NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:21 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 626 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 ... 42  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 7:02 am 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3813
tute79 wrote:
A-10 / MAC maybe ? That would give MAC 12 /14.

Since adding GMU, A-10 is at an odd number.
Assuming they would lose 2 to Big East (St. Louis U and either Dayton or an eastern school like VCU), the A-10 may want to add another.
Maybe they HAVE invited JMU and were told that JMU's response is pending....


Why would the A10 want JMU when there are so many better basketball options out there? I dont see any reality where JMU would be considered until others said no. The A10 has 4 schools in he region now, so no need to add lower quality ones (basketball). Sure, JMU football is great, fantastic stadium too, but the A10 isn't a football conference.

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 11:06 am 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:07 am
Posts: 21
Fresno St. Alum wrote:

How about add Albany and Stony Brook for all sports. Offer fb only to CCSU and Bryant so they can go to the AEC for other sports. NJIT gives you 10. Unless you have a better option from a NE10 or ECC school wanting to move up.


Why would the CAAF conference care enough to offer FB membership to CCSU and/or Bryant? It doesn't provide a nice, clean North-South break for divisions, it doesn't help the CAA become less of a hybrid league, etc. Pretty sure NJIT doesn't sponsor the same set of sports as UA and SBU and there would still be AQ issues (six teams). AFAIK, no other options for schools wanting to move up.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 11:20 am 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:07 am
Posts: 21
tute79 wrote:
Pretty sure Patriot League announced about 6 months ago, that they would go scholarship.

They were already scholly in BB.

For football they used the Academic Index.
Fordham (an affilaite) bascially called them on it, and said that they were goinng ahead with 63 scholarship equivalents (this was a bit over a year ago).
The Patriot would not kick htem out, but made Fordham ineligible for the league title while they "studied the matter".
Then they announced they were going to scholarships (which conforms to the rest of FCS (except for the Ivy League)).


Scholarships and the AI are separate issues. The Patriot resolved the scholarship issue and Fordham will again be eligible for the Patriot AQ in Football in 2014 IIRC. The Patriot still has the AI and no redshirting. Those are the issues for W&M (and Richmond, Villanova and any other school that might consider membership) and scholarships alone aren't bringing them into the Patriot.


tute79 wrote:
I see your point about the schools losing face if they go back to the AE.

I still think an AE/CAA merger may make a ton of sense.
Maybe the CAA would have to approach AE and suggest a merger (with CAA as surviving entitiy) with the implication they will pick the AE apart if they resist.
Note: the CAA currently does not sponsor CAA FB (since they are below hte min. 6). CAA FB is an independent entity run outof the CAA office.
A merger would let the combined conference bring FB "in house" and they could then control any additional invittions.


I too think some kind of merger makes sense and I fully understand that CAAF is a separate entity. My opinion is that football playing schools have different funding and Title IX issues that make it logical to align with similar schools. Common sense says that the AEC, CAA and even the SoCon should be working together to resolve the current problems. I'm not holding my breath. Personally, I don't think the AEC will see this common sense and I expect the CAA to be the driver going forward.


Last edited by UNH_Alum_In_CT on Sat Apr 06, 2013 10:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:29 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1152
My understanding was that a big reason AE couldn't get football sponsored was the same school who just left it for the Patriot. A long-time "thorn" in AE endeavors, including the naming of the hockey conference, which essentially IS the AE's.

With them gone, who's going to step up and block football sponsorship if they can secure some of those other "moving parts" to set it up?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:57 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
UNH_Alum_In_CT wrote:
Fresno St. Alum wrote:

How about add Albany and Stony Brook for all sports. Offer fb only to CCSU and Bryant so they can go to the AEC for other sports. NJIT gives you 10. Unless you have a better option from a NE10 or ECC school wanting to move up.


Why would the CAAF conference care enough to offer FB membership to CCSU and/or Bryant? It doesn't provide a nice, clean North-South break for divisions, it doesn't help the CAA become less of a hybrid league, etc. Pretty sure NJIT doesn't sponsor the same set of sports as UA and SBU and there would still be AQ issues (six teams). AFAIK, no other options for schools wanting to move up.


