I can see members of the current G5 conferences being unhappy with what they ended up with .

I could see the Texas schools joining up with either top Western or Eastern schools . Every current conference has some schools considered weak links. Poor markets or not competitive the only way to change it is a new conference .

UTEP, SMU, HOUSTON and Rice could even be split two East two West.

East -UCF, USF, UC and UCONN

West- Fresno, SDSU, CSU and UNLV

Fourteen may even work better for travel.
The Texas schools could have guaranteed cross over match ups.
Two Texas schools get California exposure the other two Florida .

Texas would be the bridge with divisions its like two conferences anyway .
Bowls being mainly in Florida, Texas and California would help this conference. I know it's like a best of the rest conference splitting the Texas teams makes it work. The four East or four west could be different.

(12-24-2013 06:29 PM)MJG Wrote:  I can see members of the current G5 conferences being unhappy with what they ended up with .

I could see the Texas schools joining up with either top Western or Eastern schools . Every current conference has some schools considered weak links. Poor markets or not competitive the only way to change it is a new conference .

UTEP, SMU, HOUSTON and Rice could even be split two East two West.

East -UCF, USF, UC and UCONN

West- Fresno, SDSU, CSU and UNLV

Fourteen may even work better for travel.
The Texas schools could have guaranteed cross over match ups.
Two Texas schools get California exposure the other two Florida .

Texas would be the bridge with divisions its like two conferences anyway .
Bowls being mainly in Florida, Texas and California would help this conference. I know it's like a best of the rest conference splitting the Texas teams makes it work. The four East or four west could be different.

You probably have to go with 6 in Texas and split them 3 each way--otherwise it's just not worth all that travel for the Texas schools. With 6--at least each Texas school gets 2 travel games in state--with 4 to 5 out of state members in eac division.

The other option is a Texas based conference with some surrounding membership. Could go east, west, or both. A few examples are below. Other than the national conference--the rest are just low travel regionals designed to limit costs.


Nationwide

West--UTEP, UTSA, Tx St, New Mexico, UNLV, SDSU, Boise, Fresno
East--Houston, SMU, ECU, UCF, USF, Memphis, Cinci, UConn

Tight Regional Eastern Version

North--SMU, N Tx, Tx St, Tulsa, Arky St, Memphis
South--Hou, Rice, UTSA, Tulane, ULaLa, LaTech

Tight Regional Western Version

West--Colorado St, NewMex, UTEP, UTSA, Tx St, Air Force
East--SMU, Rice, Houston, NTx, ArkySt, Tulane

Tight Regional Center

West--UTEP, New Mexico, Colorado St, UTEP, UTSA, Air Force (or Tulsa).
East--Tx St, SMU, Rice, Houston, Tulane, ArkySt

Take the 16 top G5 schools and form 4 pods...That would keep those 16 schools in the conversation.

(12-24-2013 06:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 06:29 PM)MJG Wrote:  I can see members of the current G5 conferences being unhappy with what they ended up with .

I could see the Texas schools joining up with either top Western or Eastern schools . Every current conference has some schools considered weak links. Poor markets or not competitive the only way to change it is a new conference .

UTEP, SMU, HOUSTON and Rice could even be split two East two West.

East -UCF, USF, UC and UCONN

West- Fresno, SDSU, CSU and UNLV

Fourteen may even work better for travel.
The Texas schools could have guaranteed cross over match ups.
Two Texas schools get California exposure the other two Florida .

Texas would be the bridge with divisions its like two conferences anyway .
Bowls being mainly in Florida, Texas and California would help this conference. I know it's like a best of the rest conference splitting the Texas teams makes it work. The four East or four west could be different.

You probably have to go with 6 in Texas and split them 3 each way--otherwise it's just not worth all that travel for the Texas schools. With 6--at least each Texas school gets 2 travel games in state--with 4 to 5 out of state members in eac division.

The other option is a Texas based conference with some surrounding membership. Could go east, west, or both. A few examples are below. Other than the national conference--the rest are just low travel regionals designed to limit costs.


Nationwide

West--UTEP, UTSA, Tx St, New Mexico, UNLV, SDSU, Boise, Fresno
East--Houston, SMU, ECU, UCF, USF, Memphis, Cinci, UConn

Tight Regional Eastern Version

North--SMU, N Tx, Tx St, Tulsa, Arky St, Memphis
South--Hou, Rice, UTSA, Tulane, ULaLa, LaTech

Tight Regional Western Version

West--Colorado St, NewMex, UTEP, UTSA, Tx St, Air Force
East--SMU, Rice, Houston, NTx, ArkySt, Tulane

Tight Regional Center

West--UTEP, New Mexico, Colorado St, UTEP, UTSA, Air Force (or Tulsa).
East--Tx St, SMU, Rice, Houston, Tulane, ArkySt

I like the nationwide conference you have . Just not enough decent teams in Esdt or West splitting Texas makes it work.

