(07-25-2012 11:33 PM)moron Wrote:  Okay, mark it down people. UTEP and Tulsa to the MWC.

"Well, moron," you'll say, "why should we believe you? After all, aren't you a moron?"

This is true, hypothetical doubter. Let's look at things from their perspective though. These schools have lost regional rivals that they valued. CUSA has watered itself down to a level where it is almost indistinguishable from the Sun Belt. If UTEP and Tulsa stay in CUSA, they'll be in the worst division in college football.

East Carolina and Southern Miss. want to win, but UTEP and Tulsa will play them with such rarity that it's not worth being in CUSA. CUSA has way too many bottom feeders for anyone to stick around if they have a way out.

UTEP lost regional rivalries?

UNT, Rice, UTSA are not near them? K.....

Tulsa.... there isn't enough in the MWC to lure them over IMO.


And face it, CUSA tv $$$ and bowl bids make leaving not a good move TO the MWC financially speaking.

Right now we have three leagues left below 12 football members.

Big XII and while I think eventually they have to do something about West Virginia being isolated, there is no reason to think they are going to move any faster than the ACC did fixing the BC issue. Realistically any Big East, C-USA, MWC, or BYU could be called and expected to come on board, but so far none has the critical number of votes to get in.

MWC. Within the current footprint they have two options. #1 NMSU #2 Idaho. Both schools have their issues that have kept MWC from acting. Unless they can point eastward, the only other option is an FCS move-up and we know Montana, Montana State, Portland State, Cal Davis, and Sacramento State decline WAC overtures a bit back and the new MWC isn't that wildly different from the WAC they turned down.

Sun Belt. The commissioner by all accounts apparently wanted to go to at least 12 and the schools wanted to let things cool down but at least five different FCS and maybe as many as eight have expressed interest in joining.

So when you survey the landscape what you have is two leagues under no compelling pressure to get to 12 in the belief that they have options.

With MWC, you have a league that is essentially land-locked into their current arrangement unless they change their mind about NMSU/Idaho, choose to pursue FCS, or they point their eyes eastward.

Does it make sense that MWC would want UTEP and Tulsa? Absolutely but it doesn't directly follow that UTEP and Tulsa would want MWC. I don't believe you get Tulsa unless you can get North Texas so they can keep a DFW opponent. I don't think you can get UTEP unless they have access to at least two of Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio.

That would mean going to 14 and having an eastern division of Tulsa, UNT, UTSA, UTEP, New Mexico and two of Wyoming, AFA, and Colorado State and I have a hard time believing AFA, Colorado State, and Wyoming support any plan that splits them up. Those three are just too close together. AFA to Wyoming is 3 1/2 hours with Colorado State about halfway between.

To really make it work without enraging some the founding billy goats, you have to start thinking 18 teams with the current MWC minus New Mexico forming a division and New Mexico plus 8 more forming the east and that becomes even more problematic.

I think what we have is a case of what the MWC wants and what the MWC gets not being the same thing.

The MWC would be a step down for Tulsa or Utep. CUSA is now the #7 conf by a good margin. MWC is just above Sun and Mac now.

Sorry but CUSA is setting itself up for the future and it's future should be pretty decent. The MWC is the WAC 2.0. I'm sorry there is no reason for UTEP and Tulsa to leave their new division in CUSA. Tulsa has a chance to dominate a truly regional division. I see no reason for them not to make that their goal. With CUSA they have a much better shot at getting involved in a Conference Championship game too, maybe even a conference tournament....

(07-25-2012 11:33 PM)moron Wrote:  Okay, mark it down people. UTEP and Tulsa to the MWC.

"Well, moron," you'll say, "why should we believe you? After all, aren't you a moron?"

This is true, hypothetical doubter. Let's look at things from their perspective though. These schools have lost regional rivals that they valued. CUSA has watered itself down to a level where it is almost indistinguishable from the Sun Belt. If UTEP and Tulsa stay in CUSA, they'll be in the worst division in college football.

East Carolina and Southern Miss. want to win, but UTEP and Tulsa will play them with such rarity that it's not worth being in CUSA. CUSA has way too many bottom feeders for anyone to stick around if they have a way out.

While I disagree with your prediction, I definitely give you style points for the delivery. My favorite part is bolded above. I was really entertained.

