Conference USA weighing 16-team model

[Harry]

After adding six new football schools for 2013 and Western Kentucky for the year after, Conference USA might not be done.

C-USA is considering expansion to 16 teams in football, commissioner Britton Banowsky said Monday.

Western Kentucky replaces Tulsa as the 14th C-USA member for 2014. Last week, the Golden Hurricanes bolted to the American Athletic Conference, formerly known as the Big East.

“We've modeled it at 16, and it does kind of create some divisions that are a little more geographically connected,” Banowsky said. “We haven't acted on it. I think personally a larger conference is better because you get some efficiencies, you get the benefit of a bigger group. We don't want to lose our identity in the process. We're just kind of moderating

the growth at a pace where people are comfortable. It could be folks are just comfortable (at 14).”

Such a proactive move would come during a time of relative small-conference stability -- the AAC, Mountain West and MAC all appear settled. The Sun Belt is deciding whether it wants to dip into the Football Championship Subdivision waters for two more teams.

Banowsky said it's too early to speculate about potential new members, while adding he's not sure how flexible his membership will be after rampant change in recent months.

Read more: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/jeremy-fowler/22030790/conference-usa-weighing-16-team-model

[Daddy Dumpsalot]

Great......more of our old Sunbelt amigos. As we continue to add the likes of WKU and UTSA this conference becomes much more of a joke. Initially the CUSA might have been able to lure some of the MAC schools away (should they have wanted to), but now the only ones wanting in are SBC folks.

[Arkstfan]

Seems like maybe I raised that geography issue in the past.

Unless Marshall, ODU, Charlotte, WKU, MTSU, FIU and FAU are all of the same mind that UAB belongs in their group, there is no chance of the needed 11 votes being there.

Unless Fowler knows something he isn't printing, the pool isn't ASU and UL, it is ASU, UL, TXST, NMSU and probably Missouri State if they are inclined to go FBS.

[Travis]

Great......more of our old Sunbelt amigos. As we continue to add the likes of WKU and UTSA this conference becomes much more of a joke. Initially the CUSA might have been able to lure some of the MAC schools away (should they have wanted to), but now the only ones wanting in are SBC folks.

Maybe it is not much better in prestige....

But, i like having a conference with local teams (Rice, UTEP?, UTSA, La Tech) and a few that have been ok in the past USM and Marshall.

I have no problem having UAB, MTSU and WKU as well. We are in a better place no doubt. i wouldn't mind having ASU or ULL for their overall program... I self-ishly wouldn't mind having UL-M just for their drivability.

[MeanGreen61]

CUSA needs to put the brakes on and stay at 14. Thought we were moving up FROM the Sun Belt, not WITH it.

[BeliefBlazer]

I have to think UAB is one of the schools pushing for more teams in the west.

[MeanGreenTexan]

I have to think UAB is one of the schools pushing for more teams in the west.

Is this because you would like to stay in the Eastern division, but feel all of the Eastern additions will push you West?

If so, why?

Wouldn't you guys want to be associated with your old buddies USM, Rice & UTEP and the likes of LA Tech and us, as opposed to these startups, south FL schools (which are just as far as Rice, LA Tech & us), and last-minute additions of MT & WK?

[BeliefBlazer]

ODU, Charlotte, WKU, and MTSU are the schools UAB supported the most in the recent round of additions. Now we find ourselves in a division with UTEP, North Texas, Rice, UTSA, and La Tech. Fine schools but they aren't going to travel to Birmingham in nearly the same numbers as some of the eastern teams. Being west might also mean not having a recruiting trip to Florida every season to play the F_Us.

P.S. being that we have never won C-USA in football, maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing to be in the weaker division.

Edited April 8, 2013 by BeliefBlazer

[MeanGreenTexan]

ODU, Charlotte, WKU, and MTSU are the schools UAB supported the most in the recent round of additions. Now we find ourselves in a division with UTEP, North Texas, Rice, UTSA, and La Tech. Fine schools but they aren't going to travel to Birmingham in nearly the same numbers as some of the eastern teams. Being west might also mean not having a recruiting trip to Florida every season to play the F_Us.

