ACC/Big East

[AusTxPony]

Article in Austin paper says Miami definitely considering ACC if Syracuse and/or Boston College will go ACC. What happens then? Big East raids C-USA and CUSA raids WAC-East? How nice, maybe we could get our "more regional" conference after all! What do you think?

[Sonic]

That is an interesting thought....I like it!

[Pony4Life]

I like it, too.

If Syracuse and Miami (and to a lesser degree, Boston College) go to the ACC, that would make the ACC the best conference in the country in both football and men's basketball - the two power (read: "revenue") sports. Miami, Florida State, Maryland, BC, Syracuse, GaTech, Virginia, and NCState are all solid in football, while Duke, Maryland, Miami, BC, Syracuse, GaTech, NCState, Virginia, North Carolina and Wake all have perennially strong hoops teams.

Say that does happen (and there's a rumor that for hoops, the ACC might add UConn, too, which would really cripple the Big East.) In that case, what C-USA teams would the Big Least go after? I'd guess Louisville, Cincinnati, Marquette and .... East Carolina? Army? The Big East would re-establish itself as a basketball-only conference.

Should THAT course of events transpire, which WAC teams would C-USA approach?







[This message has been edited by Pony4Life (edited 04-23-2003).]

[JasonB]

Also add the rumor that the Big 10 will go after PIttsburgh, and the Big East certainly needs a lot of schools to fill its ranks.

[Water Pony]

How about these combinations:
- Syracuse to Big Ten
- BC and Miami to ACC
- Louisville, Cincinnati, Army & Navy to Big East
- SMU, Rice and Tulsa to Conf. USA
- BYU and Utah to Pac Ten
- No. TX, New Mex. State and Utah St. to WAC
- Boise State and Fresno State to Mt. West

Round and round we go . . . .

[Charleston Pony]

lots of possibilities and the BCS conferences hold the key. If any of them move to expand to 12 teams and follow the lead of the SEC/Big XII, I would then expect the trickle down effect to ultmately lead to more regionalized mid-major conferences, with less travel imposed on mid-major programs (who are for the most part struggling with budget issues). Unless things change dramatically, there just isn't the demand (fan support) for mid-majors that will help these conferences generate the kind of revenue that the big state programs do.

Hopefully, SMU & Rice will be reunited with TCU and Houston at some point and joined by a combination WAC, CUSA and possibly SBC schools.

[This message has been edited by Charleston Pony (edited 04-24-2003).]

[OldPony]

While that would help the ACC quite a bit in football, I would still like the Big 12 better in both sports right now. These things have a way of changing year by year though. The main thing I would hope any realignment would do is to open up a possibility for the Ponies. I think we need to break step with Rice and Tulsa if the op is there. Just about anything is preferable to where we are now for football as far as rivalries and being able to draw a crowd.

[Diehard Pony]

Actually, OP, C-USA offers very little if any improvement in terms of regional rivalries (outside of TCU who we already play, and Houston which never was much of a rivalry when we were together before) for football. Same holds true for basketball except they have a few more quality programs (but nothing regional).

[AusTxPony]

I have to agree that C-USA offers little over the WAC in creating real rivalries and filling stadium seats. Even when we played Tulane they travelled as badly as we do. Still, at least travel-budget wise we'd be better off in a C-USA "West" vs. the WAC "East". And then add OOC games against big state schools nearby.

[Stallion]

there is not a single AD in the country who would choose the WAC over CUSA based on SMU's interests. The POINT for those that have difficulty analyzing the relevant issues is that CUSA has a great(for its position) TV contract for both FB and BB, great bowl affiliations and much better RPI position in both FB and BB. AND it has better rivalry potential as well. TCU is better than Rice, Tulane is better than Tulsa, Houston is better than UTEP, Southern Miss is better than Louisiana Tech and even the remaining CUSA schools are preferrable to just about any alternative in the WAC. Although it is true CUSA wont solve our attendance problems-no viable alternative will.

[MustangKurt20]

Attendance is dependant on winning games. We'd have good attendance if we won more games plain and simple. At least enough to make Ford look respectable anyway

Kurt

[AusTxPony]

I think attendance is also based on playing teams that travel well. Remember the Tech game this year? We can probably get 20,000 by being a winning team, but the other 15,000 need to come with our opponent. Yes, C-USA offers a MUCH BETTER TV contract, but I'm not sure Tulane and Houston will fill our stadium any better than Tulsa and UTEP. At least UTEP home attendance is better than Tulane, Rice, Tulsa or Houston or SMU! I'd rather see us go to the C-USA with Rice and UTEP myself. But, of course there is Bball, so hello Tulsa.

[Charleston Pony]

You're right that with a winning team, we could probably average 20k in Ford and maybe 4-5k in Moody and that neither CUSA or WAC opponents are going to help us sellout. Perhaps a game against TCU with a conference championship on the line, but Tulane isn't any better than Tulsa. In fact, Tulsa hoops is a pretty good draw. Much better than Tulane could ever hope to be. Tulane football might be slightly better, but I remember some games in that series attended by 12-14,000 just like the Tulsa games have been. Still, I'd prefer to be within 500 miles of all of my conference opponents and a combination of CUSA, WAC and SBC is still the best bet for SMU in the long run. ACC expansion could set that all in motion. It would put a major hurt on the Big East as far as football goes.

[abezontar]

Have we had a losing record in basketball recently? I didn't think we had, but we still don't seem to average 4-5k at Moody

[OldPony]

I just hope that we are percieved as a stronger athletic program than we were just a couple of years ago when we had the possibility of getting in CUSA. I believe that the willingness to spend the money to get Bennett helped and probably our b;ball program would be looked at as very slightly stronger. Our lack of attendance is a huge problem though.
No one is attracted to a school who wins 18 basketgball games a year (I don't care what competition) and draws 3000 or a football team that can't draw 20,000 unless playing a nearby state school. Winning will help but not all that much unless we a national championship type winners. I truly beleive that SMU could win 9 games next year(No I don't think they will) and draw less than 25,000 average (real attendance) at home. That, folks,is our affiliation problem in a nutshell.
If we were drawing we would be desirable. We don't, we're not. Winning will help but we have an alumni and student support problem that goes beyond win/loss records.