I think the CAA will go south w/ SoCon schools if they can snag them, I was giving a hypothetical for CCSU and Bryant to get AEC which they wanted and have a home for fb. Also Big South could bail them out if they want in the AEC. Big South bailed out Monmouth. If NJIT joined the AEC to replace UA and SBU they'd have 8 w/ the 7 full D-I members needed to keep AQ plus my scenario had Bryant and CCSU in the AEC for 10 w/ 9 being full members. I don't know why you have them w/6

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 10:24 am 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:07 am
Posts: 21
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
UNH_Alum_In_CT wrote:
Fresno St. Alum wrote:

How about add Albany and Stony Brook for all sports. Offer fb only to CCSU and Bryant so they can go to the AEC for other sports. NJIT gives you 10. Unless you have a better option from a NE10 or ECC school wanting to move up.


Why would the CAAF conference care enough to offer FB membership to CCSU and/or Bryant? It doesn't provide a nice, clean North-South break for divisions, it doesn't help the CAA become less of a hybrid league, etc. Pretty sure NJIT doesn't sponsor the same set of sports as UA and SBU and there would still be AQ issues (six teams). AFAIK, no other options for schools wanting to move up.


I think the CAA will go south w/ SoCon schools if they can snag them, I was giving a hypothetical for CCSU and Bryant to get AEC which they wanted and have a home for fb. Also Big South could bail them out if they want in the AEC. Big South bailed out Monmouth. If NJIT joined the AEC to replace UA and SBU they'd have 8 w/ the 7 full D-I members needed to keep AQ plus my scenario had Bryant and CCSU in the AEC for 10 w/ 9 being full members. I don't know why you have them w/6


I meant six for Olympic sports not overall membership, thought I had said that in my first reply. Baseball, softball, lacrosse, field hockey, etc. are all part of the mix.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 10:40 am 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:07 am
Posts: 21
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
My understanding was that a big reason AE couldn't get football sponsored was the same school who just left it for the Patriot. A long-time "thorn" in AE endeavors, including the naming of the hockey conference, which essentially IS the AE's.

With them gone, who's going to step up and block football sponsorship if they can secure some of those other "moving parts" to set it up?


There are still five non football schools to deal with -- Vermont, Hartford, Binghamton, UMBC and now Lowell. Why would they be interested in sponsoring football when it will result in more than twelve all sports members once football schools are added to provide stability with at least eight football schools? While that could help Olympic sports, it hurts Basketball.

And it's not as simple as just sponsoring football. There's the issue of waiting two years for an AQ. There's the issue of league strength when any variation of AE Football probably isn't strong enough to garner an at large bid while NEC schools ramp up to full scholarship. If Albany and Stony Brook go to the CAA for all sports, then AE Football is not feasible. UNH would not leave CAAF under those circumstances because the league would be a significant downgrade in quality. UNH stayed when two Southern schools were added (ODU and GaStU) so I don't think adding two new Southern schools would deter them unless they're located in the Deep South and not near a major airport. JMHO


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:40 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
UNH_Alum_In_CT wrote:
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
My understanding was that a big reason AE couldn't get football sponsored was the same school who just left it for the Patriot. A long-time "thorn" in AE endeavors, including the naming of the hockey conference, which essentially IS the AE's.

With them gone, who's going to step up and block football sponsorship if they can secure some of those other "moving parts" to set it up?


There are still five non football schools to deal with -- Vermont, Hartford, Binghamton, UMBC and now Lowell. Why would they be interested in sponsoring football when it will result in more than twelve all sports members once football schools are added to provide stability with at least eight football schools? While that could help Olympic sports, it hurts Basketball.

And it's not as simple as just sponsoring football. There's the issue of waiting two years for an AQ. There's the issue of league strength when any variation of AE Football probably isn't strong enough to garner an at large bid while NEC schools ramp up to full scholarship. If Albany and Stony Brook go to the CAA for all sports, then AE Football is not feasible. UNH would not leave CAAF under those circumstances because the league would be a significant downgrade in quality. UNH stayed when two Southern schools were added (ODU and GaStU) so I don't think adding two new Southern schools would deter them unless they're located in the Deep South and not near a major airport. JMHO


First off, they would only need 6 to sponsor FCS football. They have four right now and could easily get Rhode Island and Monmouth to join from the Big South. So they wouldn't have to expand to more than 12 as you say unless they wanted to and it helped their basketball product. Second, Rhode Island did leave when the league went too far south, why wouldn't they in the future? And if the NEC goes to full scholarship I would guarantee the northern schools would bail on the CAA.

That said, there are indeed schools the AE could add that would help their basketball and football product! Robert Morris and Bryant are two out of the NEC worth adding. If the MAC is coming for JMU there is reason to suggest W&M will bail leaving a significant gap between the Northern and Southern CAA schools. That would leave Northeastern, Drexel, Hofstra, Delaware, and Towson looking to either push out UNCW and Charleston or for another home. I think many of us expect the A-10 to add two more next year and it'll likely be among that group anyway.

