(02-25-2012 03:29 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 01:02 PM)Wedge Wrote:  ... But Boise's biggest issue IMO is their league for other sports. Just adding one more Western FB team to the BE does nothing to help Boise with that issue.

Boise had to know that they were in a position of power prior to signing on with the BE. They also had to know or should have been smart enough to know that the BE is at it's core an eastern, metro, basketball league and will make decisions accordingly. Boise leveraged getting SDSU in, and some out clauses if the landscaped changed or things didn't go according to plan, but if they wanted more they should have forced the issue before they signed.

The basketball schools agreed to UCF, Houston, SMU, and to Temple coming in and eating Villanova's lunch. I'm pretty sure that Boise could have negotiated for an all-sports invite. They didn't.

The Alliance could use a western non-football member to balance out Hawaii......

(02-25-2012 03:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 03:29 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 01:02 PM)Wedge Wrote:  ... But Boise's biggest issue IMO is their league for other sports. Just adding one more Western FB team to the BE does nothing to help Boise with that issue.

Boise had to know that they were in a position of power prior to signing on with the BE. They also had to know or should have been smart enough to know that the BE is at it's core an eastern, metro, basketball league and will make decisions accordingly. Boise leveraged getting SDSU in, and some out clauses if the landscaped changed or things didn't go according to plan, but if they wanted more they should have forced the issue before they signed.

The basketball schools agreed to UCF, Houston, SMU, and to Temple coming in and eating Villanova's lunch. I'm pretty sure that Boise could have negotiated for an all-sports invite. They didn't.

The Alliance could use a western non-football member to balance out Hawaii......

We could, but if you're talking about Boise I highly doubt they would be under any consideration for it. Denver would make a lot of sense, and I'm sure there are others although I'm not as familiar with that side of the country.

BYU might make sense for non-FB sports to balance Hawaii. Admittedly I don't know much about BYU other than many of the MWC fans hate them, maybe not a good idea. I'd rather go for a 20 football / 18 all sports split with Army as the Eastern football only school.

(02-25-2012 03:35 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 03:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 03:29 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 01:02 PM)Wedge Wrote:  ... But Boise's biggest issue IMO is their league for other sports. Just adding one more Western FB team to the BE does nothing to help Boise with that issue.

Boise had to know that they were in a position of power prior to signing on with the BE. They also had to know or should have been smart enough to know that the BE is at it's core an eastern, metro, basketball league and will make decisions accordingly. Boise leveraged getting SDSU in, and some out clauses if the landscaped changed or things didn't go according to plan, but if they wanted more they should have forced the issue before they signed.

The basketball schools agreed to UCF, Houston, SMU, and to Temple coming in and eating Villanova's lunch. I'm pretty sure that Boise could have negotiated for an all-sports invite. They didn't.

The Alliance could use a western non-football member to balance out Hawaii......

We could, but if you're talking about Boise I highly doubt they would be under any consideration for it. Denver would make a lot of sense, and I'm sure there are others although I'm not as familiar with that side of the country.

+1. There is zero chance of BSU being invited to the Alliance for non-football sports.

(02-25-2012 05:53 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 03:38 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  BYU might make sense for non-FB sports to balance Hawaii. Admittedly I don't know much about BYU other than many of the MWC fans hate them, maybe not a good idea. I'd rather go for a 20 football / 18 all sports split with Army as the Eastern football only school.

If the Big East were to add AF and say Colorado St, that would give two more olympic sports programs to solidify the WAC's olympic sports side. I believe there are already 4 non-football playing members. Boise, AF, and Colorado would give the league 7 non-football members making it quite easy for the conference to survive as an olympic sports conference shoud WAC football fall apart. Dallas Baptist or another similar school could round out the field if WAC football collapsed.

I have no idea what you're talking about but the Big East won't be adding anyone else. They have 13 now. Temple and Memphis are WVU and UL replacements. AFA has said no to the Big East already.

As for the Alliance I think it's best to look for a football only in the East if we can't get BYU's other sports.

(02-25-2012 05:52 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 03:35 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 03:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 03:29 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 01:02 PM)Wedge Wrote:  ... But Boise's biggest issue IMO is their league for other sports. Just adding one more Western FB team to the BE does nothing to help Boise with that issue.

Boise had to know that they were in a position of power prior to signing on with the BE. They also had to know or should have been smart enough to know that the BE is at it's core an eastern, metro, basketball league and will make decisions accordingly. Boise leveraged getting SDSU in, and some out clauses if the landscaped changed or things didn't go according to plan, but if they wanted more they should have forced the issue before they signed.

