Topic: CUSA/MAC Alliance... new and improved

[_sturt_]

Like I said... I'm at the front of the line in terms of criticism of the apathetic MAC fan base and its schools... preaching to the choir preacher on that one.

But there's nothing to keep CUSA from dissolving the alliance at that point that it begins to not serve our purposes to keep it going. The alliance that I'm describing is different from an all-out conference merger.

Alliances form when both conferences have something to gain from cooperation.

MWC has nothing to gain from an alliance with us at this point. I wish it weren't true, but it is. AAC, same thing.

We and MAC have a lot to gain from cooperating with each other b/c we're near equals now. I like the Ashland Oil / Marathon Oil analogy... Exxon and BP were better off before the two figured out that they were so much wiser to restructure things so that they could better compete against their deeper-pocketed competition. We may dislike the MAC and they may dislike CUSA, but at the moment, we have a bigger common enemy that we're both better served to regard as the primary enemy.

[MarshallSteve]

Like I said... I'm at the front of the line in terms of criticism of the apathetic MAC fan base and its schools... preaching to the choir preacher on that one.

But there's nothing to keep CUSA from dissolving the alliance at that point that it begins to not serve our purposes to keep it going. The alliance that I'm describing is different from an all-out conference merger.

Alliances form when both conferences have something to gain from cooperation.

MWC has nothing to gain from an alliance with us at this point. I wish it weren't true, but it is. AAC, same thing.

We and MAC have a lot to gain from cooperating with each other b/c we're near equals now. I like the Ashland Oil / Marathon Oil analogy... Exxon and BP were better off before the two figured out that they were so much wiser to restructure things so that they could better compete against their deeper-pocketed competition. We may dislike the MAC and they may dislike CUSA, but at the moment, we have a bigger common enemy that we're both better served to regard as the primary enemy.

I will have to respectfully disagree with you on that Sturt. The two leagues (Mac/CUSA) have totally different ideas on how a league should be ran. They really have nothing in common. The Mac wants to continue being a bus league whereas CUSA wants to embrace regional rivalries while still being able to expand their reach in different states and various markets.

Marshall getting increased coverage in Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Florida, North Carolina is huge for us. Its where the majority of our Alumni are. Its where we primarily recruit. Our fans can easily drive to Nashville, Norfolk, Charlotte, Bowling Green etc.

The only possible alliance that makes any sense would be with the MWC. The MWC would benefit by getting that very much desired exposure in Texas and the Eastern States. Same for CUSA in that it would like to get some exposure in Western states like New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado etc. If anything, I would like to see CUSA and the MWC work on some scheduling partnerships for Basketball and maybe the occasional OOC football game. A CUSA/MWC "basketball challenge" would be great.

[_sturt_]

I will have to respectfully disagree with you on that Sturt. The two leagues (Mac/CUSA) have totally different ideas on how a league should be ran. They really have nothing in common. The Mac wants to continue being a bus league whereas CUSA wants to embrace regional rivalries while still being able to expand their reach in different states and various markets.

Marshall getting increased coverage in Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Florida, North Carolina is huge for us. Its where the majority of our Alumni are. Its where we primarily recruit. Our fans can easily drive to Nashville, Norfolk, Charlotte, Bowling Green etc.

The only possible alliance that makes any sense would be with the MWC. The MWC would benefit by getting that very much desired exposure in Texas and the Eastern States. Same for CUSA in that it would like to get some exposure in Western states like New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado etc. If anything, I would like to see CUSA and the MWC work on some scheduling partnerships for Basketball and maybe the occasional OOC football game. A CUSA/MWC "basketball challenge" would be great.

Talk all the subjective philosophical jargon you want. Competitively we are near equals. And that's what matters in December when decisions about major bowls get made. All the other that you attempt to make important is peripheral.

MWC? MWC Commish Thompson has demonstrated interest in alliance with PAC recently, and with what is now practically the AAC formerly. There has never been an interest in playing with a level beneath them.

[carolinaherdfan]

Stuart, when Army joins the MAC, I will become a monk.

[_sturt_]

Maybe. Fwiw, Army has a scheduling agreement with the MAC from what I understand based on what I've been told by some MAC fans.

But it's not vital or even that important to the concept that Army be involved.

[MarshallSteve]

Talk all the subjective philosophical jargon you want. Competitively we are near equals. And that's what matters in December when decisions about major bowls get made. All the other that you attempt to make important is peripheral.

