Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
MinerInWisconsin Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,685
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
Post: #41
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 10:51 AM)BlueRaiderBoy Wrote:  
(03-18-2015 10:32 AM)Art Vandelay Wrote:  
(03-18-2015 10:27 AM)BlueRaiderBoy Wrote:  
(03-18-2015 10:00 AM)WIowl Wrote:  
(03-18-2015 02:15 AM)SApuro Wrote:  UTSA turned down the MWC once and opted for a Texas friendly conference.

UTEP needs to do the same. Be grateful for having a quality conference to call home.

NMSU on the other hand is a year out from being thrown out by SBC so of course they are going to push new membership....anywhere.

Sorry, if UTEP moves, Rice needs to try and tag along. I still belive the Rice admin would rather return with our traditional rivals (SMU and Houston, and a fellow AAU school in Tulane), but if the AAC door is closed, we need to move to the MWC. CUSA is untentable for Rice in the long term (rivals, academics).

I can see the logic in UTEP moving to MWC if they were ever invited which they have not been. NMSU brings nothing to CUSA or MWC. However, as to RICE, neither SMU or Tulsa are going to the MWC from AAC so who are the ATHLETIC RIVALS for Rice in MWC? Wyoming? AND, other than the Air Force Academy, who is it exactly that you consider to be an ACADEMIC RIVAL in MWC? UNLV or Boise? 03-lmfao
Seriously, we're glad to have RICE (and other current members) in the same conference as MT.

WRONG!

UTEP has been invited twice, our AD rejected them both times because he thought Houston and SMU weren't going anywhere.

When exactly was UTEP extended a Formal Invitation to join MWC?
By the way, I hope UTEP stays in CUSA and come to the Boro so that we can pay you back for knocking us out of a Bowl Game last year. 05-mafia

I don't think formal invitations are ever given out without knowing in advance that the response will be acceptance. For UTEP the invitations (supposed because of the heavy rumoring) came during the alliance debacle. I'm pretty sure UTEP was convinced that the alliance would happen and they would have their dream conference without having to make a move. Having UTEP in the same conference as the other Texas schools and the MWC schools would have been ideal.
03-18-2015 11:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #42
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
Depends on what happens with Hawaii football. If they drop, watch for UTEP to go "home" to the MWC.
03-18-2015 11:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Artifice Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,063
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 165
I Root For: Beer
Location:
Post: #43
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
I can see this happening, especially if Hawaii drops football.

However, everytime I see something like this discussed, it reinforces my belief that the way to fix this mess is very simple, and should be embraced by every program.

128 FBS programs
Sixteen 8 team regional leagues.
Scheduling:7 division games / 5 intradivisional games

The 5 intra games are autonomous scheduling to preserve rivalries, big TV games, SOS, etc.

This would preserve the best aspects of the current system, while reducing travel costs, promoting regional rivalries, etc.

Will never happen. Far too simple and common sense oriented. I also suspect it would actually increase revenues across the country.
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2015 12:10 PM by Artifice.)
03-18-2015 12:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #44
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 11:18 AM)monarx Wrote:  All of this still points to the logic of all G5 conferences putting all members on the table and reshuffle geographically and from a rivalry perspective. That would barely affect the MAC but would be better for everyone else. Since that won't happen, I hope UTEP stays. If CUSA lost both UAB and UTEP it's basketball rep would suffer tremendously. Although I guess since we only had one bid this year, it wouldn't matter. I do believe that with UAB, Charlotte, LaTech, Old Dominion, UTEP, WKU, MTSU, So Miss in the fold we can definitely improve in basketball pedigree.

And if common sense ever prevailed, while its been done a hundred times, heres my suggestion:
North/Mid Atlantic: UConn, Temple, Navy, Umass, ECU, ODU, Marshall, Char., App St, WKU, MTSU, Cincy
Texas/Central: UTSA, Houston, Rice, SMU, Memphis, Tulane, Troy, Tulsa, So. Miss, La Tech, UTEP, FIU
SunBelt:La La, La Monroe, Tx State, N Texas, Ga St, Ga So, So. Fla, FAU, USA, Ark. St, UAB, UCF

The MWC and MAC stay the same. A couple dogs and a few gems in each. Everyone wins, nobody could complain about travel/rivalries. Regional TV would eat it up, and since we all recruit regionally anyway thats not such a bad thing.

There is no one with the clout, respect and influence to create an orderly redistribution.

