HerdZoned Wrote:<a href='http://goasu.com/afp.ppt' target='_blank'>Appy State Powerpoint Presentation</a>

Solid plan...especially the maintaining "buzz" part.
:roflol:

USU78 Wrote:

Leonardo Wrote:This is what you don't understand.

So just what, pray, is it you are bringing to the table that has not been done to death?

As I understand it, what we don't understand is that Leonardo understands that there is an understanding between these burgeoning D1A powerhouses and "other conferences." If the WAC doesn't understand this understanding, then one of the understanding conferences will swoop in under the WAC's stand and snatch these gems away from us! Understand? That's OK, neither do I.

This is what you don't understand. A nuclear scenario may or may not happen but if it does the WAC is toast unless it start preparing a contingency plan right now. You need to have insurance BEFORE disaster strikes not after. The WAC is very low in the pecking order right now. There are no more schools left in the Sun Belt(except Denver) that would jump to the WAC. Certainly no one in C-USA or the MWC is moving to the WAC but either conference could end up raiding your league. As I already stated, you will lose Louisiana Tech one way or the other. It's not a question of if but when. That leaves you no margin for error and if you make a mistake in your calculations about MWC expansion you will pay a heavy price. You have to assume the worst case scenario and plan accordingly, remember that Fresno, Boise, and Hawaii have made no secret of their MWC ambitions in the past and any or all of them will jump at an invitation without giving it a second thought. If you choose to not prepare for disaster then you're basically playing russian roulette with the future of the conference and the schools left in it. [/quote]
...you don't understand...nuclear scenario...WAC is toast...contingency plan...disaster strikes...raiding...you will lose...no margin for error...mistake...pay a heavy price...worst case scenario...prepare for disaster...you're basically playing russian roulette!!!

I have some property you may want to look at.


Seriously though...what school are you a fan of? I'm willing to bet it's in the Sun Belt.

Don't YOU understand that LaTech gets more revenues from the WAC than it would in the SB, and that that helps offset travel costs? If they got an invite to CUSA, then I'd say congrats and good for them.

No SB school would ever join the WAC? Never say never. If the future is so unknowable, then things can change, can they not?

clpack Wrote:

HerdZoned Wrote:<a href='http://goasu.com/afp.ppt' target='_blank'>Appy State Powerpoint Presentation</a>

Solid plan...especially the maintaining "buzz" part.
:roflol:

Heres what Appy is doing, may look more solid if you see it in Writing


From Kidd-Brewer Stadium now


To Kidd-Brewer Stadium when done upgrading

[quote]The Athletics Enhancement Campaign
With the approval and strong recommendation of the Appalachian State University’s Board of Trustees, the Athletics Department has embarked on a $30-$32 million capital expansion to enhance its athletics’ facilities. The plan, staged in phases calls for the replacing of the turf in Kidd Brewer Stadium and resurfacing the track; demolishing Owens Field House and constructing in its place a new state of the arts Athletic building; converting Varsity Gym into a more athletics friendly training and practice facility; building a stand-alone indoor practice facility that will benefit all 20 intercollegiate sports programs; enhancing Kidd Brewer Stadium for alumni, fans and students and adding approximately 4,500 new seats to the East side of the Stadium.

The campaign, is a result of the nearly nine month study conducted an especially appointed Task Force which was initially formed to study the long range course of football, but quickly determined that the committee needed to review the entire course of athletics and its long term needs.

Chancellor Kenneth Peacock is a strong supporter of the project. “The enhancement of our Athletic Facilities will make all members of the Appalachian Family proud. Our athletics programs are an integral part of the comprehensive university experience.

HerdZoned Wrote:

clpack Wrote:

HerdZoned Wrote:<a href='http://goasu.com/afp.ppt' target='_blank'>Appy State Powerpoint Presentation</a>

Solid plan...especially the maintaining "buzz" part.
:roflol:

Heres what Appy is doing, may look more solid if you see it in Writing

Sorry...the "maintaining buzz" just cracked me up. No criticism intended.