MWC? MWC Commish Thompson has demonstrated interest in alliance with PAC recently, and with what is now practically the AAC formerly. There has never been an interest in playing with a level beneath them.

No, we are not near equals in competition and no its not always competition that matters in December by bowl selection committees. Just ask Temple. What matters in the eyes of Bowl committees in December are schools that will bring fans and help provide exposure to large areas across the US. There is a reason why CUSA has 6 bowl tie ins (About to be 7 with one coming in Miami) and the Mac only has 3 and are losing the Motor City bowl as well. We lost money on every bowl we ever went to in the Mac. In CUSA they guarantee schools that they will not lose money on bowl trips. Big difference. No comparison. CUSA is the much desired conference. Its not even close.

[_sturt_]

No, (a) we are not near equals in competition and no (b) its not always competition that matters in December by bowl selection committees....

(a) With all due respect, you and others repeatedly come here and disperse your subjective opinion with nothing to back it up, and expect that to be good enough. Maybe for some it is. Not here. Have something more than "because I said so," please... or at least do so when you can see that I've brought some evidence. It's like I just detonated a bomb, and you're sitting their with your cap gun, expecting me to respond as if you returned fire for fire. Please. Make the conversation substantive and useful, or don't make it. It's boring. Like sv always says, everyone has an opinion. So what? But not everyone has an opinion that they back up with some relevant numbers.

(b) With all due respect, keep up please. We're not talking about ANY bowl. We're talking about achieving the ONE major bowl that is guaranteed to the Go5.

With all due respect, to miss that is to miss much of the point of the entire thread. Not real sure how one misses that... perhaps one wasn't real interested to take a genuine look at the proposal in the first place... which is fine, spend your time as you wish, but then why waste anyone's time with a reply that ends up being largely irrelevant?

To re-cap... with regard to that one guaranteed major bowl slot, it's competition period. That's what will either get a CUSA or MAC school into that major bowl or will not.

[BuyNtelos4]

We may be close to equal on the playing field, but we are percceived as superior.  If we combined it would do nothing but bring us down, or make us tak our opportunities and $ and split them with someone.  No benefit at all to us other than we may get to watch a good game from the ticket we purchased, to the game that the whole country feels should be a blowout. 

As much of a step backwards as us going back to the MAC.  Thank god we have Mike Hamrick and not Mike Sturt.  I realize you are just playing, but other than going back to the Southern Conference, nothing could be worse for us.

[Big Ol' Hillbilly]

[_sturt_]

Perceived as superior?

Let's see if a quick google search reveals anything like that among the writers out there...

Who Won Realignment? (SportsOnEarth)

6. MAC
The MAC lives in its own happy little bubble, the only conference dancing through realignment virtually unaffected, immune to rumors and interest from other leagues. Temple returned to the desperate Big East a few years after getting kicked out and joining the MAC, while UMass joined after making the jump to FBS. That's it. The league has been stable, and, in fact, has raised its profile over the last couple years by playing exciting, high-scoring midweek games, in addition to producing the No. 1 pick in the NFL draft, Central Michigan tackle Eric Fisher. Very few casual fans could name all 13 teams in the MAC, but it doesn't matter. The conference will never become a power, and that's OK. It has its own little place in the world, gets on TV when it can and plays nuisance to the Big Ten and other heavyweights from time to time. May it never change....

8. Conference USA
Meet the new Sun Belt. Pretty much all of Conference USA's relevant teams - Houston, East Carolina and UCF, mainly -- are gone or will be gone, so the hope is that the future will see rebounds from Southern Miss and Marshall, a spark from WAC acquisition Louisiana Tech and development from FAU and FIU out of the Sun Belt. Otherwise, it's just a hodgepodge of mid-major mediocrity and young programs, and the likelihood of Bobby Petrino staying at Western Kentucky for the Hilltoppers' move is, say, 50/50.

Athlon Sports: Realignment Winners and Losers

(Loser: Conference USA) In 2005, this league boasted Cincinnati, Louisville, Marquette and Memphis in a strong basketball lineup. Memphis was the last to get the call from the Big East, leaving C-USA without a dominant program starting in 2013-14. The league will cobble together Charlotte from the A-10, FIU and North Texas from the Sun Belt and Old Dominion from the CAA to replace Memphis, Houston, SMU and UCF in 2013-14. While the conference should be more balanced, all the headliners are gone.

Couldn't find a single hint that any independent writer thinks of CUSA in a higher way than the MAC... but I invite you to try. Maybe I just didn't try hard enough?

