Why aren't UTEP and New Mexico St. in the MWC? Geographic sense... In state rivalry... Those two are next door neighbors though in different states... Occasionally good teams.

Then that would throw some more craziness into expansion.

A New Mexico St add would kill any WAC talk of going back to FBS. CUSA would probably be happy to have UTEP to leave because of travel reasons. Georgia Southern would be a great replacement for them.

A conference of Marshall, ODU, App, Charlotte, WKU, MTSU, Coastal, GA State, GA Southern, UAB, Southern Miss, Ark St, Lousiana, LA Tech would be a really fun southeastern conference. No Florida schools but they could be added and go to 16 if need be.

UTEP is not in because when the MWC was formed it was formed to be a conference that consisted of the best of a way to large WAC breaking away to get rid of the dead weight

at that time UTEP was some of the dead weight

later UTEP left the WAC to join in with the highly failed (yet often pushed especially by G5ers) idea of "get with more teams in the same state (and all wallow in being bad mostly)

one will never know if that was the right move for UTEP at that time because of course the WAC fell apart and there is no guarantee that UTEP would have gotten the call to be a part of the MWC when they went back to pretty much being the WAC minus a few teams, but moving to the MWC now would absolutely be the right move for UTEP it if was available

NMSU is not in the MWC because UNM is loath to be in the same conference with them and UNM at least has basketball while NMSU has pretty much nothing athletically

UTEP committed the sin that Houston committed.

They were stinking when the conference fractured.

(08-04-2016 07:28 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  UTEP committed the sin that Houston committed.

They were stinking when the conference fractured.

while that is true for UH for UTEP they had some of their best years their final years in the WAC and that was well before the WAC broke apart

so who knows how they would have looked to the MWC if they had stayed in the WAC and continued to have good seasons Vs jumping to the CUSA and starting to suck

especially since it is well known that UTSA had an offer from the MWC in addition to the CUSA offer and a Sunbelt offer as well

if UTEP had been decent in the final years of the WAC instead jumping to the CUSA and sucking and making it known that they liked sucking with 3 other Texas teams well UTEP would have most likely had an offer in conjunction with UTSA from the MWC to move as a pair

and that would have put them in a much better place today even if they were sucking

UTSA made the major major mistake of looking at "Texas teams suck buddies" instead of realizing that they had actually managed to have a winning season in the WAC even though they were only a couple of years into playing football at any level and understanding what TCU had done before and how and why they did it and how and why that worked

now they are just another Texas team sucking in CUSA with the exception of Rice that has ups and downs in CUSA

(08-04-2016 07:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 07:28 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  UTEP committed the sin that Houston committed.

They were stinking when the conference fractured.

while that is true for UH for UTEP they had some of their best years their final years in the WAC and that was well before the WAC broke apart

so who knows how they would have looked to the MWC if they had stayed in the WAC and continued to have good seasons Vs jumping to the CUSA and starting to suck

especially since it is well known that UTSA had an offer from the MWC in addition to the CUSA offer and a Sunbelt offer as well

if UTEP had been decent in the final years of the WAC instead jumping to the CUSA and sucking and making it known that they liked sucking with 3 other Texas teams well UTEP would have most likely had an offer in conjunction with UTSA from the MWC to move as a pair

and that would have put them in a much better place today even if they were sucking

UTSA made the major major mistake of looking at "Texas teams suck buddies" instead of realizing that they had actually managed to have a winning season in the WAC even though they were only a couple of years into playing football at any level and understanding what TCU had done before and how and why they did it and how and why that worked

now they are just another Texas team sucking in CUSA with the exception of Rice that has ups and downs in CUSA

UTEP and USU were offered a place in the MW to become a twelve team league. They refused and SJSU was added. UTEP made a major mistake.

(08-04-2016 09:21 AM)1IvyDog Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 07:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 07:28 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  UTEP committed the sin that Houston committed.

