CinciFlame wrote:I would like a quick recap if possible. 
Sly Fox wrote:Sorry I missed the radio excitement. It has been quite a ride today.
Not to worry... we'll have the Podcast of it up on SMCRadio.com in a few days, so you'll be able to listen to it then.
R i wrote:Manson did great. Very knowledgeable and was able to list basically every major LU athletic accomplishment. Good job Jon, the guys on the radio made it sound like in a month they would have him back on to discuss the invite Liberty had received.
My favorite part was when Manson told them our current athletic budget would rank 4th in the Sun Belt.
Jon did a GREAT job tonight... and yes, we will definitely have him back on TCR in the near future, especially if Liberty does end up heading to the Sun Belt.
LUGrad2000 wrote:At least they ended being pro Liberty. The one host talked about his ignorance on Liberty, but seemed to be impressed with what he learned throughout the day.
That was Jay... I've had a *little* (that's not saying much, haha!) more info since I've actually done some forum work around here... Jon really opened our eyes on a few things.
chiefsfan wrote:2. My last rounds told me that Liberty has 6 yes votes for SBC Membership. The 5 no votes all reside in the Western Division. However, because of how this all works. If you convince just two of the West members to change their minds...the other three should follow along.
There's really no Western Division right now... maybe the western side of the conference? (Good to see you here too, man!). I assume that UTA, TXST, Idaho and NMSU are four of the no votes? Who's the 5th? IMHO Idaho and NMSU shouldn't even have any votes since they're not full members, anyway.
chiefsfan wrote:3. UMass has always been possible, but nothing is close. The thing to understand here is that the league is not choosing UMass over Liberty, they are choosing EKU. EKU is far from ready, but will probably be in 3-4 years. FB Only invites are four year deals. Essentially, we could ride UMass for 4 years and then send them on their way and pick up EKU. Same theory for Idaho and Missouri State (Who I still think will be singing a different tune in a couple years)
NMSU is still a wild card. They didn't have the votes for SBC Membership a few months ago. Yet, I could easily see Western Schools saying no to Umass or Liberty without NMSU, and Eastern Schools blocking NMSU and telling the West, Liberty or no Title game. At which point it becomes a fun staring contest.
UMass has been shot out of the park for Sun Belt. The transportation, alone, would cripple their budget. I'm still perplexed as to how Idaho and NMSU managed to get invites to SBC at all.
chiefsfan wrote:To address stability. No conference is stable. CUSA's TV Contract isn't likely to change. I could see that league blowing up in a few years when enough members get angry, and starting their own Geographically based leagues by killing off the SBC. Likewise, you can't have a good SBC Meeting without someone making open threats about going off on their own. The same theory exists in a fragile AAC.
With the fact that there are NOW 4 guaranteed bowl games for the SBC and a 5th/6th rotational one, this gets the SBC in a better position to start working on their own TV network/contracts. If everyone was smart, it'll be a CBS or NBC Network contract with ESPN style money/exposure. Once the TV contracts get secured, you'll start hearing less of squabbles within the SBC member schools, especially if it's set up like the SEC or Pac12 (Equal distribution).