Until then...

Anyone perceiving CUSA as superior just isn't paying attention to the realignment carousel, and didn't pick up on the fact that the MAC sent a team to the Orange Bowl last season.

C'mon now. The freakin majority of CUSA 3.0 will be schools that played at a level beneath the MAC prior to this season. That's just Pollyannish BS.

One more thing... "going back to the MAC"... ?!?

Huh?!?

What the heck are you talking about?

Who said anything about going back to the MAC?

That's not in this thread.

[MarshallSteve]

We may be close to equal on the playing field, but we are percceived as superior.  If we combined it would do nothing but bring us down, or make us tak our opportunities and $ and split them with someone.  No benefit at all to us other than we may get to watch a good game from the ticket we purchased, to the game that the whole country feels should be a blowout. 

As much of a step backwards as us going back to the MAC.  Thank god we have Mike Hamrick and not Mike Sturt.  I realize you are just playing, but other than going back to the Southern Conference, nothing could be worse for us.

I totally agree. Good post.

Sometime I wonder if Sturt is really a Mac school fan that wants nothing but for Marshall to go back to the Mac. Sorry Stu....not happening. Going back to the Mac or having any alliance with the Mac is a step back for us. We're moving forward and not looking back. Sorry.

[MarshallSteve]

(a) With all due respect, you and others repeatedly come here and disperse your subjective opinion with nothing to back it up, and expect that to be good enough. Maybe for some it is. Not here. Have something more than "because I said so," please... or at least do so when you can see that I've brought some evidence. It's like I just detonated a bomb, and you're sitting their with your cap gun, expecting me to respond as if you returned fire for fire. Please. Make the conversation substantive and useful, or don't make it. It's boring. Like sv always says, everyone has an opinion. So what? But not everyone has an opinion that they back up with some relevant numbers.

(b) With all due respect, keep up please. We're not talking about ANY bowl. We're talking about achieving the ONE major bowl that is guaranteed to the Go5.

With all due respect, to miss that is to miss much of the point of the entire thread. Not real sure how one misses that... perhaps one wasn't real interested to take a genuine look at the proposal in the first place... which is fine, spend your time as you wish, but then why waste anyone's time with a reply that ends up being largely irrelevant?

To re-cap... with regard to that one guaranteed major bowl slot, it's competition period. That's what will either get a CUSA or MAC school into that major bowl or will not.

You are correct, I wasn't real interested. After reading the first few lines of your original post, I had read enough. Some idea of CUSA and the Mac is like mixing oil with water. Simply doesn't work. Different model. CUSA is forward thinking whereas the Mac is not. Schools like La Tech, MTSU, WKU, ODU, Charlotte.....are miles ahead of the likes of Kent State, Eastern Michigan, Ball State, Buffalo etc. No comparison in facilities, location, fan support etc.

[_sturt_]

You are correct, I wasn't real interested. After reading the first few lines of your original post, I had read enough. Some idea of CUSA and the Mac is like mixing oil with water. Simply doesn't work. Different model. CUSA is forward thinking whereas the Mac is not. Schools like La Tech, MTSU, WKU, ODU, Charlotte.....are miles ahead of the likes of Kent State, Eastern Michigan, Ball State, Buffalo etc. No comparison in facilities, location, fan support etc.

Good of you to admit it. Seriously.

But next time, just start your own thread on your choice of topics... the irrelevant BS you've supplied to this one is just a distraction to the actual ideas and rationale presented in this one, okay?

[_sturt_]

75.9 = AAC schools' average Sagarin ranking 2008-2012
90.4 = MWC schools' average Sagarin ranking 2008-2012
113.3 = MAC schools' average Sagarin ranking 2008-2012 (25% below MWC)
118.7* = CUSA schools' average Sagarin ranking 2008-2012 (31% below MWC)

15.5 = AAC average ranking in comparison to all other Go5 schools
25.0 = MWC average ranking in comparison to all other Go5 schools
35.3 = MAC average ranking in comparison to all other Go5 schools (40% below MWC)
38.2* = CUSA average ranking in comparison to all other Go5 schools (52% below MWC)

*Of course, there is no ranking for Charlotte, which, if they follow convention, will spend a few years in the basement, and would/will reduce these numbers further. On the other hand, the normal distribution predicts that CUSA overall is likely to balance out over time, meaning that probably 2-3 schools that currently are bottom-feeders will, at least, raise their game to middle-of-the-pack status. And with that, we're still likely to be practically even with MAC, and optimistically-speaking, we might even edge slightly ahead.

