(03-19-2012 09:14 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I think UNM is undervalued for sure. Large state school in a growing state, decent market that it dominates, and good West Texas recruiting nearby. Sure team has stunk lately, but lots of potential there. I think a toss up between UNLV and UNM (assuming AFA or BYU not an option) in terms of best western option for the BE. I like both better than Fresno.

Boy do I disagree.

Are you aware that there are no more people in the entire large state of New Mexico than there are in San Diego county? And as I mentioned above, to put it diplomatically, they aren't exactly rolling in money. In fact, I did some research and ran some numbers for this debate on the MWC board which you may have seen and roughly speaking, SD county residents earn about $8 billion (with a "b") dollars more annually than the residents of NM.

I agree with Steve's list to a large extent. Fresno, AFA and UNLV would all be better than UNM. I'd put CSU above UNM too to the extent they actually care about football in Ft. Collins.

No.... Hell, No to the University of New Mexico!

(03-19-2012 10:56 AM)SleepingGiantsFan Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 09:14 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I think UNM is undervalued for sure. Large state school in a growing state, decent market that it dominates, and good West Texas recruiting nearby. Sure team has stunk lately, but lots of potential there. I think a toss up between UNLV and UNM (assuming AFA or BYU not an option) in terms of best western option for the BE. I like both better than Fresno.

Boy do I disagree.

Are you aware that there are no more people in the entire large state of New Mexico than there are in San Diego county? And as I mentioned above, to put it diplomatically, they aren't exactly rolling in money. In fact, I did some research and ran some numbers for this debate on the MWC board which you may have seen and roughly speaking, SD county residents earn about $8 billion (with a "b") dollars more annually than the residents of NM.

I agree with Steve's list to a large extent. Fresno, AFA and UNLV would all be better than UNM. I'd put CSU above UNM too to the extent they actually care about football in Ft. Collins.

Isn't SDSU already in the BE?

New Mexico is more populous than Nebraska and West Va and in the same range as Kansas and Utah. It is easily big enough to support one school in a major conference.

Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

(03-19-2012 11:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

I think markets are important, but to say there is zero upside to Nevada and New Mexico is a bit hyperbolic.

I think a healthy conference has a mix of big market schools that share their market with lots of rival schools and small market schools who dominate their market. I've lived in Fort Worth, Denver, Iowa City, Lincoln, Indianapolis and St. Louis and seen a mix of different scenarios and honestly see the virtues of each types of markets. Specifically in defense of smaller markets with one team that dominates, my years in Lincoln showed me that there is community momentum you can get in a small market that you just don't see in markets with multiple allegiences (including professional competition). In the former, local nonaffiliated fans all adopt the school and team and the community resources aren't divided up, allowing for some "catch the wave" momentum opportunites. In the latter, there is greater potential for a "bleh" response from nonaffiliated local fans and community resources get all divided up, making the enthusiasm threshold a bit higher. Look no further than Boise as an example of how it is sometimes easier to get momentum in a small, dominated market.

So I don't go either/or on the question of markets.

I seriously can't believe that ANYONE thinks adding New Mexico is a good idea.

As a reminder, any western addition will be for FOOTBALL only, so any and all schools that suck, and have always sucked, should not be mentioned on this board.

Western Candidates

1) BYU

2) AFA

Distant 3) Fresno

All others

(03-19-2012 12:40 PM)lollaperuna Wrote:  I seriously can't believe that ANYONE thinks adding New Mexico is a good idea.

As a reminder, any western addition will be for FOOTBALL only, so any and all schools that suck, and have always sucked, should not be mentioned on this board.

Western Candidates

1) BYU

2) AFA

Distant 3) Fresno

All others

Trouble is that there are no more no brainer options out west, assuming BYU and AFA aren't options. All other candidates have warts of one sort or another.

(03-19-2012 12:40 PM)lollaperuna Wrote:  I seriously can't believe that ANYONE thinks adding New Mexico is a good idea.

As a reminder, any western addition will be for FOOTBALL only, so any and all schools that suck, and have always sucked, should not be mentioned on this board.

Western Candidates

1) BYU

2) AFA

Distant 3) Fresno

All others

I would add Colorado State and UNLV to the bottom of the list if they show improvement in FB and actually put money into the program with increased coaching salaries and building of new football stadiums.

New Mexico and UNLV are kind of like western versions of Memphis and Temple - they have pretty good value as all-sports members but very limited value as football-only members. The issue is that geography can be thrown out the window for football-only members, but that can't be done for all-sports members.

It's obvious that Air Force and BYU are the best football-only western options for the Big East (and I think the former is much more likely than the latter). The real question is that if both rebuff the Big East's advances, who else is worthy? I still say that no one should sleep on Hawaii. Remember that we're just talking about them as a football-only member and the NCAA provides a compensatory extra regular season game in the years that you travel there.

