Does $7 million a year sway Boise, Fresno, BYU, or San Diego State, to investigate a possible move to the AAC, and cause another round of movement?

Boise's special deal with the MWC might be good enough for them to pass on an AAC offer, but that same special deal might encourage Fresno and San Diego to move.

What is the current value of BYU's deal with ESPN, and would they make more as a member of the AAC?

How much more would the AAC media contract be worth if they expanded to 14 teams, with some combination of Boise, BYU, Fresno, or San Diego?

Would the AAC even be interested in adding some combination of those schools?

If the MWC lost a team or two, what would they do?

No. It has no impact on the MWC. They have their own issues and are not really connected with the Central and Eastern time zones.

Like the Pac-12 being in the West is both a blessing (unlikely to be raided -- Colorado State the only plausibe), and a curse (no schools of any value in the western most time zones -- Rice and UTEP are the current vague think about it group, Gonzaga the one Basketball school they want, which is to say, nothing going on here).

So they just have to make the best of what they have and live with it. Boise State's run under Kustra and Petersen are beginning to fade into the past, ditto SDSU and Fisher. It's what it always was, a bunch of "State" schools a couple notches below the Pac-12 in everything, and still in the Western half of the US.

What People don't understand much is Denver to Chicago or Houston is just as far as Denver to Seattle and Denver to Los Angeles. There is a gap of almost 600 miles from the edge of the Rockies to cities of the Great Plains. Further South, El Paso is equidistant to San Diego and Houston. The distances in the West and to the West always surprise people living in the Eastern half of the country. Gonzaga had to pass on the Big East because of distance. The same is pretty much true of any Western school looking East.

Island economics.

Why would it?

The MWC can coexist with the AAC. They’re geographically apart from each other and both fill a niche in their regions.

No it won’t destabilize the MW.
1. We don’t know how much the new TV deal for the MW will be in a month or so.
2. Unlike the AAC, the MW is made of flagship and land grant colleges. They are the first or second college in their states the population pays attention to.
As the population grows so will the MW.

(03-24-2019 04:14 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Does $7 million a year sway Boise, Fresno, BYU, or San Diego State, to investigate a possible move to the AAC, and cause another round of movement?

Boise's special deal with the MWC might be good enough for them to pass on an AAC offer, but that same special deal might encourage Fresno and San Diego to move.

What is the current value of BYU's deal with ESPN, and would they make more as a member of the AAC?

How much more would the AAC media contract be worth if they expanded to 14 teams, with some combination of Boise, BYU, Fresno, or San Diego?

Would the AAC even be interested in adding some combination of those schools?

If the MWC lost a team or two, what would they do?

I'm dubious a Mountain West school would leave for the American. The Big 12, yes; the American, NO

The AAC will be able to pick up a few schools from the remnants of the Big 12, they won't need to go any further west.

(03-24-2019 04:42 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  No. It has no impact on the MWC. They have their own issues and are not really connected with the Central and Eastern time zones.

Like the Pac-12 being in the West is both a blessing (unlikely to be raided -- Colorado State the only plausibe), and a curse (no schools of any value in the western most time zones -- Rice and UTEP are the current vague think about it group, Gonzaga the one Basketball school they want, which is to say, nothing going on here).

So they just have to make the best of what they have and live with it. Boise State's run under Kustra and Petersen are beginning to fade into the past, ditto SDSU and Fisher. It's what it always was, a bunch of "State" schools a couple notches below the Pac-12 in everything, and still in the Western half of the US.

What People don't understand much is Denver to Chicago or Houston is just as far as Denver to Seattle and Denver to Los Angeles. There is a gap of almost 600 miles from the edge of the Rockies to cities of the Great Plains. Further South, El Paso is equidistant to San Diego and Houston. The distances in the West and to the West always surprise people living in the Eastern half of the country. Gonzaga had to pass on the Big East because of distance. The same is pretty much true of any Western school looking East.

Island economics.

True.

