(11-14-2013 06:11 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:44 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  If you're "disguised" suggestion in this thread is to imply that CUSA and Sun Belt > MWC, you are misguided. Check the stats of recruits from CA. Fresno State and Boise State do not build programs off The state of TX (I understand this is difficult for those living in TX to grasp). When the MWC decides it needs a school from TX, they could make that happen tomorrow.

True - Fresno is 80% CA, with the rest Arizona, the Pacific (Hawaii, Samoa) and a few scattered nation-wide

San Diego State is similar in build

Boise is built on Idaho/NW/Calif/AZ/NV kids.

Texas has 26 Million people, 12 FBS and 8 FCS programs
California has 38 million people, 7 FBS and 3 schollie FCS programs
Arizona has 6 million, 2 FBS, 1 FCS

Whats amazing is that despite having more than 12 million less people than California, Texas puts out more FBS football players than California---by a decent margin. Football just isn't as big in Cali. Interestingly, the last stats I saw that broke down the nation in terms of FBS players per capita---Louisiana was the top state.

(11-14-2013 05:44 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  If you're "disguised" suggestion in this thread is to imply that CUSA and Sun Belt > MWC, you are misguided. Check the stats of recruits from CA. Fresno State and Boise State do not build programs off The state of TX (I understand this is difficult for those living in TX to grasp). When the MWC decides it needs a school from TX, they could make that happen tomorrow.

It isn't directed at MWC as a conference but Texas recruiting as it applies to New Mexico, Wyoming, and Colorado State. Boise State, so far away, has been able to pull a few Texas recruits so I didn't cite the Broncos.

Regarding California Schools, of course, they have the California base. That is why Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, and Wazzu didn't want a divisional structure that would prevent them from playing often in California (in front of California recruits).

There are five California MWC schools as I see it. In addition to SDSU, FSU, and SJSU, there is Southeastern California State (UNLV) and Northeastern California State (Nevada).

Historically, NM, WY, and CSU (and Colorado U recently) have done not as well on the football field as their large state student enrollments plus the backing of state funding would imply. There is a reason for this. For example, the state of Oklahoma with just under 4 million people turns out more IA football prospects than the four states of New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, and Nevada combined.

(11-14-2013 10:14 PM)Cardiff Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:44 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  When the MWC decides it needs a school from TX, they could make that happen tomorrow.

Lamar and Abilene-Christian... COME ON DOWN

There was discussion awhile back that Texas State might be the option if the MWC wanted to get back into Texas.

The remaining non AQ pieces on the table are UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, TXST, Houston, SMU.

UTEP makes the most sense, but everyone talks about them want to keep ties the eastern half of the state (namely Dallas, Houston, Austin/SA).

Rice's friends have all jumped to the AAC.

UNT fans talk about how everyone hated their days in the Big West and would prefer to stay in a conference with other Texas schools after being isolated in the SBC.

UTSA allegedly had an invite to MWC, but they chose CUSA to be with other Texas schools.

Earlier this year, SMU said they wanted to go east and had no interest in MWC. The only way I see either them or Houston moving west would be the collapse of the AAC.

That leaves Texas State. Being the lone school in the Sun Belt and a bit of a nomad (4th conference in 4 years), they may be easier to pry away than the other Texas schools.

Pros - we are located in prime recruiting and potential media markets. 30 miles from Austin and San Antonio, 2.5 hours from Houston, 3.5 from Dallas. Brand new facilities, large student body (35,000), dedicated athletic fee

Cons- Still new to FBS, awful basketball, currently limited media penetration, nowhere close to conference members

(11-15-2013 11:31 AM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 10:14 PM)Cardiff Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:44 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  When the MWC decides it needs a school from TX, they could make that happen tomorrow.

Lamar and Abilene-Christian... COME ON DOWN

There was discussion awhile back that Texas State might be the option if the MWC wanted to get back into Texas.

The remaining non AQ pieces on the table are UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, TXST, Houston, SMU.

UTEP makes the most sense, but everyone talks about them want to keep ties the eastern half of the state (namely Dallas, Houston, Austin/SA).

