Conference USA

[PGY Tiercel]

GF,
Sure, you can base you're argument off your assumption, However us failing to prove that it isn't so, doesn't make you assumption right.
I live by this statement "Absence of Evidence, is not Evidence of Absence",
Just because we can not bring evidence to support the MAC as being better, doesn't make CUSA the better conference.

[FliccGirl]

Back to the point made prior. The reality is that I can base an argument off of an assumption. Why can I not? I am assuming it is not a better contract. It is a "if X is true than I beleive Y to be true." I can easily make that theory. Your right that because it is built off of an assumption ti is flimsy, but I don't have to prove that is right. THe burdon of proof lies on my detractors.

You're right. The only time you have to actually back up an argument is when you want people to believe you.
According to Webster, to argue means, "to persuade by giving reasons."
Check out those classes I suggested. Really.

I will google later and see what I can find, but it was my beleive that everyone here would give me the contention that CUSAs current contract is better than the MACs.

"Dang! I can't believe that you all don't accept my unsupported statement as fact!"

This part cracks me up. Where do I say too bad I am still right? And where do I ever ask people not to question me.

Oops, my bad. You don't ever actually say you're still right; that would mean acknowledging others' counterarguments. You just ignore them. Did you ever make any kind of rebuttal or acknowledgment of 1987alum's rather long post early in this thread?

And where am I asking people to stop accusing me of avoiding questions? As far as i know I was only accused once of avoiding a question, and in response I explained why I was avoiding the question.

Since you asked I will correct you. I am not avoiding any question.

:shrug:




Oh yeah, and...

Damn. And that came from a chick too!

What are you tryin' to say??

[1987alum]

Oops, my bad. You don't ever actually say you're still right; that would mean acknowledging others' counterarguments. You just ignore them. Did you ever make any kind of rebuttal or acknowledgment of 1987alum's rather long post early in this thread?

Rather long. Ouch.

And, no, Gfitch never really replied to it. It was too straightforward to be dealt with, I suppose.

Damn. And that came from a chick too!

What are you tryin' to say??

I'm assuming Transfer meant your board designation.

[FliccGirl]

Rather long. Ouch.

lol... I didn't mean for that to sound disparaging. I just meant that it was hard to miss!

[Schadenfreude]

This thread is so tedious.

Anyway: Conference USA's ESPN deal isn't so hot. It's a bit more money than the MAC is getting and perhaps a few more guaranteed TV appearances. But it is scaled way back from where Conference USA was.

CUSA makes up that money through a deal with CSTV, the new cable TV network, which gets exclusive rights to everything ESPN passes on. CSTV isn't available very broadly, and where it is available it is sometimes poorly positioned on the dial.

But they did agree to pay a lot of money. Perhaps CSTV overpaid because they are desperate for product. Perhaps this is a sign of things to come for the MAC (especially with the emergence of ESPN-U). Hard to say.

But add it up and Conference USA continues to get whole lot more money than the MAC.

On the other hand, stir in the travel costs any MAC school would incur by joining Conference USA and it's very close to a wash in terms of what it would mean financially.

[Flipper]

CUSA is a spiritual void. There's no rhyme or reason for the conference to exist. It isn't unified by geography, traditional rivalries or educational missions. It's unnatural, illogical and irrational.

The MAC on the other hand, is a sensible alignment of like minded institutions with a long history of athletic competition.

The MAC is the sun setting over Key West. CUSA is the dark side of the moon.

[Germainfitch1]

You don't have to back up something that is accepted as truth. CUSA being better than the MAC is anot an accepted truth. The idea that their TV contract is better seems to be an accepted truth. Why do I need evidence to go any further? Should evidence of that not being the case appear than my point is out the window. But it seems to be the case so I can easily build off of that. From there I deduce that I would rather be in CUSA because of greater exposure. When have I ever said that anyone who wants to be in the MAC is wrong. I simply said that their minds may be more focused on the tradition than mine. If we are discussing progressively moving forward as a team I am of the beleif that that can best bne done in CUSA. They have a recent tradition of stronger national notiriety as well as a wealthier TV contract. The point of travel is not to be taken lightly. Those classes you suggested are the very basis of the theory that you can have a variable X and try to find Z with only knowing Y. Thats what logic is all about. You can build theories off of assumptions very easily. In fact its neccessary many times whn evidence does not present itself. Progressive discussion would never occur in many social science fields if you never said 'well what if we tried it this way". Keep in mind that discussion does not need to lead to action. That is Logic. What makes you the expert you seem to think you are on the subje
"Dang! I can't believe that you all don't accept my unsupported statement as fact!"
-Someone later printed evidence that CUSA's contract is better than the MAC's
-I reread 1987's post and am not sure what I ignored. Clearly East Carolina would not be a great team to have to travel to the Doyt. That is a great point. the travel point is also very good. IMO the fact that the travel costs would probably triple is a deal breaker (unless we can get a nucleus of Toledo, Miami and N. Illinois to move with us....Highly unlikely. )

Flipper I agree that the Conferene USA has no reason to exist. But that really does not speak to the argument of which conference has greater weight nationally. To be honest with you hype and name notiriety has so much weight that if we took every team from the MAC and put them in CUSA we would be better off.