(07-26-2012 03:08 AM)Caltex2 Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 11:33 PM)moron Wrote:  Okay, mark it down people. UTEP and Tulsa to the MWC.

"Well, moron," you'll say, "why should we believe you? After all, aren't you a moron?"

This is true, hypothetical doubter. Let's look at things from their perspective though. These schools have lost regional rivals that they valued. CUSA has watered itself down to a level where it is almost indistinguishable from the Sun Belt. If UTEP and Tulsa stay in CUSA, they'll be in the worst division in college football.

East Carolina and Southern Miss. want to win, but UTEP and Tulsa will play them with such rarity that it's not worth being in CUSA. CUSA has way too many bottom feeders for anyone to stick around if they have a way out.

(07-26-2012 10:23 AM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  UTEP lost regional rivalries?

UNT, Rice, UTSA are not near them? K.....

Tulsa.... there isn't enough in the MWC to lure them over IMO.

I'll give you that UTEP will be playing regional opponents in the new CUSA, but that doesn't automatically make them rivals.

How has Tulsa lost regional rivals? There are seven CUSA schools either closer to Tulsa than, or virtually as close as, any MWC school -- North Texas, UTSA, Rice, Louisiana Tech, Tulane, Southern Miss, and UAB -- with UTEP also being reasonable.

DRIVING DISTANCE FROM TULSA TO CLOSEST CUSA CITIES
__270 miles - Denton (04:24)
__411 miles - Ruston (07:05)
__494 miles - Houston (08:20)
__531 miles - San Antonio (09:00)
__621 miles - Hattiesburg (10:29)
__637 miles - Birmingham (10:31)
__661 miles - New Orleans (11:17)
__824 miles - El Paso (13:09)
__852 miles - Huntington (13:33)

DRIVING DISTANCE FROM TULSA TO NEAREST MWC CITIES
__650 miles - Albuquerque (10:16)
__664 miles - Colorado Springs (10:55)
__747 miles - Fort Collins (11:33)
__827 miles - Laramie (12:41)
_1211 miles - Logan (18:59)
_1231 miles - Las Vegas (19:17)
_1559 miles - Fresno (24:00)
_1690 miles - San Jose (27:00)
_1733 miles - Reno (27:30)

Tulsa may have lost SMU and Houston, but they have been replaced by North Texas and UTSA, while Rice also remains in CUSA. I see no incentive for Tulsa to jump to the MWC. Marshall is closer to Tulsa than 60% of the MWC according to Google.

(07-26-2012 04:50 PM)gata_dawg Wrote:  

(07-26-2012 03:08 AM)Caltex2 Wrote:  

(07-27-2012 01:45 AM)Lolly Popp Wrote:  How has Tulsa lost regional rivals? There are seven CUSA schools either closer to Tulsa than, or virtually as close as, any MWC school -- North Texas, UTSA, Rice, Louisiana Tech, Tulane, Southern Miss, and UAB -- with UTEP also being reasonable.

DRIVING DISTANCE FROM TULSA TO CLOSEST CUSA CITIES
__270 miles - Denton (04:24)
__411 miles - Ruston (07:05)
__494 miles - Houston (08:20)
__531 miles - San Antonio (09:00)
__621 miles - Hattiesburg (10:29)
__637 miles - Birmingham (10:31)
__661 miles - New Orleans (11:17)
__824 miles - El Paso (13:09)
__852 miles - Huntington (13:33)

DRIVING DISTANCE FROM TULSA TO NEAREST MWC CITIES
__650 miles - Albuquerque (10:16)
__664 miles - Colorado Springs (10:55)
__747 miles - Fort Collins (11:33)
__827 miles - Laramie (12:41)
_1211 miles - Logan (18:59)
_1231 miles - Las Vegas (19:17)
_1559 miles - Fresno (24:00)
_1690 miles - San Jose (27:00)
_1733 miles - Reno (27:30)

Tulsa may have lost SMU and Houston, but they have been replaced by North Texas and UTSA, while Rice also remains in CUSA. I see no incentive for Tulsa to jump to the MWC. Marshall is closer to Tulsa than 60% of the MWC according to Google.

While I agree with you leaving doesn't make sense just being close doesn't make you a rival, and North Texas and UTSA are not really "replacements" for what the SMU and Houston games meant to Tulsa. Those 2 for the moment are just placeholders in large markets. I hope they become more, but each has a long way to go to prove that, especially UTSA who I think is years away from even being competitive at the FBS level.

