[jbock13]

With inspiration from Cider, it's an interesting question we can debate here.

[Sly Fox]

I adding in the WAC just to add a little extra intrigue.

Clearly I would pick Conference USA every time so I could have the Flames regularly in Houston and within driving distance.

[NotAJerry]

Voted Sun Belt just because of the recruiting areas it would open up. With Gill's ties to the midwest/Texas being in a league that has 2 south Florida schools, and a footprint that extends through Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana and Arkanasas, would give us a leg up on developing a large region for recruiting which should get things closer to the national recruiting base that should be possible.

If not the Sun Belt, the ideas that have been floated for a new conference would work. I really don't get why the MAC would be attractive outside of the ridiculous nightly TV coverage.

[NotAJerry]

I adding in the WAC just to add a little extra intrigue.

Clearly I would pick Conference USA every time so I could have the Flames regularly in Houston and within driving distance.

Isn't Houston going with all sports to the Big East?

[prototype]

This is pretty obvious - but
1st - Conf. USA - Good teams all over country
2nd WAC - This would be a logistical nightmare..
3rd - Sun Belt. Probably makes the most sense, but not the most glamorous competition.

What about the MAC?

[Cider Jim]

I, too, picked the C-USA for sentimental reasons: seeing LU play Marshall and getting to make a road trip back to Huntington every other year; but a close second was "new conference"--especially if we could get JMU, ODU, Appy State and some of the other regional schools in the neighboring states to join.

[jbock13]

I adding in the WAC just to add a little extra intrigue.

Clearly I would pick Conference USA every time so I could have the Flames regularly in Houston and within driving distance.

Isn't Houston going with all sports to the Big East?

Rice is still near Houston.

[Jkill617]

SEC. The level of competition is second to none.

[Purple Haize]

I'm the lone new FBS conference vote. I can't see a positive outcome of this move without state and or regional tie ins of relevance. That may come in the form of a new conference or from replacing the ranks of an old one.

[Flame Convert]

I'm the lone new FBS conference vote. I can't see a positive outcome of this move without state and or regional tie ins of relevance. That may come in the form of a new conference or from replacing the ranks of an old one.

Now there are two of us. In total agreement with your analysis.

[Purple Haize]

I'm the lone new FBS conference vote. I can't see a positive outcome of this move without state and or regional tie ins of relevance. That may come in the form of a new conference or from replacing the ranks of an old one.

Now there are two of us. In total agreement with your analysis.

Well there goes your credibility on the board!

[bradyfan]

If the Sun-Belt is a last resort, I'll be fine with it. However, if I had a choice it would be between C-USA and MAC. I've been for C-USA so far but I'm watching Temple run all over Wyoming right now. I would love to join the MAC and start a little rivalry with them. Despite this, I voted for the C-USA just because of how huge the conference is becoming.

[NotAJerry]

I really don't get the MAC stuff at all. A bunch of teams primarily in Michigan and Ohio doesn't make any sense for us in a conference.

[bradyfan]

I really don't get the MAC stuff at all. A bunch of teams primarily in Michigan and Ohio doesn't make any sense for us in a conference.

There's one coming to PA. I'd rather be playing in Michigan and Ohio rather than Louisiana and Arkansas (unless we join the SEC of course!). We're not really a good fit in the Sun-Belt, most of these teams are really poor and have worse facilities than a couple of our Big South partners. We've played several MAC teams in the past and even beaten one. Plus, there could be an opening in the MAC if Temple leaves for BE.

[jbock13]

If we go to the MAC, we can compete right away.

In the Sun Belt, we'd probably be around 3-5 in conference.

In the C-USA, let's just say we're not ready to compete there yet.

[NotAJerry]

I really don't get the MAC stuff at all. A bunch of teams primarily in Michigan and Ohio doesn't make any sense for us in a conference.

There's one coming to PA. I'd rather be playing in Michigan and Ohio rather than Louisiana and Arkansas (unless we join the SEC of course!). We're not really a good fit in the Sun-Belt, most of these teams are really poor and have worse facilities than a couple of our Big South partners. We've played several MAC teams in the past and even beaten one. Plus, there could be an opening in the MAC if Temple leaves for BE.

MAC team facilities are awful as well. At least some Sun Belt teams are building new facilities or improving the existing ones. The MAC has Eastern Michigan averaging just over 4k per game and when UMass joins they'll have 10 of their 14 stadiums under 30k. 3 of the other 4 are between 30k and 30,200, with Temple renting the Eagles stadium as the only place that is decent.

The Sun Belt gives us opponents in talent rich areas like Louisiana and Miami to help in recruiting. Add in our natural recruiting areas, and Gill's familiarity in the midwest/Texas, and that gives us a footprint covering the entire southeast out to Texas. When South Alabama joins the Sun Belt, they'll have 8 of 10 teams at least meeting the supposed FBS standard of a 30k seat stadium. While the Sun Belt doesn't have the history of the MAC, it's got the better stadiums and would take us into much better recruiting areas.

Conference USA would obviously be the best of the options, but I'd bet that MAC/Sun Belt are the two that are realistic right now and adding one team in upstate NY, one in PA, one in Massachusetts, and 11 teams in Big 10 country just doesn't seem appealing. I would much rather go the direction that at least takes us to the better recruiting areas.