What normally happens based on history is the big boys make moves, the smaller leagues react, then the smaller leagues look at what they have and someone says "I don't like it" and if enough others say it there is more shuffling. Either some swaps leagues or a group says the heck with it breaks.
03-18-2015 12:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ODUCoach Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,298
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 236
I Root For: ODU
Location: Hampton Boulevard
Post: #45
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
Jeff Darby doesn't think UTEP has enough outside game to compete in the MWC.
03-18-2015 01:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RougeDawg Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 659
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 67
I Root For: Louisiana Tech
Location: Walker, LA
Post: #46
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
What is that old saying about pastures and grass?

UTEP I kind of understand being that they are only about an hour farther away from Los Angeles than Houston. Sure wish they made that decision in 2004.
03-18-2015 01:31 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #47
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
UTEP and UTSA to the MWC

Rice and Texas State to the AAC

the idea of building a program for success because you play a bunch of close regional rivals is a failed one and that is for P5 and G5 conferences alike and through history it has failed every time it has been tried and still fails today period the end

the SWC failed completely because of this

name a time in history when all 4 or even 3 of the 4 California schools in the PAC 12 were all good in any sport at the same time....NEVER at best you will have two that are really good and or one that is great and one that is really good and two that are horrible

name a time when any of the 4 Texas teams in the Big 12 have all been good at the same time or even all 4 decent or even 3 of them decent at the same time....NEVER......again at best you have one or two that are really good or one that is great and one really good and the other two are horrible

name a time when 4 Texas teams in CUSA (when it was Rice, UH, SMU and UTEP or now with Rice, UTSA, UTEP and north Texas state)......NEVER.....in the G5 conferences usually you have ONE of the four that are really good or even near great and the others are bad to horrible

name a time when the Ohio schools in the MAC have all been good or even decent at the same time....NEVER.....again at best you usually have one that is good or really good and the rest are really bad to horrible

name a time when the 4 NC schools in the ACC have ever been good at the same time in anything.....NEVER.....again at best one is good to really good and one is decent and the other two are horrible

now reverse that....UTEP had their best years when they were outside of a conference with many Texas teams

TCU made their name by specifically moving AWAY from conferences that had all Texas teams.....and yes TCU is doing well in the Big 12, but Texas is also not very good at all, Texas Tech is horrible and only Baylor is also doing well....so again only 2 out of the 4 are good to decent.....and the first two years in the Big 12 for TCU admittedly they had some issued with 205 of the team getting the boot, but Texas still sucked, Texas Tech was only decent and Baylor was the only good team.....so again 2 out of the 4 were bad and one was just OK (Tech) and Baylor was getting traction and becoming good

when you cram yourself in with other similar programs and you offer nothing to differentiate yourself from other programs in your conference then you open up other teams especially outside your conference to offer that differentiation

and then ALL of those close members lose recruits to programs that offer something different....and at best two of the programs gain traction....they get the recruits looking to play for a winner and the other two programs get labeled as a perennial loser and the only thing they offer is the chance to play for a bad team VS a good team in the same conference and it becomes difficult for those programs to climb out of it

when you are bad on your own or with one other partner in your state in the same conference you offer the chance for a recruit to stay in state, but perhaps they have family in the west (or the east) or perhaps they want to see more of the west (or east) and they can choose your program based on your program/conference mates offering that VS your your program offering what three others offer only with losing

also conferences that are too closely aligned with a single area offer nothing to draw a diverse range of viewers.....no one cares if 8 Texas teams beat up on each other because few if any of those games have meaning to the conference and programs in their area

when 2 teams in Texas play each other and 2 teams in Ohio play each other and then all those teams play or play every few years....well what goes on with those teams in Texas matters to fans in Ohio because of conference standing....and those teams matter because if they are good that helps teams in Ohio look better or if your fellow Ohio conference beats one or both of those decent to good Texas teams then when you play your Ohio conference mate you are playing a better team and your won over them has more meaning

when 4 teams in Ohio beat each other up and 4 teams in Texas beat each other up......no one on Texas or Ohio cares about those other 4 teams because it is pretty much meaningless to anything that goes on in that conference as far as divisional standing or bowl game selection

if you go 2 in Texas and 2 in Ohio for each conference then it matters more....and not only that of some of those Ohio teams and some of those Texas teams play each other in the OOC then it still matters from a "how our conference looks against other conferences" stand point and from a "how good will teams we play in conference be when we play them" standpoint