Well I think everyone knows at some point the Big East Football schools will split from the Basketball and I think with in the next 5-10 years. 16 teams never worked in the WAC and the schools in the Big East are even more divided with only half of the schools bringing in all the Football BCS revenue, that creates a clear divide. They will probably choose at least one maybe as many as 4 from Memphis, ECU, UCF, and Marshall lead or possibly another emerging school out of the MAC although unlikely because of the very poor attendance across the board in the MAC IMO. I even think a school like Delaware, Villanova, or UMASS could move up and have a chance at getting invited, but it's slim. I think the Big East will add only one initially until they have to add more. I think Memphis currently has the inside track for that bid, followed by ECU and UCF. Navy and Army have said they are more viable as indy's and will not leave after Army's disaster in CUSA, Notre Dame and the other big boys aren't going to the Big Least.

I personally think at that point the MWC will gear up for the arms race for that BCS bid with what is pretty much a level competitor in the Big East (but who have the bid). I think the MWC takes Fresno State first and maybe Boise and Hawaii to give them a solid 12 team a super conference ( to give the the edge on the Big East who are reluctant to go to 12. You already see the MWC trying to stay ahead of the Big East by adding a 9th team in TCU and they are no stranger to a large conference. This time though it makes more sense. I think in the end the strength of the MWC and the power conferences will probably force the Big East to add another team or 2 and get around 12.

At this point. You are almost assured the raided CUSA will go after La Tech and possibly New Mexico State maybe North Texas being likely with all the CUSA Texas schools or one or more eastern school likely raided by the Big East . They take the same amount of teams as the Big East takes. That will clearly leaves the WAC in hard spot for teams to meet the D1 8 team requirements. I would say this scenario is very, very likely in the future as these conferences are sure to evolve.

The WAC should start preparing now. Maybe they could pull a sun belt team or two in but I think it would be tough to argue that those remaining teams in the WAC would have the clout to attract southern teams to fly across the country or keep the the bowls. The teams that might be left in the Sun Belt, like Middle Tennessee State, Troy, FL Atlantic and the fact their are more of them would probably have as much or more pull and be reluctant to leave the Sun Belt, and might even anex what was left of the WAC.

I think the WAC needs to be proactive like the Sun Belt was when they hurried the move up of FIU and FL Atlantic from D1aa in the last expansions. UC Davis and Montana would be good starts, but Montana has been kicking ****** for a while in D1aa and has shown no signs of wanting to move up even when the WAC is viable. I especially think the WAC better start planning or they get left in the same state the Big West did where they have to beg teams from Illinois or Arkansas or Kalamazoo to align just to keep a bowl and some clout or eventually they crumble and get swept up by the Sun Belt like the Big West.

NM

NM

Is there a point behind posting that picture over and over again?

Here are some equally plausible scenarios. In 5-10 years:

-The BCS system is replaced with one that still protects the major schools, but that removes a “BCS

OK here we go one by one with some of your thought......

[quote]-The BCS system is replaced with one that still protects the major schools, but that removes a “BCS

"Is there a point behind posting that picture over and over again?"

It's called hitting the post button too many times. I couldn't delete it so I spared you guys from having to read the same thing over.

"-The BCS system is replaced with one that still protects the major schools, but that removes a “BCS

I guess the point sailed right by...which is none of us really know how things are going to unfold. Yet there are several people (all from other conferences) that appear convinced they have a crystal ball. We can dream up scenarios all day long...I was just throwing out some examples. Of course not all of them are going to happen, but none of them are farfetched.

The BCS system WILL change. The only question is how. Auto bids going bye bye is just one possibility. If they do, the big boys will be the main beneficiaries...darn right there's a lot of money involved.

Teams that can't draw crowds are a liability. Any disagreement with that?