None of these fantasy conferences offer a sufficient competitive or financial advantage to induce any MWC or AAC school to leave their current situation. Major realignment is over for a while. All that's left to be settled is whether the P5 conferences get their way on the stipend issue. I predict they will, and that the MWC and AAC and some of the top basketball conferences like the Big East will ante up to match whatever level of athlete benefits the P5 pay out.

You are probably right but this is the realignment board .
the advantage would be leaving the Tulane and Wyoming type programs behind.
Texas, Florida and California is the markets and there is not enough good programs in the East or West . Texas can go either way but using it as a base makes it all work.


I guess its as likely as Utah joining PAC or Rutgers joining the B1G .
How many surprising moves have already happened.

(12-24-2013 10:09 PM)MJG Wrote:  I guess its as likely as Utah joining PAC or Rutgers joining the B1G .
How many surprising moves have already happened.

Utah and its research base was not a surprise to join the PAC for anyone paying attention

It is also obvious there is no TV money to pay for a Nationwide non P5 conference. I think someone already tried that one and failed

(12-24-2013 06:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  You probably have to go with 6 in Texas and split them 3 each way--otherwise it's just not worth all that travel for the Texas schools. With 6--at least each Texas school gets 2 travel games in state--with 4 to 5 out of state members in eac division.

The other option is a Texas based conference with some surrounding membership. Could go east, west, or both. A few examples are below. Other than the national conference--the rest are just low travel regionals designed to limit costs.


Nationwide

West--UTEP, UTSA, Tx St, New Mexico, UNLV, SDSU, Boise, Fresno
East--Houston, SMU, ECU, UCF, USF, Memphis, Cinci, UConn

Tight Regional Eastern Version

North--SMU, N Tx, Tx St, Tulsa, Arky St, Memphis
South--Hou, Rice, UTSA, Tulane, ULaLa, LaTech

Tight Regional Western Version

West--Colorado St, NewMex, UTEP, UTSA, Tx St, Air Force
East--SMU, Rice, Houston, NTx, ArkySt, Tulane

Tight Regional Center

West--UTEP, New Mexico, Colorado St, UTEP, UTSA, Air Force (or Tulsa).
East--Tx St, SMU, Rice, Houston, Tulane, ArkySt

How about for the Tight Regional Eastern Version:
West - Houston, Rice, SMU, UTSA, Texas State, Tulsa
East - Tulane, ULL, La Tech, Arkansas State, Memphis, USM

Keeps all of the Texas schools in one division and replaces UNT with USM. I would love that baseball league.

(12-24-2013 10:26 PM)billings Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 10:09 PM)MJG Wrote:  I guess its as likely as Utah joining PAC or Rutgers joining the B1G .
How many surprising moves have already happened.

Utah and its research base was not a surprise to join the PAC for anyone paying attention

It is also obvious there is no TV money to pay for a Nationwide non P5 conference. I think someone already tried that one and failed

Nope. Nobody has tried it as an all sports conference. The thing is, I think at first a national all-sports G5 conference probably would NOT pay much more than a regional G5. However, I think that the single unique coast to coast G5 conference offering a NATIONAL footprint for NATIONAL sports networks makes sense and would quickly pull away from the other G5 in media earnings. It would become the most well known G5 conference with the largest fan base of all the G5.

As I see it, a bunch of 2nd and 5th bananas concentrated In a small regional market have little intrinsic value to a NATIONAL broadcaster. However, a nationwide conference could make games going on in California relevant for G5 fans in Florida, Texas, or Ohio. Since a national sports network is broadcasting in California as well as Ohio, Texas, and Florida (and everywhere else as well), then all these small 3rd and 4th banana audiences across the nation can add up to an audience approaching a P5 conference value. Of course, a nationwide G5 conference would require more members and the contract would be split more ways--but your talking about a group of G5 teams potentially earning 10 million a team.

If you can get pod play legalized as a replacement for divisional play--you can construct a conference that has 20-24 teams. That's 24 g5 fan bases that have a potential interest in every conference game broadcast by a national sports network. The big plus with pod play is it would mimic the cost of a much more regional league while offering the advantages of the nationwide G5 super conference. Frankly, I think this is the only future option that would allow some G5 schools to survive in the top level of college football. Otherwise, these low income G5 regional legues will simply see the G5-P5 income gap grow to a point that an inevitable split becomes reality.

