Sorry for the long post, but I will try to explain what the MWC is currently working onright now. Take it for what its worth, as these are whats being said in the Wyoming athletic department offices.

Backtracking a little, Boise St did contact some university presidents about possibly rejoining. San Diego St did not. BYU did not initiate contact with the MWC, it was actually ESPN that started this conversation. At first the MWC was very interested in the idea of the 2 not leaving, but getting BYU back as well got minds rolling. Their was overtures made out to SMU and Houston, SMU was willing to listen, Houston was not. Their plan was those 5 plus UTEP.

With Houston and SMU out of the mix, they began proposing ideas to CBS that involved 14 and 16 team models. UTEP is in both of those. CBS is not too interested in renegotiation at any of these ideas. Conversations were then going on with ESPN. Your guess is good as mine on how this works out. I can't get any details as far as the TV contract, other than its 2016/2019 but outs for both sides.

Late Sunday night, San Diego St did make contact with the MWC about rejoining. Boise St was on that call as well. They both want to see what the Big East TV deal is but also know time is running short. Their have been discussions with UTEP, Rice, Tulsa, UTSA, and Louisiana Tech. All are pretty much beginning talks, nothing formal, meaning nothing is imminent or that anybody is joining anytime soon.

Here is the nugget though, Houston did call MWC Monday morning. What I was told is there was not major with the talks, just both sides talking options. I heard that this afternoon and thought it was complete BS until the news of the Big East came out tonight so maybe that is all true.

My question is there any fan of Houston, SMU, Boise St, or San Diego St that is hearing anything on their end? Even BYU or UTEP fans.

I'm curious if the non-football schools of the Big East are hoping something like this will happen. Makes it easier on them.

I still don't think its going to happen though. But its going to be a fun week hearing all the rumors.

That would build a conference like the old 16-team WAC that failed quickly. The MWC school enjoy playing each other -- don't kill that tradition again, please!

Instead, reform the Southwest Conference with TX, NM, OK and other regional teams. The nSWC will then be the rival to the MWC -- a jointly-owned champions bowl then can be created. Each conference to have 12 teams.

And keep the exit fees low so that teams can move up to the PAC-12 and Big XII if we come calling, and backfill with other regional teams when needed.

(12-11-2012 07:22 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  That would build a conference like the old 16-team WAC that failed quickly. The MWC school enjoy playing each other -- don't kill that tradition again, please!

Instead, reform the Southwest Conference with TX, NM, OK and other regional teams. The nSWC will then be the rival to the MWC -- a jointly-owned champions bowl then can be created. Each conference to have 12 teams.

And keep the exit fees low so that teams can move up to the PAC-12 and Big XII if we come calling, and backfill with other regional teams when needed.

The MWC can do that as well by creating two 8 team divisions and then moving to four divisions when rules allow. They can just use a 7+1 or 7+2 schedule with two divisions and no one will have to be responsible for making a brand new conference which will be a massive headache.

(12-11-2012 05:01 AM)Ron7098 Wrote:  Sorry for the long post, but I will try to explain what the MWC is currently working onright now. Take it for what its worth, as these are whats being said in the Wyoming athletic department offices.

Backtracking a little, Boise St did contact some university presidents about possibly rejoining. San Diego St did not. BYU did not initiate contact with the MWC, it was actually ESPN that started this conversation. At first the MWC was very interested in the idea of the 2 not leaving, but getting BYU back as well got minds rolling. Their was overtures made out to SMU and Houston, SMU was willing to listen, Houston was not. Their plan was those 5 plus UTEP.

With Houston and SMU out of the mix, they began proposing ideas to CBS that involved 14 and 16 team models. UTEP is in both of those. CBS is not too interested in renegotiation at any of these ideas. Conversations were then going on with ESPN. Your guess is good as mine on how this works out. I can't get any details as far as the TV contract, other than its 2016/2019 but outs for both sides.

Late Sunday night, San Diego St did make contact with the MWC about rejoining. Boise St was on that call as well. They both want to see what the Big East TV deal is but also know time is running short. Their have been discussions with UTEP, Rice, Tulsa, UTSA, and Louisiana Tech. All are pretty much beginning talks, nothing formal, meaning nothing is imminent or that anybody is joining anytime soon.