[bradyfan]

I really don't get the MAC stuff at all. A bunch of teams primarily in Michigan and Ohio doesn't make any sense for us in a conference.

There's one coming to PA. I'd rather be playing in Michigan and Ohio rather than Louisiana and Arkansas (unless we join the SEC of course!). We're not really a good fit in the Sun-Belt, most of these teams are really poor and have worse facilities than a couple of our Big South partners. We've played several MAC teams in the past and even beaten one. Plus, there could be an opening in the MAC if Temple leaves for BE.

MAC team facilities are awful as well. At least some Sun Belt teams are building new facilities or improving the existing ones. The MAC has Eastern Michigan averaging just over 4k per game and when UMass joins they'll have 10 of their 14 stadiums under 30k. 3 of the other 4 are between 30k and 30,200, with Temple renting the Eagles stadium as the only place that is decent.

The Sun Belt gives us opponents in talent rich areas like Louisiana and Miami to help in recruiting. Add in our natural recruiting areas, and Gill's familiarity in the midwest/Texas, and that gives us a footprint covering the entire southeast out to Texas. When South Alabama joins the Sun Belt, they'll have 8 of 10 teams at least meeting the supposed FBS standard of a 30k seat stadium. While the Sun Belt doesn't have the history of the MAC, it's got the better stadiums and would take us into much better recruiting areas.

Conference USA would obviously be the best of the options, but I'd bet that MAC/Sun Belt are the two that are realistic right now and adding one team in upstate NY, one in PA, one in Massachusetts, and 11 teams in Big 10 country just doesn't seem appealing. I would much rather go the direction that at least takes us to the better recruiting areas.

I'm not referring to the capacity of the stadiums. I would actually agree with you on the attendance and recruiting factors. MAC facilities don't have huge stadiums, neither does Sun-Belt for that matter. However, the quality of the Sun-Belt facilities are terrible and most of those schools are very poor. I've talked to several fans at UL Monroe, and they're actually concerned that their school wouldn't be able to pay for travel expenses to Lynchburg.

[Blessed1]

I voted for C-USA, but I would not be opposed to the MAC (for football-only) and the Atlantic 10 (for olympic sports). I forgot who on here suggested A-10 for our olympic sports. The A-10 wouldn't be a bad idea for Liberty since we would be in the mix with other private schools.

[bradyfan]

I voted for C-USA, but I would not be opposed to the MAC (for football-only) and the Atlantic 10 (for olympic sports). I forgot who on here suggested A-10 for our olympic sports, but it wouldn't be a bad idea for Liberty since we would be in the mix with other private schools in that conference.

+1

[chukels911]

C-USA or MAC sound good to me, if we are going to make the change go big or go home. Lets find a conference that will be want to compete in for at least 8 years...

[NG33]

The MAC has Eastern Michigan averaging just over 4k per game and when UMass joins they'll have 10 of their 14 stadiums under 30k.

Not that it really matters, but UMass will actually be playing football for the next 3 years at Gillette Stadium while McGuirk Stadium is being renovated to fit 30k.

[PAmedic]

CUSA probably the highest profile of the group (at least on the east coast, and that's all that really matters to me) : that's kind of a no-brainer.

Agree with NOTAJERRY @ ridiculous amount of coverage for the MAC tho... I think I watched more MAC games on ESPN2 this fall than ever in my life. Crazy.

Agree with JBOCK that we'd compete right away in the MAC and out-draw many, if not most of the schools.

Agree with everyone else that the SunBelt is probably the best fit geographically

So the obvious choice for me was CUSA.

[logic]

Our other sports need better competition than the A-10. That is another "FCS" conference and oUr other sports need FBS competition. We need to move everyone together if at all possible. What sports would carry over to the Sun Belt? I would guess everything except the new womens - FH, swimming, LAX. BJ, care to look that up?

[NotAJerry]

Our other sports need better competition than the A-10. That is another "FCS" conference and oUr other sports need FBS competition.

Their men's BB includes current top 10 team Xavier and has good programs in Richmond, St. Louis, Dayton, Temple, Dayton, UMass, St. Joseph's, and Charlotte. The conference has put multiple teams in the NCAA tourney for 6 straight years. The women's conference put 3 in the NCAA tourney last year as well.

I'm not sure how they do outside of basketball, but as a hoops conference, they're near the top of mid-majors.

You're really missing any kind of fact or reason in your "logical" posts today.

[bradyfan]

Our other sports need better competition than the A-10. That is another "FCS" conference and oUr other sports need FBS competition.

Their men's BB includes current top 10 team Xavier and has good programs in Richmond, St. Louis, Dayton, Temple, Dayton, UMass, St. Joseph's, and Charlotte. The conference has put multiple teams in the NCAA tourney for 6 straight years. The women's conference put 3 in the NCAA tourney last year as well.

I'm not sure how they do outside of basketball, but as a hoops conference, they're near the top of mid-majors.

You're really missing any kind of fact or reason in your "logical" posts today.

It's for these reasons that the A-10 isn't considered a mid-major conference. It isn't considered a championship conference either but I believe it's comparable to the C-USA or the MWC. It's different than mid-majors in football because there are only 120 teams. However, since the A-10 does not provide football, it's more of a major conference. It's really confusing and I'm not exactly sure how to explain it. However, it's better to think of it as a bigger conference than Sun-Belt but not as big as the ACC. That's what I was told anyways.