I think it's worth noting they made a play for CCSU and Bryant. They're wanted to expand in the NE area even more. Would that force UMBC out of the AE and is their plan to just stay in that area? I always assumed if the AE was going to sponsor football they'd use the opportunity to bridge the gap to them but that doesn't appear to be the case. It would be nice to see the AE take the Northeast, CAA the Central-east, and the So-Con the southeast.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:28 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:07 am
Posts: 21
SJSUFan2010 wrote:

First off, they would only need 6 to sponsor FCS football. They have four right now and could easily get Rhode Island and Monmouth to join from the Big South. So they wouldn't have to expand to more than 12 as you say unless they wanted to and it helped their basketball product. Second, Rhode Island did leave when the league went too far south, why wouldn't they in the future? And if the NEC goes to full scholarship I would guarantee the northern schools would bail on the CAA.

That said, there are indeed schools the AE could add that would help their basketball and football product! Robert Morris and Bryant are two out of the NEC worth adding. If the MAC is coming for JMU there is reason to suggest W&M will bail leaving a significant gap between the Northern and Southern CAA schools. That would leave Northeastern, Drexel, Hofstra, Delaware, and Towson looking to either push out UNCW and Charleston or for another home. I think many of us expect the A-10 to add two more next year and it'll likely be among that group anyway.

I think it's worth noting they made a play for CCSU and Bryant. They're wanted to expand in the NE area even more. Would that force UMBC out of the AE and is their plan to just stay in that area? I always assumed if the AE was going to sponsor football they'd use the opportunity to bridge the gap to them but that doesn't appear to be the case. It would be nice to see the AE take the Northeast, CAA the Central-east, and the So-Con the southeast.


While true that technically only six are needed to sponsor football, reality says that nobody is going to leave an established, multiple playoff bid league for a start-up league that has to worry about two affiliate members to maintain an AQ and wait two years for that AQ. Especially when you add in a significant drop in quality and horrendous scheduling problems with such a small league. Without some type of a scheduling agreement, there's no way the other CAA teams continue to schedule home and home with the NY and New England teams. The Patriot survives because it has a scheduling agreement with the Ivies (which could be at risk since the PL added scholarships). The NEC schools are finally announcing their 2013 schedules, it's been that difficult. And personally, I wouldn't recommend anyone's football future be reliant on Rhody who could decide to drop back to lower scholarships or kill their program at any time. JMHO, but if you want a solid, viable league then it should have a minimum of eight all sports members. Anything less than that and why would UNH, Albany or Stony Brook ever be interested? (I never speak for what Maine wants to do.) Frankly, with their planned stadium enhancements I don't think Albany or Stony Brook see their football future with Bryant, Monmouth, Sacred Heart, Wagner,, Robert Morris, etc. They could have stayed in the NEC for that. They want to be associated with Maine, UNH, Delaware, Villanova, Towson, William and Mary, Richmond and JMU if they stick around. Why add the travel to Pittsburgh (Robert Morris) when bundling trips for Olympic sports to UMBC would be less expensive and maintain ties with already associated schools?

From my UNH point of view based on knowing that UNH cares significantly more about football than basketball, the goal is keeping the core of Maine, UNH, Albany, Stony Brook, Delaware, Towson and W&M together. Hopefully, that will keep Richmond, Villanova and Rhody on board as affiliates for a ten team football league. Preferably that core of seven would be in an all sports league and a couple more football schools could be added for 12 and divisions to ease travel. FWIW, a full scholarship NEC isn't on the radar, why wouldn't they have done so to keep Albany and Stony Brook? I don't think the small, private schools want to go that route so it's not an option. Also, since UNH has virtually no history in any sport with the small private Bryant, Sacred Heart, Wagner, Robert Morris, Duquesne, SFCPA, etc., I doubt they'd ever bail on Delaware (playing since the 50's), Richmond (playing since the mid 80's), Towson (playing since the early 80's) or W&M/Villanova (league mates for about two decades now) . No way they'd bail on fellow northeastern publics Maine, Albany and Stony Brook for small, private NEC schools either.