Here is the nugget though, Houston did call MWC Monday morning. What I was told is there was not major with the talks, just both sides talking options. I heard that this afternoon and thought it was complete BS until the news of the Big East came out tonight so maybe that is all true.

My question is there any fan of Houston, SMU, Boise St, or San Diego St that is hearing anything on their end? Even BYU or UTEP fans.

I'm curious if the non-football schools of the Big East are hoping something like this will happen. Makes it easier on them.

I still don't think its going to happen though. But its going to be a fun week hearing all the rumors.

So from your sources, if SDSU, BSU, Houston, SMU, and BYU all jump in, either Tulsa or UTEP is screwed and your sources say it would be Tulsa?

I'm nervous. No doubt.

The only thing I dispute in your post is that Tulsa is "just beginning" talks with the MWC. I have no idea if we get in or not, but its obvious from the widespreads rumors and reports that we've been talking with them for quite some time. Same for UTEP.

These rumors are a riot. I hear the WAC will bring in UCF, Houston, Memphis, SMU, Tulane, ECU, Boise, SD state, for all sports and then cherry pick the rest as needed.

As a Houston fan, I have not heard any confirmation of Houston talking with the MWC, but if the Big East basketball schools are debating whether to break off AND SDSU/Boise are having discussions with the MWC, then our leadership would be foolish not to cover all the bases.

The MWC is at a disadvantage because it is locked in to a TV deal. If the Big East is not going to work out, I would prefer a national conference with eastern and western divisions that would be in position to negotiate a new TV deal.

(12-11-2012 08:44 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  As a Houston fan, I have not heard any confirmation of Houston talking with the MWC, but if the Big East basketball schools are debating whether to break off AND SDSU/Boise are having discussions with the MWC, then our leadership would be foolish not to cover all the bases.

The MWC is at a disadvantage because it is locked in to a TV deal. If the Big East is not going to work out, I would prefer a national conference with eastern and western divisions that would be in position to negotiate a new TV deal.

Ya, I think that has been something message boards have discussed. I posted this back on November 17th.

Obviously, given what has transpired since then, you'd change UCONN for L-Ville, but the idea remains the same.

While I still think this is a good idea, doesn't seems like the winds are blowing this way.

---------------------------------------------------
IMHO, the remaining teams need to pick up a western and eastern division to go to 14 or probably 16. Forget markets and get good solid football programs. Approach the TV negotiations with the offer of a longterm GOR. You aren't getting bigtime monies, not close to the other 5 conferences, but maybe close to the low range of what BE thought it would get?

My choices
West
1. Boise
2. SDSU
3. Fresno
4. Nevada
5. UNLV
6. Air Force
7. New Mexico
8. Utah St

East
1. Louisville
2. Cincy
3. USF
4. UCF
5. Memphis
6. Houston
7. ECU
8. Tulsa

If someone doesn't want to sign GOR, pick someone else and move on without them.

I've watched this movement for 15 years now. Instabilit has been as big a negative force with the nonBCS teams as anything. My big focus here is picking programs commited to winning.

JMHO. Please remember that, nothing personal against anyone not included. I say that because playing more on what I said above, the negativity that is spewed from one nonBCS against other nonBCS from all this instability is amazing to me.
------------------------------------------------------------------

(12-11-2012 08:44 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  As a Houston fan, I have not heard any confirmation of Houston talking with the MWC, but if the Big East basketball schools are debating whether to break off AND SDSU/Boise are having discussions with the MWC, then our leadership would be foolish not to cover all the bases.

The MWC is at a disadvantage because it is locked in to a TV deal. If the Big East is not going to work out, I would prefer a national conference with eastern and western divisions that would be in position to negotiate a new TV deal.

There are many costs associated with starting a brand-new conference and hassles including a waiting period before the new conference gets NCAA autobids in various sports.

If the MWC's TV deal is bad enough to bother people, it might be a lot less expensive to buy it out than to start a new conference just to get out of the TV deal.