this is the MAIN issue the Big 12 faces with 9 conference games and trying to get into the playoffs (it is NOT THE CCG OR LACK OF)......it is the Big 12 trying to gain "conference strength" through beating up on each other instead of beating up on other conferences.....this damages the Big 12 strength, weakens and lessens the opportunity for the Big 12 to damage other conference members and other conferences strength of schedule and it limits the chance for the Big 12 to play games that draw the viewership from outside the conference

when Clemson and SC play that matters to the SEC and ACC.....when Florida and Miami or Free Seafood play that matters to the SEC and ACC.....when Georgia and Georgia Tech play that matters to the SEC and ACC.....when Texas and OU play that matters to the Big 12 unless both are really good and are competing for a playoff spot

programs have a better chance in the long term to distance from more programs in their area and to expand their range and to offer something besides "we are the good team or we are the bad team in a bunch of similar programs in the same conference"

there is not one single example in the history of conferences when this has not been true at the P5 and G5 level and there are examples of programs that offered something different and that went away from regionalism that have had success and continue to have success
03-18-2015 01:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #48
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
Jeezus. Can you not get your point across in less words?
03-18-2015 02:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Afflicted Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,249
Joined: Sep 2009
I Root For: Rice and UH
Location:
Post: #49
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 09:08 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  
(03-18-2015 09:04 AM)ODUCoach Wrote:  
(03-18-2015 08:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Speaking only for myself, I would rather have UTEP in CUSA than the MWC. I see some kinship for UTEP with the MWC - at least UTEP is in the Mountain time zone. But I think an analysis of travel would show that UTEP is better off in CUSA. Trips to Houston, SA and Denton are better than trips to Boise et al, and the NM rivalries can be continued as OOC. At least the letters behind El Paso are T and X.

It's not the trips to Houston, SA, and Denton that are the issue. It's the trips to Bowling Green, Murfreesboro, Norfolk, Charlotte, Huntington.

Which is why 16 might be good for all of us. Get the divisions as tight as possible. Football travel means little since if 14 member then only 2 out of division games with only 1 on the road. Basketball is set with 2 games per trip. imho the other sports should be restricted to divisional play only until the post season.

I agree.
03-18-2015 02:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #50
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 02:00 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Jeezus. Can you not get your point across in less words?

take your A.D.D medication as prescribed.....

is that few enough
03-18-2015 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
papa_dawg Offline
Stirring Pots Since 1975
*

Posts: 1,578
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 138
I Root For: LA Tech
Location:
Post: #51
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 10:33 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  
(03-18-2015 07:27 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  If Uab does not bring FB back, UTEP moving could be good for CUSA. If it can bring TV in flat or slightly down, you could get more per school.

That makes no sense... What does UAB bring to the FB that UTEP needs?

It does make sense, he just didn't fully clarify what he meant.

If UAB doesn't bring back football and UTEP leaves it evens CUSA out at 12 teams. With upcoming TV negotiations, if we get the same (or even slightly less) money as we do now we will be making more money per school with the pot split at 12 instead of 14.
03-18-2015 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
pilot172000 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,626
Joined: Apr 2011
Reputation: 337
I Root For: Tech/ Bama
Location: North Louisiana
Post: #52
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
SWC failed because of the 80's. Not because of regional rivals. Arkansas leaving hurt the SWC terribly but it was the first true wave of conference expansion that caused its demise. Also we are talking about a much smaller scale of athletics as opposed to the SWC. You need regional rivals with a decent proximity for both recruiting and attendance. Take it from the Tech folks who played in the WAC for a dozen years.
03-18-2015 02:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
papa_dawg Offline
Stirring Pots Since 1975
*

Posts: 1,578
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 138
I Root For: LA Tech
Location:
Post: #53
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 02:00 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Jeezus. Can you not get your point across in less words?

+1

I count no punctuation in his ramblings, sans ellipses. What a disaster of a post.
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2015 02:24 PM by papa_dawg.)
03-18-2015 02:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
papa_dawg Offline
Stirring Pots Since 1975
*

Posts: 1,578
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 138
I Root For: LA Tech
Location:
Post: #54
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 12:09 PM)Artifice Wrote:  I can see this happening, especially if Hawaii drops football.

However, everytime I see something like this discussed, it reinforces my belief that the way to fix this mess is very simple, and should be embraced by every program.

128 FBS programs
Sixteen 8 team regional leagues.
Scheduling:7 division games / 5 intradivisional games

The 5 intra games are autonomous scheduling to preserve rivalries, big TV games, SOS, etc.