Rice's friends have all jumped to the AAC.

UNT fans talk about how everyone hated their days in the Big West and would prefer to stay in a conference with other Texas schools after being isolated in the SBC.

UTSA allegedly had an invite to MWC, but they chose CUSA to be with other Texas schools.

Earlier this year, SMU said they wanted to go east and had no interest in MWC. The only way I see either them or Houston moving west would be the collapse of the AAC.

That leaves Texas State. Being the lone school in the Sun Belt and a bit of a nomad (4th conference in 4 years), they may be easier to pry away than the other Texas schools.

Pros - we are located in prime recruiting and potential media markets. 30 miles from Austin and San Antonio, 2 hours from Houston, 3 from Dallas. Brand new facilities, large student body (35,000), dedicated athletic fee

Cons- Still new to FBS, awful basketball, currently limited media penetration, nowhere close to conference members

If the MW made the move into Texas, they should just go big. Take four Texas schools. Any 4 of Rice, UTSA, UTEP, Texas State, and N Texas. The best bet is probably Rice, Texas St, N Texas, and UTSA. That's where all the population is. UTEP is really more New Mexico than it is Texas.

(11-15-2013 11:51 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-15-2013 11:31 AM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 10:14 PM)Cardiff Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:44 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  When the MWC decides it needs a school from TX, they could make that happen tomorrow.

Lamar and Abilene-Christian... COME ON DOWN

There was discussion awhile back that Texas State might be the option if the MWC wanted to get back into Texas.

The remaining non AQ pieces on the table are UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, TXST, Houston, SMU.

UTEP makes the most sense, but everyone talks about them want to keep ties the eastern half of the state (namely Dallas, Houston, Austin/SA).

Rice's friends have all jumped to the AAC.

UNT fans talk about how everyone hated their days in the Big West and would prefer to stay in a conference with other Texas schools after being isolated in the SBC.

UTSA allegedly had an invite to MWC, but they chose CUSA to be with other Texas schools.

Earlier this year, SMU said they wanted to go east and had no interest in MWC. The only way I see either them or Houston moving west would be the collapse of the AAC.

That leaves Texas State. Being the lone school in the Sun Belt and a bit of a nomad (4th conference in 4 years), they may be easier to pry away than the other Texas schools.

Pros - we are located in prime recruiting and potential media markets. 30 miles from Austin and San Antonio, 2 hours from Houston, 3 from Dallas. Brand new facilities, large student body (35,000), dedicated athletic fee

Cons- Still new to FBS, awful basketball, currently limited media penetration, nowhere close to conference members

If the MW made the move into Texas, they should just go big. Take four Texas schools. Any 4 of Rice, UTSA, UTEP, Texas State, and N Texas. The best bet is probably Rice, Texas St, N Texas, and UTSA. That's where all the population is. UTEP is really more New Mexico than it is Texas.

The problem for a Texas school as I see it, is that playing at NM, CSU, and WY doesn't have the strong appeal that it once had. For example, look at the CUSA/West Bowls....they are close by and in good locations. The TV in CENTRAL TIME ZONE is there. If UNT, UTEP, Rice, and UTSA want to play NM, CSU, and NM, do it as they do it now...as a nonconference game. The other advantage of CUSA/West for the Texas schools is that their fans and alumni have the opportunity to see their school play at away games.

UTSA beat NM this year and Texas State beat Wyoming. SO I just don't think CSU, NM, and WY add the "cache" that the Texas schools are looking for....as CUSA/West is a strong platform for college athletics.

(11-15-2013 12:19 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(11-15-2013 11:51 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-15-2013 11:31 AM)chrisattsu Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 10:14 PM)Cardiff Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:44 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  When the MWC decides it needs a school from TX, they could make that happen tomorrow.

Lamar and Abilene-Christian... COME ON DOWN

There was discussion awhile back that Texas State might be the option if the MWC wanted to get back into Texas.

The remaining non AQ pieces on the table are UTEP, Rice, UNT, UTSA, TXST, Houston, SMU.

