(07-25-2012 10:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 09:38 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 08:17 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  The MWC rejecting Idaho and NMSU is the dumbest thing they can do. Expansion won't happen, unless they go to Montana or a school like that. Sigh...

No, taking them probably would be. They'd reduce their revenue and add programs that add very little. It is worthwhile to wait on Montana or someone else to be ready. Then they could either take two of those and go to 12 or pair one with TSU.

You have only so few spots- gotta make them count.

The MWC doesn't need anyone now.

Neither did the WAC a few years back....

I should note that I think you will see FAU or an assortment of FCS "move ups" in CUSA before you would see Fresno in out league, although I would like to have them.

UTEP won't get tired of traveling, because our school has done it all along. The MWC is not the same one that left UTEP behind years ago.

Sure we'd like to play UNM, UNLV, AFA, and Fresno, but they only represent half the conference. We also like S Miss, Rice, Tulsa, etc., too.

As for those CUSA fans who feel they'd be OK with UTEP leaving. Remember that you're in the same boat.

(07-25-2012 04:45 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  To all the haters, Stever and Lolly Popp I told you we want Texas St. over NMSU. Sounds like they are interested in the MWC too. PS you are both still my favorite frienemys (SJSUfan2010 from the csi board), thanks to LP for finding all the overlooked errors in the wiki maps for me.

The MWC might suddenly be interested in Texas State, after ignoring them in the Spring when they were begging the MWC to look their way, but now there is a problem.

First the MWC ignored Texas State when they could have been grabbed with no hassle, second Texas State has paid to join the SBC, and third more SBC foes are closer.

In the SBC, at least Texas State has easy road trips to UT-Arlington and Louisiana-Lafayette, while there would be no relatively nearby MWC road trips for Texas State.

So then it comes back to the "better conference" argument, but that might not be enough to get Texas State to move, because there are a lot more issues to consider.

(07-26-2012 12:05 AM)Lolly Popp Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 04:45 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  To all the haters, Stever and Lolly Popp I told you we want Texas St. over NMSU. Sounds like they are interested in the MWC too. PS you are both still my favorite frienemys (SJSUfan2010 from the csi board), thanks to LP for finding all the overlooked errors in the wiki maps for me.

The MWC might suddenly be interested in Texas State, after ignoring them in the Spring when they were begging the MWC to look their way, but now there is a problem.

First the MWC ignored Texas State when they could have been grabbed with no hassle, second Texas State has paid to join the SBC, and third more SBC foes are closer.

In the SBC, at least Texas State has easy road trips to UT-Arlington and Louisiana-Lafayette, while there would be no relatively nearby MWC road trips for Texas State.

So then it comes back to the "better conference" argument, but that might not be enough to get Texas State to move, because there are a lot more issues to consider.

Spin away, CUSA will be adding 2 more, probably SBC schools, and the MWC will lose AFA advantage MWC w/ or w/o SBC losing anyone. Plus more NCAA money from Tourney credits, more money from TV. It's not like the SBC has BE buyout numbers that Texas St. can't overcome. Look at your argument at least they have UTA and ULL. You act like it's TCU and LSU.

(07-25-2012 08:17 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  The MWC rejecting Idaho and NMSU is the dumbest thing they can do. Expansion won't happen, unless they go to Montana or a school like that. Sigh...

MWC will be at 10 next season. Why expand with low-quality additions, simply to get to 12?

After 2012 the WAC and MWC should just merge and reunite again after the BE takes AF or Fresno if BYU says no, or if the MWC stays together if BYU says yes to the BE.. After trying to destroy each other they are just split conferences of the old WAC any way minus the headliners Utah, Boise, TCU, and, BYU. New merged conference to be know as "WMAC" - Western Mountain Athletic Conference, or "MWAC" - Mountain Western Athletic Conference, or just take the name of one of the merging conferences (MWC or WAC).

If BYU joins the BE and leaves the MWC intact:

West FB Division - Nevada, UNLV, SJST, Fresno, Utah ST, Hawaii (all sports) + Seattle for BB/Olympic Sports and add Utah Valley for BB/Olympic Sports.