The G5 regional league models have been a massive failure at creating G5 value and earnings. The G5 will have to at least try something different because the "more of the same" strategy has resulted in a steadily widening income gap that's getting worse. Even worse, the rate of change is accelerating with each renegotiation cycle. If the G5 continue to utilize the same tired failed regional model, the G5 will be demoted to a separate FCS style division within another contract cycle or two. The difference in financial means is simply not sustainable within a single division at this rate of change.

(12-25-2013 02:53 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 06:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  You probably have to go with 6 in Texas and split them 3 each way--otherwise it's just not worth all that travel for the Texas schools. With 6--at least each Texas school gets 2 travel games in state--with 4 to 5 out of state members in eac division.

The other option is a Texas based conference with some surrounding membership. Could go east, west, or both. A few examples are below. Other than the national conference--the rest are just low travel regionals designed to limit costs.


Nationwide

West--UTEP, UTSA, Tx St, New Mexico, UNLV, SDSU, Boise, Fresno
East--Houston, SMU, ECU, UCF, USF, Memphis, Cinci, UConn

Tight Regional Eastern Version

North--SMU, N Tx, Tx St, Tulsa, Arky St, Memphis
South--Hou, Rice, UTSA, Tulane, ULaLa, LaTech

Tight Regional Western Version

West--Colorado St, NewMex, UTEP, UTSA, Tx St, Air Force
East--SMU, Rice, Houston, NTx, ArkySt, Tulane

Tight Regional Center

West--UTEP, New Mexico, Colorado St, UTEP, UTSA, Air Force (or Tulsa).
East--Tx St, SMU, Rice, Houston, Tulane, ArkySt

How about for the Tight Regional Eastern Version:
West - Houston, Rice, SMU, UTSA, Texas State, Tulsa
East - Tulane, ULL, La Tech, Arkansas State, Memphis, USM

Keeps all of the Texas schools in one division and replaces UNT with USM. I would love that baseball league.

The problem with that idea is no one would ever agree to it. Lol

BYU
Boise State
UNLV
SDSU
New Mexico
Colorado State
Air Force (Football Only)


Cincinnati
Memphis
USF
UCF
Houston
SMU
Navy (Football Only)

Southern Tier Conference East and West Divisions
Cincinnati
Memphis
Houston
SMU
UCF
USF
USM

SDSU
Fresno state
New Mexico
UNLV
Tulsa
UTEP
Nevada

I am still confused why this thread is titled New Western Conference, even the OP talked about a national conference, not a western conference.

Unless its the Western Hemisphere conference:

(12-25-2013 06:03 PM)goofus Wrote:  I am still confused why this thread is titled New Western Conference, even the OP talked about a national conference, not a western conference.

Unless its the Western Hemisphere conference:

West of the Appalachian Mountains ~ just like the failed expansion of the Old Big East was going to be the Big East of Reno.

(12-25-2013 06:31 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 06:03 PM)goofus Wrote:  I am still confused why this thread is titled New Western Conference, even the OP talked about a national conference, not a western conference.

Unless its the Western Hemisphere conference:

West of the Appalachian Mountains ~ just like the failed expansion of the Old Big East was going to be the Big East of Reno.

I did screw that up should be Texas centered National conference.

(12-24-2013 06:46 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Take the 16 top G5 schools and form 4 pods...That would keep those 16 schools in the conversation.

No it won't.

(12-24-2013 06:29 PM)MJG Wrote:  I can see members of the current G5 conferences being unhappy with what they ended up with .

I could see the Texas schools joining up with either top Western or Eastern schools . Every current conference has some schools considered weak links. Poor markets or not competitive the only way to change it is a new conference .

UTEP, SMU, HOUSTON and Rice could even be split two East two West.

East -UCF, USF, UC and UCONN

West- Fresno, SDSU, CSU and UNLV

Fourteen may even work better for travel.
The Texas schools could have guaranteed cross over match ups.
Two Texas schools get California exposure the other two Florida .

Texas would be the bridge with divisions its like two conferences anyway .
Bowls being mainly in Florida, Texas and California would help this conference. I know it's like a best of the rest conference splitting the Texas teams makes it work. The four East or four west could be different.

When the C7 left the conference with our identity (the Big East name), Houston and SMU should have went to the MWC in my opinion. In fact, the MWC should have also considered adding two more Texas schools since the market is so huge and dominated by UT and A&M…..

(12-27-2013 12:55 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 06:29 PM)MJG Wrote:  I can see members of the current G5 conferences being unhappy with what they ended up with .