(12-11-2012 08:44 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  As a Houston fan, I have not heard any confirmation of Houston talking with the MWC, but if the Big East basketball schools are debating whether to break off AND SDSU/Boise are having discussions with the MWC, then our leadership would be foolish not to cover all the bases.

The MWC is at a disadvantage because it is locked in to a TV deal. If the Big East is not going to work out, I would prefer a national conference with eastern and western divisions that would be in position to negotiate a new TV deal.

The MWC and CUSA talked about a megaconference, but TV partners weren't thrilled and CUSA didn't want to give up tourney credits and exit fees.

The tourney credits and exit fees wouldn't be an issue if a new conference was formed. Nor would the existing TV contract.

For example:
UH, SMU, Boise, SDSU, BYU, UTEP, Hawaii, Fresno, UNLV, UNM, CSU, Air Force. 4 BE, 1 Indie, 1 CUSA, 1 part MWC, 5 MWC. And if they want to go to 14, Wyoming gets in (or is already in instead of UTEP) and one other. But not the full MWC. 1 or more of Nevada, SJSU, USU or Wyoming is out.

(12-11-2012 11:49 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 08:44 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  As a Houston fan, I have not heard any confirmation of Houston talking with the MWC, but if the Big East basketball schools are debating whether to break off AND SDSU/Boise are having discussions with the MWC, then our leadership would be foolish not to cover all the bases.

The MWC is at a disadvantage because it is locked in to a TV deal. If the Big East is not going to work out, I would prefer a national conference with eastern and western divisions that would be in position to negotiate a new TV deal.

There are many costs associated with starting a brand-new conference and hassles including a waiting period before the new conference gets NCAA autobids in various sports.

If the MWC's TV deal is bad enough to bother people, it might be a lot less expensive to buy it out than to start a new conference just to get out of the TV deal.

They haven't been able to get rid of it out yet. They did manage to get rid of the Mountain West network. And they could just use an existing conference like the Great West or possibly even the WAC. Seattle and NMSU are the only current voting members left. The rest are leaving or haven't joined yet.

Like someone already said, didn't they already try this and it failed? It was called the 16 member WAC.

This alignment doesn't do much for what the networks really want....markets. The increase by bringing in Dallas and Houston will be greatly offset by the increased number of pieces of the pie.

Probably why everyone is being cautious.

The schools in the OP's first post would all be foolish if they weren't talking to the MWC about their options. but there seems to be enough uncertainty in the nBE to warrant discussions between all parties.

This is all part of the process, with the MWC and the aforementioned schools in a wait and see mode. Waiting for the majors to stop picking off ACC schools, waiting for the ACC to back fill those spots with more Big East members, waiting to see the nBE media rights deal, Big East basketball schools evaluating the nBE media deal to decide what their next move will be . . . then the MWC can move or not on any of those rumors.

The MWC is not driving any of this IMO.

(12-11-2012 07:22 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  That would build a conference like the old 16-team WAC that failed quickly. The MWC school enjoy playing each other -- don't kill that tradition again, please!

Instead, reform the Southwest Conference with TX, NM, OK and other regional teams. The nSWC will then be the rival to the MWC -- a jointly-owned champions bowl then can be created. Each conference to have 12 teams.

And keep the exit fees low so that teams can move up to the PAC-12 and Big XII if we come calling, and backfill with other regional teams when needed.

that's not a horrible idea

(12-11-2012 12:15 PM)Fireman451 Wrote:  The schools in the OP's first post would all be foolish if they weren't talking to the MWC about their options. but there seems to be enough uncertainty in the nBE to warrant discussions between all parties.

This is all part of the process, with the MWC and the aforementioned schools in a wait and see mode. Waiting for the majors to stop picking off ACC schools, waiting for the ACC to back fill those spots with more Big East members, waiting to see the nBE media rights deal, Big East basketball schools evaluating the nBE media deal to decide what their next move will be . . . then the MWC can move or not on any of those rumors.

The MWC is not driving any of this IMO.

