If you want to talk ASUN smack or ramble ad nauseum about your favorite pro or major college teams, this is the place to let it rip.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

User avatar
By R i
Registration Days Posts
#472024
Long before Randy moved to Lynchburg to be President of WSET, he was in Roanoke as GM for WSLS10.

Id love to see him work hard on capturing the Roanoke Market.
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#472058
CBS Sports wrote:Bowlsby: Big 12 should consider co-champions after playoff snub

December 16, 2014 3:43 pm CT
Dennis Dodd
CBS Sports


The time has come for the Big 12 to consider whether it needs to stay with the longstanding practice of naming co-champions in the event of ties, commissioner Bob Bowlsby told CBSSports.com on Tuesday.

The league considered Baylor and TCU co-champs even though the Bears beat the Frogs head-to-head during the regular season. That was a divisive issue on the final weekend of the season when the Big 12 was the only major conference left out of the playoff.
Click Here for Full Story
User avatar
By Sly Fox
Registration Days Posts
#472067
The three conferences that want de-regulation (XII, ACC & Belt) allegedly don't have the votes to get it enacted. Why would the SEC, B1G & Pac-12 give away their comptitive advantage right now?
By soccer7
Registration Days Posts
#472081
The ACC wants to have their two highest ranking or best teams play in the championship game. They dont want to do away with the requirement of having 12 for a championship game.
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#472093
soccer7 wrote:The ACC wants to have their two highest ranking or best teams play in the championship game. They dont want to do away with the requirement of having 12 for a championship game.
Exactly. And they don't want it bad enough to level the playing field for the Big XII.
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#472098
BuryYourDuke wrote:That's what I have read, but does that come as a package with having less than 12?
It wouldn't have to be part of the package. It depends on what the conferences will agree to. If the ACC only wants to have the ability to have its top two teams in the conference championship game, I could see the other conferences possibly supporting that. The Big XII and Sun Belt would like to have championship games without having 12 teams (6 in each division). The other conferences are smart enough not to allow that.

The Sun Belt is irrelevant to the discussion. But if the other P5 conferences want to keep their upper hand over the Big XII in football and destabilize the Big XII, each one thinks that they can get Texas and Oklahoma and all the money that comes with it.
By ATrain
Registration Days Posts
#472104
bluejacket wrote:
BuryYourDuke wrote:That's what I have read, but does that come as a package with having less than 12?
It wouldn't have to be part of the package. It depends on what the conferences will agree to. If the ACC only wants to have the ability to have its top two teams in the conference championship game, I could see the other conferences possibly supporting that. The Big XII and Sun Belt would like to have championship games without having 12 teams (6 in each division). The other conferences are smart enough not to allow that.

The Sun Belt is irrelevant to the discussion. But if the other P5 conferences want to keep their upper hand over the Big XII in football and destabilize the Big XII, each one thinks that they can get Texas and Oklahoma and all the money that comes with it.
That would require either SEC or B1G to go to 16 teams, or the ACC to go to 17. The PAC-12 is the only P5 conference with a Championship game that doesn't have 14 members. I honestly don't see the SEC reaching out to the Longhorns, they won't put up with that Prima Dona attitude in Austin. The B1G: Nope
ACC: Nope
PAC-12, I can see that happening.
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#472106
ATrain wrote:That would require either SEC or B1G to go to 16 teams, or the ACC to go to 17. The PAC-12 is the only P5 conference with a Championship game that doesn't have 14 members. I honestly don't see the SEC reaching out to the Longhorns, they won't put up with that Prima Dona attitude in Austin. The B1G: Nope
ACC: Nope
PAC-12, I can see that happening.
If Texas and Oklahoma are willing to come, every single conference will make take them or make room for them.

But, as I said in an earlier post, I don't think that will happen.
User avatar
By Sly Fox
Registration Days Posts
#472122
Come on, ATrain. The two most valuable schools in the nation to any conference are Texas & Notre Dame.