Mountain FB Division - Colorado St, Air Force, Wyoming, NM, NMST, Idaho + Denver and TX-Arlington for BB/Olympic Sports.

This becomes a 16 member hybrid conference with with 12 FB members and a Championship game, and a BB conference with at least 2 NCAA bids to repackage for a new TV deal when the old one runs out.

Bowl Package if they keep their current bowls (6 bowls total):
New Mexico - $456,250 - current MWC #4 or 5.
Idaho Potato - $325,000 - current WAC #1 or 2.
Poinsettia - $500,000 - current MWC #2.
Las Vegas - 1,100,000 - current MWC #1.
Hawaii - $650,000 - current Hawaii or MWC #3.
Armed Force (Bell Helicopter) - $600,000 - current MWC #4 or 5.

Boise replaces Hawaii in the Big West - a conference they use to be a member of before joining the WAC years ago. The travel costs are cheaper than Hawaii especially with a little cash from Boise and / or the BE to make this work.

New Big East version #2 with BYU:

West - SMU, Houston, Memphis, (FB Only's) Boise, BYU, SDSU, Navy.
East - Rutgers, Temple, UConn, Cinn, L'Ville, USF, UCF.
BB / Olympic / No BE FB - ND, Nova, G'town, SH, Providence, St Johns, Marquette, DePaul.

(07-28-2012 09:22 AM)panite Wrote:  This becomes a 16 member hybrid conference with with 12 FB members and a Championship game, and a BB conference with at least 2 NCAA bids to repackage for a new TV deal when the old one runs out.

No. 1 autobid per conference.

(07-28-2012 09:49 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-28-2012 09:22 AM)panite Wrote:  This becomes a 16 member hybrid conference with with 12 FB members and a Championship game, and a BB conference with at least 2 NCAA bids to repackage for a new TV deal when the old one runs out.

No. 1 autobid per conference.

My mistake. I just lumped the two together via a merger. Thirty auto bids are handed out to the conference tournament champions and one auto bid is handed out to the IVY League champion because they do not have a season ending tournament. That comes to a grand total of 31 current auto bids. That would drop to 30 auto bids if the MWC and WAC merged with one of the bids becoming an at large bid.

After The Big East grabs 3 more MWC schools to go to 16 (Or at least 2 more if Navy bails out) then I think it would be best for the MWC to just take whatever is left and put it C-USA before C-USA ads anymore ridiculous candidates or maybe even The Sun-belt.

(07-25-2012 01:43 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  That's fine with me if UTEP and UTSA leave...

Easy my CUSA brothers UTSA is as happy as a kid at a candy store to be in CUSA. Were staying put. Looking forward to 2013!

(07-29-2012 11:16 AM)Runner Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 01:43 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  That's fine with me if UTEP and UTSA leave...

Easy my CUSA brothers UTSA is as happy as a kid at a candy store to be in CUSA. Were staying put. Looking forward to 2013!

Of course you're happy about it, doesn't mean we are.

(07-25-2012 01:43 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  That's fine with me if UTEP and UTSA leave...

easy there big fella, if not for your AD, we wouldn't be in this mess. But NO, he was hell bent on getting a regional conference.

(07-29-2012 03:42 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 01:43 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  That's fine with me if UTEP and UTSA leave...

easy there big fella, if not for your AD, we wouldn't be in this mess. But NO, he was hell bent on getting a regional conference.

No it was a mess no matter what we did. What could we have done that wouldn't have sucked? That merger just wasn't worth it. Money wasn't there. It needed to be worth at least 3 million per team per year to come close to making up for lost buyouts and credits. It obviously wasn't, and we weren't the ones who wanted UTSA or Charlotte.

We should have only replaced the geographic locations that left, but instead we added two additional east coast teams and now we're stuck at 14 and had the ECU AD had his way, we would have moved to 16 and 1 of those teams would have been app st.