UTEP makes the most sense, but everyone talks about them want to keep ties the eastern half of the state (namely Dallas, Houston, Austin/SA).

Rice's friends have all jumped to the AAC.

UNT fans talk about how everyone hated their days in the Big West and would prefer to stay in a conference with other Texas schools after being isolated in the SBC.

UTSA allegedly had an invite to MWC, but they chose CUSA to be with other Texas schools.

Earlier this year, SMU said they wanted to go east and had no interest in MWC. The only way I see either them or Houston moving west would be the collapse of the AAC.

That leaves Texas State. Being the lone school in the Sun Belt and a bit of a nomad (4th conference in 4 years), they may be easier to pry away than the other Texas schools.

Pros - we are located in prime recruiting and potential media markets. 30 miles from Austin and San Antonio, 2 hours from Houston, 3 from Dallas. Brand new facilities, large student body (35,000), dedicated athletic fee

Cons- Still new to FBS, awful basketball, currently limited media penetration, nowhere close to conference members

If the MW made the move into Texas, they should just go big. Take four Texas schools. Any 4 of Rice, UTSA, UTEP, Texas State, and N Texas. The best bet is probably Rice, Texas St, N Texas, and UTSA. That's where all the population is. UTEP is really more New Mexico than it is Texas.

The problem for a Texas school as I see it, is that playing at NM, CSU, and WY doesn't have the strong appeal that it once had. For example, look at the CUSA/West Bowls....they are close by and in good locations. The TV in CENTRAL TIME ZONE is there. If UNT, UTEP, Rice, and UTSA want to play NM, CSU, and NM, do it as they do it now...as a nonconference game. The other advantage of CUSA/West for the Texas schools is that their fans and alumni have the opportunity to see their school play at away games.

UTSA beat NM this year and Texas State beat Wyoming. SO I just don't think CSU, NM, and WY add the "cache" that the Texas schools are looking for....as CUSA/West is a strong platform for college athletics.

That was one of the reasons I was saying take 4. It would allow the 4 in Texas to maintain their appeal to Texas Bowls. The eastern division of the MW under my scenario would be something like--

Rice
Texas St
UTSA
N Tx
New Mexico
Colorado St
Air Force
Wyoming

That's a pair of state flagships, and Academy, and a pretty solid G-5 school in Colorado St. To play them, they trade games against UTEP, La Tech, and S Miss--no state flagships or academies there. There would also be crossovers with west division members Boise, Fresno, Utah St, SDSU, Nevada, UNLV, Hawaii, and San Jose. Other than Hawaii and UNLV, most of the crossover games are decent quality.

This would also be a huge step up in basketball with games against New Mexico, SDSU, UNLV, Colorado St---and Boise (which has emerged as a solid basketball program). There would be a bit more money for those schools and a pretty decent step up in prestige.

(11-15-2013 08:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The eastern division of the MW under my scenario would be something like--

Rice
Texas St
UTSA
N Tx
New Mexico
Colorado St
Air Force
Wyoming

That's a pair of state flagships, and Academy, and a pretty solid G-5 school in Colorado St.

don't think it will happen

but if it did happen
utep would be shafted as hard as any
fbs-team has been shafted
since smu got the death penalty

c-usa western division:
utep
la. tech
southern miss
?
?
?
?

(11-15-2013 09:31 PM)Cardiff Wrote:  

(11-15-2013 08:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The eastern division of the MW under my scenario would be something like--

Rice
Texas St
UTSA
N Tx
New Mexico
Colorado St
Air Force
Wyoming

That's a pair of state flagships, and Academy, and a pretty solid G-5 school in Colorado St.

don't think it will happen

but if it did happen
utep would be shafted as hard as any
fbs-team has been shafted
since smu got the death penalty

c-usa western division:
utep
la. tech
southern miss
?
?
?
?

Wow. I didn't really think of that. UTEP would probably do whatever it had to in order to be included in the MW deal. If they weren't, they would be looking at a division like this

UTEP
LaTech
S Miss
NM St
ULaLa
LaMonroe
Arky St or a Texas move up like Sam Houston or Lamar.