[MarshallSteve]

Good of you to admit it. Seriously.

But next time, just start your own thread on your choice of topics... the irrelevant BS you've supplied to this one is just a distraction to the actual ideas and rationale presented in this one, okay?

The only irrelevant BS that I've seen in this thread is your original post of ideas and rationale.

[MarshallSteve]

75.9 = AAC schools' average Sagarin ranking 2008-2012
90.4 = MWC schools' average Sagarin ranking 2008-2012
113.3 = MAC schools' average Sagarin ranking 2008-2012 (25% below MWC)
118.7* = CUSA schools' average Sagarin ranking 2008-2012 (31% below MWC)

15.5 = AAC average ranking in comparison to all other Go5 schools
25.0 = MWC average ranking in comparison to all other Go5 schools
35.3 = MAC average ranking in comparison to all other Go5 schools (40% below MWC)
38.2* = CUSA average ranking in comparison to all other Go5 schools (52% below MWC)

*Of course, there is no ranking for Charlotte, which, if they follow convention, will spend a few years in the basement, and would/will reduce these numbers further. On the other hand, the normal distribution predicts that CUSA overall is likely to balance out over time, meaning that probably 2-3 schools that currently are bottom-feeders will, at least, raise their game to middle-of-the-pack status. And with that, we're still likely to be practically even with MAC, and optimistically-speaking, we might even edge slightly ahead.

  Those Sagarin numbers are totally worthless since most of those schools haven't even played together.

Since you are such a huge Mac fan, here is a link to their board: http://csnbbs.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=513

[_sturt_]

The only irrelevant BS that I've seen in this thread is your original post of ideas and rationale.

*chuckle*

The person who starts the thread and writes something in the subject header, by definition, determines what is relevant for that thread... but I guess that concept somehow escapes you. Next time you start a thread, maybe I can demonstrate the shoe on the other foot for the sake of illustration.

[_sturt_]

  Those Sagarin numbers are totally worthless since most of those schools haven't even played together.

Since you are such a huge Mac fan, here is a link to their board: http://csnbbs.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=513

Steve, I don't mean to be insulting. I really don't. But you don't appear to have ever taken the time to read and understand how Sagarins work. You're even less informed than I'd realized. Concisely for our purposes here, Sagarin's formula predicts winners of games between teams that routinely haven't played against each other at about 70-75% accuracy... which ranks in the top 2 or 3 of all of the calculations out there. Sagarin is one of six ratings that have been highly regarded enough to be included in the BCS formula.

Then again, since you can't seem to make the minimal effort to even read sufficiently to gather the purpose of the proposal of this thread, I suppose no one should be surprised that you hadn't taken the time to understand the significance of the Sagarin ratings and rankings.

I know this is a little brutal, and you're probably a nice guy otherwise, but it's not my fault that you fail to take the time to understand before you haul off and talk with ignorant indignation. I'm sure you're intelligent enough, you just need to slow down and get a grasp of the whole picture. Until then, your opinion really isn't informed, and for that reason, can't be taken too seriously.

[luvherd]

What a dumb thread.

[_sturt_]

What a dumb thread.

Started this whole thing to irritate just you, luv. My day is made.  :P

[CoachMaclid]

Sturt, as much as you've always posted this, there's always one piece of the puzzle you never address... The two leagues ability to generate revenues is not equal, so there no monetary benefit for CUSA.  C-USA makes 12 times per school what MAC makes on TV.  And, despite the perceived step back in quality with the additions, C-USA 3.0 home markets are 40% larger than C-USA's 2.0 home markets.

The league don't share geography or history (Marshall is basically the only connection between the 27 schools in the two leagues).  Heck, the two leagues don't even have an agreement to meet each other in a bowl game.

[_sturt_]

Sturt, as much as you've always posted this, there's always one piece of the puzzle you never address... The two leagues ability to generate revenues is not equal, so there no monetary benefit for CUSA.  

Thanks, Maclid.... ahhh, but I do address it, and there most definitely is a monetary benefit for CUSA and MAC... did you read this?...

Sturt,

You did some very good research and make some compelling arguments.

However, how would adding any MAC schools increase profits/money (including TV revenue)?

Conferences look at the financial impact of adding a school before looking at "competition on the field."

It is all amount money...money...money.

The majority of the MAC schools' budget are minimal and not even close to ours (Marshall).  Moreover, most MAC schools would not increase the revenue generated from TV.

