Conference realignment speculation

BGSUfalcons · Post by **BGSUfalcons** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 1:41 pm

San Diego Falcon wrote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by San Diego Falcon:
If UCF, Memphis, ECU, and Southern Miss all left C-USA, it wouldn't be much better than the Sun Belt. At that point, why would any team in the MAC even consider joining it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Six Bowl bids vs three bowl bids and national TV contract with ESPN would be two off the top of my head.
Good points. But wouldn't those bowl bids disappear rather quickly with that conference membership? Is the C-USA ESPN contract better than ours? Even if it is, I imagine that would disappear quickly as well?

I agree with San Diego Falcon on this one. If C-USA lost those four teams, then that conference would be terrible. It would make little sense for any MAC school to join that gutted conference. In addition, the bowl bids would disappear in short order.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 1:54 pm

I agree also if it were just one school leaving, but the scenario is that all 3 MAC schools (UT, MU, and NIU) would leave together to replace the 4 departed CUSA schools. I don't see the addition of the three MAC members as much of a downgrade from the current setup, and it might even be an upgrade if they can get a decent fourth school to come in. Therefore, CUSA would still have the better bowl situation. I'm only considering Football here as opposed to all sports + academics, which is what the actual conferences will be using to decide.

BGSUfalcons · Post by **BGSUfalcons** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:20 pm

Jacobs4Heisman wrote:I agree also if it were just one school leaving, but the scenario is that all 3 MAC schools (UT, MU, and NIU) would leave together to replace the 4 departed CUSA schools. I don't see the addition of the three MAC members as much of a downgrade from the current setup, and it might even be an upgrade if they can get a decent fourth school to come in. Therefore, CUSA would still have the better bowl situation. I'm only considering Football here as opposed to all sports + academics, which is what the actual conferences will be using to decide.

Also, as was mentioned, UT, Miami, and NIU would be in a conference with teams from WV, AL, LA, OK, and TX (4 teams).

Marshall
UAB
Tulane
Tulsa
UTEP
Houston
Southern Methodist
Rice

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:23 pm

BGSUfalcons wrote:
Jacobs4Heisman wrote:I agree also if it were just one school leaving, but the scenario is that all 3 MAC schools (UT, MU, and NIU) would leave together to replace the 4 departed CUSA schools. I don't see the addition of the three MAC members as much of a downgrade from the current setup, and it might even be an upgrade if they can get a decent fourth school to come in. Therefore, CUSA would still have the better bowl situation. I'm only considering Football here as opposed to all sports + academics, which is what the actual conferences will be using to decide.

Also, as was mentioned, UT, Miami, and NIU would be in a conference with teams from WV, AL, LA, OK, and TX (4 teams).

Marshall
UAB
Tulane
Tulsa
UTEP
Houston
Southern Methodist
Rice

Yeah, travel budgets would be ridiculous. I really can't see this setup as a viable conference.

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:29 pm

I mention this everytime this discussion comes up. I think a C-USA with two divisions split something like this would make a lot of sense:

Marshall
Toledo
NIU
Miami
BG
Akron

UAB
Tulane
Tulsa
UTEP
Houston
Southern Methodist
Rice

Maybe add a Western KY to the first group to make it 7 and 7.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 3:42 pm

San Diego Falcon wrote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by San Diego Falcon:
If UCF, Memphis, ECU, and Southern Miss all left C-USA, it wouldn't be much better than the Sun Belt. At that point, why would any team in the MAC even consider joining it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Six Bowl bids vs three bowl bids and national TV contract with ESPN would be two off the top of my head.

yet more validation for playoffs....bowl system is well...BAD and over indulgent
Good points. But wouldn't those bowl bids disappear rather quickly with that conference membership? Is the C-USA ESPN contract better than ours? Even if it is, I imagine that would disappear quickly as well?

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 3:50 pm

Warthog wrote:I mention this everytime this discussion comes up. I think a C-USA with two divisions split something like this would make a lot of sense:

Marshall
Toledo
NIU
Miami
BG
Akron

UAB
Tulane
Tulsa
UTEP
Houston
Southern Methodist
Rice

Maybe add a Western KY to the first group to make it 7 and 7.

Does the MAC dissolve in this scenario?

Anyways, that feels a lot more like two seperate conferences. I don't know how much interest there would be from fans (and to a lesser extent the general public) for a lot of those cross-divisional matchups. The prospect of in-conference road trips Rice, SMU, and Houston doesn't really fire up anything for me but my budget.

It's an interesting idea to be sure, I just don't think it really benefits anybody more than the current alignments.

