You're welcome OldTiger. And I'm a guy. I was surprised this moved to the SmackBoard as well. I thought my post was pretty tame and factual considering some of my other posts. But since this is now on the smack board. TCU sucks like a Hoover vacuum.

toddl18 Wrote:Say what you want about the MWC vs Wac, C USA, Sunbelt. It's not that important in the fans/medias eyes. Because the MWC doesn't care about those games. Sure we want to win them but learned it's much more important to win games against the BCS. These are the games the media look at and compare to nothing else it doesn't matter if it's a top 10 school or a bottom 10 they see them better then all the NonAQ.

MWC has had a few close games that one play could have turned into another w for them. UNLV vs Wisky being one of them that's a 7th/8th/9th place team in the MWC going and almost being a top BCS school. That gets you street credit with the media.

I'll say this also the only great thing about MWC fans is that we don't consider ourselves inferior to the BCS. We consider ourselves right there with them and you should consider your league there to. All the NonAQ fans need to stop with this David vs Galieth match up they have. We're just as good with any of their teams on any given year we can and do hang with them. The things we have to avoid is body bag games that's what the MWC does so well that's why it's considered by many in the media to be the best nonbcs conference.

Depending on what BCS schools you are talking about. I would rather beat a Boise state or a byu than a Baylor anytime. My point is, the MWC is not superior to the wac or CUSA. Most top teams in the CUSA can beat most teams In the MWC as we have learned by head to head. Same as the wac. Heck, most top teams in non bcs can beat most teams in Bcs. Let me give you some schools that are extremely beatable that are BCS,baylor, oklahoma state, duke, north carolina state, north carolina, pittsburgh, arizona, washington state, cincinatti, etc. etc. etc. These teams are not the exceptions like florida, USC, west virginia, oklahoma, etc.

Who is moderating this site now? This was moved to smack for what, telling the MWC fans the truth?

ultraviolet Wrote:Because they're always flapping their gums about being a BCS autobid conference which is totally at odds with reality. They have marginal TV interest and exposure, dubious character, and obnoxious fans for the most part. Right now they're turning into pretzels to rationalize that they're 0-2 vs a supposedly weak CUSA.

For the record, I think the league is unique amoung the non-autobid conference in that our league has openly talked about the goal of BCS autobid inclusion. That was mainly because after Utah's 2004 #6 BCS finish and TCU's #14 2005 BCS finish we actually were in line to possibly meet at least one of the new BCS criteria (we were still ahead of the BE in the finish of the champ criteria at that point- 10.0 avg vs 10.5 for the BE after 2005). BYU's #18 finish last year and the fact we are far away from the other main criteria have pretty much squelched any autobid talk for this evaluation period- I don't think anyone is talking about it now.

My question is, if the CUSA was in the same position and had some teams finish high in the BCS standings to the point that it was ahead of one of the autobid leagues in at least one of the BCS autobid criteria, wouldn't its fans "talk" about possibly getting an autobid on its message boards? Wouldn't you expect your commish to lobby for your cause? I know it is because some MWC fans lack couth in expressing their opinion (although that happens for all leagues), as well as the history behind the start of the MWC and later, the departure of TCU that has CUSA and WAC fans hating the MWC. Still the vast majority of MWC fans are simply "good fans" supporting their team and conference, and not at the expense of other teams and conferences.

[/quote]
Still the vast majority of MWC fans are simply "good fans" supporting their team and conference, and not at the expense of other teams and conferences.
[/quote]

I take issue with that one. You're certainly in that group, but not the usual type that comes here. And I don't care what a team does in a non BCS conference they will stack the deck to keep all others out. The MWC was naive or delusional to even think the 'club' would relent and let in another conference as an autobid or replace one that dropped out. If a conference fell below the threshold or was in danger of doing so the rules would either change or they'd just go to 5 auto bids.

The biggest difference between MWC and CUSA (plus the rest of the non-BCS conf.) is like what Sinky said. The MWC does have aspirations to be an autobid conference. We don't have programs here that schedule "bodybag" games on a regular basis, programs that are thinking about droping football or programs debating about jumping to another conference. The MWC for the most part is a tight nit group that has been together longer than any other non-BCS conference (aside from UNLV, SDSU and TCU ofcourse).

