I know what your talking about:

Northwest quadrant:

BYU
Utah
Boise

Southwest quad:

SDSU
UNLV
Fresno

Southeast quad:

Utep
UNM
TCU

Northeast quad:

Wyoming
CSU
AFA

Northern teams play northern teams every year. Southern play southern. Eastern play eastern. Western play western teams.

It gives you 8 permanent games for your conference schedule. You could rotate games against teams from the opposite quadrant to balance your schedule.

Personally, I think the MWC should go to twelve and play a ten game conference schedule every season. You play your normal 8 games and two games a year against the opposite quad. That way rivalries are maintained, your gauranteed 5 home games a year, and you only have to schedule two ooc games (to keep us from getting bent over and given two for ones with the BCS).

MountainLair Wrote:I can't help but think (or Dream) why not take the best schools to represent the geographic area. Here's how it would look:

North:
Air Force (could sub in Boise St... Nah!)
BYU
Colorado
Colorado St
Utah
Wyoming

South:
Arizona
Arizona St
New Mexico
SDSU
TCU
UNLV

This would be an exciting conference full of rivalries!

What in the world are you thinking? Why would Colorado EVER leave the Big XII?

Cowboy Junky Wrote:I know what your talking about:

Northwest quadrant:

BYU
Utah
Boise

Southwest quad:

SDSU
UNLV
Fresno

Southeast quad:

Utep
UNM
TCU

Northeast quad:

Wyoming
CSU
AFA

Northern teams play northern teams every year. Southern play southern. Eastern play eastern. Western play western teams.

It gives you 8 permanent games for your conference schedule. You could rotate games against teams from the opposite quadrant to balance your schedule.

Personally, I think the MWC should go to twelve and play a ten game conference schedule every season. You play your normal 8 games and two games a year against the opposite quad. That way rivalries are maintained, your gauranteed 5 home games a year, and you only have to schedule two ooc games (to keep us from getting bent over and given two for ones with the BCS).

Yup, that is the one I was talking about. This is far and away the best scenario out there. Thanks for posting it Junky!

Cowboy Junky Wrote:I know what your talking about:

Northwest quadrant:

BYU
Utah
Boise

Southwest quad:

SDSU
UNLV
Fresno

Southeast quad:

Utep
UNM
TCU

Northeast quad:

Wyoming
CSU
AFA

Northern teams play northern teams every year. Southern play southern. Eastern play eastern. Western play western teams.

It gives you 8 permanent games for your conference schedule. You could rotate games against teams from the opposite quadrant to balance your schedule.

Personally, I think the MWC should go to twelve and play a ten game conference schedule every season. You play your normal 8 games and two games a year against the opposite quad. That way rivalries are maintained, your gauranteed 5 home games a year, and you only have to schedule two ooc games (to keep us from getting bent over and given two for ones with the BCS).

No Thanks!

I don't see Toledo, BGSU, Akron , or Miami leaving the MAC. None have the money or support to do such a move. Geography pretty much makes a move to CUSA very unlikely.

Speaking as an alum, former FB player, and booster of NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY which is in FARGO ND, I would support any effort to see any expansion include THE BISON

so much talk going around, I am curious as to what will happen in the future. as long as the Miners keep improving in football and stay solid in bball they should be ok,

If I were the MWC, I would add Gonzaga. UNLV isn't what they once were. MWC needs a name.

;-) lmfao :domokun: :shhh: :banned: ;-) lmfao :shhh: :withstupid: :iagree: :marines: :navy: :coastguard: :powmia: :airforce: :army: :tp: :microwave: :spam: :snowman: :construction: :tomcat: :boat: :airplane: :band: :censored: :soda: :help: :john: :8ball: :ninja: :uberbow: :rootbeer: :baby: :chillpill: :baby: :moon2: :titanic: :moon2: :moon2: :moon: :secret: :clap2: :goodnight: :beammeup: :dirtyvegas: :dirtyvegas: :dirtyvegas: :dirtyvegas: :dirtyvegas: :kiss: :kneelsucka: :kneelsucka: :kneelsucka: :kneelsucka: :kneelsucka: :towel: :drinky2: :bean: :gasp: :sorry: :-O :bustacap: :mullet: :sick: :sly: :-P :outraged: :muttering: 8-) :irate: 8-O :bandit: :lauramac2: :lauramac2: :lauramac2: :lauramac2: :ncaabbs: :sylviaplath: :sylviaplath: :sylviaplath: :utep: :smokie: :discoaintdead: :billgates: :billgates: :billgates: :billgates: :kobe: :kobe: :kobe: :memphis: :youmoron: :popo: :edd: :edd: :edd: :eddy: :eddy: :ed: :wallace: :cartman: :kenny: :tomservo: :gypsey: :crow: :joel: :raphael: :leonardo: :pacman: :michelangelo: :luigi: :donatello: :pinky: :joecool: :joecool: :mario: :snoopy: :odie: :spongebob: :mrkrabs: :gary: :plankton: :mysterymachine: :fred: :scooby: :velma: :daphne: :homer: :sgthartman: :hellokitty: :hellokitty: :cookiemonster:

if there is any kind of expansion, it will be the MWC.
CUSA is on much more solid ground than most think. The conglomoration called the Big East is much stronger than most think.
If the Big East would split(they won't), they would first and foremost invite Army and Navy. This has been a deal in the works for 5 years now. Army/Navy are just waiting for the call. Big East is done with raiding CUSA. They got who they wanted. As long as they have that BCS bid in football, they don't need anyone. And they too have time to grow and get better together.
After 5 to 8 years, CUSA and the MWC for that matter, would have had the necessary time to grow stronger and accomplish some success to stabilize their futures.

When thinking expansion, everyone jumps the gun and automatically thinks expanding straight to 12 teams is the way to go. But in non bcs reality, the MWC will do things much slowly. Some time past 2010, the MWC could possibly invite one team to join their league.
Why? Because it is the same o answer..................money. No league wants to split the pie more than they have to. So instead of adding 3 or 4 teams. Every member will agree to add one at a time. In other words, add one now then see how things go and 3 to 5 years later, add another one, and so on and so on.
This helps to absorb the blow of splitting the revenue.
Sure, a conference championship game brings in money but not enough to offset the potential losses from splitting the profits with new members.

Personally, I think it is inevitable that the MWC will take teams from the WAC in the future.
But, just as time is on the MWC's side, it is time for the WAC to do the same. They too have the same time to grow together and get stronger.
Of course, their goal is to raid the MWC in the future when the time is right.

So, it should be very interesting how this all plays out.

Right now, from here on out, the decisions that our leagues make will determine our existance in the future or our break-up.
So good luck to everyone.

Football schools WILL split in the Big East. They have to. That conference is a huge mess right now. Football schools will want to go their own way.

There will not be any changes for at least 20 or 25 years. All these rumors are just garbage talk left over from the last realignment.

CAJUNNATION Wrote:BIG EAST adds UCF and/or MEMPHIS

MWC responds by adding BOISE STATE


CUSA splits.

UTEP/Houston/Rice/SMU/Tulsa/Tulane will add North Texas/Louisiana Tech/Louisiana to form the New CUSA.

Now, Marshall/East Carolina/UAB/Southern Miss/(Memphis or UCF) will have 2 choices:

1) Join the SBC.

2) Form a new league from scratch with Toledo/Bowling Green/Miami/Akron


The WAC will be left with 7 members. Still a viable conference, just won't have a vote on NCAA matters. They would probably bring along a 1-AA program or 2 to avoid losing all 1-A Conference privileges.

The only thing far flung about C-USA are Marshall and ECU. (UTEP, but they are in Texas) The eastern division of your split is still quite far-flung.
In your scenario, southern miss (and probably UAB) would go west.
And that's why the split won't happen...because it isn't like the 2 1/2s would create 2 compact leagues...they wouldn't. There are exactly 2 geographic outliers. So it's inconvenient for those 2, but not a big deal for the rest of the league. Again UTEP is an outlier in a sense, but are in Texas.

Another expansion option for MWC would be for basketball. With 9 teams. MWC is able to Add Gonzaga for hoops. That would give MWC for TV games and ESpn could drop WCC deal if Gonzaga left.

I believe if the BE expands UCF and Marshall will be left out due to the fact that they would be competition for USF and WVU. My predictions would be ECU, Memphis, UAB and and S. Mississippi. Only having eight teams with only WVU, Pitt and Syracuse having any real long term football histories makes the NBE a risky experiment which could work if the schools are competitive with the other BCS conferences in OOC games. Louisville and USF seem to have very bright futures, but depending on Rutgers, UConn and Cincinnati to become FB powers is iffy at best. That is why four extra teams would provide not only a championship game, but a 50% better chance to cover the conference's behind in case some of the other teams falter. Each of the four teams I listed are in populous states and would provide the BE with that much more from a marketing standpoint. Their programs are not that strong now, but being in the BCS mix couldn't hurt. The NBE is still on double secret probation IMO. Right now, we are counting on West Virginia and Louisville to help maintain our BCS spot, but that is only two teams. Pitt should bounce back from last season's disappointing performance, however. What's going on with Syracuse? I don't have a clue, but they sure picked a hell of a time to go in the tank. Most of my BE brethern think I'm delusional and insist that they don't want to split the money 12 ways, but they are assuming that the money will always be there. I don't make that assumption. The BE was burned once by being reactive instead of proactive and I feel that we should take the lead.