They were stinking when the conference fractured.

while that is true for UH for UTEP they had some of their best years their final years in the WAC and that was well before the WAC broke apart

so who knows how they would have looked to the MWC if they had stayed in the WAC and continued to have good seasons Vs jumping to the CUSA and starting to suck

especially since it is well known that UTSA had an offer from the MWC in addition to the CUSA offer and a Sunbelt offer as well

if UTEP had been decent in the final years of the WAC instead jumping to the CUSA and sucking and making it known that they liked sucking with 3 other Texas teams well UTEP would have most likely had an offer in conjunction with UTSA from the MWC to move as a pair

and that would have put them in a much better place today even if they were sucking

UTSA made the major major mistake of looking at "Texas teams suck buddies" instead of realizing that they had actually managed to have a winning season in the WAC even though they were only a couple of years into playing football at any level and understanding what TCU had done before and how and why they did it and how and why that worked

now they are just another Texas team sucking in CUSA with the exception of Rice that has ups and downs in CUSA

UTEP and USU were offered a place in the MW to become a twelve team league. They refused and SJSU was added. UTEP made a major mistake.

that only would have made a 10 team league

the WAC was 16 teams and 8 broke away in 1999

TCU left to the CUSA in 2001 and then left the CUSA to the MWC in 2005

in 2005 UTEP could have left the CUSA for the MWC IF they were offered to have a 10 team league with TCU, but who knows if they were offered

when Utah and BYU left in 2011 Boise was offered and they stayed at 8

it was not until TCU left in 2012 that Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii Football only were added to get back to 10

and then in 2013 SJSU and USU were added to go to 12

so what you are saying is not accurate the closest that could be to accurate would be UTEP getting an offer to leave the WAC and move with TCU coming out of the CUSA to the MWC to be 10 teams, but UTEP declining that POSSIBLE offer and moving to CUSA instead

Here's my question regarding Houston, in looking up the membership timelines of the WAC and CUSA recently: why, in 1996 after the SWC dissolved, did Houston venture into the brand-new CUSA instead of sticking with TCU, SMU, and Rice, who all went to the WAC?

The WAC added Tulsa at the same time as those three, so I assume it would've welcomed Houston either in addition to Tulsa or perhaps in place of. Or is that not correct?

(08-04-2016 09:21 AM)1IvyDog Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 07:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 07:28 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  UTEP committed the sin that Houston committed.

They were stinking when the conference fractured.

while that is true for UH for UTEP they had some of their best years their final years in the WAC and that was well before the WAC broke apart

so who knows how they would have looked to the MWC if they had stayed in the WAC and continued to have good seasons Vs jumping to the CUSA and starting to suck

especially since it is well known that UTSA had an offer from the MWC in addition to the CUSA offer and a Sunbelt offer as well

if UTEP had been decent in the final years of the WAC instead jumping to the CUSA and sucking and making it known that they liked sucking with 3 other Texas teams well UTEP would have most likely had an offer in conjunction with UTSA from the MWC to move as a pair

and that would have put them in a much better place today even if they were sucking

UTSA made the major major mistake of looking at "Texas teams suck buddies" instead of realizing that they had actually managed to have a winning season in the WAC even though they were only a couple of years into playing football at any level and understanding what TCU had done before and how and why they did it and how and why that worked

now they are just another Texas team sucking in CUSA with the exception of Rice that has ups and downs in CUSA

UTEP and USU were offered a place in the MW to become a twelve team league. They refused and SJSU was added. UTEP made a major mistake.

I remember watching a UTEP press conference where the AD Bob Stull said the merger between C-USA and the MWC was going to happen and how good that would be for UTEP. Obviously that fell apart but it is entirely possible that UTEP was counting on that even after SJSU and USU were added. If he had the choice at that time to move and didn't take it then definitely a major mistake.

NM State doesn't offer much to conferences really. They've had a few blips on the radar for basketball but that's been about it.

As for UTEP, I grew up in El Paso so I am much more familiar with them and their alumni presence throughout Texas. UTEP alums seem to flock towards North Texas and areas such as Austin and Houston. It benefits them to be in a conference where 1. they can recruit both players and students, and 2. have closer divisional conference mates. UTEP has more to gain by looking East than they do by looking West. It's similar to when the MWC was talking about schools like Houston/SMU looking Westward. At the end of the day the media markets, recruiting, money is East. I like the MWC a lot and think UTEP would be a great cultural fit but they just have more to gain academically and sports-wise by looking Eastward.