For example, Denver to Salt Lake City is 520 miles. To Albuquerque is 445 miles and to El Paso 635 miles. People are surprised when they find out there’s no direct interstate connection between Phoenix and Las Vegas (300 miles) and Fresno is the largest American city not served by the interstate highway system. El Paso to Los Angeles is 800 miles and to Phoenix is 430 miles. Want a trip from Boise to Seattle? That’s going to be a 500 mile drive. Las Vegas to San Francisco is 570 miles and Salt Lake to San Diego is 750 miles.

The MWC will always be the second Western conference behind the Pac-12 just like it was in the old WAC days. The only difference is that they consolidated their power with the extinction of WAC football. There’s only three FBS programs in their region left: two independents (BYU, NMSU) and a school stuck in a Southern based conference (UTEP).

(03-24-2019 05:03 PM)XLance Wrote:  The AAC will be able to pick up a few schools from the remnants of the Big 12, they won't need to go any further west.

Big 12 exit fees mean the Big 12 will stay intact and add schools IF (and a pretty big IF) any teams leave the Big 12

(03-24-2019 04:50 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  No it won’t destabilize the MW.
1. We don’t know how much the new TV deal for the MW will be in a month or so.
2. Unlike the AAC, the MW is made of flagship and land grant colleges. They are the first or second college in their states the population pays attention to.
As the population grows so will the MW.

First off, I don't think there's anything the AAC has done or is doing that would destabilize the MWC. As others have said, the geography largely ensures there's little to no chance schools in one would see much appeal in switching to the other. Furthermore, the AAC just signed their new deal - why do any of us think that ESPN is interested in paying an additional ~$7MM/year/team to add any MWC schools to the AAC?

But I think you're WAY overselling the notion that somehow the MWC is going benefit from population growth while the AAC won't. Here are the states that have grown the most since the last census:

#1 - Texas (+3,555,740)
#2 - Florida (+2,494,702)
#3 - California (+2,304,150)

These are the only states to have grown by more than a million people in that time span. 4/12 of the AAC are in those states compared to 3/12 of the MWC (all in California, and none of which are land grant universities nor in the top 6 of options for students from California). Furthermore,

#4 - North Carolina (+847,928)



#8 - Colorado (+666,240)

you have to go down a ways before you hit another state in the MWC. And in case you didn't realize, the enrollments at USF, UCF and Houston are all going up quite a bit, not to mention that the AAC has teams in the #4, #5, #7, #11 and #18 media markets. So I think we can dispense with the notion that somehow population growth in states like Nevada (+333,701), Idaho (+186,556) or Wyoming (+13,970) are going to have a serious impact.

USFFan

You'd add schools to increase the value of a deal coming up. Unless you have a pro rata clause---you wouldn't add schools after signing a new deal. That would just lower per school earnings. Right now, the AAC can collect their raise without the additional travel burden adding MW schools would entail---so it doesnt make much sense right now.

Maybe later---before the next deal--perhaps Air Force or Colorado St--or maybe even BYU or New Mexico---could be potential adds if the networks like the idea. But for now---I just dont see any changes. More likely there could be some internal strife within the MW over the special Boise deal than any destabilization due to the AAC.

(03-24-2019 05:03 PM)XLance Wrote:  The AAC will be able to pick up a few schools from the remnants of the Big 12, they won't need to go any further west.

It’ll be the other way around. The Big XII will still be attractive for a school like Houston to be reunited with Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU. The U_F twins, Cincinnati and Memphis would follow Houston. The AAC would backfill with C-USA schools not Big XII ones.

If we're being completely honest, the only school that I could see at least contemplate a move would be BYU, mostly because it would put them back into play for the "highest rated champion of a G5 conference" NY6 bid (unless Holmoe is a DavidSt disciple who refuses to recognize that BYU isn't eligible for that slot). I don't think any MWC school would be interested in being a full AAC member because of the travel costs, and I also don't see them willing to find another conference to park their other sports.

USFFan

PS - I also know that many BYU fans embrace their independent status, even though it doesn't provide them with great bowl access...

