I’d rather us try and put football in the MAC and leave all other sports in A10. Sun Belt just isn’t desirable. I don’t see how Sun Belt sets you up better than CAA. Clearly you don’t need Sun Belt to get into Alliance if UTSA gets in, or look at USF in the past.
I completely agree. Football in the MAC is better than football in the Sun Belt. Basketball in the A10 is much much better than basketball in the Sun Belt.
I completely agree. Football in the MAC is better than football in the Sun Belt. Basketball in the A10 is much much better than basketball in the Sun Belt.[/quote]
That is fine - all I am saying is if the big leagues say you have to play FBS football first and the only FBS football conference invite we have is the SunBelt. There are plenty of options I think are “better” though. Also in one of the articles the MWC told UTSA they couldn’t get in that fast. Given the recent changes in conference landscape may have changed that stance. My main point is our goal is to get to set us up for the next movement and where ever we have to go for that - regardless of how attractive it is in the short term is the right move. We have to think long term here.
We don’t have any evidence that the MAC has expressed ANY interest in us. Our realistic FBS options are the Sun Belt and the Alliance. Both will want our basketball program. Is the Sun Belt the best option, NO; but once we’re FBS we can then work to form a new FBS conference. If we’re stuck in an FCS conference we’ll never be invited to move up. The important thing is to get our foot in the FBS door. Once we do, all kinds of new options open up for us. Are we willing to throw that chance away just to stay in a conference where no locals care to watch us play and we have slim chances to recruit well and win against?
Sun Belt for all sports will be the worst thing we have ever done. We did not start football to play basketball in the Sun Belt. If you think Halton is empty now just wait until you see it when the Sun Belt teams come to visit. The Sun Belt teams won’t exactly fill up our new football stadium. I’m sure they would love to have us but we can do better.
[quote=“49RFootballNow, post:24, topic:26518”]We don’t have any evidence that the MAC has expressed ANY interest in us. Our realistic FBS options are the Sun Belt and the Alliance. Both will want our basketball program. Is the Sun Belt the best option, NO; but once we’re FBS we can then work to form a new FBS conference. If we’re stuck in an FCS conference we’ll never be invited to move up. The important thing is to get our foot in the FBS door. Once we do, all kinds of new options open up for us. Are we willing to throw that chance away just to stay in a conference where no locals care to watch us play and we have slim chances to recruit well and win against?[/quote]No one will care to watch us play in the Sun Belt either, football or basketball, even if we start winning. This is not the Sun Belt of old, there are few even decent programs left in it.
I understand the argument, football trumps all and so it’s better to position the football program with a chance to move to a better conference. But if the Alliance is expressing (rumored) interest in a brand new program now, why wouldn’t they potentially be interested in an already started FCS program in a few years? I think a brand new program is likely to have real problems winning enough games to attract fans, so how will the optics look for joining other conferences if the program is bleeding money in the sun belt and not attracting fans despite the FBS label? Not much profit, if any, for Sun Belt schools, along with destruction of the basketball program, to show the other conferences we will struggle to draw? I don’t see the argument for doing this, over having an FCS program for a few years, drawing at an FCS level (or slightly worse) with the excuse of it not being FBS, and not killing the basketball program for the foreseeable future to hopefully keep it as an asset for higher-level conferences. Both seem quite risky to me, and the FCS for now route seems less risky than the FBS Sun Belt money drain.
I think what we are saying is that if we dont get into the alliance it might because they won’t take a FCS program. They may want to pull only FBS schools and if that is the case we only have two choices MAC or SBC.
If we stay FCS we could play there for the next 15 years with no FBS invite. Those things don’t just passed out left and right - ask App. Obviously I hope this is all moot and we have the alliance just waiting on timing to announce we are in.
Sure would be nice to know what is being said behind closed doors.
[quote=“NinerWupAss, post:28, topic:26518”]I think what we are saying is that if we dont get into the alliance it might because they won’t take a FCS program. They may want to pull only FBS schools and if that is the case we only have two choices MAC or SBC.
If we stay FCS we could play there for the next 15 years with no FBS invite. Those things don’t just passed out left and right - ask App. Obviously I hope this is all moot and we have the alliance just waiting on timing to announce we are in.
Sure would be nice to know what is being said behind closed doors.[/quote]I think I understand the argument, getting a foot in the door to FBS makes it more likely to get into a better conference, like the alliance, in the future. But my point is that part of the reason we’d be attractive to a better conference is 1) the potential to draw better in football with a better conference, and 2) a strong basketball program. If we don’t make it into the alliance now because they don’t want a new program, will they still want us after several years of 1) likely not showing the ability to draw to Sun Belt games (it’s tough to do so, even for long-established programs) and 2) a declining, if not already dead, basketball program? That’s the key issue, does going Sun Belt for all sports really help us in the present and/or future?
We could be in the Sun Belt for the next 15 years too, waiting for an invite to the better conference, spending lots of money all the while.
[quote=“9erken, post:29, topic:26518”][quote=“NinerWupAss, post:28, topic:26518”]I think what we are saying is that if we dont get into the alliance it might because they won’t take a FCS program. They may want to pull only FBS schools and if that is the case we only have two choices MAC or SBC.
If we stay FCS we could play there for the next 15 years with no FBS invite. Those things don’t just passed out left and right - ask App. Obviously I hope this is all moot and we have the alliance just waiting on timing to announce we are in.
Sure would be nice to know what is being said behind closed doors.[/quote]I think I understand the argument, getting a foot in the door to FBS makes it more likely to get into a better conference, like the alliance, in the future. But my point is that part of the reason we’d be attractive to a better conference is 1) the potential to draw better in football with a better conference, and 2) a strong basketball program. If we don’t make it into the alliance now because they don’t want a new program, will they still want us after several years of 1) likely not showing the ability to draw to Sun Belt games (it’s tough to do so, even for long-established programs) and 2) a declining, if not already dead, basketball program? That’s the key issue, does going Sun Belt for all sports really help us in the present and/or future?
We could be in the Sun Belt for the next 15 years too, waiting for an invite to the better conference, spending lots of money all the while.[/quote]
Very true - whatever we do this is a very important time in Charlotte athletics.
Latest (thanks 2k!).
Sports.yahoo.com: CAA vehemently denies George Mason and VCU are bound for A-10
Now if we can just drop Fordham & SBU and shift the conference fulcrum farther south, then the A-10 wouldn’t seem so wrong.
FTFY
The way we have played since joining…we have no right to talk high and mighty about dropping “dead weight” programs from the conference.
We haven’t exactly proven our value to the Conference at this point.
The way we have played since joining…we have no right to talk high and mighty about dropping “dead weight” programs from the conference.
We haven’t exactly proven our value to the Conference at this point (at least from a basketball perspective).[/quote]
The way we have played since joining…we have no right to talk high and mighty about dropping “dead weight” programs from the conference.
We haven’t exactly proven our value to the Conference at this point.[/quote]
Not the point. Geographically it doesn’t make sense to play them. I didn’t say we are too good.