I think we all wish we were playing already, but this isn’t going to be a one year and it’s over deal. It will take a bit for things to shuffle down. If this was 2 years ago and we still didn’t know if we were for sure getting a team then I can understand. At this point though we will be hitting FBS capable right about the time the dust is settling so we are still good. Waiting on us for a year or two is way different than waiting on us for 5.
Also the magnitude of the changes obviously pay a huge role. The bigger the dominos the longer this will take and the better it is for us IMO.
I think we all wish we were playing already, but this isn’t going to be a one year and it’s over deal. It will take a bit for things to shuffle down. If this was 2 years ago and we still didn’t know if we were for sure getting a team then I can understand. At this point though we will be hitting FBS capable right about the time the dust is settling so we are still good. Waiting on us for a year or two is way different than waiting on us for 5.
Also the magnitude of the changes obviously pay a huge role. The bigger the dominos the longer this will take and the better it is for us IMO.[/quote]
IDK. I agree the longer it takes the better it is for us. But the difference is I don’t see it taking that long(5 years).
When the ACC made their last expansion, the Big East immediately filled the lost spots. Now the PAC10 and BigTen expand, the Big12 reacted quickly and it appears the SEC is reacting fairly quickly too. Should the SEC pull from the Big12 and/or the ACC, I imagine those conferences will fill those spots quickly too, within a year.
I think we all wish we were playing already, but this isn’t going to be a one year and it’s over deal. It will take a bit for things to shuffle down. If this was 2 years ago and we still didn’t know if we were for sure getting a team then I can understand. At this point though we will be hitting FBS capable right about the time the dust is settling so we are still good. Waiting on us for a year or two is way different than waiting on us for 5.
Also the magnitude of the changes obviously pay a huge role. The bigger the dominos the longer this will take and the better it is for us IMO.[/quote]
IDK. I agree the longer it takes the better it is for us. But the difference is I don’t see it taking that long(5 years).
When the ACC made their last expansion, the Big East immediately filled the lost spots. Now the PAC10 and BigTen expand, the Big12 reacted quickly and it appears the SEC is reacting fairly quickly too. Should the SEC pull from the Big12 and/or the ACC, I imagine those conferences will fill those spots quickly too, within a year.[/quote]
Right so this year (2011) we know nothing is changing 2012 will be the earliest. So even if ALL moves are made in that one year we only need a conf to wait for us for 2 seasons. IMO it will take 2 years for all the schools to move (like it did to get all the big east schools into the ACC). If that is true then it means we only need a conference to wait for us for one year. So while the schools might be named and selected in a hurry the process to make the move will take longer.
I think we all wish we were playing already, but this isn’t going to be a one year and it’s over deal. It will take a bit for things to shuffle down. If this was 2 years ago and we still didn’t know if we were for sure getting a team then I can understand. At this point though we will be hitting FBS capable right about the time the dust is settling so we are still good. Waiting on us for a year or two is way different than waiting on us for 5.
Also the magnitude of the changes obviously pay a huge role. The bigger the dominos the longer this will take and the better it is for us IMO.[/quote]
IDK. I agree the longer it takes the better it is for us. But the difference is I don’t see it taking that long(5 years).
When the ACC made their last expansion, the Big East immediately filled the lost spots. Now the PAC10 and BigTen expand, the Big12 reacted quickly and it appears the SEC is reacting fairly quickly too. Should the SEC pull from the Big12 and/or the ACC, I imagine those conferences will fill those spots quickly too, within a year.[/quote]
Right so this year (2011) we know nothing is changing 2012 will be the earliest. So even if ALL moves are made in that one year we only need a conf to wait for us for 2 seasons. IMO it will take 2 years for all the schools to move (like it did to get all the big east schools into the ACC). If that is true then it means we only need a conference to wait for us for one year. So while the schools might be named and selected in a hurry the process to make the move will take longer.[/quote]
I love the optimism and hope you’re right. But you’re talking about decisions being made in 2011 - 2012, maybe 2013. That’s all before we’ve played a single game. I guess that’s possible, like UTSA. But IMO it’s more realistic to think we’re a better candidate after a few seasons under our belt, which won’t be until 2016.
Of course all of this is different for each conference. I can see your scenario for CUSA. But I was thinking/hoping more for a BCS conference like the BE.
I think we all wish we were playing already, but this isn’t going to be a one year and it’s over deal. It will take a bit for things to shuffle down. If this was 2 years ago and we still didn’t know if we were for sure getting a team then I can understand. At this point though we will be hitting FBS capable right about the time the dust is settling so we are still good. Waiting on us for a year or two is way different than waiting on us for 5.
Also the magnitude of the changes obviously pay a huge role. The bigger the dominos the longer this will take and the better it is for us IMO.[/quote]
IDK. I agree the longer it takes the better it is for us. But the difference is I don’t see it taking that long(5 years).