By "strides WAC teams are taking", I wasn't talking about Boise and Fresno. If you're not familiar with the very valid reasons for optimism at every single WAC school, there's really nothing to discuss until it plays out. IMO there's a very good chance it isn't going to play out the way y'all are so convinced that it will. Do remember the day you were totally convinced that your school (insert ECU or Marshall) had arrived and was going be among the football elite indefinitely? Didn't quite play out that way, did it?

clpack Wrote:Do remember the day you were totally convinced that your school (insert ECU or Marshall) had arrived and was going be among the football elite indefinitely? Didn't quite play out that way, did it?

Ummm Marshall is 70-23 since entering I-A. With 9 wins over BCS oppts, 5 Top 25s, 2 Top 20s, 1 Top 15 and 1 Top 10 wins.

We have 5 Conf Championships have played in 6 Championship games and have went to a Bowl 7-8 years. We are 5-2 in Bowl games.

We've had 3 Hiesman finalist, 4 1st round draft picks and have had 34 players drafted in the NFL since our jump in 97.

Are we where we want to be, well we tried to get in CUSA when we first jumped. Have we done everything we want to do. Thats a no, we are setting new goals every year for our program.

HerdZoned Wrote:

clpack Wrote:Do remember the day you were totally convinced that your school (insert ECU or Marshall) had arrived and was going be among the football elite indefinitely? Didn't quite play out that way, did it?

Ummm Marshall is 70-23 since entering I-A. With 9 wins over BCS oppts, 5 Top 25s, 2 Top 20s, 1 Top 15 and 1 Top 10 wins.

We have 5 Conf Championships have played in 6 Championship games and have went to a Bowl 7-8 years. We are 5-2 in Bowl games.

We've had 3 Hiesman finalist, 4 1st round draft picks and have had 34 players drafted in the NFL since our jump in 97.

Are we where we want to be, well we tried to get in CUSA when we first jumped. Have we done everything we want to do. Thats a no, we are setting new goals every year for our program.

My comment wasn't intended to knock your team (or ECU), but to point out that things change. When you joined the MAC, and proceeded to win 10 or more games 5 out of 6 years (yeah, I looked it up), didn't you figure you would rule the conference for the foreseeable future? Just like you're claiming Boise and Fresno will rule the WAC for an even longer period? But you dropped to 8-4, then 6-6 last year.

Last year, Boise and Fresno were prohibitive favorites just as much as this year, but UTEP finished ahead of Fresno and gave Boise a battle.

Not for a second do I accept there being no chance of catching up to Boise AND Fresno a few years down the road. In Reno, we not only hope that it'll happen, but expect it. Probably not this year or next, but over a 5-10 year period...definitely! I understand every other WAC school's reasons for optimism as well. I'd be willing to bet that someone other than Boise or Fresno will win the WAC within the next 5 years (with both still in the conference), but that would be such a long-term bet that it's not practical.

[QUOTE]It want matter when the MWC scoops up 1-3 of Fresno Boise and Hawaii. All that good they did will go to them then, and look at this way. The stronger you get the more the MWC will go for the cut throat, like the ACC is castrating the Big East. Eliminate the threat of the WAC and better yourself it is a no brainer. The MWC is insane if they don't go for the kill and everyone knows it is coming.[QUOTE]

This is not going to happen. The MWC, despite what many of the internet posters think, is not in the mood to pillage the WAC. You are way off base and instead of just saying it look you do, I will cite sources. I was once worried about this so I did some research. There is almost no chance that what you said happens.

Source 1-The MWC was formed to keep traditional rivalries alive. If they add 1-3 teams like you say they would not play each other on an annual basis. They didn't like the championship game and they aren't going to make the same mistake twice. That was one of the purposes for them breaking up. Here is the <a href='http://themwc.collegesports.com/about/mwc-about.html' target='_blank'>link</a>. Read under history.

Source 2-The MWC never had any intention to expand beyond 9 and MWC never had much intention to add WAC schools. TCU was what they wanted from the start.