Our main goal every year is to beat as many BCS teams as possible and get our champ to a BCS bowl not to a bowl that nobody cares about vs a non-BCS Champ!!

Loboblast-mwc Wrote:The biggest difference between MWC and CUSA (plus the rest of the non-BCS conf.) is like what Sinky said. The MWC does have aspirations to be an autobid conference. We don't have programs here that schedule "bodybag" games on a regular basis, programs that are thinking about droping football or programs debating about jumping to another conference. The MWC for the most part is a tight nit group that has been together longer than any other non-BCS conference (aside from UNLV, SDSU and TCU ofcourse).

Our main goal every year is to beat as many BCS teams as possible and get our champ to a BCS bowl not to a bowl that nobody cares about vs a non-BCS Champ!!

This is good comedy.......

I'm sure every nonBCS conference's aspiration is to become an autobid conference. The difference between the other 4 nonBCS conferences and the MWAC is that we don't have an idiot as a commissioner who goes around saying the conference is more deserving of the autobid than the Big East. He looks foolish now....especially since the Big East proved everybody they're a legit BCS conference (with 5 teams ranked in the top 30) and the MWAC has done absolutely nothing to deserve the autobid. That's why nobody takes Craig Thompson seriously, the guy is a complete idiot.

The BCS is all about TV markets, the MWAC will NEVER become a BCS autobid conference.

toddl18 Wrote:Say what you want about the MWC vs Wac, C USA, Sunbelt. It's not that important in the fans/medias eyes. Because the MWC doesn't care about those games. Sure we want to win them but learned it's much more important to win games against the BCS. These are the games the media look at and compare to nothing else it doesn't matter if it's a top 10 school or a bottom 10 they see them better then all the NonAQ.

MWC has had a few close games that one play could have turned into another w for them. UNLV vs Wisky being one of them that's a 7th/8th/9th place team in the MWC going and almost being a top BCS school. That gets you street credit with the media.

I'll say this also the only great thing about MWC fans is that we don't consider ourselves inferior to the BCS. We consider ourselves right there with them and you should consider your league there to. All the NonAQ fans need to stop with this David vs Galieth match up they have. We're just as good with any of their teams on any given year we can and do hang with them. The things we have to avoid is body bag games that's what the MWC does so well that's why it's considered by many in the media to be the best nonbcs conference.

Wow, just when I thought I've seen it all. A UNLV fan lecturing us about being BCS worthy.

Let me see, UNLV:
Stadium: Terrible
Fan support: Horrible
Media attention: Irrelevant
Bowls since '99: One

But hey, the MWAC and UNLV are right there with the big boys.

ultraviolet Wrote:I take issue with that one. You're certainly in that group, but not the usual type that comes here. And I don't care what a team does in a non BCS conference they will stack the deck to keep all others out. The MWC was naive or delusional to even think the 'club' would relent and let in another conference as an autobid or replace one that dropped out. If a conference fell below the threshold or was in danger of doing so the rules would either change or they'd just go to 5 auto bids.

All boards have hyperjingoistic flamers from other conferences who offend others- certainly not unique to the MWC.


As far as being "delusional", all I know is that if you don't make something a goal, you'll never reach that goal. If the leaders of the CUSA do not have a plan with all the steps listed to achieve an autobid status, I think that is a mistake. I know from TCU experience for 30 years if you take a "we'll never make it" attitude, you never will. Once we got off our laurels and came up with a specific plan to compete on the highest level, we've enjoyed our best stretch in 70 years. I think that can translate into a conference level, too. It may not happen right away, but if as a conference you invest in the key infrastructure areas with the goal of an eventual autobid, the bridge between the haves and have nots can be traversed. Think about it. Even without the benefits of huge conference windfalls, our conferences can enjoy moderate success- the MWC is 5-8 this year as an example. With futher commitment by all members in an organized infrastructure improving effort, I think even more success is possible. But not with a "we'll never make" fatalistic attitude.

Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:

ultraviolet Wrote:I take issue with that one. You're certainly in that group, but not the usual type that comes here. And I don't care what a team does in a non BCS conference they will stack the deck to keep all others out. The MWC was naive or delusional to even think the 'club' would relent and let in another conference as an autobid or replace one that dropped out. If a conference fell below the threshold or was in danger of doing so the rules would either change or they'd just go to 5 auto bids.

