CSNbbs

Send 'em an invite! Make it public, along with one to Kansas and K-State. We would be the first official invites in the realignment. And they would try to blow us off, but when they're left out in the cold and come back to us we look good for sticking by them even after they dissed us.

Sounds like a "I know we're breaking up but i still love you, is their anything i can do...." letter

They can hear the tuba....... E... F..........E.....F........E..F...E..F...E..F..

SALSA SHARK!

(06-04-2010 03:16 PM)uakronkid Wrote: [ -> ]Send 'em an invite! Make it public, along with one to Kansas and K-State. We would be the first official invites in the realignment. And they would try to blow us off, but when they're left out in the cold and come back to us we look good for sticking by them even after they dissed us.

agree, why not throw them an invite. It would be nice to see the MAC take an active stance and do what it can to come out of this mess with an upgrade instead of waiting for every other conference to make moves and leave us as the bottom feeders of college football.

Wow. The other three "leftovers" from the Big XII follow suit.

http://www.kstatesports.com/ViewArticle....=204955297

http://www.baylorbears.com/genrel/060410aaa.html

http://www.kuathletics.com/genrel/060410aab.html

They can "reaffirm their support" of the Big XII, but they'll be all alone. They can try to invite MWC teams to join to stay alive, but why would the MWC teams leave when they're now in the better conference? Some C-USA teams might go, but they're done for as a BCS conference and as one with any attractiveness for TV.

I repeat myself: Send them an invite (except Baylor)! That brings us to 16 and puts us in position to become what the MWC is right now, filling the void after they move up to the BCS.

(06-04-2010 09:45 PM)uakronkid Wrote: [ -> ]They can "reaffirm their support" of the Big XII, but they'll be all alone. They can try to invite MWC teams to join to stay alive, but why would the MWC teams leave when they're now in the better conference? Some C-USA teams might go, but they're done for as a BCS conference and as one with any attractiveness for TV.

Because just those 4 leftovers and the Big12 as an organization still have more clout than the MWC, being current BCS members. It's more likely the BIG12 organization remains and invites new members, or it desolves and starts a new BCS league. The MWC and its top teams would always remain hindered by the bottom teams (Think about it: Does Wyoming deserve BCS status as a program, institution, and market?). AFA, BYU, CSU, NM, UTAH, TCU would be the most likely for BCS inclusion. WY, SDSU, UNLV, and potencially Boise St..I'm not certain the top MWC teams and Big12 orphans would want them included. Houston and Memphis would be more attractive first options, if the Big12 wanted to get back to 12. Big14? Then maybe bring in SDSU and UNLV. Big16? Then perhaps Boise, WY, and UTEP would be options.

The MWC is going to add Boise soon. When they do and provided that none of the current MWC members leave; they will have 4 of the heavyweights among nonBCS football which should be enough to get them BCS AQ status. Once they get BCS AQ status, what will the MWC need KSU, ISU, KU & Baylor and the B12 organization for? Why would they want have their BCS share cut to accommodate these 4 programs?

These 4 may find a home in CUSA, should CUSA want to expand or lose CUSA East teams to the BE. But simply by offering KSU, ISU & KU MAC membership shows that the conference is being proactive and not waiting till everyonelse has made their move.

(06-05-2010 08:14 AM)onlinepole Wrote: [ -> ]The MWC is going to add Boise soon. When they do and provided that none of the current MWC members leave; they will have 4 of the heavyweights among nonBCS football which should be enough to get them BCS AQ status. Once they get BCS AQ status, what will the MWC need KSU, ISU, KU & Baylor and the B12 organization for? Why would they want have their BCS share cut to accommodate these 4 programs?

These 4 may find a home in CUSA, should CUSA want to expand or lose CUSA East teams to the BE. But simply by offering KSU, ISU & KU MAC membership shows that the conference is being proactive and not waiting till everyonelse has made their move.

The bottom teams in the MWC just don't deserve BCS AQ status.
A newly constituted league makes more sense if there is a massive reshuffling to 16 team megaconferences.

It would sicken me to see weak half of the MWC instantly leapfrog the entire MAC having done nothing on their own merit to deserve this.

(06-05-2010 01:29 PM)owen Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-05-2010 08:14 AM)onlinepole Wrote: [ -> ]The MWC is going to add Boise soon. When they do and provided that none of the current MWC members leave; they will have 4 of the heavyweights among nonBCS football which should be enough to get them BCS AQ status. Once they get BCS AQ status, what will the MWC need KSU, ISU, KU & Baylor and the B12 organization for? Why would they want have their BCS share cut to accommodate these 4 programs?

These 4 may find a home in CUSA, should CUSA want to expand or lose CUSA East teams to the BE. But simply by offering KSU, ISU & KU MAC membership shows that the conference is being proactive and not waiting till everyonelse has made their move.

The bottom teams in the MWC just don't deserve BCS AQ status.
A newly constituted league makes more sense if there is a massive reshuffling to 16 team megaconferences.

It would sicken me to see weak half of the MWC instantly leapfrog the entire MAC having done nothing on their own merit to deserve this.

45-16
Agree 100%.