[TG1996]

To be honest with you hype and name notiriety has so much weight that if we took every team from the MAC and put them in CUSA we would be better off.

That's a decent point, but do you think if you took Michigan, Ohio State and Wisconsin and moved them to the Big East or something, it would take long for people to not respect/care about the Big Ten as much? Louisville and Cincy are the two schools that help CUSA go, now they're gone. The CUSA times are a changin'.

[PGY Tiercel]

I for one, don't feel the TV exposure is enough to warrant the opinon that CUSA's grass is greener than ours. GF and others you have made the point that the TV money is better, with some more exposure.
However, I will stand by my statement and say that it is not logically/philosophically correct to state that because there is an absence of evidence to prove your assumption wrong than your assumption is correct. In your case it appears that your assumption was right. But without your data showing that, you can't really know that it is truth, just because I don't have the data to show it is a lie. Nothing is truth without facts.

[Rightupinthere]

The initial discussion of this forum was in regards to "where would a MAC school be better off". I paraphrase but that is the crux of the discussion. The simple implication is that CUSA offers more exposure and has a more positive opinion from fans of other conferences.

After reading all of the tedious posts I asked for the current CUSA TV contract to be compared to the previous contract. I was attempting to make a point with dollar signs. I was also tempting the fly into the web.

The new TV deal with CUSA is less EXPOSURE with their NEW lineup than with their previous conference lineup. You even admitted to that fact.

The MAC with their NEW conference lineup inked a TV deal giving us more exposure than the previous contract.

I also read somewhere where the MAC football games were pretty highly rated in terms of household watching. I can't find the info, however.

This all tells me that the image of CUSA is waning and the MAC image is gaining.

It's like saying in the year 2000 "Oh, I won't buy Apple stocks because their stock is only selling at $15 a share. I'll invest in ENRON instead."

The current MAC lineup is in a great position and will continue to gather strength and national prestige.

In conclusion, the MAC schools are in a better position right NOW in the MAC than making a very risky and overall costly jump to C-USA.

Thank you for playing.

[kdog27]

this thread keeps on going and going. Does anyone have a picture of the Energizer Bunny?

Without UofL and Cincy, Cusa is on the way down the toilet.

[momtartin]

Ask and you shall recieve

[UK Peregrine]

Are we still taking about this?

It's a simple dichotomy. Germain(e) is all about instant gratification that the current C-USA (this past season's conference alignment, not the current one that is missing their big teams for next season) is a richer and more nationally prominent conference at this exact moment in time. However, in C-USA’s current state it may be that BG does more for improving them than they could do for us. Others, myself included, believe that the MAC is the best for BG in the long-term. The MAC is gaining national prominence right now and has the traditional stability the C-USA does not have. If the MAC secures one, maybe even two more bowls and C-USA losses one or two bowls, which I fully expect to happen in the near future, then we begin to turn the table on C-USA where the MAC would likely overtake them in national prominence and this discussion becomes moot.

[Germainfitch1]

"Are we still taking about this?"

you don't have to be

I would be foolish to argue that the Mac was not gaining in prominence while CUSA is not waining. That is true. CUSA is falling apart at the seems. However, they are stronger in national notierirty which in turn leads to bowl bids and NCAA bids. We may not like to admit it but how many times have we sat at home when we should have been in a tournament or at a bowl. Would we have been if we were in CUSA? Thats the past, but thats the recent tradition that is very pertinent to this discussion. IMO the MAC has a stigma of being a regional second class conference that hangs like an albatross. I don't feel that the MAC will ever gain the notierity we deserve if we are seen as Ohio conference plus 6. We just won't get taken seriously. Now if we cut the fat off the MAC and re-invent ourself in a new conference I think that notiriety would come. I lvoe the idea of creating an Alliance with NIllinois, Miami, Toledo and BG and moving on. I dont care where we go. But if we cut the MAC fat and keep those 4 we would be a greater success. We could start a brand new league for all I care, as long as we have those 4 teams we would be fine and have a great nucleus to build off of.

I absolutely agree that BG would do more for improving them than they could do for us. We would provide the stability they need. But we would improve our national attention just through the action of moving.

CUSa is definately on the way down and the MAC is on the way up. But the progressive actions by CUSA leave me to beleive that the higher ups in Conference USA will never allow the conference to fall below MAC status. They could not do anything to avoid being poached by the bigger conferences. If Micheal Jordan is declining as a player and I am improving that does not mean you should jump on my band wagon as ever being better than Michael Jordan.

That is certainly a much more polar analogy than the MAC and CUSA, but i dont think they are that close that the MAC will ever catch it. It may disband, but the MAc wont catch it. And trust me. I hate conference USA and think its overrated. But I am a BG fan. We are biased to that by our very nature.

It would be interesting to ask someone who covers college football this question on an ESPN chat. It would also be beneficial to get the idea out there that we are a better conference. These kind of ideas sometimes catch fire and then become hot button topics by a topic hungry group of sports writers.

[transfer2BGSU]

I'm assuming Transfer meant your board designation.

Yeah, That's what I meant to say ...your board designation

Thanks for bailing me out on that one '87!