Ding Ding someone gets it!!!



Of course schools are talking to the MWC just like the flip side we are talking to the ACC, B12, and the P12.

Doesn't mean we are joining the ACC, B12, P12, or the MWC anytime soon. Just means we are covering our bases.

(12-11-2012 12:11 PM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  Like someone already said, didn't they already try this and it failed? It was called the 16 member WAC.

This alignment doesn't do much for what the networks really want....markets. The increase by bringing in Dallas and Houston will be greatly offset by the increased number of pieces of the pie.

Probably why everyone is being cautious.

There really are not any great options. CUSA added so many programs they are full and are not an option. There are not enough teams in the east to do anything other than a reconstituted CUSA (plus the poaching of the league would begin as soon as the ACC gets hit agains, so whats the point?). The only thing that hasnt been tried is an mixture of western and eastern teams. It might not work either, but its at least worth a shot. Just looking for some combination that can generate a bigger mid-major tv contract.

(12-11-2012 12:17 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 07:22 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  That would build a conference like the old 16-team WAC that failed quickly. The MWC school enjoy playing each other -- don't kill that tradition again, please!

Instead, reform the Southwest Conference with TX, NM, OK and other regional teams. The nSWC will then be the rival to the MWC -- a jointly-owned champions bowl then can be created. Each conference to have 12 teams.

And keep the exit fees low so that teams can move up to the PAC-12 and Big XII if we come calling, and backfill with other regional teams when needed.

that's not a horrible idea

Theres not enough decent schools to do that. Better off just creating a stronger "east" divison for the MW.

I need to provide clarification on the WAC-16 failure. It's much too simple to say the 16-team model failed in the late 90's and will never work again in the 10's. Highlights on the failure:

- Six core WAC members couldn't fit in the 4-team pod model. The Gang of Six were Colorado State, Wyoming, Air Force, New Mexico, Utah, and Brigham Young. UTEP, San Diego State, Hawaii, and Fresno State had been members for a few years (Fresno) and up to 30 years (San Diego, Hawaii, UTEP), but the core schools were the first group listed above. They'd been playing against each other for decades -- not unlike the AQ conferences today (B1G, PAC, SEC, ACC).

- With the dissolution of the SWC, a few schools in TX were looking for a new conference home. Rather than pick up two schools to grow to the now-standard 12-with-2-divisions model, the presidents (and thus the commissioner) felt that adding 6 schools in new markets would be better. But they never truly worked out details like preserving rivalries and bowl access.

- Finally, schools would rotate pods in some gawd-unknown fashion each year. No school/fanbase could settle into a nice hate with the division rivals because they'd change every year. (What up wi' that?!?)

Summary: Rivalries cast aside...screwy & illogical divisions...under-performing schools dragging down the product...no growth in bowl access from 10-member to 16-member WAC.

Today, the MWC could easily learn from the WAC's mistakes:
- Two core WAC members are gone-gone-gone (Utah and Brigham Young) and the remaining four (CSU, Wyo, AFA, UNM) are a logical cluster.

- MWC is in a position of stability and thus strength during all this realignment jive. Say what you will about the television contract (which will be opened for negotiation), but the MWC looks good to more than a few schools right now. It has the luxury of selecting schools that fit the profile/mission of the conference, rather than grabbing willy-nilly.

- Each pod/quad can be a geographic region and rivalries can be preserved with in each. Duh.

The only thing the MWC can't alter from the late 90s is a larger number of bowl games, and unless you're BIG, PAC or SEC, you can't alter them anyway.

End of lecture. There will be a pop quiz next Wednesday. Go State!

(12-11-2012 12:11 PM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  Like someone already said, didn't they already try this and it failed? It was called the 16 member WAC.

And the WAC-16 failed for a totally different set of reasons. If you're going to make an assumption that since the WAC 16 failed, then you would have to assume any other attempt to reach a 16-team league would fail as well.

A lot has changed in college sports since the WAC failed.

(12-11-2012 01:37 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  A lot has changed in college sports since the WAC failed.

Exactly. The WAC-16 was before its time. Now there is strength in numbers.