When the ACC made their last expansion, the Big East immediately filled the lost spots. Now the PAC10 and BigTen expand, the Big12 reacted quickly and it appears the SEC is reacting fairly quickly too. Should the SEC pull from the Big12 and/or the ACC, I imagine those conferences will fill those spots quickly too, within a year.[/quote]
Right so this year (2011) we know nothing is changing 2012 will be the earliest. So even if ALL moves are made in that one year we only need a conf to wait for us for 2 seasons. IMO it will take 2 years for all the schools to move (like it did to get all the big east schools into the ACC). If that is true then it means we only need a conference to wait for us for one year. So while the schools might be named and selected in a hurry the process to make the move will take longer.[/quote]
I love the optimism and hope you’re right. But you’re talking about decisions being made in 2011 - 2012, maybe 2013. That’s all before we’ve played a single game. I guess that’s possible, like UTSA. But IMO it’s more realistic to think we’re a better candidate after a few seasons under our belt, which won’t be until 2016.
Of course all of this is different for each conference. I can see your scenario for CUSA. But I was thinking/hoping more for a BCS conference like the BE.[/quote]
For Big East yeah probably happening a little too fast, but we all knew BE was a long shot anyway. If we can land a FBS league invite before playing a down of football or after only a year we should be very happy. There will be one more major realignment in the next 10 years eliminating the BCS and if we are in an FBS league I would feel good about our chances being on the inside of whatever it becomes.
I think we all wish we were playing already, but this isn’t going to be a one year and it’s over deal. It will take a bit for things to shuffle down. If this was 2 years ago and we still didn’t know if we were for sure getting a team then I can understand. At this point though we will be hitting FBS capable right about the time the dust is settling so we are still good. Waiting on us for a year or two is way different than waiting on us for 5.
Also the magnitude of the changes obviously pay a huge role. The bigger the dominos the longer this will take and the better it is for us IMO.[/quote]
IDK. I agree the longer it takes the better it is for us. But the difference is I don’t see it taking that long(5 years).
When the ACC made their last expansion, the Big East immediately filled the lost spots. Now the PAC10 and BigTen expand, the Big12 reacted quickly and it appears the SEC is reacting fairly quickly too. Should the SEC pull from the Big12 and/or the ACC, I imagine those conferences will fill those spots quickly too, within a year.[/quote]
Right so this year (2011) we know nothing is changing 2012 will be the earliest. So even if ALL moves are made in that one year we only need a conf to wait for us for 2 seasons. IMO it will take 2 years for all the schools to move (like it did to get all the big east schools into the ACC). If that is true then it means we only need a conference to wait for us for one year. So while the schools might be named and selected in a hurry the process to make the move will take longer.[/quote]
I love the optimism and hope you’re right. But you’re talking about decisions being made in 2011 - 2012, maybe 2013. That’s all before we’ve played a single game. I guess that’s possible, like UTSA. But IMO it’s more realistic to think we’re a better candidate after a few seasons under our belt, which won’t be until 2016.
Of course all of this is different for each conference. I can see your scenario for CUSA. But I was thinking/hoping more for a BCS conference like the BE.[/quote]
For Big East yeah probably happening a little too fast, but we all knew BE was a long shot anyway. If we can land a FBS league invite before playing a down of football or after only a year we should be very happy. There will be one more major realignment in the next 10 years eliminating the BCS and if we are in an FBS league I would feel good about our chances being on the inside of whatever it becomes.[/quote]
I see 2 potential roadblocks possibly preventing a FBS invititation and even more so preventing a BCS invitation.
Our stadium size is too small.
We were unable to captures the hearts of Charlotte when we were in CUSA. This may make some conferences wonder if we are a good choice even if we do have a good tv market.
Expansion plans in place for stadium (and yes, it may still be too small @ 45k for BCS)
we didnt play football in CUSA. CUSA is not the Big East, etc.[/quote]
In addition to that since our time in CUSA the student base is larger and the alumni base is larger - both of which contribute to stadium size and market.
Not capturing at least a small portion of the Charlotte market hurt us more than some of you realize. The tv ratings in Charlotte for our games against Cincy, Louisville, and Memphis were atrocious. TV ratings is the name of the game now, especially in the Big East.
We did capture a “small portion” of the market and the TV ratings while not the best were certainly not “atrocious” based upon what I remember and have heard.
We did capture a “small portion” of the market and the TV ratings while not the best were certainly not “atrocious” based upon what I remember and have heard.[/quote]
“Small” is a correct term to use. My apology. Not nearly as significant as they should have been. It’s no wonder the paper kept our stories on the back pages back then (with a few exceptions, of course).
Much the way we alienated our fan base those years we did not play archrival Davidson?