All boards have hyperjingoistic flamers from other conferences who offend others- certainly not unique to the MWC.


As far as being "delusional", all I know is that if you don't make something a goal, you'll never reach that goal. If the leaders of the CUSA do not have a plan with all the steps listed to achieve an autobid status, I think that is a mistake. I know from TCU experience for 30 years if you take a "we'll never make it" attitude, you never will. Once we got off our laurels and came up with a specific plan to compete on the highest level, we've enjoyed our best stretch in 70 years. I think that can translate into a conference level, too. It may not happen right away, but if as a conference you invest in the key infrastructure areas with the goal of an eventual autobid, the bridge between the haves and have nots can be traversed. Think about it. Even without the benefits of huge conference windfalls, our conferences can enjoy moderate success- the MWC is 5-8 this year as an example. With futher commitment by all members in an organized infrastructure improving effort, I think even more success is possible. But not with a "we'll never make" fatalistic attitude.

Yes, I agree with you as far as the BCS should be everyones goal. But can we actually say that the MWC deserves a bid more than the WAC or CUSA. Or can we say the WAC deserves it more than the Mountain West. Probably not yet. Now think about this, what if Hawaii goes undefeated and makes it to a BCS bowl. That will be 2 years in a row that the wac would have sent a team to a BCS game. Would the mountain west still say that they deserve it more than the wac. The wac, mountain west, and conference usa all have teams that are capable of making a run and going to a bcs bowl. The MWC ans CUSA will miss out on that oportunity this year but I can assure you next year there will be several candidates on both conferences.

Does Loboblast only post in the threads of this nature?

Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:

ultraviolet Wrote:I take issue with that one. You're certainly in that group, but not the usual type that comes here. And I don't care what a team does in a non BCS conference they will stack the deck to keep all others out. The MWC was naive or delusional to even think the 'club' would relent and let in another conference as an autobid or replace one that dropped out. If a conference fell below the threshold or was in danger of doing so the rules would either change or they'd just go to 5 auto bids.

All boards have hyperjingoistic flamers from other conferences who offend others- certainly not unique to the MWC.


As far as being "delusional", all I know is that if you don't make something a goal, you'll never reach that goal. If the leaders of the CUSA do not have a plan with all the steps listed to achieve an autobid status, I think that is a mistake. I know from TCU experience for 30 years if you take a "we'll never make it" attitude, you never will. Once we got off our laurels and came up with a specific plan to compete on the highest level, we've enjoyed our best stretch in 70 years. I think that can translate into a conference level, too. It may not happen right away, but if as a conference you invest in the key infrastructure areas with the goal of an eventual autobid, the bridge between the haves and have nots can be traversed. Think about it. Even without the benefits of huge conference windfalls, our conferences can enjoy moderate success- the MWC is 5-8 this year as an example. With futher commitment by all members in an organized infrastructure improving effort, I think even more success is possible. But not with a "we'll never make" fatalistic attitude.

Well, you certainly can set a goal to be worthy, but the idea that the cartel will relent and do the right thing is beyond naive. The system is probably as good as it's going to get with one media darling a year allowed in to make them offer the illusion that the system is 'fair', while never letting an outsider sniff the championship game.

UTEPSAL Wrote:

Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:

ultraviolet Wrote:I take issue with that one. You're certainly in that group, but not the usual type that comes here. And I don't care what a team does in a non BCS conference they will stack the deck to keep all others out. The MWC was naive or delusional to even think the 'club' would relent and let in another conference as an autobid or replace one that dropped out. If a conference fell below the threshold or was in danger of doing so the rules would either change or they'd just go to 5 auto bids.

All boards have hyperjingoistic flamers from other conferences who offend others- certainly not unique to the MWC.


As far as being "delusional", all I know is that if you don't make something a goal, you'll never reach that goal. If the leaders of the CUSA do not have a plan with all the steps listed to achieve an autobid status, I think that is a mistake. I know from TCU experience for 30 years if you take a "we'll never make it" attitude, you never will. Once we got off our laurels and came up with a specific plan to compete on the highest level, we've enjoyed our best stretch in 70 years. I think that can translate into a conference level, too. It may not happen right away, but if as a conference you invest in the key infrastructure areas with the goal of an eventual autobid, the bridge between the haves and have nots can be traversed. Think about it. Even without the benefits of huge conference windfalls, our conferences can enjoy moderate success- the MWC is 5-8 this year as an example. With futher commitment by all members in an organized infrastructure improving effort, I think even more success is possible. But not with a "we'll never make" fatalistic attitude.