(03-24-2019 05:25 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 05:03 PM)XLance Wrote:  The AAC will be able to pick up a few schools from the remnants of the Big 12, they won't need to go any further west.

It’ll be the other way around. The Big XII will still be attractive for a school like Houston to be reunited with Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU. The U_F twins, Cincinnati and Memphis would follow Houston. The AAC would backfill with C-USA schools not Big XII ones.

LOL - gotta admit, I've never heard of us being referred to as twins...

USFFan

(03-24-2019 05:34 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 05:25 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 05:03 PM)XLance Wrote:  The AAC will be able to pick up a few schools from the remnants of the Big 12, they won't need to go any further west.

It’ll be the other way around. The Big XII will still be attractive for a school like Houston to be reunited with Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU. The U_F twins, Cincinnati and Memphis would follow Houston. The AAC would backfill with C-USA schools not Big XII ones.

LOL - gotta admit, I've never heard of us being referred to as twins...

USFFan

the U_F twins date the GSU sisters and they have the F_U twins as their side pieces

Not even a little bit, why would it.

BYU can join if they want, the AAC and them deserve each other.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(03-24-2019 05:21 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 04:50 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  No it won’t destabilize the MW.
1. We don’t know how much the new TV deal for the MW will be in a month or so.
2. Unlike the AAC, the MW is made of flagship and land grant colleges. They are the first or second college in their states the population pays attention to.
As the population grows so will the MW.

First off, I don't think there's anything the AAC has done or is doing that would destabilize the MWC. As others have said, the geography largely ensures there's little to no chance schools in one would see much appeal in switching to the other. Furthermore, the AAC just signed their new deal - why do any of us think that ESPN is interested in paying an additional ~$7MM/year/team to add any MWC schools to the AAC?

But I think you're WAY overselling the notion that somehow the MWC is going benefit from population growth while the AAC won't. Here are the states that have grown the most since the last census:

#1 - Texas (+3,555,740)
#2 - Florida (+2,494,702)
#3 - California (+2,304,150)

These are the only states to have grown by more than a million people in that time span. 4/12 of the AAC are in those states compared to 3/12 of the MWC (all in California, and none of which are land grant universities nor in the top 6 of options for students from California). Furthermore,

#4 - North Carolina (+847,928)



#8 - Colorado (+666,240)

you have to go down a ways before you hit another state in the MWC. And in case you didn't realize, the enrollments at USF, UCF and Houston are all going up quite a bit, not to mention that the AAC has teams in the #4, #5, #7, #11 and #18 media markets. So I think we can dispense with the notion that somehow population growth in states like Nevada (+333,701), Idaho (+186,556) or Wyoming (+13,970) are going to have a serious impact.

USFFan

MWC schools are for the most part flagship/land grant institutions which means they are the first or second voice for students not the 5th or 6th one. Even the ones that are not flagships like Fresno State, Boise State, San Diego State and UNLV (that’ll change next year) are the only game in town and get media attention in their markets.

States like Texas and Florida are growing but how many of those transplants automatically become North Texas, Houston, USF or FAU fans? Not that many. In the long term their offspring might attend those schools but the problem is the younger generation is not into college sports the way previous generations were.

(03-24-2019 05:25 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 05:03 PM)XLance Wrote:  The AAC will be able to pick up a few schools from the remnants of the Big 12, they won't need to go any further west.

It’ll be the other way around. The Big XII will still be attractive for a school like Houston to be reunited with Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU. The U_F twins, Cincinnati and Memphis would follow Houston. The AAC would backfill with C-USA schools not Big XII ones.

Correct. If the Big XII needs to replenish its membership for whatever reason, they’ll have their pick of American and/or Mountain West teams.

(03-24-2019 05:34 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 05:25 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 05:03 PM)XLance Wrote:  The AAC will be able to pick up a few schools from the remnants of the Big 12, they won't need to go any further west.

It’ll be the other way around. The Big XII will still be attractive for a school like Houston to be reunited with Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU. The U_F twins, Cincinnati and Memphis would follow Houston. The AAC would backfill with C-USA schools not Big XII ones.