This would preserve the best aspects of the current system, while reducing travel costs, promoting regional rivalries, etc.

Will never happen. Far too simple and common sense oriented. I also suspect it would actually increase revenues across the country.

Get that English pyramid soccerball garbage outta here. 03-drunk
03-18-2015 02:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #55
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 12:56 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  
(03-18-2015 12:38 AM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  While the CUSA membership has changed, the geography not so much. Why would the geography of the MWC do UTEP more favors than the geography they have encountered since they came to CUSA? I always had the impression they couldn't wait to get into the more geographically diverse CUSA. I don't see how the MWC can offer UTEP better TV money for football and basketball at this time over CUSA, unless the tv deal looming for CUSA is going to be a real eye opener.

I like C-USA. I truly believe this conference (3.0) has more potential in basketball than 2.0 ever had where it was just Memphis and the 11 dwarfs. In football there's some upside but there's lots of work to do before we catch up to 1.0 and even 2.0. If UTEP decides to stay here, I'll be happy. If it's the MWC, I'll be happier.

With that said, Rice is the only school that UTEP has any history with and it just started less than 20 years ago in the WAC-16. The relationship with UAB, USM and Marshall is just 10 years old and UAB might be heading out of the door.

The MWC has UTEP's biggest rival: New Mexico. The UTEP-UNM basketball games were THE basketball rivalry in the old WAC. New Mexico lacks a true rival, they haven't had one since 1999, the last year both schools played in the same conference. It has schools UTEP has history with. They're mostly schools where they're the only show in town, not the 4th or 7th choice. They have their basketball tournament in Las Vegas. Who doesn't want to go to Vegas? These are some of the reasons why the MWC is an attractive option to a school like UTEP.

But I think nothing will happen. I don't think our AD would talk about this very openly if there was some interest from the MWC. He's just making it clear that if the MWC is interested in UTEP, the interest is mutual. That's it.

It seems to be the history of UTEP, caught between 2 worlds. But, as history has proven and will again, UTEP will choose the CUSA texas core over MW. Just like when they left the WAC and also when MW had to choose SJSU most likely due to UTEP not wanting to leave the Texas core.
03-18-2015 02:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TOPSTRAIGHT Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,783
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 451
I Root For: WKU
Location: Glasgow,KY.
Post: #56
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
A league of 12 each get a bigger piece of the income:


CFP $$
TV $$
NCAA Tourney $$
Any other misc. conf. distributions
Possible travel savings

Add it all up-it could be a significant amount.


Depends mostly on the new TV contract or how possible adds affect said contract.


Still doubt any openings in the MWC in the near future unless they go to 16(doubtful).
03-18-2015 02:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #57
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 02:18 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(03-18-2015 02:00 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Jeezus. Can you not get your point across in less words?

take your A.D.D medication as prescribed.....

is that few enough

Now, this ^^^ is a much more effective message board post. You could've used a question mark at the end but I'll let that slide.
03-18-2015 02:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #58
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 12:54 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  I would think UTEP would do better playing in San Antonio, Houston, and Dallas than New Mexico, Idaho, and Colorado. The package deal with NMSU is interesting. Makes me think UTEP wouldn't be opposed to NMSU in CUSA.

That could be. It may be the catalyst of having CUSA go to 16 teams or having NMSU filling out the west division as #14 and paired a travel partner with UTEP.

If the MW is in play regardless of Hawaii, that will shift BSU to the West division and would be met with gladness to be able to play Nevada, fresno and SDSU annually. The Mtn division would only have USU as an outlier but other than that the front range offer much tight travel the will make up for the revenue loss from the CFP and TV rev.

It would also bring more content to the MW digital network in which NMSU has a great setup already with their Aggie Vision.