(03-19-2012 12:18 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 11:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

I think markets are important, but to say there is zero upside to Nevada and New Mexico is a bit hyperbolic.

I think a healthy conference has a mix of big market schools that share their market with lots of rival schools and small market schools who dominate their market. I've lived in Fort Worth, Denver, Iowa City, Lincoln, Indianapolis and St. Louis and seen a mix of different scenarios and honestly see the virtues of each types of markets. Specifically in defense of smaller markets with one team that dominates, my years in Lincoln showed me that there is community momentum you can get in a small market that you just don't see in markets with multiple allegiences (including professional competition). In the former, local nonaffiliated fans all adopt the school and team and the community resources aren't divided up, allowing for some "catch the wave" momentum opportunites. In the latter, there is greater potential for a "bleh" response from nonaffiliated local fans and community resources get all divided up, making the enthusiasm threshold a bit higher. Look no further than Boise as an example of how it is sometimes easier to get momentum in a small, dominated market.

So I don't go either/or on the question of markets.

What I said is that there is zero upside to those markets. In other words, if they become more popular and expand thier primary metro market to encompass a significant percentage of their secondary state markets---whats their up side? The problem with both universities, is thier state markets are smaller than many cities. So even if they begin to capture thier entire states, the secondary market upside is very limited.

Thats why if we are unable to get either of the best obvious choices (BYU or Air Force) to join the Big East, then Fresno is the no brainer. They have a strong fanbase, fill a 40K seat stadium regularly, have 2.6 million in the the general Fresno area, and have the additional huge upside potential of capturing a precentage of the 37 million viewers that reside in the state of California. Comparared to that, New Mexico and UNLV have no market upside.

Not to mention that this entire argument ignores the obvious. Why give teams who are terrible at football, and pretty much always have been, a football only invite? With the exception of the last couple of years, Fresno St has consistantly played football at a high level. That cant be said of UNLV or New Mexico.

(03-19-2012 11:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

Sounds like YOU are the one that doesn't understand TV markets.

Las Vegas is a Top 50 TV Market (#42), while Fresno is not (#55).

Las Vegas is almost the #1 or #2 tourist destination in the USA, with approx 40 Million visitors per year.

Next time...why not do your own research into the matter vs throwing out dumb and non-factual statements like "zero upside to (UNLV's) TV market".

(03-19-2012 02:16 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 11:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

Sounds like YOU are the one that doesn't understand TV markets.

Las Vegas is a Top 50 TV Market (#42), while Fresno is not (#55).

Las Vegas is almost the #1 or #2 tourist destination in the USA, with approx 40 Million visitors per year.

Next time...why not do your own research into the matter vs throwing out dumb and non-factual statements like "zero upside to (UNLV's) TV market".

lol....The 40 million people who go to Las Vegas arent going to UNLV football games. They are gambling at the Wynn.

What I said is the Las Vegas market has no upside in it's secondary state market.

Reading comprehension is your friend. If you actually read the comments, you would see that I was talking about how the secondary state market for UNLV has a very limited upside due to the states small population. Where as Fresno has much more upside due California's massive 37 million person population. The valley surrounding Fresno alone has nearly as many people as the entire state of Nevada. In Fresno, 40,000 people regularly show up for Bulldog football games---that doesnt happen at UNLV. Add in the synergistic affect of having two teams in California, the interest of TV viewers across that highly populated state could increase marketly. Thats what I mean by upside. The UNLV upside is extremely limited beyond its core market.

(03-19-2012 02:45 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 02:16 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 11:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

Sounds like YOU are the one that doesn't understand TV markets.

Las Vegas is a Top 50 TV Market (#42), while Fresno is not (#55).

Las Vegas is almost the #1 or #2 tourist destination in the USA, with approx 40 Million visitors per year.

Next time...why not do your own research into the matter vs throwing out dumb and non-factual statements like "zero upside to (UNLV's) TV market".

lol....The 40 million people who go to Las Vegas arent going to UNLV football games. They are gambling at the Wynn.

What I said is the Las Vegas market has no upside in it's secondary state market.

Reading comprehension is your friend. If you actually read the comments, you would see that I was talking about how the secondary state market for UNLV has a very limited upside due to the states small population. Where as Fresno has much more upside due California's massive 37 million person population. The valley surrounding Fresno alone has nearly as many people as the entire state of Nevada. In Fresno, 40,000 people regularly show up for Bulldog football games---that doesnt happen at UNLV. Add in the synergistic affect of having two teams in California, the interest of TV viewers across that highly populated state could increase marketly. Thats what I mean by upside. The UNLV upside is extremely limited beyond its core market.