LOL - gotta admit, I've never heard of us being referred to as twins...

USFFan

It’s easier to write. Same for the F_U twins in C-USA.

(03-24-2019 05:37 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 05:21 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 04:50 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  No it won’t destabilize the MW.
1. We don’t know how much the new TV deal for the MW will be in a month or so.
2. Unlike the AAC, the MW is made of flagship and land grant colleges. They are the first or second college in their states the population pays attention to.
As the population grows so will the MW.

First off, I don't think there's anything the AAC has done or is doing that would destabilize the MWC. As others have said, the geography largely ensures there's little to no chance schools in one would see much appeal in switching to the other. Furthermore, the AAC just signed their new deal - why do any of us think that ESPN is interested in paying an additional ~$7MM/year/team to add any MWC schools to the AAC?

But I think you're WAY overselling the notion that somehow the MWC is going benefit from population growth while the AAC won't. Here are the states that have grown the most since the last census:

#1 - Texas (+3,555,740)
#2 - Florida (+2,494,702)
#3 - California (+2,304,150)

These are the only states to have grown by more than a million people in that time span. 4/12 of the AAC are in those states compared to 3/12 of the MWC (all in California, and none of which are land grant universities nor in the top 6 of options for students from California). Furthermore,

#4 - North Carolina (+847,928)



#8 - Colorado (+666,240)

you have to go down a ways before you hit another state in the MWC. And in case you didn't realize, the enrollments at USF, UCF and Houston are all going up quite a bit, not to mention that the AAC has teams in the #4, #5, #7, #11 and #18 media markets. So I think we can dispense with the notion that somehow population growth in states like Nevada (+333,701), Idaho (+186,556) or Wyoming (+13,970) are going to have a serious impact.

USFFan

MWC schools are for the most part flagship/land grant institutions which means they are the first or second voice for students not the 5th or 6th one. Even the ones that are not flagships like Fresno State, Boise State, San Diego State and UNLV (that’ll change next year) are the only game in town and get media attention in their markets.

States like Texas and Florida are growing but how many of those transplants automatically become North Texas, Houston, USF or FAU fans? Not that many. In the long term their offspring might attend those schools but the problem is the younger generation is not into college sports the way previous generations were.

Great - congratulations on being in the top 2 options in states like Idaho, Wyoming, New Mexico and Hawaii. Even if 1% of those 3 million+ people who moved to Texas in the last 8 years became Houston or SMU fans, that's still more than if 100% of the people who moved to Wyoming or New Mexico did. And if none of the "younger generation" are into college sports, then doesn't that defeat the purpose of the whole "growing population" argument? Or are you somehow thinking that the retirees moving in are going to adopt the local team. As somebody who lives in Florida and sees Rays games dominated by Yankees and Red Sox fans, they're not.

USFFan

(03-24-2019 05:31 PM)usffan Wrote:  If we're being completely honest, the only school that I could see at least contemplate a move would be BYU, mostly because it would put them back into play for the "highest rated champion of a G5 conference" NY6 bid (unless Holmoe is a DavidSt disciple who refuses to recognize that BYU isn't eligible for that slot). I don't think any MWC school would be interested in being a full AAC member because of the travel costs, and I also don't see them willing to find another conference to park their other sports.

USFFan

PS - I also know that many BYU fans embrace their independent status, even though it doesn't provide them with great bowl access...

The only reason they “embrace” it is because they have to pretend they have a good P5 lineup on their schedule. They’ll keep the charade as long as they can because their biggest rival is in the Pac-12 which even on a mediocre season, they can still go to the Sun or Holiday bowls. It’s the reason they won’t humiliate themselves to go back to the MWC or even consider the AAC.

If you’re a BYU fan and your best friend is a Utah fan, what would you rather say?

“We have Cincinnati, UCF, Tulsa, Memphis, Temple, SMU, and UConn on the schedule” or

“We have Wisconsin, Texas, Tennessee, Washington, USC on the schedule”