P.S. being that we have never won C-USA in football, maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing to be in the weaker division.

Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.

The FL recruiting trips are certainly good for you guys, but you're probably only getting 1/yr (in football) right? ... since I would assume they would schedule them 1 away/1 home? I would argue that Texas talent is just as good and just as deep, and with 4 teams in TX, you'll likely get 2 trips here.

I cannot argue your PS. This is probably the most compelling point. But hey, you can always come over and beat up on UTSA with us!

As far as travelling your opposition's fans, you sound very much like some of our fans who desperately want to add TX St and other neighboring schools. And to that, I would simply say: You guys need to focus on filling your stadium with your own fans and don't worry about the other teams travelling fans to your stadium. If you're counting on the opposition to travel fans to your stadium in order to fill it, you're doing something wrong.

[Andrew]

I would love 16 if Rice would stay and Tulsa would come back! Then that final spot could go to someone like Houston. I would even been willing to dump Charlotte for ECU and FAU for UCF. ODU for Tulane? bring back the schools that geoograhicaly make sense and I am fine with 16; even if it means having a few belt teams.

[Harry]

I would love 16 if Rice would stay and Tulsa would come back! Then that final spot could go to someone like Houston. I would even been willing to dump Charlotte for ECU and FAU for UCF. ODU for Tulane? bring back the schools that geoograhicaly make sense and I am fine with 16; even if it means having a few belt teams.

Dallas to Tulsa: 4 hours 17 minutes or 257 miles

Dallas to New Orleans: 7 hours 30 minutes or 520.4 miles

Dallas to Jonesboro: 6 hours 42 minutes or 447 miles

Dallas to Lafayette: 5 hours 34 minutes or 390 miles

Dallas to San Marcos: 3 Hours 26 minutes or 225 miles

Dallas to Las Cruces: 9 hours 39 minutes or 680 miles

Dallas to Springfield Missouri: 7 hours 7 minutes or 415.4 miles

[Mo Green]

Not if your in a SHELBY, Harry!

[shaft]

Dallas to Tulsa: 4 hours 17 minutes or 257 miles - Great, but they're gone.

Dallas to New Orleans: 7 hours 30 minutes or 520.4 miles - Great, but they're gone.

Dallas to Jonesboro: 6 hours 42 minutes or 447 miles - Isn't there any bigger market?

Dallas to Lafayette: 5 hours 34 minutes or 390 miles-Isn't there any bigger market?

Dallas to San Marcos: 3 Hours 26 minutes or 225 miles - Maybe

Dallas to Las Cruces: 9 hours 39 minutes or 680 miles - God No

Dallas to Springfield Missouri: 7 hours 7 minutes or 415.4 miles - Why?

[Proud North Texan]

Please no more addition

[Eagle1855]

I'd be fine with adding ULL and Texas State, though I'm not sure what La Tech and USM would think about ULL. In that event, I'd be glad to welcome back NMSU or Ark State.

This conference isn't any better than the one we left. But I like that we get to play conference games inside the State of Texas, and I'd welcome another one in San Marcos.

[Cerebus]

This conference isn't any better than the one we left. But I like that we get to play conference games inside the State of Texas, and I'd welcome another one in San Marcos.

The TV money is better, and the travel for us is better, and so is the chance of building rivalries with schools that have alumni bases in DFW.

Sure, I would love for tulsa/houston/smu to still be in the conference, but I would love to be in the B12 even more. Realistically, this is the best place for us to be.

[laxtonto]

I would love to see TSU and Ark St. Not sure another add in LA is what is best for the conference or LT. If UTSA likes the idea if TSU, I am all for it.

As long as UTA is not in the mix as a possible add, I have no problem adding Texas teams.