(07-29-2012 05:13 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 03:42 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 01:43 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  That's fine with me if UTEP and UTSA leave...

easy there big fella, if not for your AD, we wouldn't be in this mess. But NO, he was hell bent on getting a regional conference.

No it was a mess no matter what we did. What could we have done that wouldn't have sucked? That merger just wasn't worth it. Money wasn't there. It needed to be worth at least 3 million per team per year to come close to making up for lost buyouts and credits. It obviously wasn't, and we weren't the ones who wanted UTSA or Charlotte.

Well, C-USA could have just stuck at 8, or brought in the best one out of Louisiana Tech, UNT, FIU and UTSA. I still would have voted UTSA as the best prospect out of those, but your opinion may differ.

(07-29-2012 06:19 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 05:13 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 03:42 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 01:43 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  That's fine with me if UTEP and UTSA leave...

easy there big fella, if not for your AD, we wouldn't be in this mess. But NO, he was hell bent on getting a regional conference.

No it was a mess no matter what we did. What could we have done that wouldn't have sucked? That merger just wasn't worth it. Money wasn't there. It needed to be worth at least 3 million per team per year to come close to making up for lost buyouts and credits. It obviously wasn't, and we weren't the ones who wanted UTSA or Charlotte.

Well, C-USA could have just stuck at 8, or brought in the best one out of Louisiana Tech, UNT, FIU and UTSA. I still would have voted UTSA as the best prospect out of those, but your opinion may differ.

Sticking at 8 is a disaster that the Big East did. Adding 1 would have been an option, but how badly would our TV deal have been dinged if we didn't get back up to 12 to keep the championship game? My guess is a lot.

(07-29-2012 07:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 06:19 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 05:13 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 03:42 PM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 01:43 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  That's fine with me if UTEP and UTSA leave...

easy there big fella, if not for your AD, we wouldn't be in this mess. But NO, he was hell bent on getting a regional conference.

No it was a mess no matter what we did. What could we have done that wouldn't have sucked? That merger just wasn't worth it. Money wasn't there. It needed to be worth at least 3 million per team per year to come close to making up for lost buyouts and credits. It obviously wasn't, and we weren't the ones who wanted UTSA or Charlotte.

Well, C-USA could have just stuck at 8, or brought in the best one out of Louisiana Tech, UNT, FIU and UTSA. I still would have voted UTSA as the best prospect out of those, but your opinion may differ.

Sticking at 8 is a disaster that the Big East did. Adding 1 would have been an option, but how badly would our TV deal have been dinged if we didn't get back up to 12 to keep the championship game? My guess is a lot.

Frankly, I think that UTSA is a sleeping giant. They have support among fans. They have a large student body. They are the only game in town (I know UT Austin is the favorite, but there are plenty fans to go around). They are in a huge market in a city with a tremendous upside. They are in a fast growing state. There are more D1 prospects in Texas than anywhere else (yes even more than in CA, because Texas schools fund HS FB, while CA is suffering budget wise). And they are in an area with a large part of the fastest growing demographic in the US.

(07-28-2012 03:16 PM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  After The Big East grabs 3 more MWC schools to go to 16 (Or at least 2 more if Navy bails out) then I think it would be best for the MWC to just take whatever is left and put it C-USA before C-USA ads anymore ridiculous candidates or maybe even The Sun-belt.

You're right-on with this opinion, but you & I know that Thompson & the Front-Range schools are too stupid to expand strategically in that situation. They'll do what they've always done; circle the wagons and let the tribals pick-off their remaining gunslingers until there's nothing left.

Too provincial, too small-minded. That's how the MWC works.

(07-28-2012 03:16 PM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  After The Big East grabs 3 more MWC schools to go to 16 (Or at least 2 more if Navy bails out) then I think it would be best for the MWC to just take whatever is left and put it C-USA before C-USA ads anymore ridiculous candidates or maybe even The Sun-belt.

That's if the big east adds any additional west coast teams, bsu was only taken to keep up AQ status and that is gone, why would they want more west coast teams? Instead of adding a west coast presence, they went and added temple and memphis, that is how dedicated they are to the west coast.