(11-14-2013 06:11 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:44 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  If you're "disguised" suggestion in this thread is to imply that CUSA and Sun Belt > MWC, you are misguided. Check the stats of recruits from CA. Fresno State and Boise State do not build programs off The state of TX (I understand this is difficult for those living in TX to grasp). When the MWC decides it needs a school from TX, they could make that happen tomorrow.

True - Fresno is 80% CA, with the rest Arizona, the Pacific (Hawaii, Samoa) and a few scattered nation-wide

San Diego State is similar in build

Boise is built on Idaho/NW/Calif/AZ/NV kids.

Texas has 26 Million people, 12 FBS and 8 FCS programs
California has 38 million people, 7 FBS and 3 schollie FCS programs
Arizona has 6 million, 2 FBS, 1 FCS

It is a valid question whether the Mountain schools can thrive without being in Texas. The western schools in the MWC which are based in or near CA and play in CA every year do well with CA recruits. Not sure how many CA kids will want to play at 5000 ft. in the cold. It doesn't matter whether it is CState or Colorado they all seem to be struggling.

If Air Force ever left the MWC then the MWC could take UTEP, UTSA, and Rice to get to 14.

(11-15-2013 08:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  That was one of the reasons I was saying take 4. It would allow the 4 in Texas to maintain their appeal to Texas Bowls. The eastern division of the MW under my scenario would be something like--

Rice
Texas St
UTSA
N Tx
New Mexico
Colorado St
Air Force
Wyoming

That's a pair of state flagships, and Academy, and a pretty solid G-5 school in Colorado St. To play them, they trade games against UTEP, La Tech, and S Miss--no state flagships or academies there. There would also be crossovers with west division members Boise, Fresno, Utah St, SDSU, Nevada, UNLV, Hawaii, and San Jose. Other than Hawaii and UNLV, most of the crossover games are decent quality.

I think this conference is attractive, but it needs to include UTEP. Texas State can backfill C-USA with other Sunbelt programs.

It comes down to do UTEP, UTSA, N Texas, and Rice want to be in a division with New Mexico, Colorado St, Air Force, and Wyoming with West Coast inter divisional games v. being in a division w/ La Tech, S. Miss, and UAB with Mid Atlantic/FL inter divisional games.

If they move as a block and its not too costly exit fee wise, once the MWC contract is up for renewal it would really be something to consider. The divisions for a 16 team MWC w/ 4 in Texas work out perfectly.

Just one thought --- a 16 team Mountain West Conference, we've been here before. It just went by another name, a 16 team WAC, and that blew up pretty quickly.

UNM, AFA, Wyoming and Colorado State will probably be more open to this then they were in the late 1990s, considering there won't be annual games against BYU & Utah they will be losing. but I think history will be in the back of their mind and they would proceed with caution.

(11-16-2013 08:26 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  Just one thought --- a 16 team Mountain West Conference, we've been here before. It just went by another name, a 16 team WAC, and that blew up pretty quickly.

UNM, AFA, Wyoming and Colorado State will probably be more open to this then they were in the late 1990s, considering there won't be annual games against BYU & Utah they will be losing. but I think history will be in the back of their mind and they would proceed with caution.

As long as you keep Wyoming, Air Force, and Colorado State together in the same division you should be ok.

(11-14-2013 12:01 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  NM, CSU, and WY have a total of 4 Texas verbals, 3 of which were not offered by any Texas CUSA, AAC, or SBC school. This is down substantially from previous years. For example, Texas State Coach Franchione had huge success at New Mexico, mostly with his Texas recruits.

UNT in Dallas/Ft. Worth Metroplex and UTSA in the beautiful city of San Antonio and playing in the Alamodome, offer lots of positives and competition that CSU, WY, and NM didn't have to compete with previously. Throw in CUSA's good bowls and tv.

