If the MWC is going to expand, which it looks like it is, why go to 10, when you can go to 12, have a championship game and possibly make some teams think twice about leaving. Boise and a couple more gets you BCS status next year, a new TV contract, a championship game in Vegas, what more could Utah and BYU want.....might be better than being the little fish in a big pond( PAC10). Who are the other two invitees, Nevada, UTEP, Houston. Nevada and a traveling partner for TCU....Houston, huge TV market, UTEP, mountain time zone, large school?????

(06-02-2010 03:31 PM)jfisher Wrote:  If the MWC is going to expand, which it looks like it is, why go to 10, when you can go to 12, have a championship game and possibly make some teams think twice about leaving. Boise and a couple more gets you BCS status next year, a new TV contract, a championship game in Vegas, what more could Utah and BYU want.....might be better than being the little fish in a big pond( PAC10). Who are the other two invitees, Nevada, UTEP, Houston. Nevada and a traveling partner for TCU....Houston, huge TV market, UTEP, mountain time zone, large school?????

UTEP and Houston are probably gone IMO. CUSA as we know it is probablt toast. This is what I fear.

Rice, SMU, TU, Tulane will stay together - to its detriment IMO. Neither Rice or Tulane are committed to athletics like us. I'd like to see us, SMU and So Miss stay together out of CUSA. We'll probably see NM St, La Tech, MTSU and La La to lobby to be replacements, but it won't be the same league we joined.

Would this be any good:

TU
SMU
Rice
Tulane
La Tech
So Miss
La La
MTSU
No Texas
Arkansas St
UTSA
NM St/Texas State

IMO the MWC will probably invite ISU, KU, KSU and maybe Baylor along with Houston and UTEP.

It sucks all this expansion talk comes after a weak season. We are off the charts nearly everywhere.

The thing that alarms me about much of this is the realization that we have so many delusional fans that do the old AE Newman routine "what me worry?". They seem content to sign 2-1, 3-1 contracts and become road warriors for the money. That is the beginning of the end of most programs. These TV contracts and conference alignments are the life blood of the program.

Right now it looks like we will have to join forces with a lot of programs we have nothing in common with or "dumb down" our competition level. TBH, if we are going to lose a lot of the prestige teams in the league, I'd rather see us go to a more regional alignment that includes a La Tech, Louisana (laf), No Texas, Arkansas St. At least we'd save travel expense money and possibly build a rivalry or two. Problem is that we won't get many big names on the home schedule (something I've been preaching for years since we reduced Skelly). So our attendence will naturally drop and we'll never see the "big game" again. I knew this day was coming when Skelly became Chapman TBH.

I think there are a number of schools running a little bit scared right now, which may lead to some opportunities. Not just Tulsa but some BCS schools.....as one schools President said, he's spent the last two weeks on nothing but conference realignment. What do some of the Big East schools that nobody wants do......also KU, KSU, Iowa St and Baylor. Something that keeps you in a BCS conference might be better than nothing.....not getting left out in the cold is the goal!! If KU, KSU and Baylor thought they were going to get left out would they accept a MWC invite......I think they might with the MWC moving up to BCS next year. If any of the Big 12 starts the ball rolling and leaves, Big 10, PAC 10, I don't care and KU, KSU, Iowa St, and Baylor thought.....just thought they were going to get left out, would they be interested in a new Big 12 with CUSA West plus Memphis and Southern Miss..............pretty good basketball for Kansas, average football to start but maybe good enough for BCS consideration. All of those schools, Tulsa included,have to be thinking outside the box......what if this, what if that. that's what Tulsa has to be doing, talking to the schools that might be getting left out and trying to set up different scenarios and what would happen or could happen. If you're not proactive in this environment, you could be looking up from the bottom.

I think we may see KU, KSU, ISU and Baylor join the MWC - especially if BYU, Boise and Utah are part of that. TBH, our only chance of advancement is if those castoffs need a naural geographically "linked" program to the Texas schools.

I think everyone left out would be better served to shuffle and start over. Then we'd be more attractive to a new conference than say a Wyoming or Colorado State or even San Diego St who are traditionally just bottom feeding in FB and MBB. But in the end, I think we may see a MWC of -

ISU
KU
KSU
Houston
Baylor
TCU
UTEP/Nevada/Fresno
NM
SDSt
UNLV
Boise
CSU
AF
Wyoming
Utah
BYU

Why is Kansas not getting any attention right now?

Football is still the BIG DOG and even though Kansas had a pretty good team last year, they haven't been near the top of the heap very often and not known as a big football school. The big part of Kansas City is in MO, so they aren't going to bring a big population state. I just don't believe the new rumor of Texas Tech and OSU going to the PAC 10.....Stanford and Cal would never vote them in and it takes a 100% vote.......heck, they would more likely vote us in than them!!!

(06-04-2010 04:52 PM)jfisher Wrote:  Football is still the BIG DOG and even though Kansas had a pretty good team last year, they haven't been near the top of the heap very often and not known as a big football school. The big part of Kansas City is in MO, so they aren't going to bring a big population state. I just don't believe the new rumor of Texas Tech and OSU going to the PAC 10.....Stanford and Cal would never vote them in and it takes a 100% vote.......heck, they would more likely vote us in than them!!!

I think the reason Tech and OSU are included is politics. Tech is also a western link geographically with CU and the west. OSU is just politics and Pickens' money. BTW, his notoriety is more important right now than his money to the aggs, although he seems intent on spending a lot of what he has. According to the Fortune's richest, he only has about 1.5 billion - peanuts today when compared to others on the list. But in the end, OSU has a lot of political pull. That's why there is always an ex-politician that head these schools - to the detriment of the state IMO. These politicians should be raked thru the coals when they cut common ed more than colleges with professors making Obama-rich ($250 grand) salaries IMO.

As I mentioned on the Tulsa Rivals board, I would think the Big 12 commissioner along with KU, KSU, Iowa St and Baylor would want a contingency plan to expand immediately if anything major occurs or if some teams won't guarantee they are staying in the Big 12. There are so many teams sitting on the edge of their sit, I think they could tap that fear and add teams now......to keep the Big 12 alive. Louisville and Cincy don't know whether they get left out, invite them, I bet they would join for the guarantee of a conference that should still be BCS......then probably Memphis and Houston. A respectable football league and a great basketball league. Once they have a guaranteed Big 12 they could expand to 12 over the next few years with the teams left out of expansion or maybe getting a team like TCU out of the MWC. It would make a lot more sense for TCU than the MWC. I guess Tulsa would have a slight chance of being in that 4 teams added in a few years, but being so small it would probably take a couple of years of great football and basketball to get the new Big 12's attention......a couple of 7-5 football seasons and no NCAAs in basketball wouldn't make the grade.