(08-04-2016 07:04 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  UTEP is not in because when the MWC was formed it was formed to be a conference that consisted of the best of a way to large WAC breaking away to get rid of the dead weight

at that time UTEP was some of the dead weight

later UTEP left the WAC to join in with the highly failed (yet often pushed especially by G5ers) idea of "get with more teams in the same state (and all wallow in being bad mostly)

one will never know if that was the right move for UTEP at that time because of course the WAC fell apart and there is no guarantee that UTEP would have gotten the call to be a part of the MWC when they went back to pretty much being the WAC minus a few teams, but moving to the MWC now would absolutely be the right move for UTEP it if was available

NMSU is not in the MWC because UNM is loath to be in the same conference with them and UNM at least has basketball while NMSU has pretty much nothing athletically

When the 16 team WAC broke-up and the MWC was formed there was a real threat, with grounds, of a lawsuit against the MWC members leaving the conference. MWC members leaving were very careful to make sure they left the WAC as a viable 8 member conference. Thus only 8 could leave. Had the lawsuit threat not existed the MWC would have formed a 10-12 team league when they left but killing the WAC would have been ugly in court. (a former WAC/MWC president explained that to me)

Otherwise I suspect, my speculation, Fresno, Hawaii, and UTEP all would have been in the MWC on its formation

(08-04-2016 10:21 AM)Comet Wrote:  NM State doesn't offer much to conferences really. They've had a few blips on the radar for basketball but that's been about it.

As for UTEP, I grew up in El Paso so I am much more familiar with them and their alumni presence throughout Texas. UTEP alums seem to flock towards North Texas and areas such as Austin and Houston. It benefits them to be in a conference where 1. they can recruit both players and students, and 2. have closer divisional conference mates. UTEP has more to gain by looking East than they do by looking West. It's similar to when the MWC was talking about schools like Houston/SMU looking Westward. At the end of the day the media markets, recruiting, money is East. I like the MWC a lot and think UTEP would be a great cultural fit but they just have more to gain academically and sports-wise by looking Eastward.

And yet they are obviously looking at MWC membership and have publicly said so

(08-04-2016 10:29 AM)billings Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 10:21 AM)Comet Wrote:  NM State doesn't offer much to conferences really. They've had a few blips on the radar for basketball but that's been about it.

As for UTEP, I grew up in El Paso so I am much more familiar with them and their alumni presence throughout Texas. UTEP alums seem to flock towards North Texas and areas such as Austin and Houston. It benefits them to be in a conference where 1. they can recruit both players and students, and 2. have closer divisional conference mates. UTEP has more to gain by looking East than they do by looking West. It's similar to when the MWC was talking about schools like Houston/SMU looking Westward. At the end of the day the media markets, recruiting, money is East. I like the MWC a lot and think UTEP would be a great cultural fit but they just have more to gain academically and sports-wise by looking Eastward.

And yet they are obviously looking at MWC membership and have publicly said so

True. The AD has stated that the MWC would be a better athletic home for UTEP. The MWC is at 12 though and I see no reason for a conference to expand past that. If a school leaves, UTEP will be trying to get in.

The membership history of the WAC is really interesting to me. Started out with a really solid conference in the early 60's and then by later 60's:
Arizona/Arizona St, Utah/BYU, Wyoming/CO St, New Mexico/UTEP (8)

Late 70's the PAC takes the Arizona's and the WAC adds three:
Utah/BYU, Wyoming/CO St, New Mexico/UTEP, SD St, Hawaii, Air Force (9)

Add Fresno in 1992, then pick up six more teams in 1996 after the SWC conf breaks up:
Utah/BYU, Wyoming/CO St, New Mexico/UTEP, SD St, Hawaii, Air Force, Fresno St/San Jose St, TCU/Tulsa, SMU/Rice, UNLV (16)


"Upper crust" teams decide they want to break away, and form the MWC in 1999:
MWC - Utah/BYU, Wyoming/CO St, New Mexico, SD St, Air Force, UNLV (8)
WAC - Fresno St/San Jose St, TCU/Tulsa, SMU/Rice, UTEP, Hawaii (8)

Why the MWC took UNLV, Air Force, and SD St over UTEP??? I don't know.