All 3 A&M grads I know are tickled this is happening. They view it as a huge victory over Texas.[/quote]
Really? You’re comparing not playing Texas as being the same as not playing Davidson? That should not even have been brought up. For A&M fans, this is akin to us losing Cincy off of our schedule after 2005 x 10. We only had 9 year history with Cincy. Texas and Texas A&M have been rivals since 1894 and have played each other in football a total of 117 times. Sure A&M is joining the SEC, but do you really think they’re going to be looked upon any differently than Arkansas is in that conference? They will be another stepchild in the west. Also, people keep saying that A&M can play Texas a in non-conference game each year. Why in the hell would you schedule a team each season that you purposely left a conference to avoid altogether? That makes no sense. I’m sure some of their fans are happy about the move, but if they think playing the SEC teams is going to have the same tradition that playing Texas was they are mistaken or dilusional.
Much the way we alienated our fan base those years we did not play archrival Davidson?
All 3 A&M grads I know are tickled this is happening. They view it as a huge victory over Texas.[/quote]
Really? You’re comparing not playing Texas as being the same as not playing Davidson? That should not even have been brought up. For A&M fans, this is akin to us losing Cincy off of our schedule after 2005 x 10. We only had 9 year history with Cincy. Texas and Texas A&M have been rivals since 1894 and have played each other in football a total of 117 times. Sure A&M is joining the SEC, but do you really think they’re going to be looked upon any differently than Arkansas is in that conference? They will be another stepchild in the west. Also, people keep saying that A&M can play Texas a in non-conference game each year. Why in the hell would you schedule a team each season that you purposely left a conference to avoid altogether? That makes no sense. I’m sure some of their fans are happy about the move, but if they think playing the SEC teams is going to have the same tradition that playing Texas was they are mistaken or dilusional.[/quote]
The real point of my post was to point out A&M fans are happy to be jumping to the SEC. They feel they have won over Texas because their new conference is better than the BigXI.
SOME State fans would feel the same way toward UNC if State received an SEC invite.
Much the way we alienated our fan base those years we did not play archrival Davidson?
All 3 A&M grads I know are tickled this is happening. They view it as a huge victory over Texas.[/quote]
Really? You’re comparing not playing Texas as being the same as not playing Davidson? That should not even have been brought up. For A&M fans, this is akin to us losing Cincy off of our schedule after 2005 x 10. We only had 9 year history with Cincy. Texas and Texas A&M have been rivals since 1894 and have played each other in football a total of 117 times. Sure A&M is joining the SEC, but do you really think they’re going to be looked upon any differently than Arkansas is in that conference? They will be another stepchild in the west. Also, people keep saying that A&M can play Texas a in non-conference game each year. Why in the hell would you schedule a team each season that you purposely left a conference to avoid altogether? That makes no sense. I’m sure some of their fans are happy about the move, but if they think playing the SEC teams is going to have the same tradition that playing Texas was they are mistaken or dilusional.[/quote]
SOME State fans would feel the same way toward UNC if State received an SEC invite.[/quote]
True. But most State fans I know live to hate Carolina. They don’t care near as much about losing to any other team. Beating UNC-CH generally makes their football season acceptable despite the results of the other games.
Many UNC fans would be pissed if State went to the SEC, and not because the 2 teams may no longer be playing each other. On the other hand, many State fans would be elated. What better way to get the upper hand over your rival than to move up a notch ahead of them?
Well, they might be in the better conference, but if they get their brains beat in every season by the other SEC teams they would not really be a notch ahead of them. South Carolina has just gotten to the point of where they can truly compete in the SEC after being in the conference for 18 years. They thought that being in the SEC somehow made them “better” than all of the surrounding area programs. Only last year did it come to frution, and when Florida, Tennessee, and Georgia return to form their run will likely be brief.
For Big East yeah probably happening a little too fast, but we all knew BE was a long shot anyway. If we can land a FBS league invite before playing a down of football or after only a year we should be very happy. There will be one more major realignment in the next 10 years eliminating the BCS and if we are in an FBS league I would feel good about our chances being on the inside of whatever it becomes.[/quote]
If all of this shakes out I don’t think the BE would be that much of a long shot.
Yes, the following contains a lot of “what if” scenarios, but here goes my thinking. The SEC does go after VT, FSU and/or Clemson. Then the ACC goes after WV, Syracuse, Rutgers, USF and/or UConn. TCU leaves the BE for the Big12. That could leave the BE with only Cincy, UL and Pitt for football.
If that scenario happens 5/6 years from now, I honestly believe we’d be on a list to join the conference. If it happens in the next couple of years, we’re not on the list.
If we end up in a FBS league without playing a single down of football, yes I would be ecstatic. But, with expansion happening in the BCS conferences, I would feel much more confident of not getting screwed by them if we got into a BCS conference .