HoustonFalcon · Post by **HoustonFalcon** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 4:23 pm

That conference scenario would sure in the heck fire me up. I would get to see my Falcons play at least every other year down here, that is while I'm down here. But knowing my luck, whether you want to call it good or bad, I will probably have gone to a different school to coach by then. I don't think that it is a bad scenario, but I think that the MAC should just stay the way it is for now, and see what happens. The conference really is getting stronger, and more competitive, just give it a few more years. I don't see enough movement from these other conferences to worry about drastic changes in the MAC. Sure, we might lose one, maybe two teams, but that would be it.

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 4:32 pm

Jacobs4Heisman wrote:
Warthog wrote:I mention this everytime this discussion comes up. I think a C-USA with two divisions split something like this would make a lot of sense:

Marshall
Toledo
NIU
Miami
BG
Akron

UAB
Tulane
Tulsa
UTEP
Houston
Southern Methodist
Rice

Maybe add a Western KY to the first group to make it 7 and 7.
Does the MAC dissolve in this scenario?

Anyways, that feels a lot more like two seperate conferences. I don't know how much interest there would be from fans (and to a lesser extent the general public) for a lot of those cross-divisional matchups. The prospect of in-conference road trips Rice, SMU, and Houston doesn't really fire up anything for me but my budget.

It's an interesting idea to be sure, I just don't think it really benefits anybody more than the current alignments.

Your right, this scenario doesn't play out as well as what I had proposed in the past. Previously, I would include East Carolina, Memphis, and Southern Miss and throw out the Texas schools. That has a better geographic footprint. But if those schools bolt for the Big East, that scenario doesn't work.

It would be interesting to see what NIU, Toledo and Miami would think of that scenario. It might be a chance for the MAC to make the coup and grab Marshall back and add like UAB, and West KY while dumping Buffalo and Temple. The thought would be for the MAC to be proactive and poach C-USA teams rather than the other way around, if some of the C-USA left for the Big East, that is. That could leave C-USA with the likes of Rice, SMU, and Houston to hook up with the Sun Belt. Tulsa and UTEP could join the WAC and the C-USA disappears. That migh tbe best.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 4:38 pm

I'm still not sure about BG moving anywhere outside of the MAC be it the Big East or Conference USA.

What I do know is that any scenario that has Miami & UT leaving the MAC would be VERY bad for BG. We don't want to be left behind in a conference without those 2 schools.

Wauseon Falcon · Post by **Wauseon Falcon** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 1:53 pm

1987alum wrote: One scenario that seems to be gaining some steam is that The Big East would add two schools for all sports, giving them 10 football schools, a good scheduling number. In basketball, they'd split into two divisions with limited crossover games. In reality, this would be more like two leagues with a scheduling agreement, but would allow the conference to maintain a lot of status/prestige collectively.

Ah, hints of Baseketball! So, do we have the Big East East and the Big East West, or the Big East North and the Big East South? Don't forget the Big East North Eastern and the Big East South Western!:lol:

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 2:20 pm

hammb wrote:I'm still not sure about BG moving anywhere outside of the MAC be it the Big East or Conference USA.

What I do know is that any scenario that has Miami & UT leaving the MAC would be VERY bad for BG. We don't want to be left behind in a conference without those 2 schools.

This is correct. Let me say what I always say when this comes up. The best bet for BG is to stay in the MAC at least as it is today, with the conference continuing to grow and improve.

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 3:32 pm

Well maybe we need to have our new AD have some meetings with Toledo and possibly have an agreement that if either school bolts for something bigger they try and bring the other with them....

Wouldn't be the first time...

FalconAviator · Post by **FalconAviator** » Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:35 am

UT & BG aren't moving this year or the next. I've seen there travel contracts. Long story short, MAC is a co-signer and the contract can't be broke without BG or UT paying a pretty penny. Why not bring Memphis and everyone else here to the MAC and pitch Buffalo, Temple, and Kent. They can be the paperweight conference.

Count Vertigo · Post by **Count Vertigo** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 9:59 pm

FalconAviator wrote:UT & BG aren't moving this year or the next. I've seen there travel contracts. Long story short, MAC is a co-signer and the contract can't be broke without BG or UT paying a pretty penny. Why not bring Memphis and everyone else here to the MAC and pitch Buffalo, Temple, and Kent. They can be the paperweight conference.

Memphis would lose far too much in hoops to ever go for that.
All for giving Buffalo and Temple the boot,but keep Kent State.
They are nothing in football,but help the MAC hoops out a lot.

Conference realignment speculation

UT & BG Moving?

Re: UT & BG Moving?