I could see the Texas schools joining up with either top Western or Eastern schools . Every current conference has some schools considered weak links. Poor markets or not competitive the only way to change it is a new conference .

UTEP, SMU, HOUSTON and Rice could even be split two East two West.

East -UCF, USF, UC and UCONN

West- Fresno, SDSU, CSU and UNLV

Fourteen may even work better for travel.
The Texas schools could have guaranteed cross over match ups.
Two Texas schools get California exposure the other two Florida .

Texas would be the bridge with divisions its like two conferences anyway .
Bowls being mainly in Florida, Texas and California would help this conference. I know it's like a best of the rest conference splitting the Texas teams makes it work. The four East or four west could be different.

When the C7 left the conference with our identity (the Big East name), Houston and SMU should have went to the MWC in my opinion. In fact, the MWC should have also considered adding two more Texas schools since the market is so huge and dominated by UT and A&M…..

If BYU ever rejoined the MW, I could see 3 Texas teams (SMU, Houston, and one other) as part of last additions to the MW. Going to the MW with 3 other Texas schools is not an unattractive option. If the AAC was raided of several key members--it might in fact become the best option for Houston and SMU.

(12-27-2013 12:58 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 12:55 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 06:29 PM)MJG Wrote:  I can see members of the current G5 conferences being unhappy with what they ended up with .

I could see the Texas schools joining up with either top Western or Eastern schools . Every current conference has some schools considered weak links. Poor markets or not competitive the only way to change it is a new conference .

UTEP, SMU, HOUSTON and Rice could even be split two East two West.

East -UCF, USF, UC and UCONN

West- Fresno, SDSU, CSU and UNLV

Fourteen may even work better for travel.
The Texas schools could have guaranteed cross over match ups.
Two Texas schools get California exposure the other two Florida .

Texas would be the bridge with divisions its like two conferences anyway .
Bowls being mainly in Florida, Texas and California would help this conference. I know it's like a best of the rest conference splitting the Texas teams makes it work. The four East or four west could be different.

When the C7 left the conference with our identity (the Big East name), Houston and SMU should have went to the MWC in my opinion. In fact, the MWC should have also considered adding two more Texas schools since the market is so huge and dominated by UT and A&M…..

If BYU ever rejoined the MW, I could see 3 Texas teams (SMU, Houston, and one other) as part of last additions to the MW. Going to the MW with 3 other Texas schools is not an unattractive option. If the AAC was raided of several key members--it might in fact become the best option for Houston and SMU.

With the season Houston had this year, I think it would have went undefeated in the MWC. However, I agree that BYU is a better addition than four Texas schools. Nevertheless, BYU would join the B12 before becoming mid-major material and be seen as beneath Utah. Consequently, adding four Texas schools in a market dominated by UT and A&M is the only realistic expansion option the MWC has in my opinion.

(12-27-2013 01:16 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 12:58 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 12:55 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 06:29 PM)MJG Wrote:  I can see members of the current G5 conferences being unhappy with what they ended up with .

I could see the Texas schools joining up with either top Western or Eastern schools . Every current conference has some schools considered weak links. Poor markets or not competitive the only way to change it is a new conference .

UTEP, SMU, HOUSTON and Rice could even be split two East two West.

East -UCF, USF, UC and UCONN

West- Fresno, SDSU, CSU and UNLV

Fourteen may even work better for travel.
The Texas schools could have guaranteed cross over match ups.
Two Texas schools get California exposure the other two Florida .

Texas would be the bridge with divisions its like two conferences anyway .
Bowls being mainly in Florida, Texas and California would help this conference. I know it's like a best of the rest conference splitting the Texas teams makes it work. The four East or four west could be different.

When the C7 left the conference with our identity (the Big East name), Houston and SMU should have went to the MWC in my opinion. In fact, the MWC should have also considered adding two more Texas schools since the market is so huge and dominated by UT and A&M…..

If BYU ever rejoined the MW, I could see 3 Texas teams (SMU, Houston, and one other) as part of last additions to the MW. Going to the MW with 3 other Texas schools is not an unattractive option. If the AAC was raided of several key members--it might in fact become the best option for Houston and SMU.

With the season Houston had this year, I think it would have went undefeated in the MWC. However, I agree that BYU is a better addition than four Texas schools. Nevertheless, BYU would join the B12 before becoming mid-major material and be seen as beneath Utah. Consequently, adding four Texas schools in a market dominated by UT and A&M is the only realistic expansion option the MWC has in my opinion.

I dont think Houston or SMU would go that route unless the AAC lost several key members to the P5. At that point a foursome of Texas teams being added to the MW might be the best option available.