Let's stop the hybrid leagues, they don't work. Northeastern, Hofstra and Drexel would probably prefer getting away from football schools too! I hope the A-10 does take some of them to help nudge the remaining CAA Football schools to bond with UNH, Maine, Albany and Stony Brook. I believe the remaining FCS leagues are all sports leagues or leagues where the majority of members sponsor scholarship football.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 2:08 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
UNH_Alum_In_CT wrote:
SJSUFan2010 wrote:

First off, they would only need 6 to sponsor FCS football. They have four right now and could easily get Rhode Island and Monmouth to join from the Big South. So they wouldn't have to expand to more than 12 as you say unless they wanted to and it helped their basketball product. Second, Rhode Island did leave when the league went too far south, why wouldn't they in the future? And if the NEC goes to full scholarship I would guarantee the northern schools would bail on the CAA.

That said, there are indeed schools the AE could add that would help their basketball and football product! Robert Morris and Bryant are two out of the NEC worth adding. If the MAC is coming for JMU there is reason to suggest W&M will bail leaving a significant gap between the Northern and Southern CAA schools. That would leave Northeastern, Drexel, Hofstra, Delaware, and Towson looking to either push out UNCW and Charleston or for another home. I think many of us expect the A-10 to add two more next year and it'll likely be among that group anyway.

I think it's worth noting they made a play for CCSU and Bryant. They're wanted to expand in the NE area even more. Would that force UMBC out of the AE and is their plan to just stay in that area? I always assumed if the AE was going to sponsor football they'd use the opportunity to bridge the gap to them but that doesn't appear to be the case. It would be nice to see the AE take the Northeast, CAA the Central-east, and the So-Con the southeast.


While true that technically only six are needed to sponsor football, reality says that nobody is going to leave an established, multiple playoff bid league for a start-up league that has to worry about two affiliate members to maintain an AQ and wait two years for that AQ. Especially when you add in a significant drop in quality and horrendous scheduling problems with such a small league. Without some type of a scheduling agreement, there's no way the other CAA teams continue to schedule home and home with the NY and New England teams. The Patriot survives because it has a scheduling agreement with the Ivies (which could be at risk since the PL added scholarships). The NEC schools are finally announcing their 2013 schedules, it's been that difficult. And personally, I wouldn't recommend anyone's football future be reliant on Rhody who could decide to drop back to lower scholarships or kill their program at any time. JMHO, but if you want a solid, viable league then it should have a minimum of eight all sports members. Anything less than that and why would UNH, Albany or Stony Brook ever be interested? (I never speak for what Maine wants to do.) Frankly, with their planned stadium enhancements I don't think Albany or Stony Brook see their football future with Bryant, Monmouth, Sacred Heart, Wagner,, Robert Morris, etc. They could have stayed in the NEC for that. They want to be associated with Maine, UNH, Delaware, Villanova, Towson, William and Mary, Richmond and JMU if they stick around. Why add the travel to Pittsburgh (Robert Morris) when bundling trips for Olympic sports to UMBC would be less expensive and maintain ties with already associated schools?

From my UNH point of view based on knowing that UNH cares significantly more about football than basketball, the goal is keeping the core of Maine, UNH, Albany, Stony Brook, Delaware, Towson and W&M together. Hopefully, that will keep Richmond, Villanova and Rhody on board as affiliates for a ten team football league. Preferably that core of seven would be in an all sports league and a couple more football schools could be added for 12 and divisions to ease travel. FWIW, a full scholarship NEC isn't on the radar, why wouldn't they have done so to keep Albany and Stony Brook? I don't think the small, private schools want to go that route so it's not an option. Also, since UNH has virtually no history in any sport with the small private Bryant, Sacred Heart, Wagner, Robert Morris, Duquesne, SFCPA, etc., I doubt they'd ever bail on Delaware (playing since the 50's), Richmond (playing since the mid 80's), Towson (playing since the early 80's) or W&M/Villanova (league mates for about two decades now) . No way they'd bail on fellow northeastern publics Maine, Albany and Stony Brook for small, private NEC schools either.

Let's stop the hybrid leagues, they don't work. Northeastern, Hofstra and Drexel would probably prefer getting away from football schools too! I hope the A-10 does take some of them to help nudge the remaining CAA Football schools to bond with UNH, Maine, Albany and Stony Brook. I believe the remaining FCS leagues are all sports leagues or leagues where the majority of members sponsor scholarship football.



All interesting but I ask you a couple questions. Why do you think the AE asked football schools to join? Bryant I at least get, they have decent BBall. But CCSU? And my second question, why do you think Nova and Delaware won't join the AE if they take over the football conference? The AE taking over the football conference in my eyes is about one thing only and that's making sure the CAA doesn't bring on Southern members like Elon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:47 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 754
Location: Columbus, OH
With there being nothing but silence lately regarding the future of the CAA i'm guessing that the expansion discussions are probably stonewalled. The northern schools are probably still demanding that the expansion include at least 1-2 new northern teams. Meanwhile the southern schools are still trying to sell a division model and the addition of 3 southern schools. Meanwhile Delaware and Towson just want to keep the football league intact and not in the hands of America East and William & Mary is getting impatient with everyone.