Nevada was added in 2000, with TCU leaving for CUSA in 2001 and being replaced the same year by Boise + Louisiana Tech:
Fresno St/San Jose St, Tulsa, SMU/Rice, UTEP, Hawaii, Nevada, Boise, LA Tech (10)


In 2005, the Tulsa, SMU, and Rice left to join the CUSA, and for some reason UTEP also decided to join the CUSA instead of sticking it out in the WAC. They were replaced by Utah St, Idaho, and New Mexico St:
Fresno St/San Jose St, Hawaii, Nevada, Boise, LA Tech, Utah St, Idaho, New Mexico St (9)


That lasted until the conference started collapsing in the early 2010's, with the Mountain West eventually taking in 5 of the 9 (and 6 in football, Hawaii), LA Tech going to CUSA and Idaho & New Mexico St getting screwed.



Hindsight, it doesn't make any sense why UTEP left its original conference in 2005. I think if they had it to do over, they might have reconsidered. And would quite possibly be in the MWC right now instead of San Jose St.

(08-04-2016 10:11 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Here's my question regarding Houston, in looking up the membership timelines of the WAC and CUSA recently: why, in 1996 after the SWC dissolved, did Houston venture into the brand-new CUSA instead of sticking with TCU, SMU, and Rice, who all went to the WAC?

The WAC added Tulsa at the same time as those three, so I assume it would've welcomed Houston either in addition to Tulsa or perhaps in place of. Or is that not correct?

The answer is two fold (1) the WAC didn't need a second team in Houston, and (2) UH wanted to go east (with its greater population and TV sets).

The WAC was going to 16 (and if they could have found a way to protect more historic rivalries, may have survived) and wanted to have the broadest possible reach. A team in Houston, Tulsa, Fort Worth, and Dallas got the conference more potential viewers.

Houston strongly pushed saving the SWC by hand picking many of the teams that would be founding members of C-USA.

In the end the decision not to get UH into the WAC was mutual.

I appreciate the answer, and trust it is correct.

However, I find it more than a bit arbitrary to claim that TCU/SMU wasn't two teams in the same market, while Rice/Houst was.

(08-04-2016 06:28 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  A conference of Marshall, ODU, App, Charlotte, WKU, MTSU, Coastal, GA State, GA Southern, UAB, Southern Miss, Ark St, Lousiana, LA Tech would be a really fun southeastern conference. No Florida schools but they could be added and go to 16 if need be.

The question would be how to get to this setup. F_U aren't going to just leave CUSA

(08-04-2016 10:11 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Here's my question regarding Houston, in looking up the membership timelines of the WAC and CUSA recently: why, in 1996 after the SWC dissolved, did Houston venture into the brand-new CUSA instead of sticking with TCU, SMU, and Rice, who all went to the WAC?

The WAC added Tulsa at the same time as those three, so I assume it would've welcomed Houston either in addition to Tulsa or perhaps in place of. Or is that not correct?

No idea. As primarily a football fan, I had zero interest in joining the basketball first conference CUSA was orginally envisioned as. In fact, my question has always been--why didn't the 4 left behinds rebuild the SWC? They still had a conference with wonder name recognition, a good bowl tie, and history. They could have added a few of the names that eventually went to CUSA and created a solid compact conference that made sense. I think those teams would have been more successful by maintaining those SWC ties rather than playing far flung schools across the nation that drew little interest locally.

Tulsa, S Miss, and Tulane quickly get you to 7 members. All you would have needed was one or two more to form a nice conference from a group of Louisville, Cincy, Air Force, New Mexico, UTEP, LaTech, and BYU.

That idea makes a ton of sense today, similar to the assumptions (at least made here) that leftover B12 schools would rebuild the B12.

I wonder why they didn't think of that back then ...