Yes, I agree with you as far as the BCS should be everyones goal. But can we actually say that the MWC deserves a bid more than the WAC or CUSA. Or can we say the WAC deserves it more than the Mountain West. Probably not yet. Now think about this, what if Hawaii goes undefeated and makes it to a BCS bowl. That will be 2 years in a row that the wac would have sent a team to a BCS game. Would the mountain west still say that they deserve it more than the wac. The wac, mountain west, and conference usa all have teams that are capable of making a run and going to a bcs bowl. The MWC ans CUSA will miss out on that oportunity this year but I can assure you next year there will be several candidates on both conferences.

Again, most of the talk about the autobid was when we actually had something to talk about. After three years, you don't hear about it much since it is unlikely we'll meet even one of the criteria. But after the first two years of this cycle, yes indeed we were much closer than the CUSA and WAC. Our champ averaged #10 after two years in the average finish of the champ criteria the BCS is going to look at. The BE was at 10.5 and another conference was around 9.0 (can't remember who). The CUSA hadn't (and still hasn't) had a top 25 BCS finish. The WAC had a #9 finish with Boise in 2004 but none in 2005 (now Boise has added another top 10 finish but it is too hard to come back from that 2005 0-fer). So at that time even though we weren't likely to meet the other criteria, the possibility of meeting one of the criteria was certainly something to talk about.

And as far as Thompson, remember, one of the things we fight the most is negative branding as "non-BCS" conferences. In order to change our image, not only will we have to improve on the field, but we'll have to fight that negative image in a PR campaign to change peoples biases. That's all Thompson was doing by talking about the BCS.

I realize that just by talking about it it makes other non-BCS conferences and their fans feel uncomfortable and gives the appearance that we think we are "better" than the other conferences (and the history of how the MWC was formed doesn't help in that regard), but its really just the conference trying to play the BCS "game". The BCS is, of course, the bad guy here to even create such artificial lines and rules, not the MWC or its fans.

Yeah, but Thompson's wishful thinking hooked TCU into leaving CUSA because they thought that they would be in the running for an auto-bid by switching conferences. Most TCU posters swore back then that they were leaving because the MWC would be the next auto-bid conference and the MWC would have a much better TV contract and bowl package than CUSA. None of which has happened. I am only stating what TCU fans reported three years ago as to their reasons for leaving CUSA. Now they'll tell you that it was to improve attendance at home games and improve strength of schedule. And again since this is now on the smack board I'm free to say that TCU makes Paris Hilton look chaste.

EastStang Wrote:Yeah, but Thompson's wishful thinking hooked TCU into leaving CUSA because they thought that they would be in the running for an auto-bid by switching conferences. Most TCU posters swore back then that they were leaving because the MWC would be the next auto-bid conference and the MWC would have a much better TV contract and bowl package than CUSA. None of which has happened. I am only stating what TCU fans reported three years ago as to their reasons for leaving CUSA. Now they'll tell you that it was to improve attendance at home games and improve strength of schedule. And again since this is now on the smack board I'm free to say that TCU makes Paris Hilton look chaste.

BTW, I love seeing SMU on TXA21. First, the Phil Bennett Show every Saturday and 3 road games that didnt' get picked up by CSTV and ESPN. Not too long ago, a private school 30 miles from Big D used to have games on that channel........

oldtiger Wrote:EastStang, thank you. That helped me understand a great deal. I now understand the background for the "edgy" comments. Thank you sir......or ma'am.

edit....I didn't notice that this had been moved to "smack".......I hope my comment didnt cause that. That's not intended to be "my style".

EastStang hit a lot of the high points, but he missed a few details.

Most importantly, we knew the WAC-16 was a risky venture so it was incorporated with a contract among the member schools requiring something like 5 years to make it work. The Airport 5 programs violated that contract, and litigation was a real possibility. Rice and Hawaii were the schools ready to litigate.

