From the article:

The 12-member Mountain West only has 11 basketball-playing members as Hawaii plays basketball in the Big West. Wichita State may value its basketball on a larger stage with momentum created by highly successful coach Gregg Marshall.

Through a spokesman, Bardo declined comment.

Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson said he did not have direct contact with Bardo or Wichita State officials. He added that if Wichita State plans to park its basketball program in a new conference, “It ain't going to be us.”

One source told CBS Sports that it's a simple case of economics. The league would be splitting its media rights revenue 12 ways instead of 11 in basketball if it added the Shockers.

One MWC source considered it unlikely that Mountain West's media rightsholders (ESPN, CBS Sports Network) would renegotiate their current contracts to include additional revenue for a 12th basketball school.

The Missouri Valley Conference is aware of Wichita State's desire for upward mobility. Marshall's success has helped brand the program and the MVC as high mid-major entities -- at least. The Shockers have advanced to a school-record five consecutive NCAA Tournaments, reaching the Final Four in 2013 and going 35-1 in 2013-14.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...k-football

4 WSU 2 start up a f-ball program cost will run around $50 million
Stadium renovations? Minimum $20-30 million

Plus what conference will want their f-ball program?
WSU would have 2 play as an independent

I predict cost, conference affiliation, future legal issues,
concussion concerns, & accessibility
will derail any hopes of WSU resurrecting
their f-ball program to D-1 level

IF MWC ever decides 2 add a b-ball school,
I'm sure they'll attempt 2 go after Gonzaga 1st
B4 ever considering WSU

I think the AAC would give WSU a strong look.TULSA and SMU(geography) along with divisional play make it doable.Mountain West seems to be their preference.C-USA an outside chance.

None of it happens w/o a conf. shakeup.

I've said it a million time that CUSA should be considering Wichita State as a way to jump start its basketball success.

Minimal FBS program in CUSA...no problem look at Charlotte.

AAC is and should expect more in FB.

I think Wichita State is bulking at the idea of an eastern exposure. There seems to be talent on the west coast that Wichita State wants to tap into which is why they want MWC.

The minimum requirement for MWC membership is to play football in the conference. This has been the case since the conference's inception. The MWC wouldn't compromise this principle for BYU so it's not surprising that it wouldn't consider doing so for Wichita State.

Wichita State can come to the American without football we have 11 members for basketball need one more. Also they have a good baseball program that will fit in the conference.

Football can be built in FCS for a few years then move up to independent for four years then join the conference. Join sooner if someone leaves.

(05-04-2016 07:27 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  Wichita State can come to the American without football we have 11 members for basketball need one more. Also they have a good baseball program that will fit in the conference.

Football can be built in FCS for a few years then move up to independent for four years then join the conference. Join sooner if someone leaves.

The original article says, regarding the Shockers in the MWC:

Quote: One source told CBS Sports that it's a simple case of economics. The league would be splitting its media rights revenue 12 ways instead of 11 in basketball if it added the Shockers.

One MWC source considered it unlikely that Mountain West's media rightsholders (ESPN, CBS Sports Network) would renegotiate their current contracts to include additional revenue for a 12th basketball school.

Why would either of those points be different for the AAC?

(05-04-2016 07:29 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 07:27 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  Wichita State can come to the American without football we have 11 members for basketball need one more. Also they have a good baseball program that will fit in the conference.

Football can be built in FCS for a few years then move up to independent for four years then join the conference. Join sooner if someone leaves.

The original article says, regarding the Shockers in the MWC:

Quote: One source told CBS Sports that it's a simple case of economics. The league would be splitting its media rights revenue 12 ways instead of 11 in basketball if it added the Shockers.

One MWC source considered it unlikely that Mountain West's media rightsholders (ESPN, CBS Sports Network) would renegotiate their current contracts to include additional revenue for a 12th basketball school.

Why would either of those points be different for the AAC?