Getting together to discuss as package for either conference looks like it'll benefit both schools.
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2015 03:02 PM by MWC Tex.)
03-18-2015 03:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #59
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
(03-18-2015 02:20 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  SWC failed because of the 80's. Not because of regional rivals. Arkansas leaving hurt the SWC terribly but it was the first true wave of conference expansion that caused its demise. Also we are talking about a much smaller scale of athletics as opposed to the SWC. You need regional rivals with a decent proximity for both recruiting and attendance. Take it from the Tech folks who played in the WAC for a dozen years.

what did "the 80s" have to do with anything that statement has no meaning

and the SWC failed because it was a conference with two powers Texas and A&M and occasionally UH or Tech having a decent season and Baylor, SMU, Rice and TCU all stuck completely sucking and having nothing to offer any recruit that the other 3 did not offer other than being bad in a different city

and the SWC failed because outside of Texas no one cared what happened in the SWC unless A&M or Texas were good and were in contention to play for a MNC or in a major bowl

again you can say that a new regional conference would be relevant, but there is only 100% of all established history to disprove that

would ECU, Wake, UNC, Duke, NCState and Appy State combined with GSU, GUSII, GaTech and Georgia be good.....no it would suck

Akron, Bowling Green, Toledo, Cincy, Kent, Miami (Oh), Toldeo, tOSU, KU, Louisville, WKU <<<<< SUCKS

Texas, A&M, Tech, SMU, UH, Rice, UTSA, Texas State, Baylor, TCU UTSA, north Texas state<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< SUCKS.....NO ONE CARES.....that is 3 good teams and 9 dwarfs all fighting to be not terrible or possible perhaps just decent for a few years

Cal, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Fresno, UCSD, SJSU, AU, ASU, UO, OsU, WSU, WU, Boise <<<<<< 3 or 4 good teams and a bunch of games no one wants to see or cares about and a bunch of programs moving from semi-relevance to irrelevance as they all lose any differentiation from one another

LSU, LaTech, ULM, Louisiana, Tulane, stAte, Arkansas USM, Ole' Miss, MSU, + two other warm bodies NO ONE CARES....that is 3 or 4 teams that would dominate and 8 or 9 teams that would wallow in misery.....and compare what LaTech did in the WAC to what ULM and Louisiana did in a "more regional conference"......compare where La Tech is now compared to ULM and Louisiana.....not a great deal better conference wise, but better than the Sunbelt and a bunch of D1-AA teams

UF, FSU, Miami, UCF, USF, FIU, FAU + a bunch of teams from NC....NO ONE CARES.....it would be 3 or 4 good teams and 8 or 9 teams always fighting to be the crab that climbs to the top of the pot and gets boiled last

Alabama, Auburn, Troy, UAB, USA, MSU, Ole' Miss, LSU, Tulane, ULM, Louisiana, LaTech, LSU, MSU.....where is the clicker so I can change the channel off this garbage......that is 3-4 teams rotating being good and really good and 10 or 11 trying to stay relevant and failing at it

all of those conference suck and all of those conferences completely and totally suck compared to the conferences that the top teams out of those conferences are in now.....and taking the top teams out of those conferences above and replacing them with more close in regional teams that would be at the bottom of the above conferences just makes them suck even more and it just makes them even less nationally relevant

what is a better conference Troy, USA, UAB, USM, Tulane, La Tech, Louisiana, stAte, north Texas state, Rice, UH, UTSA, Texas State, UTEP, SMU and Tulsa

or ECU, USF, UCF, USM, Tulane, UH, SMU, Tulsa, LaTech, Louisiana, Memphis, Cincy

which of the above two conferences offers the teams in that conference a chance to be different than the multitude of programs in most of those states that are similar......which of the above two conferences offers their members the chance to still play games in the OOC against regional teams, but to not hurt the strength of the conference overall when they win that game because the team that lost was also now in the same conference

which of the above two conferences offers their members the chance to go out and win over other regional teams in the OOC and then to bring that strength back to the conference

which of the above two conferences offers the chance for their conference members to play games that are relevant regionally in the OOC and that yet still matter to people outside of the region because their conference mates are spread much further across the country and one would assume the conference mates in other regions would want their conference mates to win in the OOC because that is better for the conference

when you get 4_ team in the same conference you get what I will call the "north Texas state effect" where one team and their fans sit around hoping that their 3 other conference mates in the same state all lose every game because they believe that makes them look "good"

if you have Tulane, ULM, Louisiana, and LaTech all in the same conference then the same thing happens....fans openly cheer for their conference mates to totally suck because that is the only way they feel they can offer something to recruits....and often the result is that all those programs suck and recruits go elsewhere....like to programs outside the conference and then the conference sucks

there has never been any evidence to support otherwise period and there never will be period
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2015 03:14 PM by TodgeRodge.)
03-18-2015 03:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RougeDawg Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 659
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 67
I Root For: Louisiana Tech
Location: Walker, LA
Post: #60
RE: UTEP AD Bob Stull talks about possible MWC membership
This guy types fast.
03-18-2015 03:14 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.