The reason for the ACC & Sun Belt connections is that they are like the Big XII needing deregulation of the Conference Championship Games. The odds of deregulation of CCGs is rather low right now. Who know swhat it will be like a little further down the road.
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#472149
BuryYourDuke wrote:Does the NCAA's acquisition of Oliver Luck change anything?
Oliver Luck moves fast, not the usual glacial speed of the NCAA. The regulatory functions (academic and membership affairs, the Eligibility Center and enforcement) will probably operate more quickly with him as NCAA #2.

But that doesn't change anything with conference championships. The conferences will have to vote on that.
User avatar
By Cider Jim
Registration Days Posts
#472174
BuryYourDuke wrote:C-USA is very interested in a couple of the MAC schools.
That's exactly the process that Marshall took: FCS Southern Conference to FBS MAC and then C-USA.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#472175
Cider Jim wrote:
BuryYourDuke wrote:C-USA is very interested in a couple of the MAC schools.
That's exactly the process that Marshall took: FCS Southern Conference to FBS MAC and then C-USA.
As much as it pains me to say it.....Marshall did it the right way. Even had a National Title if I'm not mistaken
By jack_sparrow81
Registration Days Posts
#472183
They had dynasty in mid 90s like App and North Dakota State have had recentely. UCF was impressive as well going from D1-AA to independent to the MAC to CUSA now to the AAC (winning a BCS bowl last year). That travel cost while they were in the MAC those couple of years must have been a burden on their budget though.
By jlread
Registration Days Posts
#472187
Woooooooohooooo BAD NEWS on it's way for JMU!!!! Just heard on NPR news that Cox will be putting legislation in place to Block/decrease athletic related cost&fees that schools can charge students for all VA schools!!!!!! I hope Barber and Jr add that to their C-USA sales pitch...
User avatar
By rmiller1959
Registration Days Posts
#472206
"Virginia House Republican Majority Leader Kirk Cox is introducing legislation for the 2015 General Assembly session that will strike at the heart of the fees, putting a cap on how much revenue colleges and universities in the Commonwealth can collect from student fees, with a five-year phase-in to allow athletics departments to find new sources of revenues to account for what they’d lose from the reductions in student fees.

"'In Virginia, only about 3 percent of college students will play intercollegiate athletics. But mandatory student fees account for, on average, 69 percent of athletic program expenditures,' Cox said. 'In other words, we are asking non-athletes and their parents to cover two-thirds of the cost of college sports. In my view, we simply cannot ask students who will never play a minute of college sports to bear such a disproportionate share of the costs associated with these programs.'

"The percentage of athletic department revenues ranges from the ridiculous (88 percent of the sports budget at Radford and 80 percent of the sports budget at JMU come from student fees) to the sublime (student fees account for 15 percent of the athletics budget at UVA and 10 percent of the athletics budget at Virginia Tech, both of which, like many schools in the state and across the country, would nonetheless operate in the red without the infusion from student fees).

http://augustafreepress.com/game-happen ... s-anymore/
User avatar
By rmiller1959
Registration Days Posts
#472207
Based on this information, I had these two questions:

1) Do you think the $200K JMU bid to host a home playoff game had any influence on Majority Leader Cox's decision to introduce this legislation?

2) How are LU's sports programs funded? I'm assuming it's a combination of student fees, generated revenue, and the online program, but that's just a guess.
By jlread
Registration Days Posts
#472209
I hope JR and Barber exploit this little gift that's just landed in their laps sooner rather than later. The fear factor is priceless given the timing. Who knows if the policy actually passes but after the UAB situation C-USA shouldn't be sitting on their hands to find out.
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#472213
Will be interesting to see what the details of the bill are and what the cap actually means. If 88%-80% is ridiculous, then I would guess that they are looking at a 50% to 60% cap. I agree that the legislation will pass.
  • 1
  • 364
  • 365
  • 366
  • 367
  • 368
  • 607
LU vs Delaware 2/4/26

LU Armchair Coach take: Yes, Ihnen won’t pla[…]

Middle Tennessee 1/29/26

We are playing very well. About the only two issu[…]

Delaware 1/24/26 1PM

Just watched the replay. Team has gelled. Well exe[…]

WKU 1/21/26 7:30

Agreed. As someone who admittedly doesn't follow[…]