Each team would give up minimal tv money for more ticket sales and possible ncaa credits

(05-04-2016 07:29 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 07:27 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  Wichita State can come to the American without football we have 11 members for basketball need one more. Also they have a good baseball program that will fit in the conference.

Football can be built in FCS for a few years then move up to independent for four years then join the conference. Join sooner if someone leaves.

The original article says, regarding the Shockers in the MWC:

Quote: One source told CBS Sports that it's a simple case of economics. The league would be splitting its media rights revenue 12 ways instead of 11 in basketball if it added the Shockers.

One MWC source considered it unlikely that Mountain West's media rightsholders (ESPN, CBS Sports Network) would renegotiate their current contracts to include additional revenue for a 12th basketball school.

Why would either of those points be different for the AAC?

Because a lot of AAC posters want the WS Shockers in the AAC for some reason....
Cheers!

(05-04-2016 07:29 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  [quote='Carolina_Low_Country' pid='13240759' dateline='1462364867']
The original article says, regarding the Shockers in the MWC:

Quote: One source told CBS Sports that it's a simple case of economics. The league would be splitting its media rights revenue 12 ways instead of 11 in basketball if it added the Shockers.

One MWC source considered it unlikely that Mountain West's media rightsholders (ESPN, CBS Sports Network) would renegotiate their current contracts to include additional revenue for a 12th basketball school.

Why would either of those points be different for the AAC?

It might be different for the American if we lose Cincy and UConn to the Big 12, two of our best basketball properties.

Well that counters the talk of some AAC people who said they would want to the in the AAC for their exposure.

(05-03-2016 10:46 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I've said it a million time that CUSA should be considering Wichita State as a way to jump start its basketball success.

Minimal FBS program in CUSA...no problem look at Charlotte.

AAC is and should expect more in FB.

The thing is that Wichita State is not going to start football in order to join C-USA. That's simply not a step up in basketball compared to MVC (and is an overall step down). It would be one thing if I really thought Wichita State wanted to start football because it really wants to play football, but I don't get that feeling. Instead, they seem to have come to the sober conclusion that there is absolutely no chance for them to get into a better basketball league as-is, which means that their only shot at a better league is to have FBS football. A better basketball league is the end goal for Wichita State, NOT adding football in and of itself.

As I've stated before, Wichita State is in a complete box and a classic "Think like a university president and not like a fan" case regarding conference realignment. Fans generally just see Wichita State's performance on-the-court and think that they're going to be attractive to a lot of conferences. The reality, though, is that they don't have any of the off-the-field attributes that any of the conferences that are a clear step up from the MVC (the P5 leagues, Big East, AAC, A-10, MWC and WCC) want from a school, whether it's institutional and academic profile for the Big East and WCC, geography and markets for the A-10, and many of the above plus the lack of a football program for the AAC and MWC.

As we see now with UMass, even a school that has a lot of the attributes that university presidents actually LOVE in conference realignment (e.g. flagship university with solid academics in a large population state with strong ties to large markets), the willingness to take a start-up FBS program is actually very low even for the Sun Belt, much less the MWC and AAC, no matter how good the basketball program might be. Wichita State is actually in a significantly worse position than UMass when it comes to the factors that have actually ended up mattering in conference realignment... and look at how UMass football is homeless right now.

On the flip side, note that UMass refused to join the MAC as an all-sports member because they couldn't stomach a basketball downgrade from the A-10. Much like Wichita State now, the UMass end game was really to add FBS football for the purpose of getting into then-Big East/now-AAC because it would be a boon for basketball, so when that didn't come to fruition, we now see UMass saddled with a nomad football program. Wichita State is looking pretty much the exact same way with respect to their desire to join the MWC, only that Wichita State offers a much worse market and doesn't carry the same academic reputation.

Once again, think like a university president and not like a fan. Always remember this rule as opposed to what might have happened in the NCAA Tournament or a bowl game last year. Why would Wichita State end up with better options than a large market flagship school like UMass by starting up FBS football?