The basketball schools agreed to UCF, Houston, SMU, and to Temple coming in and eating Villanova's lunch. I'm pretty sure that Boise could have negotiated for an all-sports invite. They didn't.

The Alliance could use a western non-football member to balance out Hawaii......

We could, but if you're talking about Boise I highly doubt they would be under any consideration for it. Denver would make a lot of sense, and I'm sure there are others although I'm not as familiar with that side of the country.

+1. There is zero chance of BSU being invited to the Alliance for non-football sports.

I mean I could understand the idea of considering keeping SDSU around for non-FB sports, because they are a top notch basketball program. Boise offers very little outside of football.

(02-25-2012 01:02 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 12:53 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  The next Big East addition will be in the West. The best two options are BYU and Air Force. We will know how this will shake out over the next year or so. If Louisville and BYU go to the Big 12 then the Big East will be at 12 when Navy joins. Then perhaps Air Force and a partner (Fresno/Colorado St/UNLV) may be ready to jump to the Big East at that point to get to 14. That would give the league a bit more balance.

... But Boise's biggest issue IMO is their league for other sports. Just adding one more Western FB team to the BE does nothing to help Boise with that issue.

If the Big East were to add AF and say Colorado St, that would give the WAC two more olympic sports programs to solidify the WAC's olympic sports side. I believe there are already 4 non-football playing members playing in the WAC. Boise, AF, and Colorado would give the league 7 non-football members making it quite easy for the WAC to survive as an olympic sports conference should it's football side fall apart. Dallas Baptist or another similar school could round out the field if WAC to get 8 olympic sports members if football collapses.

(02-25-2012 03:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 03:29 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-25-2012 01:02 PM)Wedge Wrote:  ... But Boise's biggest issue IMO is their league for other sports. Just adding one more Western FB team to the BE does nothing to help Boise with that issue.

Boise had to know that they were in a position of power prior to signing on with the BE. They also had to know or should have been smart enough to know that the BE is at it's core an eastern, metro, basketball league and will make decisions accordingly. Boise leveraged getting SDSU in, and some out clauses if the landscaped changed or things didn't go according to plan, but if they wanted more they should have forced the issue before they signed.

The basketball schools agreed to UCF, Houston, SMU, and to Temple coming in and eating Villanova's lunch. I'm pretty sure that Boise could have negotiated for an all-sports invite. They didn't.

The Alliance could use a western non-football member to balance out Hawaii......

No they couldnt of. No way no how teams on the east coast or even boise themselves want to send their olympic teams across the country for games. You think cross country teams or tennis teams want to travel 2000 miles? Hell no!

-Boise
-Nevada
-Hawaii
-UNLV
-Fresno
-SDSU
-New Mexico
-Colorado State
-Air Force
-Wyoming
-UTEP
-Utah State

That's a viable western conference with enough fire power in Football and Basketball to be the next AQ league.

Do any of you really expect any of these blog sites about the MWC or Alliance to say those two schools should leave, or even have any type of unbiased views? If you do, then I have a bridge to sell you!

If I'm not mistaken, the Big East promised one travel partner for Boise State and a 70/30 television revenue split. It was the Broncos who lobbied for San Diego State after initial Big East-BYU talks hit a snag; the Aztecs were their choice! Plus, everyone knows the Big East continues to push for football inclusion of Air Force and BYU and would accept them at anytime.

BSU and SDSU are football only members, with conference football being only roughly 4 road games a season, travel and distance doesn't play a significant roll in that type of membership and everyone knows this. All this negative talk is only coming from sources who benefit from them not moving or critics who were against it from the start, which I think everyone should expect.

I understand doubts, but I just don't see a benefit of backing out now for the MWC/Alliance. They are guaranteed to get significantly less television revenues than the Big East. The Big East has AQ now and will ALWAYS have better bowl access and tie-ins (even if AQ goes away), the buyout reduction is only if the Big East individually loses AQ, not if the system changes. Let's not forget an undefeated team in the Big East will be rated higher than one from the Alliance, and thus create an easier route to any potential plus-one National Championship scenario. Plus, there is associate access to other sports in the Big East for scheduling high value/ranked programs, and any potential other revenues that the Big East sells for multi-millions yearly to companies like American Eagle, Hershey, Volvo, Verizon, Geico, and now Fedex who sponsor conference championships and member-wide scholarships -- that I cannot believe MWC/Alliance could match.

I like the unbiased comparison of UNLV to Memphis.

Tigers ONLY had an avearage attendance of 20,078 football fans at home games. Add to that a TV market rated #49 nationally.

