CBS Sportsline says...

[Hoop Fan]

that Tulsa and UCF have provisionally accepted offers from CUSA. They didn't elaborate. I wonder what that means, but i have to assume they have the most support. Copeland is quoted several times in the article, basically our necks are on the line right now. The way the comments have sounded I am starting to believe SMU, Tulsa and Rice are somewhat of a package deal...meaning unless TCU and Tulane find a candidate they like better. I bet TCU has veto power right now in the West and Memphis does in the East.

[Hoofprint]

Got a link for the article?

[FloridaMustang]

Copeland is waiting to see what TCU does, period.

[Hoofprint]

Why would TCU have veto power? They are (I believe) the newest member of the conference and should have no more power than the rest of the schools, right? Or is there something I'm missing here?

[Hoop Fan]

I'm sure TCU doesn't have a veto "right", but that doesn't mean they dont have veto power per se.

[Nacho]

<A HREF="http://www.sportsline.com/general/story/6671502" TARGET=_blank>http://www.sportsline.com/general/story/6671502</A>

[MizterTea]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Hoop Fan:
<B>I'm sure TCU doesn't have a veto "right", but that doesn't mean they dont have veto power per se. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would TCU veto a chance to play SMU as a conference game (read: Conference WIN) with no travel costs over taking three planes and a 2 hours bus ride to travel to some place like the swamps of Florida - only to have that team come to Ft. Worth the next year and have 0 interest from the locals (read: Attendance)


seems to me their "veto" power comes from the fact that UH, Tulane, SMU, and Tulsa ALL want to play in a conference with tcu
------------------
"I can remember when the air was clean and sex was dirty."
- George Burns

[This message has been edited by MizterTea (edited 09-26-2003).]

[EastStang]

TCU will be the strongest football program left in CUSA after the others leave. They do have the option of going to the WAC along with Houston and Tulane. Thus, they can pretty well dictate who joins. Houston and TCU want SMU and Rice. SMU and Rice want Tulsa as does Memphis. This is one time where the private schools can exact some revenge.

[Stallion]

I think one reason why UH is willing to consider adding Rice, Tulsa and SMU is simply because the President has probably had enough of the huge deficits that program has run over the years. He may figure that at least by adding those schools UH will significantly reduce costs although I feel that revenues will likely plummet. I can tell you that fan sentiment on UHs Fan Forum would be running Oh about 10-1 against adding the private schools.

[Dooby]

Stallion, why will revenues plummet? Travel expenses decline, obviously. But why would revenue? Theoretically, aren't Rice, Tulsa and SMU more likely to travel to Houston and buy tickets than Cincinatti and Louisville?

Nobody goes to Houston games as it is. They aren't going to lose a lot of fans because they aren't playing Cincy in Football.

I personally don't have much interest in going to see a game played at the "John O'Quinn big money donation to keep from getting disbarred" field.

Loss of TV or bowl revenue? Saying they'd decline is speculative now, particularly if a

[The CPC]

NCAA basketball tournament revenue will plummet, and thats not speculation. Add up the tournament units generated by Marquette, Lousiville, Cincinnatti and Depaul in the last few years, then compare that to the schools being added. Tulsa is the only one making any kind of contribution. The basketball tournament is the conferences prime source of revenue, and more than 2/3rds of that revenue walks out the door with the schools that are leaving, particularly when you consider that St. Louis and and UNCC are also rumored to be departing. Memphis and Tulsa will be the only remaining schools with recent NCAA appearances.

Saying that the loss of the conferences marquee basketball teams will result in less TV revenue may be just speculation now, but that doesnt mean there isnt a strong possibility it will happen. C-USA is about to go from being a basketball power league to something roughly equal to last years WAC. TV networks arent going to be clamoring to put that on the air.

[Stallion]

CUSA has a pretty darn good TV contract which I have always suspected, as CPC suggests, was the result of marquee BB schools NOT FB as many in CUSA suggest. Seriuosly, I wouldn't be surprised to see the CUSA TV contract drop by 2/3 next time it is signed. This is just about the best alternative SMU has right now-but the Networks aren't going to pay big bucks for the Tulsas, Rices and SMUs of the world.

[Dooby]

Well, I don't disagree with any of that, except to say a conference championship football game might add something to the mix. And it isn't like Cincy and Louisville aren't leaving anyway; C-USA has to do something.

The reference was specifically made to Houston. It isn't as if Houston is contributing much to C-USA. Last bowl game was in 1996. I haven't paid attention, but isn't their basketball program still in disaray? So what right do the UofH faithful have to be against this move?

[Stallion]

probably because one school has a winning percentage of about 23% over the last 15 years, another hasn't been to a bowl game in 43 years and another hasn't had a winning season in about 12 years. Something like that.

[Dooby]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Stallion:
<B> probably because one school has a winning percentage of about 23% over the last 15 years, another hasn't been to a bowl game in 43 years and another hasn't had a winning season in about 12 years. Something like that.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But that doesn't say anything about Houston. And lets be honest about what Houston is. UofH is little more than a commuter school with little more (if any) community support for athletics than SMU. I know, I went to law school there.

I looked up their attendance and its not significantly better than SMU. I bet UofH sells fewer football tickets than Rice does. And their record of success ain't much better than Rice and SMU's post-SWC breakup.