If the MWC expands would Boise State actually be a better fit than Tulsa? I'm from West Virginia and don't know which of the two has the better fan base, but it seems that the state of Oklahoma has a lot more people than Idaho. Here's hoping that the MWC gets a BCS spot this year and that the ACC never gets to send more than one team. I still hate those guys.

billings Wrote: North
BYU
Utah
WYO
CSU
Air Force
Boise St

South
TCU
UTEP
New Mexico
Fresno
UNLV
SDSU

This was a good idea, looking back. It would stink for UNLV to not get Nevada as a conference-mate (a great basketball program with quickly improving football who still suffers from extremely poor fan support & attendence), but it does balance the conference geographically. TCU would have to play in a division spanning 3 time zones, but all "South" Division schools would share similar hot weather cultures. BYU/Utah are changing to have more in common with the western Pacific timezone than the other eastern four-corners states, but adding Boise State would upgrade "The Gang of Five" to the perfect Mountain-Range Six. You have two California schools (Fresno State & SDSU) for increased western recruiting and two Texas (UTEP & TCU) schools for increased southern recruiting. UTEP gets to play TCU (the best non-BCS school in Texas, completely opposite of Rice/Houston/SMU) and old-rival New Mexico, plus is in the same conference as BYU again, among others. The Miners add a great basketball program, much-improved football, and good attendence (as of lately). Boise State and Fresno can even keep their WAC rivalry going by shooting for a head-to-head in the MWC Championship Game!

It's a pretty good set-up.

You all just assume that any team in the WAC would take any chance it could get to move to the MWC. I couldn't disagree more. TV deals aside, there is hardly any gap between the two conferences in either football or especially basketball.

In football, the top of both conferences is virtually the same. Here's how both conferences fared in the AP poll last season:
WAC: 2 teams, 13 weeks - high of 16
MWC: 1 team, 13 weeks - high of 11

In bowl games, the MWC was 2-2 while the WAC was 1-2.

Unless I made a glaring mistake, that doesn't show superiority by any stretch. The MWC is certainly deeper, but the three schools at the bottom of the WAC (New Mexico State, Idaho, Utah State) are brand new to the conference. Come 2010, that gap will certainly close.

The two conferences were even more identical in basketball. The MWC and WAC finished the season as the No. 8 and 9 conferences respectively in the RPI. The MWC was only a mere .0021 ahead of the WAC. The highest teams in the WAC were Nevada (19) and Utah State (46). The top two in the MWC were Air Force (50) and San Diego State (55).

It's easy to say that since the MWC has more TV money right now that all the teams in the WAC want a piece. But two or three years from now, especially with MWC's ridiculous football deal with non-network CSTV, WAC teams will see the MWC as an equal, not superior conference.

PS - Utah State will remain the king of college basketball in Utah as long as Stew Morrill is coach!!!!

MWC: $82 Million TV contract, including 27 nationally televised games this year (1 TBS game, 2 FSN games, 1 ESPN game, 2 ESPN2 games, 1 ESPN+ game, 8 OLN/"Versus" games, 8 CSTV games, and 4 ESPN Bowl games) and an additional 29 regional games.
WAC: $6 Million, Sun/Mon/Tue/Wed games, early morning and late night start times.

MWC: Utah ranked #4 ranking in 2004 (BCS Bowl win over Pitt), TCU ranked #9 in 2005 (bowl win over Iowa State).
WAC: Boise State ranked Top 20 in 2004 after bowl loss to Louisville, no team finished Top 25 in 2006.

MWC: 7th-ranked football conference in 2005. 6th in 2004 above the Big east.
WAC: 9th-ranked football conference in 2005. 8th in 2004.

MWC: Highest attendence near 65,000, conference averages nearly 35K.
WAC: Highest attendence 40,000, conference averages about 25K.

MWC: Can raid the WAC for up to 3 schools and go to 12 at any time.
WAC: In fear of losing up to 3 teams to the MWC (Fresno State, Boise State, and Nevada), up to 4 teams to C-USA after the Big east expands again, and up to 5 teams to NCAA non-compliance (attendence minimums). No school is not at risk to leave the conference, one way or another. The WAC also has no viable expansion candidates at either the I-A or I-AA level. None.

You're only talking about football! What does the MWC have on the WAC in basketball other than a TV contract?!

And pretty much all of you stats came from 2004 when the MWC's stock was inflated because of one team. Not to take anything away from the Utes that season, but they didn't have much competition.

Look at where the conferences are at RIGHT NOW. Utah was great, but they're just Utah again, BYU still hasn't completely recovered from Crowton and other than that, it's just TCU in football. In basketball, if you look at the stats, you can't even tell the difference between the two conferences!

So if MWC was a lot better than the WAC in football in 2004, why isn't it still that much better even after adding TCU?!?!?!? If the WAC closed the gap that much in just one year, how can you say there's still going to be a huge gap four or more years down the road?

UtahStatesman Wrote:So if MWC was a lot better than the WAC in football in 2004, why isn't it still that much better even after adding TCU?!?!?!?

It is. The gap is continuing to widen. The Mountain West was statistically closer to the SEC last year than they were the WAC.

This is all readily apparent to the national media. Funny how only WAC fans can't/won't see the truth for what it is.