Another goal was to eventually split into permanent 8-team divisions. Several sources say the Texas schools (Rice, SMU, TCU and UTEP) were to join Tulsa, New Mexico, Air Force, and one other in the East. That eventual alignment was also out the window without formal discussion.

And finally, I believe the Airport 5 approached ESPN at about the same time they announced the conference formed, getting a jump start on the television negotiations at the expense of the remaining programs.

The bad blood will last a generation or more.

I don't blame the MWC schools splitting from the WAC-16. It was a bad marriage from the start waiting for a divorce. It's not the split that angered a lot of folks....it's how they did it. They did it in a secret meeting at the Denver Airport. Basically Utah, BYU, CSU, Wyoming and Air Force forced UNM, SDSU and UNLV to make a decision right now or we'll call UTEP, Hawaii and Fresno. Had they announced after the airport meeting that they were splitting effective in 2 or 3 years...then it'd been different. In some way, UTEP, Hawaii and Fresno got punished for voting in favor of the WAC-16 expansion since four of the gang of five members voted against it. This is how the old WAC voted:

FOR EXPANSION
Hawaii
UTEP
Fresno State
Colorado State
San Diego State

AGAINST EXPANSION
Utah
BYU
Air Force
Wyoming

DIDN'T VOTE
New Mexico

So it was 5-4-1

UTEPDallas Wrote:I don't blame the MWC schools splitting from the WAC-16. It was a bad marriage from the start waiting for a divorce. It's not the split that angered a lot of folks....it's how they did it.

Complete agreement on all counts there. In the long run, Rice is much better off aligned with central time zone programs Houston, Tulane, USM, Memphis and UAB. And, as a bonus, we still have UTEP.

But the real story on how the MWC was formed needs to keep being told so fans like OldTiger know the rest of the story.

And, to shamelessly borrow from EastStang, now that this is on the smack board I can say the behavior of BYU, Utah, Air Force, Colorado State and Wyoming in the Denver Airport was far sleazier than anything Larry Craig did in the Minneapolis Airport!

UTEPDallas Wrote:

EastStang Wrote:Yeah, but Thompson's wishful thinking hooked TCU into leaving CUSA because they thought that they would be in the running for an auto-bid by switching conferences. Most TCU posters swore back then that they were leaving because the MWC would be the next auto-bid conference and the MWC would have a much better TV contract and bowl package than CUSA. None of which has happened. I am only stating what TCU fans reported three years ago as to their reasons for leaving CUSA. Now they'll tell you that it was to improve attendance at home games and improve strength of schedule. And again since this is now on the smack board I'm free to say that TCU makes Paris Hilton look chaste.

BTW, I love seeing SMU on TXA21. First, the Phil Bennett Show every Saturday and 3 road games that didnt' get picked up by CSTV and ESPN. Not too long ago, a private school 30 miles from Big D used to have games on that channel........

Those were the days. The ability to locally produce games is a huge plus in the C-USA TV package. I know the Big 10 also allows that to happen. Big 12 and MWC does not allow it, and I am not sure about the other conferences.

UTEPDallas Wrote:I don't blame the MWC schools splitting from the WAC-16. It was a bad marriage from the start waiting for a divorce. It's not the split that angered a lot of folks....it's how they did it. They did it in a secret meeting at the Denver Airport. Basically Utah, BYU, CSU, Wyoming and Air Force forced UNM, SDSU and UNLV to make a decision right now or we'll call UTEP, Hawaii and Fresno. Had they announced after the airport meeting that they were splitting effective in 2 or 3 years...then it'd been different. In some way, UTEP, Hawaii and Fresno got punished for voting in favor of the WAC-16 expansion since four of the gang of five members voted against it. This is how the old WAC voted:

FOR EXPANSION
Hawaii
UTEP
Fresno State
Colorado State
San Diego State

AGAINST EXPANSION
Utah
BYU
Air Force
Wyoming

DIDN'T VOTE
New Mexico

So it was 5-4-1

Call me a fool, but I really like CUSA more than to be in the MWC. Just having teams like houston, smu, rice and tulsa is attractive to me let alone the other good programs in the east. Our alumni in both the houston and dallas areas love it. we get tons of people for those houston and dallas games. I just wished we had TCU, so we could have another opportunity to watch another road game.