(07-26-2012 04:09 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The MWC would be a step down for Tulsa or Utep. CUSA is now the #7 conf by a good margin. MWC is just above Sun and Mac now.

Not true in the slightest. After Southern Miss, Tulsa, and ECU most of conference USA is lucky to go 6-6. If your talking markets yes but there is no reason to believe the MAC or MWC wont be better next year.

(07-27-2012 07:31 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-27-2012 01:45 AM)Lolly Popp Wrote:  How has Tulsa lost regional rivals? There are seven CUSA schools either closer to Tulsa than, or virtually as close as, any MWC school -- North Texas, UTSA, Rice, Louisiana Tech, Tulane, Southern Miss, and UAB -- with UTEP also being reasonable.

DRIVING DISTANCE FROM TULSA TO CLOSEST CUSA CITIES
__270 miles - Denton (04:24)
__411 miles - Ruston (07:05)
__494 miles - Houston (08:20)
__531 miles - San Antonio (09:00)
__621 miles - Hattiesburg (10:29)
__637 miles - Birmingham (10:31)
__661 miles - New Orleans (11:17)
__824 miles - El Paso (13:09)
__852 miles - Huntington (13:33)

DRIVING DISTANCE FROM TULSA TO NEAREST MWC CITIES
__650 miles - Albuquerque (10:16)
__664 miles - Colorado Springs (10:55)
__747 miles - Fort Collins (11:33)
__827 miles - Laramie (12:41)
_1211 miles - Logan (18:59)
_1231 miles - Las Vegas (19:17)
_1559 miles - Fresno (24:00)
_1690 miles - San Jose (27:00)
_1733 miles - Reno (27:30)

Tulsa may have lost SMU and Houston, but they have been replaced by North Texas and UTSA, while Rice also remains in CUSA. I see no incentive for Tulsa to jump to the MWC. Marshall is closer to Tulsa than 60% of the MWC according to Google.

While I agree with you leaving doesn't make sense just being close doesn't make you a rival, and North Texas and UTSA are not really "replacements" for what the SMU and Houston games meant to Tulsa. Those 2 for the moment are just placeholders in large markets. I hope they become more, but each has a long way to go to prove that, especially UTSA who I think is years away from even being competitive at the FBS level.

This is correct - sure there may not be a big difference in the distance, but proximity doesn't always make a rivalry - however, history does - we have little history with UNT and UTSA has no history at all, so it's hard to call either a rival. We lost 2 great rivals in Houston and SMU... I feel like TU should have tried harder to do whatever it took stay in the same conference as those 2 schools.

(07-27-2012 07:42 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(07-26-2012 04:09 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The MWC would be a step down for Tulsa or Utep. CUSA is now the #7 conf by a good margin. MWC is just above Sun and Mac now.

Not true in the slightest. After Southern Miss, Tulsa, and ECU most of conference USA is lucky to go 6-6. If your talking markets yes but there is no reason to believe the MAC or MWC wont be better next year.

There's more to determining the better conference than wins & losses. CUSA has been and will continue to be the most profitable non big6 conference. CUSA basketball, even losing Memphis, is still far better than the MAC (MWC still better). Also, with the change of membership, it is impossible to tell how the teams will improve. La Tech is poised for a breakout season this year, which can only help them in the future. And Marshall has also been steadily improving in both major sports.

CUSA is set up for more longterm success than any of the other non big6 leagues because of the moves they made. Is it instantly as good as what they had before the raid? no. Can it get back to that level pretty soon and eventually go beyond it? Yes.

(07-27-2012 07:42 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(07-26-2012 04:09 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The MWC would be a step down for Tulsa or Utep. CUSA is now the #7 conf by a good margin. MWC is just above Sun and Mac now.

Not true in the slightest. After Southern Miss, Tulsa, and ECU most of conference USA is lucky to go 6-6. If your talking markets yes but there is no reason to believe the MAC or MWC wont be better next year.