With Koch(Koch Industries) and Carney(Pizza Hut Founders) money behind them, they should be able to get football restarted easily.

What's the more stable place, honestly? Who's looking to swipe MWC schools and who's itching to jump from the conference? Now, apply that to the AAC. THAT'S why WSU would want the MWC. Stability. They had it for so long in MVC, and now it's corroding.

And understand the basketball side of this from a school that might be unique in wanting the best move to defend its prominence. You can have a good program in the MWC and likely get bids for it. The AAC, except for this past season, has not gotten the bids. And that's not a bad hoops league at the top there. Yes, it's early. Yes, they were hosed, in theory. Schools still look and study this stuff, and that information is what it is.

AAC is probably close to losing at least Cincinnati and probably UConn somewhere down the line. Or Houston. It won't keep Navy's football forever, either. Those are HUGE hits for that conference, and it WILL propel the MWC straight to the undisputed top of the G5 pile. It is a far more top-heavy conference than the MWC.

Wichita fans want the AAC. Eastern exposure and schools in Texas. The MWC does offer much more stability but fans aren't as big on it because of late start times and less national exposure. And yes, we're looking to add football to help protect our basketball and get us into a stronger conference. But don't mistake that as we won't invest or care about football. If Bardo says we're bringing it back, it's going to be funded and we're going to do what we can to be good/respectable. We're not doing it just to field a team. But basketball is king in Wichita and the state of Kansas as a whole. Always has been, always will be.

Personally, the AAC is my first choice with the MWC being second. The MWC would be more attractive to myself and many other Wichita fans if they had a presence in Texas, but it is what it is. They would offer stability for us to grow in multiple sports. Football will be a process and you never know how long it'll take to get where you want to go, but money is not going to be an issue. Koch, Carney, Devlin and others are more than willing to invest in Wichita in both academics and athletics if they see the value it offers them and the city as a whole. Our study should be concluded in the next few weeks and we'll have a better picture of where we stand and the costs to get where we want to go.

As far as renovating Cessna Stadium, I'm sure we'll have to do some but I don't see it being the permanent home of the football program which will keep costs down if I'm correct. We have a lot of land on the east side of campus where our golf course used to be where we could build a new stadium when the time comes. I think Cessna will be a placeholder until then. But you could do worse than a 31k seat placeholder I suppose.

The MWC as expected is saying we need football. I think everybody and their dog knew that was the case to get into any conference. I feel good about the return of football on campus in the next few years and hope that it does help us get into a stronger conference.

(05-04-2016 10:08 AM)SubGod22 Wrote:  Wichita fans want the AAC. Eastern exposure and schools in Texas. The MWC does offer much more stability but fans aren't as big on it because of late start times and less national exposure. And yes, we're looking to add football to help protect our basketball and get us into a stronger conference. But don't mistake that as we won't invest or care about football. If Bardo says we're bringing it back, it's going to be funded and we're going to do what we can to be good/respectable. We're not doing it just to field a team. But basketball is king in Wichita and the state of Kansas as a whole. Always has been, always will be.

Personally, the AAC is my first choice with the MWC being second. The MWC would be more attractive to myself and many other Wichita fans if they had a presence in Texas, but it is what it is. They would offer stability for us to grow in multiple sports. Football will be a process and you never know how long it'll take to get where you want to go, but money is not going to be an issue. Koch, Carney, Devlin and others are more than willing to invest in Wichita in both academics and athletics if they see the value it offers them and the city as a whole. Our study should be concluded in the next few weeks and we'll have a better picture of where we stand and the costs to get where we want to go.

As far as renovating Cessna Stadium, I'm sure we'll have to do some but I don't see it being the permanent home of the football program which will keep costs down if I'm correct. We have a lot of land on the east side of campus where our golf course used to be where we could build a new stadium when the time comes. I think Cessna will be a placeholder until then. But you could do worse than a 31k seat placeholder I suppose.