While adding Ohio or NIU would increase CUSA's "on field" competitiveness...it would not increase revenue.

Add schools that are willing to spend money, improve their facilities and increase the revenue from TV contracts.

Mike...Go Herd!!!!

Good observation, Mike. And you're right. It all goes back to the money.

It appears that the standardized revenue distribution of the new bowl system isn't going to be significantly different for Boise and the MWC from what it is for Idaho and the SBC. So, in that vein... originally one that I personally thought may be significant... it's not a big deal.

But then, think about this.

Did NIU's appearance in the Orange Bowl make a difference to the MAC?

Yes. Absolutely. Both in terms of national regard and in terms of money.

Even though we all... and I'm in the front of that line... scoff at the MAC's lack of ambition... clearly the attention and money (reportedly as much as $13 million) was eagerly received by that conference, and it's only natural to think that they'd like to keep doing that as often as possible.

The thing is, you want to maximize your potential for being that conference that has that school that made the major bowl. And you have to do that through some innovative thinking about things that are within your power to control, and enact a structure that puts you in the best position possible.

As things stand for the moment, the gap that we all perceived there was between us and the MAC has not only vanished, but most of the schools responsible for that gap have joined with Cincinnati, USF, UConn and Temple and advanced, while we've joined with schools that were the best we could get but that, with the exception of Louisiana Tech, set us back further than if we somehow were allowed to continue on our own. There are three tiers now in Go5... AAC and MWC... us and MAC... and Sun Belt.

Creating a Great 8 puts the odds in our favor that every season one of us from the MAC or CUSA is going to be contending for that major bowl slot, largely by virtue of the built-in in-season playoff mechanism that ensure the Kent/NIU effect... ie, that some team from among the elite is going to finish the season with three wins over good-to-very-good competition.

To not do so is to make that pursuit mostly dominated by the AAC and MWC... only occasionally through odd circumstances will either a MAC or CUSA school jump up to compete, let alone win that right to play in a major bowl.

C-USA makes 12 times per school what MAC makes on TV.  And, despite the perceived step back in quality with the additions, C-USA 3.0 home markets are 40% larger than C-USA's 2.0 home markets.

Again, it's beside the point because TV revenues would continue to be funneled to the parent conferences anyhow... there's no actual bearing one way or the other. But addressing your point, while it may be true for the moment that CUSA makes more than MAC based on the composition of CUSA 2.0, that is about to change. When the majority of your conference is suddenly made up of schools that previously played in some lesser environment than MAC, your CUSA 3.0 TV revenues are going to begin to look a lot more like something MAC-like than CUSA 2.0-like. And again, if the Miami and Nashville markets as delivered by FIU, FAU and MTSU were all that significant, you would have seen that reflected in Sun Belt revenues... clearly, they had little effect on SB, and just as a rose is a rose by any other name... a dandelion is a dandelion whether under the Sun Belt tent or the CUSA tent.

The league don't share geography or history (Marshall is basically the only connection between the 27 schools in the two leagues).  Heck, the two leagues don't even have an agreement to meet each other in a bowl game.

Again, we're not talking merger here, so tell me why sharing anything is important with the exception of a common interest in virtually always having at least one real competitor for the major bowl?

We're talking about a cooperative venture.

And it's not even as-if we're not talking even about a Boise in the Big East situation. The schools would still be primarily playing the teams they're currently playing.

[_sturt_]

So having gotten past some of the initial objections, let's turn our attention to the NCAA D1 manual, and what is actually a legitimate objection that hasn't yet been raised...



...which is this: these schools would not only be part of the same football conference, but would be required to function as a conference for other sports as well.

It works for football. But does it work for basketball? And what about non-revenue sports?

The regulations say that you've got to have at least six members that remain static in any two-year period.

That would be satisfied under this arrangement, since there would only be two of the eight schools being relegated and replaced in any two year period.

But the bigger question is does Rice want to be having to play Northern Illinois in all of these basketball and non-revenue contests?

Surely not.

Well, they wouldn't.

Instead, for non-revenue team sports, the 8-team conference would have 4-team subdivisions aligned according to whether their parent conference is CUSA or MAC. And unless I missed something (the manual is 416 pages, but it's not difficult to search a PDF, of course), those 4 schools are only required to play each other home and away, and then for the 8 to have a post-season tournament.

For non-revenue individual sports, there is latitude to determine the conference champion through whatever means a conference desires to do so... ostensibly, that could be a single conference meet.

