(09-30-2014 01:32 PM)goofus Wrote:  Hmmm, maybe MWC, AAC, MAC, and Sunbelt should team up and each take 4 teams and let C-USA fold.

MWC takes BYU, UTEP, UTSA, UNT
AAC takes Rice, southern miss, Old dominion, Arky State
MAC takes Marshall, UMass, Army, Idaho
SBC takes everybody else

eh, on second thought....

If you're going for a G4:

MWC - add BYU, UTEP, NMSU, Idaho
AAC - add UMass, UTSA, La Tech, ODU
MAC - add Army, Marshall, WKU, MTSU
SBC - add Rice, UNT, USM, FAU, FIU, Charlotte, UAB

(09-30-2014 02:11 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 12:46 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Regarding any Texas school considering MWC, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

yea it worked out horribly for TCU

I think TCU would have followed its 2005-2010 trajectory even if it had remained in C-USA. But that's un-proveable, so I'll leave it to the side. The fact still remains that from 2005-2010, the MWC had BYU/Utah/TCU as members. The MWC of 2014… not so much. No program located in the Central Time Zone is going to willingly place itself into the MWC as presently constituted.

(09-30-2014 07:13 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 10:16 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  I'm waiting for the Dude of WV to confirm.

His mom has grounded him, and taken away his computer until he cleans up his room.

Honest question: does "the Dude" even still have a blog anymore? Does he still pretend to be some sort of "expert" about conference-realignment issues?

(09-30-2014 07:34 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  BYU will never go back to the MWC. End of story.

This.

I know people say weird sh*t online, but it is truly baffling why that subject (BYU-returns-to-MWC) keeps coming up. There's a better chance that BYU joins the SEC.

Quote:Best guess: we're all going to be where we are for a while to come UNLESS the ACC acts first and grabs UConn or Cincinnati. Then all bets are off.

I mostly agree, although I think the Big <XII might get the ball rolling, too.

(09-30-2014 08:40 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  So we're following a thread from 2013?

Sure, rub it in.

I don't know why MW would want UTSA, being crowded out in the great state of Texas. Rice? OK -- super-high-academic program and can have a competitive football team once every few years. OK.

But CUSA is basically now a jived-up-Sun-Belt, as the AAC took the best (and left Marshall to prove themselves).

I could see MW taking Rice. But Texas State or UTSA? Unless their stadiums/fan-base are going big -- WHY?

(10-01-2014 12:04 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 07:13 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 10:16 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  I'm waiting for the Dude of WV to confirm.

His mom has grounded him, and taken away his computer until he cleans up his room.

Honest question: does "the Dude" even still have a blog anymore? Does he still pretend to be some sort of "expert" about conference-realignment issues?

You can read all about the latest news from his "insiders"^ on his Twitter.

^insiders=the voices inside his head

(09-30-2014 07:36 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 02:38 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 11:12 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Theoretically, having access to both TX and CAL for recruiting and TV would be a big boon for the MWC.

If they went to 16 (yes I know about the WAC but this is just a thought experiment) They could break into pretty perfect pods:

Pacific Ocean

Hawaii
Fresno
San Jose
San Diego

Great Basin
Boise
Utah State
Nevada
UNLV

Front Range

New Mexico
Air Force
Wyoming
Colorado State

Lone Star

North Texas
Rice
UTEP
UTSA

Now about those choices: Two of them are in good sized markets with much less P5 influence (San Antonio and El Paso) and two are recruiting trips in Dallas and Houston area, two of the most fertile in the country. TXST was a consideration but they will always suffer the same problem as Eastern Michigan: located in a small town way too close to one of the biggest and most popular powers in the state so ultimately they don't add much for recruiting or TV (and before any bobcats complain, it's all about how things look on paper and not a reflection of your actual FB program)

It would probably be better to do 8 team divisions.
West Division
Hawaii
Fresno
San Jose
San Diego
Boise
Utah State
Nevada
UNLV

Mtn Division
New Mexico
Air Force
Wyoming
Colorado State
North Texas
Rice
UTEP
UTSA

It would setup a nice divide especially where the each division mostly recruits. Kinda like 2 regional conferences within one and where the MW has a TV platform and the MW Digital Network running and improving, it could be a revenue boon on the digital network side which could make up the dilution of the $12 million max payment for each conference.
BSU and FSU would have the familar teams fans want to see, same goes for CSU and Wyoming.
The CCG would be very interesting, it would rarely have 2 teams that played each other during the regular season.

However, I don't see it happening but I can see 14 (with NMSU and TX St) added before that scenario.

In all honesty, that's a good-looking lineup.

I like it too, but realistically I see no chance of the MWC expanding unless one of the additions is BYU. And the odds of the Cougars returning are close to nil.

(09-30-2014 02:33 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Rice an UTSA would be good gets for the MWC but count me among those surprised if the MWC pushed beyond 12 anytime soon.

The BYU-Rice combo to get the Cougars to return to the MWC sounds more appealing.

Mountain Div: BYU, Utah St, Wyoming, Colorado St, Air Force, New Mexico, Rice
West Div: Boise St, Nevada, UNLV, San Jose St, Fresno St, San Diego St, Hawaii

It makes the divisions more regional for everyone involved. Rice would get a division with Air Force and BYU and that is better than anything CUSA could possibly offer from an academic standpoint.