Document no. 22 of 100
[Go To Best Hit]
Saturday, October 18, 2003
Deseret News
[Edit Document]


Edition: Metro
Page: D02

MWC could target TCU

Texas school is AD's top choice, source says
By Damien Pierce
Fort Worth Star-Telegram

If the athletic directors of the Mountain West Conference have their way, TCU will become the league's newest member.
The eight Mountain West athletic directors recently met and decided to push their individual presidents to add a ninth school, with their leading candidate being TCU, according to a source.
The conference's presidents have been debating whether to expand, but they don't have to do anything because the Mountain West isn't in danger of losing any teams.
"I can tell you the Mountain West Conference athletic directors sat around 10 days ago and came to an agreement to add a ninth school," the source said. "They were going to go back to their individual presidents and tell them they needed to go to nine. There was a vote clearly listing TCU as their first choice, but it's obviously up to the presidents."
TCU has not been contacted by Mountain West officials.
Like Conference USA, the Mountain West does not have a guaranteed invitation to the Bowl Championship Series. The Mountain West is expected to undergo minimal change as conference realignments are announced, possibly as soon as when the Big East meets in Philadelphia on Nov. 4.
If the Mountain West offers TCU an invitation, the school would have to decide whether to join a conference that is more stable than C-USA but one that has no other schools in the Central time zone. New Mexico is the closest of the Mountain West schools to TCU.
TCU has not altered its stance on keeping its options open.
"We are committed to Conference USA as much as we possibly can be in this changing landscape," TCU athletic director Eric Hyman said. "It's been a positive affiliation for us, and they've got a good television package. But we want to be in the best possible position to be a nationally prominent program."
According to Conference USA's bylaws, a school would have to pay the conference $500,000 if it left after one calendar year or $400,000 if the institution gives a two-year notice. The amount decreases with every additional year provided in such a notice.
If a revenue stream, such as a television contract, is affected by a school's departure, the league can also seek payment from the school for the amount lost.
Conference USA is expected to lose Cincinnati, DePaul, Louisville, Marquette and possibly South Florida to the Big East. Charlotte and Saint Louis are expected to join the Atlantic 10, while Army has already asked out of the conference after this season.
The departures would leave C-USA with seven schools, including TCU, but the league is pursuing Central Florida, Marshall, Rice, SMU and Tulsa. On Friday, Rice President Malcolm Gillis said his school, along with SMU and Tulsa, would leave the Western Athletic Conference to join Conference USA.
He said in the league's new expected configuration, Rice, SMU and Tulsa would join current members TCU, Houston and Tulane to form a western division of Conference USA.
If TCU were to leave for the Mountain West, it could affect whether those five schools decide to join C-USA.
While no Mountain West athletic director would confirm a formal vote, two athletic directors spoke highly of TCU.
"Speaking for myself and for New Mexico, I think we need to add a team to the conference," said Rudy Davalos, athletic director at New Mexico. "And if we decide to add a team, I'm all for TCU.
"I think it would make a lot of sense. It gets our league into the Texas market, TCU is a top school and has done a great job of building and improving its athletic programs and facilities."
Adds BYU athletic director Val Hale, "TCU is a great institution and has a broad-based program. They have a lot to offer a conference."
Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson was not available to comment Friday. Through a spokesman, Thompson said that he had no knowledge of MWC athletic directors voting to support expanding the league.
"If they held that vote, the commissioner wasn't in the room," MWC director of communications Javan Hedlund said.
Davalos also did not confirm whether a formal vote has been taken, but acknowledged expansion had "been an informal topic" at recent meetings.

Source 3-The MWC wanted TCU for its market and its Texas recruiting base. Boise is not a huge market and Idaho does not have the same depth of talent that Texas does. Fresno is not huge and they have been shut out 2 times. Hawaii was left out due to travel costs. That will never change. These markets are nowhere in comparison to the Dallas-Ft.Worth. The league commisioner and the university presidents are against a 12 team league. Here is an article about it.