For basketball, the requirement is to either play double round-robin with all schools or a minimum of 14 contests. The latter is more ideal than the former in order to limit travel costs, so this is where a little more creativity gets employed.

For basketball season only, the Great Eight of football morphs into the Great Twelve of basketball.



Here's why.

By instituting automatic additions--the MAC West, MAC East, CUSA West and CUSA East champs from the previous year--to the new conference, scheduling becomes a piece of cake for all involved... teams continue to play conference mates with whom they're more geographically and/or historically tied:

Great Twelve regular season format
- 10 (5h/5a) former-MAC vs. former MAC, and 10 (5h/5a) former CUSA vs. former CUSA
- 4 (2h/2a) former-MACs vs. former CUSAs

MAC and CUSA regular season formats
- 8 (4h/4a) intradivision
- 6 interdivision: 1 h&a + 2h + 2a

Someone might say, "Yeah, that might work for CUSA where the relationships aren't developed to the degree that you're putting into jeopardy some rivalries, but in the MAC, some schools do have that: Ohio/Miami for instance. If Ohio is in the Great Eight/Twelve, and Miami in the MAC, that's a problem."

But wait. On the other hand, you have 14 conference games, whereas as things are currently constituted, I believe they are committed to 16.

So... you schedule Ohio/Miami home and away, and it nets out to be 16 games overall either way you do it.

And that leads to another advantage to this structure...

That is, every conference has a few games for which there's no particularly palpable interest... and so another thing that's great about this arrangement is that, assuming one is in the G12 and the other in the MAC, Akron doesn't absolutely have to play NIU in basketball.

Closer to home and more importantly to all of us, Marshall doesn't absolutely have to play, for instance, UTSA in basketball. Rice doesn't absolutely have to play Old Dominion. Florida Atlantic doesn't absolutely have to play Louisiana Tech. They might. But they don't have to. There's more room for building a schedule that you want.

(Of course, that's a bigger deal to us in this new widespread CUSA than it would be to the MAC side.)

Advantage, new alliance.

But here's another objection:

What about the tournament... you just aren't going to be able to find a good mid-point location for a tournament that is potentially attempting to attract fans from Buffalo to El Paso.

True.

Simple and easy resolution to that...

The Great Twelve Tournament, except for the championship (which I address below), would take place in two locations... the six former-MAC schools would be seeded 1 through 6 and would play their games in Cleveland (MAC tourney location)... same for the former-CUSA schools, playing their games in whatever city the tournament ends up being in (for now, El Paso). On the calendar, those would precede the MAC and CUSA tournaments.

From those two, then, a former-MAC team and a former-CUSA team would emerge to play in a championship game. Both the MAC and CUSA tournaments currently conclude on Saturdays. The G12 championship would take place on Sunday, in the tournament city of the higher-seeded team (based first on conference record, then on tie-breakers)--e.g., if Southern Miss emerges from the CUSA side, and Akron emerges from the MAC side, the championship would be played in Cleveland if Akron has the higher seeding, and in El Paso or whatever new site is chosen, if Southern Miss has it.

So, the G12 Championship ends up just being an additional one-game nominal money maker pitting a former CUSA school versus a former MAC school.

Which highlights another important advantage to this structure:

Currently, the MAC has 13 schools, CUSA 14 schools. Between them, those two conferences yield TWO champions. (Of course.)

Adding 3 schools to MAC and 2 schools to CUSA provides sufficient membership to carve out and establish this third "co-op" conference of their most elite. And besides satisfying its primary purpose in making it substantially more likely to put one of their schools in a major bowl year-in-year-out, adding just five schools between them makes it possible to award a THIRD school a championship... and... in doing so, also makes the MAC and CUSA championship more reachable from top-to-bottom in the regular conferences.

I know it's a lot to think about, and seemingly is too out-of-the-box to comprehend actually occurring. Some, no doubt, have skipped all the way to the bottom and this very paragraph, muttering to themselves, "I can't believe he thought all this out, and then wrote all of this." (Yep. I did, and I did... more discretionary time right now than normal.)

The point, for now, is that we have a problem... we are in the second tier of the second tier of NCAA D1 FBS football...

And we're not alone... the MAC is in the same position.

If we cooperate together, I've demonstrated we can resolve the problem, and do so in both an innovative and an NCAA-compliant way.

If we refuse that and are content to operate in silos, it doesn't bode well for our future, likely ensuring AAC and MWC's advancement and our own regression.

[Buffalo Bop]

[Big Ol' Hillbilly]