If the AQ money and status is gone...

Kynd Tulsa Phan · Post by **Kynd Tulsa Phan** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:00 am

Does this expanision make sense?

I would argue that you would be in a better league with BYU and Boise but you would still technically be in their league with the Superfriends allaince and would maintain regional rivarlies with Tulsa,UTEP and Rice.

I guess the deciding factor is the TV deal. I dont know if its all that great if Boise and BYU say no to the Big East under the NO MORE AQ status situation.

2ndandlong · Post by **2ndandlong** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:03 am

TV deal

And basketball.

PonyKai · Post by **PonyKai** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:04 am

Cut the dead weight. Bye bye, Tulane, UAB, Rice, Memphis to an extent.

Kynd Tulsa Phan · Post by **Kynd Tulsa Phan** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:07 am

I agree on some aspects with the TV deal.

Hoops - come on SMU hasnt competed in the WAC or CUSA. As a big hoops fan and someone who sees a lot of games @ Moody I cant see much of a turnaround in the near future with or without D'oh. CUSA has great hoops this year....Tulsa is 3-0, Memphis is #10 or 9 in the nation, Marshall has a great team. I think we get three teams in the Dance. The WAC had great hoops as well.

I could see the Big East hoops schools merging with the A-10 bc of the dilution of talent going out.

SMU_Alumni11 · Post by **SMU_Alumni11** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:14 am

Even without AQ, BE would be better exposure for the school in terms of academics. It would be considered the best non-AQ conference. Our basketball program would have the ability to grow, since we would be one of the only schools in the region to give players the opportunity to play against the best. I mean we should add Memphis for basketball only to make those BE BB schools happy. All in all, its better to go to this conference, because you are taking the best of the best in non-AQ conference football and giving them a chance to be seen.

Dutch · Post by **Dutch** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:15 am

if the AQ and money status is gone, then we're right back where we started this season!

RGV Pony · Post by **RGV Pony** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:15 am

Dep on the tv deal

Junior · Post by **Junior** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:22 am

as long as we don't have to be in a conference with perinnial powerhouses such as Fresno St. and CSU...

ponyinNC · Post by **ponyinNC** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:27 am

All indications are that tv deal will be big, and there will be a bidding war between NBC, ESPN, Comcast, etc. Not necessarily because the teams are so great, but because of the timing and the fact that NBC really wants more cfb.

You also have some major tv markets and some good national followings (BYU, Boise, Academies, etc). I know some of these teams don't really carry their markets, but the fact remains that those teams are located in major media hubs (D/FW, Houston, Orlando, SLC, NYC, Cincy, etc).

Aside from tv money (I'd guess we get between $5-10M per team in BE vs. $1.3 we get now in CUSA), you also cut the dead weight and stop associating with schools that have no desire to compete or have no commitment to the fb program (Rice, Tulane, Memphis, etc). Not to mention you gain incredible bb exposure.

I feel for Tulsa b/c they have done everything right, have been competitive or near the top in fb and bb for years...heck, your AD was so good that UNC hired him away. BUt Tulsa shares many of SMU's problems with attendance and small student base. Add the fact that your tv market isn't as sexy, and unfortunately the golden hurricane are left out of this round.

skyscraper · Post by **skyscraper** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:29 am

Still worth moving to BE.

gostangs · Post by **gostangs** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:38 am

The existing contract is 10 per school. The new one will be at least 13 - but more likely with BYU and Boise and academies included about 15.

Kynd Tulsa Phan · Post by **Kynd Tulsa Phan** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:41 pm

No AQ means no Boise and BYU. You guys realize that dont you.

Tulane is building an On Campus Stadium. Tulane went 12-0 in 1998.

Rice won 10 games in 2008 and is 1-1 in bowl games since 2006. Last time I checked SMU is 1-1 in the same time period.

UAB brings plenty for Hoops.

Anyway - this board is delusional and has a chubby for a conference that ranks lower in football than CUSA.

SMU 86 · Post by **SMU 86** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:49 pm

We still get much more money than CUSA. Tulsa can still enjoy it's small share.

Dutch · Post by **Dutch** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:55 pm

don't forget about UNT!

smupony94 · Post by **smupony94** » Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:56 pm

And ECU