The MWC as expected is saying we need football. I think everybody and their dog knew that was the case to get into any conference. I feel good about the return of football on campus in the next few years and hope that it does help us get into a stronger conference.

Oh, I understand. I just think that this is exactly what UMass thought when it started up FBS football, too. They were honestly thinking that "worst case scenario is that we end up in the Big East after a few years as a MAC football-only even though we really think the ACC will eventually want us" just as I see Wichita State fans now debating the merits of the AAC vs. MWC as if they have any choice in the matter or that either league wants them in the first place. What I think UMass underestimated was that it couldn't leverage its basketball fan base and revenue to get a better home for its startup FBS football program. In fact, the one common thread for the startup FBS football programs that *did* find homes relatively quickly over the past few years was that they were all located in fast-growing football recruiting hotbeds in Texas and the South. The FBS startups that found homes were truly PURE net football additions with nary a thought to anything else.

Plus, if the MWC wants to expand to where it ends up in the Central Time Zone, why would it choose Wichita State over, say, Rice and/or some other Texas schools that have already established themselves football-wise and are located in fast-growing markets with access to truckloads of football talent (which is a much more acute issue for the MWC since it doesn't really have any good recruiting territory outside of California)?

I'm not trying to be a downer, but I hope Wichita State fans don't get rosy tunnel vision into thinking that simply adding football means that the AAC or MWC is going quickly add them. Those leagues (or whatever their equivalent successors might be in the future) have a ton of other options with schools that have more established football programs, better institutional, academic and geographic fits, better access to football recruits and/or better TV markets. This is anything BUT a slam dunk for Wichita State because we can't even be sure that the Sun Belt would want a startup WSU FBS program, much less the AAC or MWC (and adding FBS football to simply go to the Sun Belt seems to defeat the purpose of Wichita State switching conferences). Wichita State is like someone looking for a job has a valuable skill on paper (great basketball program and fan base), but its overall profile (when looking at academics, geography, demographics, TV market, etc.) doesn't fit any of the employers (AKA conferences) looking for new workers. It might not be fair, but what they're selling simply isn't what the conferences want to buy when it comes to realignment.

I'll add a couple things to this.
The MW is more focused on football and if they wanted a team to boost the basketball, BYU would be back in the MW.
Also, the MW has several better options than WSU even if they started football. The better choices are UC-Davis (AAU school and good facilities. The stadium would need upgrades but the built it to expand to 30k) and Portland St. (very high research school, will have a good basketball facility and Providence Park is very suitable) in which both would bring some bigger markets to the MW.
Not to mention Texas State, North Texas and UTSA as options.
However, the MW hasn't taken in a FCS school before, but wonder if that will change down the road.

(05-04-2016 10:33 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  I'll add a couple things to this.
The MW is more focused on football and if they wanted a team to boost the basketball, BYU would be back in the MW.
Also, the MW has several better options than WSU even if they started football. The better choices are UC-Davis (AAU school and good facilities. The stadium would need upgrades but the built it to expand to 30k) and Portland St. (very high research school, will have a good basketball facility and Providence Park is very suitable) in which both would bring some bigger markets to the MW.

I don't think they even need to go for startups. The MWC could viably start going after the Texas-based schools in C-USA. SubGod22's issue about the MWC not having a presence in Texas unwittingly exposes yet another issue in thinking that Wichita State really has much of a chance of garnering membership: the MWC would likely rather address that lack of Texas presence first and foremost, anyway.

And look - I have no dog in this fight at all. I have no allegiances at all to any of the schools or conferences involved here. I'm just noting what I see based on years and years of dealing with realignment issues. Fans generally overrate the value of their own schools in the marketplace while underrating the inertia and off-the-field factors involved in realignment.

Honestly, if the MAC didn't do what it did to UMass, Wichita State might have followed that direction, placing hoops in the A10 and letting football run amok there, assuming MAC wanted them.