Document no. 15 of 100
[Go To Best Hit]
Wednesday, November 5, 2003
Deseret News
[Edit Document]


Edition: All
Page: D01

MWC talking expansion in greater detail


By Loren Jorgensen
Deseret Morning News

The ripple effect from the Atlantic Coast Conference raiding the Big East appears like it will reach the Mountain West Conference soon.
Craig Thompson, the only commissioner the MWC has had in its four-plus years of existence, has come out publicly in favor of his league expanding for the first time. His remarks came on the heels of a conference call on Monday with the MWC board of directors — which is made up of the presidents of the eight MWC schools —discussing possible expansion.
"I have, for 4 1/2 years, felt pretty good about eight (MWC schools)," Thompson said Tuesday in his weekly media conference call. "I still feel very comfortable about our eight, but I think we can strengthen ourselves with additional members."
Thompson described the talks with the school presidents as a "full and detailed discussions of expansion issues" during which possible schools the MWC may invite were identified. The group discussed adding one, two, three or four universities — or simply staying put at eight.
Thompson, for his part, says he favors the MWC becoming a nine- or 10-team league. He expects a decision will be made by the end of this month at the earliest or by the end of the calendar year at the latest. He was quick to point out that "no firm decisions were made" on the conference call.
Thompson and the league presidents are not naming which schools the MWC may ask to join them, but he did say that the number of possibilities discussed was "fewer than eight."
"We're just trying to keep things quiet, behind the scenes and confidential," Thompson said.
The MWC includes BYU, Utah, Air Force, Colorado State, New Mexico, San Diego State, UNLV and Wyoming — eight schools that broke away from the short-lived 16-team WAC. The WAC has continued to have changes — most recently adding Utah State and New Mexico State. The MWC has stayed the same since its inception.
Texas Christian, formerly in the expanded WAC and now a member of Conference-USA, has been thought to be high on the MWC's wish list. In fact, some reports out of the Dallas-Fort Worth area have said that it's just a matter of time before the Horned Frogs are asked to join the MWC.
While TCU has pluses in its favor — an undefeated football team currently rated ninth in the BCS rankings and a large fan/population base among them — Thompson indicated that the reports out of Texas have been premature.
Besides TCU, other schools that are thought to be serious contenders for MWC expansion include current WAC members Boise State, Fresno State, Hawaii and Nevada.
Six of the eight MWC school presidents would have to vote for expansion for it to happen. They would also have to decide how many teams to include.
Having nine teams works out well for football scheduling —since each team would play all eight league opponents with four games at home and four on the road. Right now, with eight teams in the MWC, every other year teams have just three conference games at home.
Having 10 — or any even number of teams — is better for basketball scheduling, so that schools can have travel partners. A drawback to a 10-team league for football would be that the league would still play just eight conference games, meaning that each school would have one conference foe that they wouldn't play in any given year.
A 12-team league is the minimum number of schools a league needs to hold a football championship game, but that's not something that Thompson will recommend to the presidents.
Thompson said the next big date will be Nov. 16 when representatives from the six Division IA schools in the BCS and the five Division IA schools not in the BCS will meet to discuss the future. The current BCS contract expires in 2005. The five non-BCS leagues are hoping for more inclusion and more money from the new contract beginning in the 2006 season.

Source 4-TV money drove the ACC expansion, not pillaging the Big East. If Boise, Fresno and Hawaii were added they would not receive a bigger TV contract to make it worth it. They would lose money instead. Here is a quote from a news source.