Texas State has a nice new stadium and offers nearby San Antonio and Austin amenities. Texas State has beaten Wyoming and Southern Miss this year, another positive to recruit to.

In addition, all three schools--UNT, UTSA, and Texas State--appear bowl bound, another positive for these three schools to attract Texas recruits.

The B12 and CUSA/West opened up Texas recruiting for both Oklahoma State and Tulsa, and both schools experienced a much higher level of success recruiting in the state of Texas. Arkansas, Colorado, and Nebraska have not enjoyed the previous level of Texas recruiting success since leaving the Big12.

I can't see any of the four leaving for the MWC. The C-USA Texas programs have much more in common with the teams in the South East. I see no advantage to conferencing with Wyoming, Air Force, Colorado State, or Boise. I'd much rather keep the core of C-USA West intact. North Texas, Rice, UTEP, LA Tech, Southern Miss, and UTSA make for a great schedule. We can always schedule those MWC teams for nonconference games.

As for Texas State, I'm sure they want into the MWC. When North Texas was in the Sun Belt we would have jumped at the chance too. The question is does the MWC want back into Texas bad enough to add Texas State. I don't think they are at that point. I think the MWC is happy with the structure they have right now.

(11-17-2013 07:05 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:01 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  NM, CSU, and WY have a total of 4 Texas verbals, 3 of which were not offered by any Texas CUSA, AAC, or SBC school. This is down substantially from previous years. For example, Texas State Coach Franchione had huge success at New Mexico, mostly with his Texas recruits.

UNT in Dallas/Ft. Worth Metroplex and UTSA in the beautiful city of San Antonio and playing in the Alamodome, offer lots of positives and competition that CSU, WY, and NM didn't have to compete with previously. Throw in CUSA's good bowls and tv.

Texas State has a nice new stadium and offers nearby San Antonio and Austin amenities. Texas State has beaten Wyoming and Southern Miss this year, another positive to recruit to.

In addition, all three schools--UNT, UTSA, and Texas State--appear bowl bound, another positive for these three schools to attract Texas recruits.

The B12 and CUSA/West opened up Texas recruiting for both Oklahoma State and Tulsa, and both schools experienced a much higher level of success recruiting in the state of Texas. Arkansas, Colorado, and Nebraska have not enjoyed the previous level of Texas recruiting success since leaving the Big12.

I can't see any of the four leaving for the MWC. The C-USA Texas programs have much more in common with the teams in the South East. I see no advantage to conferencing with Wyoming, Air Force, Colorado State, or Boise. I'd much rather keep the core of C-USA West intact. North Texas, Rice, UTEP, LA Tech, Southern Miss, and UTSA make for a great schedule. We can always schedule those MWC teams for nonconference games.

As for Texas State, I'm sure they want into the MWC. When North Texas was in the Sun Belt we would have jumped at the chance too. The question is does the MWC want back into Texas bad enough to add Texas State. I don't think they are at that point. I think the MWC is happy with the structure they have right now.

I am in total agreement with your post about CUSA/West Texas schools should stay put. And I am in total agreement with you regarding your observation that the MWC is happy with the structure they have now.

(11-16-2013 08:26 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  Just one thought --- a 16 team Mountain West Conference, we've been here before. It just went by another name, a 16 team WAC, and that blew up pretty quickly.

UNM, AFA, Wyoming and Colorado State will probably be more open to this then they were in the late 1990s, considering there won't be annual games against BYU & Utah they will be losing. but I think history will be in the back of their mind and they would proceed with caution.

That is why 14 would make more sensible.

Mountain: Utah St, Wyoming, Colorado St, Air Force, New Mexico St, UTEP, UTSA

West: Boise St, Nevada, San Diego St, Fresno St, UNLV, San Diego St, Hawaii

It gives the MW basically everyone out west not in the PAC and a better shot at landing the Sun Bowl as a place for its champion.

The long term goal of the MW is to become a contract league in 2020 when the Holiday Bowl comes online as a CFP game. CUSA has a backseat to the AAC in that regard so for UTEP/UTSA a move to the MWC is a step up.