Then obviously UNLV is WAAAAY better because:

UNLV Rebels who has about the same home attendance record average with 20,612 fans. But UNLV also has sole possession the #40 TV market in the nation, it is one of the nation's greatest away-game destinations for fans of all conferences.

So let me get this straight....home attendance is a complete wash....so you say. So UNLV is a slam dunk over Memphis because of being 9 TV markets better and it is a better travel destination? Oh and you failed to mention the Memphis FedEx connection and Memphis basketball......which is way closer to places like Providence and Orlando.....than say....Las Vegas?!?

So BSU and SDSU are upset about 1 travel road date every other year to Memphis for JUST football......yet then the writer thinks every Olympic sport (like tennis and volleyball) from say Seton Hall and St Johns every other year....flying to Las Vegas IS reasonable?

(02-26-2012 12:42 PM)The Brown Bull Wrote:  I like the unbiased comparison of UNLV to Memphis.

Comparing UNLV football to Memphis football is like comparing dog vomit to dog poop. Maybe you have a fiercely-held opinion as to which is better. I don't.

Of course, Memphis basketball vs UNLV basketball is like comparing 1991 to 2008. Maybe Justin Bieber is clearly better or clearly worse than MC HAmmer, but one is still relevant and one isn't.

I think what Bull's trying to point out is that with both programs, basketball quality is a wash, they both have it. The difference, and big difference, is that how do you convince any single basketball school way out by the Atlantic ocean that it would be a great idea to have them fly their cross-country and tennis teams out to the Rockys every single year? And more importantly, how does UNLV even afford the do the same, for more than half the season, every season!? If UNLV football was worth anything, they'd get a look for the Big East, yesterday. But that program is in terrible shape right now, so it's not an option atm.

Teams from one region of the nation should not be trying to be all-sports members in conferences located more than 2 time zones away. Not good for students, not good for schools, and it's just plain ridiculous.

(02-26-2012 04:47 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

Unsure if you're making the same point or not. But if Louisville heads to the Big XII, and BSU and SDSU back out. I have to assume that Navy will reconsider the BE as well.

(02-26-2012 10:25 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  -Boise
-Nevada
-Hawaii
-UNLV
-Fresno
-SDSU
-New Mexico
-Colorado State
-Air Force
-Wyoming
-UTEP
-Utah State

That's a viable western conference with enough fire power in Football and Basketball to be the next AQ league.

Thinking about "AQ" is like preparing to fight the last war instead of the next war.

The question for now should be, if a team in that league is 12-0, will the conference's strength and reputation be good enough to get that 12-0 team into the 4-team playoff?

Would they be better off with 12 teams and a conference title game, or would they be better off with a smaller league that has less of the football dead weight?

If BSU and SDSU decide they'd rather be in the alliance that's fine with me, the Big East could just add ECU and USM and have a truly eastern league. The Big East only accepted SDSU to appease BSU. They got what they want. I think they'll stay.

Why would either want to leave? There football teams which draws more eyes than any other sports will be seen in the largest cities in the U.S.A. Thus reaching to more potential students, and raising the academic profile of each individual school. Boise and SDSU would be foolish to leave a league that could grow the potential pool of incoming students. With the recent success of Cincinnati Football the University has seen a significant increase in applications. Hopefully Boise and SDSU will see the same.

(02-26-2012 06:44 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  Why would either want to leave? Their football teams which draws more eyes than any other sports will be seen in the largest cities in the U.S.A. Thus reaching to more potential students, and raising the academic profile of each individual school. Boise and SDSU would be foolish to leave a league that could grow the potential pool of incoming students. With the recent success of Cincinnati Football the University has seen a significant increase in applications. Hopefully Boise and SDSU will see the same.

That statement will not be consistently true. The bottom line is that many current BE games were not well positioned to be seen by many viewers in the largest cities. The Big East still has a high population density among all of the other conferences out there. However, it is far from proven if the Big East will be able to deliver all of those eyeballs to its network partners - especially during football season. This is one reason why I am skeptical that the Big East will get a monster contract out of anyone. I'll believe it when I see it.

(02-26-2012 12:57 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Comparing UNLV football to Memphis football is like comparing dog vomit to dog poop.

"Dog poop" has been playing football for 99 years compared to 43 for "Dog vomit", and owns wins over such as Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, FSU, Miami and Southern Cal, to name a few. Who has "Dog vomit" ever beaten? Tradition matters in college athletics. Moerover, a few years ago "Dog poop" averaged over 40,000 per game and soon will again.