Document no. 7 of 100
[Go To Best Hit]
Sunday, February 15, 2004
Deseret News
[Edit Document]


Edition: All
Page: D10

TV money drives college expansion


By Scott D. Pierce
Deseret Morning News

In case you're still wondering what drove the Atlantic Coast Conference to expand to 12 teams, USA Today has reported that the league is about to nearly double the fees it takes in from ESPN and ABC for its football rights — up to nearly $38 million a year in a seven-year contract
To put that in some perspective, the Mountain West Conference — home of Utah, BYU and their six other league foes — is currently in the sixth year of a seven-year deal that brings the league less than $7 million a year for all sports. And don't expect that to come anywhere close to doubling when TCU joins the MWC in 2005.
Oh, the league certainly hasn't hurt itself by adding a team in a top 10 TV market that has a relatively high national profile. But adding the Mountain West's addition of TCU can't be compared to the ACC's addition of Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College.

Source 5-The MWC could have taken any of the WAC schools in 2004. None were taken. It would have been easier to do it during the conference shuffling. If they tried now then there could be lawsuits and they certainly do not want to deal with that. The Big East had a <a href='http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=ncf&id=2052805' target='_blank'>big settlement</a> with the ACC. Bottom line is that if they were interested in these teams they would have taken them then, it would have been simpler.

And a final thought, the WAC gives the MWC a cheap OOC game. It makes no sense to kill it. It is a mutually beneficial relationship. Instead of coming here to tell us the gloom and doom we face go back to your own board and talk about C-USA. A Big East raid may happen if the league splits and you may need to find some more schools. You really should research this before you make such claims. The WAC will be fine and it already is a better basketball league than the MWC. With a little bit of time it will be a better football league. All of the new teams are committed to improving.

You can cite all the sources you want. But if the BCS told the MWC to expand to 12 in order to be a part of the BCS, the MWC would add three schools in a New York minute.


Will that happen? Who knows. The ACC wanted to keep a nine school format but then the money from a championship game became too hard to resist.

Yes they would, but the BCS does not have an interest in the MWC as an auto member. They still want the Big East. (This is why they are letting Louisville's C-USA record last year count for the Big East.) If the MWC adds USC and UCLA then the BCS would show interest in them, until that time they are just a mid major. (Not going to happen.) If they lose interest in the Big East they most likely will give 5 auto bids out instead of 6. Bottom line is no combination of mid-majors will get an auto bid for the BCS. It is about TV ratings and fan followings, not quality of football for BCS bids. Realistically there are only 1-2 teams that bring that fan support with them in the MWC.

The ACC championship and TV contract brings in enough additional revenue to offset the costs of 3 new members. The BCS did not tell the ACC to expand, the ACC saw that they could make money doing it. It was still difficult to do because schools like Duke and UNC do not like the new basketball format. The MWC had that format once and hated it. They lost money doing it and would lose money again.

I'm not going to post on this anymore, it is a waste of time. The MWC had no interest in WAC schools and it is highly unlikely they will in the future. I've shown why and comments and quotes from administators, not just things I've made up. The WAC will stay the way it is and so will the MWC.

Even if the MWC doesn't expand, there's still the possibility that Louisiana Tech or maybe New Mexico State could be a CUSA target in the future (if the Big East took one of their members). Losing one of these schools drops the WAC membership down to eight. Wouldn't you feel more comfortable about the future viability of a ten-team WAC over an eight-team WAC? Failing to prepare is preparing to fail.

Yes there needs to be a school or 2 ready and UC Davis is a prime candidate. I'm not arguing that point because La Tech does want a new more geographically friendly home and will most likely eventually find one. All I was talking about is the "nuclear option." The world could have a nuclear war as well, but that isn't really likely either. Unless something DRAMATICALLY changes the MWC will not add WAC schools. C-USA might do it and that is more of a possibility.

erdaaggie Wrote:The BCS did not tell the ACC to expand, the ACC saw that they could make money doing it. It was still difficult to do because schools like Duke and UNC do not like the new basketball format. The MWC had that format once and hated it. They lost money doing it and would lose money again.

Did I say the BCS told the ACC to expand? No. I said the championship game money was too much for the ACC to resist.

But if the BCS would mandate the 12 team, championship game format for all conference, we are going to see another round of conference movement.

Will this ever happen? Who the hell knows.