Re: Re: Conference Affiliations

[jon breiner]

I'd love that in football.

jon b


dfairchild wrote:

> Yes, you have identified the problem.  I am fine with lopping of Houston and
> Tulane, but you are still left with bringing in 2 schools that have football
> programs.  I left Houston and Tulane because of their TV markets.  I think
> if C-USA wants to move closer to BCS status - it needs 12 fb teams so it can
> have a championship game - beyond the TV money, it would help with exposure
> and recruiting.
>
> Adding Rutgers and UConn could be options
> Cincy
> Pitt
> WV
> Rutgers
> U Conn
> V Tech
>
> UL
> Memphis
> TCU
> ECU
> So. Fla
> So. Miss
>
> How does that look for a fb conference?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oleskl [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 11:25 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: RE: [UC Basketball] Re: Conference Affiliations
>
>
>  
>
> > FB members
> > Cincy
> > UL
> > Memphis
> > V Tech
> > Pitt
> > WV
> > TCU
> > ECU
> > So. Fla
> > Houston
> > So Miss
> > Tulane (New Orleans TV market)
> >
> > for basketball keep Marquette and DePaul (chicago TV market)
> >
> > so long Army, Charlotte, St. Louis and UAB
> >    
>
> You say we can lop off some of the bottom feeders but yet you keep Tulane
> and Houston in the conference. Houston's athletic department is in a very
> bad money situation right now, reportedly not able to even pay for
> scholarships and Tulane is facing a vote to give up their Div 1 status due
> to financial restraints. Charlotte, St. Louis and UAB have hardly been
> bottom feeders in basketball.
>
> oleskl
> e-mail: address@hidden
>
>
>
>
>
>