Rice won't go if the Owls are the only central time zone team in a western based conference.

It's the Texas package of UTEP, UTSA, North Texas and Rice, or bust.

Well, this is fun. One year old thread with many of the latest posts still dissing C-USA despite the fact that C-USA is doing much better than most here thought they would. C-USA also has a high ceiling in the future with UAB, UTEP and FIU getting actual pulses and new programs with lots of potential actually demonstrating that.

With that in mind I'll switch this around. Instead of the MWC poaching C-USA, a division between eastern and western MWC schools, partially due to the strange tv contract, will lead Wyoming, CSU, AFA and UNM to join C-USA in a couple of years. Probably when C-USA is finishing its media negotiations and the MWC front range schools see a better deal for them is available plus more eastern leaning exposure.

C-USA east:

Marshall
ODU
Charlotte
MTU
WKU
UAB
FIU
FAU
USM

C-USA west:

UTEP
UNT
Rice
UTSA
LTU
Wyoming
CSU
AFA
UNM

(10-01-2014 07:53 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  a division between eastern and western MWC schools, partially due to the strange tv contract, will lead Wyoming, CSU, AFA and UNM to join C-USA in a couple of years. Probably when C-USA is finishing its media negotiations and the MWC front range schools see a better deal for them is available plus more eastern leaning exposure.

I see how the Front Range programs would benefit from that, but would C-USA (other than UTEP) really be any better off?

(09-30-2014 08:38 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  LOL at Houston to the MWC. There's a reason Houston went east to C-USA once the SWC fell apart and stayed put in the 2003 realignment carosel. Now, especially without programs like TCU, BYU and Utah what exactly is the incentive? Basketball maybe but that is an even trade at worst.

Let's also not forget that UTSA turned down the MWC for C-USA or so I heard.

Yes, I believe UTSA did 'turn down' the MW when CUSA came knocking. But only because they want to be with regional Texas teams to develop there program.
The MW would also have 15 member olympic members. That would be interesting for basketball as then perhaps the MW would lower the conference games to 14 so each school plays each other once. Would be harder to schedule more OOC games....well getting OOC games from the major conferences. The lower conferences will jump at the opportunity to play against the MW teams.

Anyway, the MW isn't in any hurry to move past 12 teams and most likely won't unless a TV network says expand and we'll give quite a bit more than what your are getting now.

(10-01-2014 01:35 AM)toddjnsn Wrote:  I don't know why MW would want UTSA, being crowded out in the great state of Texas. Rice? OK -- super-high-academic program and can have a competitive football team once every few years. OK.

But CUSA is basically now a jived-up-Sun-Belt, as the AAC took the best (and left Marshall to prove themselves).

I could see MW taking Rice. But Texas State or UTSA? Unless their stadiums/fan-base are going big -- WHY?

I'm not saying either would leave their current conferences unless the situation was right, but the reasons that the MWC might be interested in TXST or UTSA are as as follows--

1. Both UTSA and TXST are large public institutions (35,000+ students) in a fast growing part of the state.

2. Both located in the heart of Texas for recruiting. UTSA is in San Antonio. Texas State is 40 minutes from San Antonio and in the Austin metro area. Both are 2.5 hours from Houston, 3.5 hours from Dallas. Front Range schools used to recruit Texas when TCU was there, I am not sure how well they do now.

3. Money. Both schools have adopted $20/Credit Hour Athletic fees to help with their athletic programs. They also get MWC advertising back into Texas and reopen that market to the league

4. Good facilities and tourist destination. UTSA is a tourist city and games are played in the 65,000 person Alamodome, baseball has access to the AA park in town. TXST recently renovated all of their athletic facilities. -- Both locations are good roadtrip destinations.


Attendance is hard to say. Texas State is currently averaging ~24,900 and will likely finish out somewhere around 21,000 when it is said and done. UTSA is averaging 33472 and will finish around 29,000 when its done.
Neither are outstanding on P5 standards (or even top level G5 standards) but when compared to the MWC lineup that puts them ahead UNLV, SJSU, UNM, Nevada, USU.

(10-01-2014 09:24 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Anyway, the MW isn't in any hurry to move past 12 teams and most likely won't unless a TV network says expand and we'll give quite a bit more than what your are getting now.

This.

(10-01-2014 01:35 AM)toddjnsn Wrote:  I don't know why MW would want UTSA, being crowded out in the great state of Texas… I could see MW taking Rice. But Texas State or UTSA? Unless their stadiums/fan-base are going big -- WHY?

TXST and UTSA are obviously new to the FBS-game, but I think they both have a huge upside. And I suspect that somewhere down the road they will be conference-mates, one way or the other.

(10-02-2014 04:29 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-01-2014 01:35 AM)toddjnsn Wrote:  I don't know why MW would want UTSA, being crowded out in the great state of Texas… I could see MW taking Rice. But Texas State or UTSA? Unless their stadiums/fan-base are going big -- WHY?

TXST and UTSA are obviously new to the FBS-game, but I think they both have a huge upside. And I suspect that somewhere down the road they will be conference-mates, one way or the other.

Hopefully so. Its good they signed an 8 game series with each other.