Meanwhile in SoCon-land they need to figure out an expansion plan by July 1 2014 or their football league will be down to a meager 7 members. They will need to act before the OVC makes a play for Samford and UT Chattanooga--if those two schools suspect Davidson is leaning towards the CAA it would behoove them to go to the OVC if the OVC expresses interest.

I really think William & Mary has the power to tilt this thing--everyone knows the Patriot wants them so they can use that as leverage. Also, if Wm & Mary grows frustrated with the CAA's bickering and decides they want to align with the SoCon then Charleston, UNC Wilmington, and Richmond football follow them.

The three northern basketball schools are in the position where they can stonewall as long as they want--they can afford to wait and either force the southern schools to concede to their demands or wait for them to get so fed up they leave the CAA and then the northern schools are free to add the northern members they want.

Delaware and Towson are the schools who really need resolution to situation and are probably the ones trying to mediate between the two extreme factions. These schools like the CAA (with football) the way it is and they don't want to be in a diluted, AmEast-operated football league so it imperative to them that the southern wing isn't driven away.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:53 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1152
fighting muskie wrote:
The northern schools are probably still demanding that the expansion include at least 1-2 new northern teams.


If that's to be believed, then Stony Brook and Albany must be oh so happy in the AE and not actually want full CAA membership. Do you believe they only want to be football members?

SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Why do you think the AE asked football schools to join? Bryant I at least get, they have decent BBall. But CCSU? And my second question, why do you think Nova and Delaware won't join the AE if they take over the football conference? The AE taking over the football conference in my eyes is about one thing only and that's making sure the CAA doesn't bring on Southern members like Elon.


This is where I was coming from with the "serve two masters" thing. If CAA football is so strong, why does it seem like the concessions are being made to the northern football-only members, like URI, Maine, and UNH to stay? The better football is being played in the midwest and south...there's no shortage of potential members there; even if the best in the SoCon keep rebuffing them, there are schools in the Big South, MEAC, and MVFC that are reasonably attainable. It's because there's that "full membership" issue that the basketball schools take against them...because, we are to believe the CAA is a basketball league.

It's just a mess is all it is. Who runs this thing?

As for CCSU and Bryant...Bryant may be the better school and program, but CCSU is more like what AE is becoming: public.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:14 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 754
Location: Columbus, OH
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
fighting muskie wrote:
The northern schools are probably still demanding that the expansion include at least 1-2 new northern teams.


If that's to be believed, then Stony Brook and Albany must be oh so happy in the AE and not actually want full CAA membership. Do you believe they only want to be football members?


The one to two northern teams I'm referring to are Albany and Stony Brook--I think both of these schools would be interested in full membership rather than their football-only status but I don't think there are enough votes in the CAA right now for them to get invited. It's not that they've rebuffed the CAA, their invitations have yet to materialize.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:22 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 717
Location: Louisville, KY
There might be a hesitancy to destabilize America East, as the CAA also has New Hampshire and Maine, both members of America East, for football only. If Albany and Stony Brook left, the only option might be for the AEC to add NJIT to have 7 Division I members (UMass-Lowell is in transition). Even then the situation would be tenuous with regards to multi-sport sponsorship requirements.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAA Realignment
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2013 9:04 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1731
There has to be something going on here behind the scenes.

Yeah, no official meetings during the march madness (now over), but there are so many schools here with their athletics future hanging in the balance,
that there must be a lot of phone calls and diiscussion (maybe not so much at the conference level).

It seems obvious to several of us that the AE, CAA and SoCon have enough teams for 2 conferences.

If the conf. commissioners go all Macchiavelian and put the survival of THEIR conference above everything else, it will create a mess,
with conferences perhaps trying to poach each other at the same time.
Ultimately, the conference commissioners work at the behest of the member schools, and if the member schools work out something decent behind the scenes,
and then the college presidents and ADs ask the commissioners to implement it, that might be for the best.

It almost appears that there is a "news black-out" about who is chasing who here....
When Freaked isn't turning up blogs and articles and leaks on three (3) different conferences (all of which appear to be "in play" right now), it makes me suspicious.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 626 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 ... 42  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jbb 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