Well really 2013 the league isn't going to get that much weaker. FIU and La Tech are solid additions that aren't going to drop the league competitively. I think it's very possible both those teams could win their leagues this year. UNT is a question mark but I don't think they are going to be a dumpster fire in 2013, and UTSA will just take Memphis' place as bottom feeder. Charlotte and ODU don't get here till 2015. I would say in 2013 you'll be looking at ECU, USM, Tulsa, Marshall, FIU, and La Tech as the programs who could realistically compete for the conference title. The rest of the league will be wait and see, but no different than what it is currently.

(07-27-2012 09:09 AM)goldenhurricane2 Wrote:  

(07-27-2012 07:31 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  While I agree with you leaving doesn't make sense just being close doesn't make you a rival, and North Texas and UTSA are not really "replacements" for what the SMU and Houston games meant to Tulsa. Those 2 for the moment are just placeholders in large markets. I hope they become more, but each has a long way to go to prove that, especially UTSA who I think is years away from even being competitive at the FBS level.

This is correct - sure there may not be a big difference in the distance, but proximity doesn't always make a rivalry - however, history does - we have little history with UNT and UTSA has no history at all, so it's hard to call either a rival. We lost 2 great rivals in Houston and SMU ... I feel like TU should have tried harder to do whatever it took stay in the same conference as those 2 schools.

The Big East is not interested in Tulsa so there is absolutely nothing that could have been done to stay with SMU and Houston. Moving on then, what is better for Tulsa going forward, sticking with regional placeholders or paying higher travel costs for a more distant conference with no historic rivals at all and no reasonably drivable games for fans?

i agree that utep fits better in the mwc - and they would certainly 'want' tulsa to go with them - aand even that utep and tulsa probably aren't very happy with the changes in c-usa...but the mwc is a shell of what it was too (although I don't think air force is leaving) and the exit and entrance fees make it a net loss to make the change for utep (and tulsa).

if utep was an independent and had to pick one conferenc eof the other, i believe they would pick the mwc...and so would tulsa, but those darn exit fees...

(07-28-2012 12:41 PM)e-bethMSU Wrote:  i agree that utep fits better in the mwc - and they would certainly 'want' tulsa to go with them - aand even that utep and tulsa probably aren't very happy with the changes in c-usa...but the mwc is a shell of what it was too (although I don't think air force is leaving) and the exit and entrance fees make it a net loss to make the change for utep (and tulsa).

if utep was an independent and had to pick one conferenc eof the other, i believe they would pick the mwc...and so would tulsa, but those darn exit fees...

I don't think UTEP would go MWC--I looked it up, and they have alumni chapters in Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and Austin, but none in Denver or anywhere else except Juarez, Mexico. So I think UTEP would go with the more Texas-centric conference, with UTSA, UNT, and Rice. Plus the recruiting is better in Texas than in MWC country.

(07-27-2012 09:29 AM)mufanatehc Wrote:  

(07-27-2012 07:42 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(07-26-2012 04:09 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The MWC would be a step down for Tulsa or Utep. CUSA is now the #7 conf by a good margin. MWC is just above Sun and Mac now.

Not true in the slightest. After Southern Miss, Tulsa, and ECU most of conference USA is lucky to go 6-6. If your talking markets yes but there is no reason to believe the MAC or MWC wont be better next year.

There's more to determining the better conference than wins & losses. CUSA has been and will continue to be the most profitable non big6 conference. CUSA basketball, even losing Memphis, is still far better than the MAC (MWC still better).

Let me correct you, CUSA will continue to be the 2nd most profitable non-Big 5 conference. The BE will be the #1 most profitable non Big 5 conference followed by CUSA.

(07-27-2012 01:45 AM)Lolly Popp Wrote:  DRIVING DISTANCE FROM TULSA TO NEAREST MWC CITIES
__650 miles - Albuquerque (10:16)
__664 miles - Colorado Springs (10:55)
__747 miles - Fort Collins (11:33)
__827 miles - Laramie (12:41)
_1211 miles - Logan (18:59)
_1231 miles - Las Vegas (19:17)
_1559 miles - Fresno (24:00)
_1690 miles - San Jose (27:00)
_1733 miles - Reno (27:30)

is that reno number right? it can't be (based on the other numbers) - can it?

(07-28-2012 04:31 PM)e-bethMSU Wrote:  is that reno number right? it can't be (based on the other numbers) - can it?

It's driving mileage, not physical mileage, and that is the shortest highway route from Tulsa to Reno. I was also surprised but it's just not an easy trip.