[Harry]

Everything I am reading seems to indicate that UTSA are ok with adding Texas State because they are major rivals and bring good crowds. This is of course why SMU has agreed to schedule us in non-conference (as well as they expect to win). I would think that UTSA - if given a choice - would prefer just scheduling Texas State in non-conference and keeping the recruiting advantage in place.

We have some UTSA visitors from time to time and they may be willing to chime in on this.

[outoftown]

I think lets let all this movement settle for a year or two and reassess then. I am not categorically against adding new schools, but it is easier to know what is best if everyone in conference has gotten time to see problems and good things in action, before jumping the gun. Also: before we add more, maybe we should first see if C-USA is gonna loose more members, if we add 2 teams to a conference that includes USM or one that does not makes a big difference to me.Amd finally: I think the teams we might want to add will pretty much all still be around in a year.

[laxtonto]

Everyone is waiting on the B1G...

If they go after the ACC all hell will break lose. You could see anything from the death of the ACC to the death the B12, AAC, or Sun Belt.

If we see a move to 16 by the B1G then the SEC will match. That is 4 teams and it will lead to trickle down effect. Even if the B12 does not move the ACC will take 2 to get to 12. That leaves the AAC losing 2. That means that they are at 9 (10) and will need to expand.

The best case scenario for the CUSA and UNT is to see the the nuclear option and see the absolute pillage of the ACC (B1G 16+, SEC 16, B12 14+), which will force the death of the AAC and the restructuring of the conference landscape. I am not sure how that trickles down to to UNT, but it allows for potential upward mobility and will more than likely make a more regional mix that will see the CUSA, Sun Belt, AAC and MAC condense into 3 conferences and and ACC being relegated from the ranks of the elite to on par with everyone else.

[Arkstfan]

As the AD at ASU and I discussed (he's more skeptical than I am). CUSA TV money isn't going to change anyone's life. But the point I made to him is as a fan, in CUSA I can drive to 6 of 7 divisional opponents for a weekend trip and 3 of 8 potential cross-division games. In the Belt I can drive to three of five divisional games and two of the six in the other division. That holds value for me.

[MeanGreen61]

As the AD at ASU and I discussed (he's more skeptical than I am). CUSA TV money isn't going to change anyone's life. But the point I made to him is as a fan, in CUSA I can drive to 6 of 7 divisional opponents for a weekend trip and 3 of 8 potential cross-division games. In the Belt I can drive to three of five divisional games and two of the six in the other division. That holds value for me.

Not to long ago weren't you praising the Sun Belt and downplaying the CUSA ?

[VideoEagle]

As the AD at ASU and I discussed (he's more skeptical than I am). CUSA TV money isn't going to change anyone's life. But the point I made to him is as a fan, in CUSA I can drive to 6 of 7 divisional opponents for a weekend trip and 3 of 8 potential cross-division games. In the Belt I can drive to three of five divisional games and two of the six in the other division. That holds value for me.

That sounds a lot like why I like NT being in CUSA, even the watered down CUSA.

If they add two more western schools, that goes a way to making each division into a "small conference" that really just gets together for championship games. That greatly cuts travel and increases the visibility of the division schools as we are playing them often in all sports. Playing someone often builds a rivalry which helps attendance, etc.

If they plan to add more by the time the TV contract comes up, I think they should just go ahead and do it now. No point in making the turbulence last longer - better to have a little more now for a shorter period.

[Arkstfan]

Not to long ago weren't you praising the Sun Belt and downplaying the CUSA ?

No that's your spin.

I don't think CUSA offers better football competition and the TV is nothing great with money trade-off being no ESPN.

But it's a bunch of driveable trips. Guess that makes me a Sun Belt hater????

[Eagle1855]

The TV money is better, and the travel for us is better, and so is the chance of building rivalries with schools that have alumni bases in DFW.

Sure, I would love for tulsa/houston/smu to still be in the conference, but I would love to be in the B12 even more. Realistically, this is the best place for us to be.

When I said better, I meant the level of on-field performance is a push with the SBC- especially with Tulsa leaving.

As for the rest, I agree with you.