169 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  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