1) Last year, Fresno State average "announced" attendance was 29,298 per game.

2) Even if Fresno drew 40,000 or 50,000 per game...that's obviously not the most important factor to the Big East...because if it was...ECU would have been invited over teams such as Boise, SDSU, SMU, UH, UCF, Memphis and Temple.

Attendance doesn't mean much...especially compared to TV market and other factors....because if it did, schools like SMU, Memphis and Temple never would have been invited.

3) Last I recall, there are ZERO bowl games played in Fresno...and with Big East expanding to the West Coast...any and all new bowl games in that area might become future partners for the conf.

From all of your previous posts...seems like you have some personal hatred about UNLV...especially trying to even suggest that Fresno or New Mexico have more "upside" than UNLV with a new $2 Billion stadium project would be able to bring in.

(03-19-2012 02:16 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 11:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

Sounds like YOU are the one that doesn't understand TV markets.

Las Vegas is a Top 50 TV Market (#42), while Fresno is not (#55).

Las Vegas is almost the #1 or #2 tourist destination in the USA, with approx 40 Million visitors per year.

Next time...why not do your own research into the matter vs throwing out dumb and non-factual statements like "zero upside to (UNLV's) TV market".

I don't mean to get into a urinating contest here but how familiar are you with California and southern Nevada? As I've said, I would love to see UNLV added to the BE PROVIDED the western division was expanded to include all sports. Because UNLV hoops is great but their football is awful.

And here's the deal with Fresno from somebody who has lived in the Bay Area, in Fresno and in Southern California and who travels throughout the state on business. The Fresno area only has about half a million people but the San Joaquin Valley extends from Redding in the north to Bakersfield in the south and has a population of probably four million or so.

Fresno State has the only FBS football program in the SJ Valley. Therefore, nearly every little hamlet south of Fresno roots for the Bulldogs first and USC, which is on the other side of the Tahachapis, to a much lesser extent. (Almost nobody in the central valley cares about either UCLA or SDSU.) North of Fresno, including Merced, Modesto and Sacramento, Fresno State football is almost as popular as Cal, Stanford, UC Davis and Sac State combined. UCD and Sac State play FCS football so almost don't matter at all and Cal and Stanford are perceived by many as being part of the uppity Bay Area rather than the agricultural central valley. Pat Hill emphasized that by placing a large green "V" on the back of Fresno State's helmets.

The bottom line is that looking at Fresno State's "market" as strictly the Fresno metro area is highly misleading.

(03-19-2012 02:52 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  Last I recall, there are ZERO bowl games played in Fresno...and with Big East expanding to the West Coast...any and all new bowl games in that area might become future partners for the conf.

From all of your previous posts...seems like you have some personal hatred about UNLV...especially trying to even suggest that Fresno or New Mexico have more "upside" than UNLV with a new $2 Billion stadium project would be able to bring in.

Yep, the so-called Raisin Bowl was thrown in the crapper at least 20 years ago. However, how much money does a bowl game earn? Granted, UNLV would look good if they build that stadium. However, it's been in the discussion stage for a decade. Which makes sense since LV housing has been hit harder by the economic downturn that any market in the country. And if the UNLV fan I sat next to at the MWC tournament a couple weekends ago is correct, LV is finally starting to get nervous about water. Just like California, Nevada has lost a significant share of Colorado River water to Arizona. And unlike California, Nevada won't be able to recoup that loss from the Pacific Ocean through desalinization.

Anyway, with due respect, I can hardly think of a worse football-only member to add to the BE than UNLV. These would be my choices in order of preference:

YBU (pronounced Why Be You? & short for Young Borg University)
AFA
Fresno
CSU

(03-19-2012 02:52 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 02:45 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 02:16 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 11:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

Sounds like YOU are the one that doesn't understand TV markets.

Las Vegas is a Top 50 TV Market (#42), while Fresno is not (#55).

Las Vegas is almost the #1 or #2 tourist destination in the USA, with approx 40 Million visitors per year.

Next time...why not do your own research into the matter vs throwing out dumb and non-factual statements like "zero upside to (UNLV's) TV market".

lol....The 40 million people who go to Las Vegas arent going to UNLV football games. They are gambling at the Wynn.

What I said is the Las Vegas market has no upside in it's secondary state market.

Reading comprehension is your friend. If you actually read the comments, you would see that I was talking about how the secondary state market for UNLV has a very limited upside due to the states small population. Where as Fresno has much more upside due California's massive 37 million person population. The valley surrounding Fresno alone has nearly as many people as the entire state of Nevada. In Fresno, 40,000 people regularly show up for Bulldog football games---that doesnt happen at UNLV. Add in the synergistic affect of having two teams in California, the interest of TV viewers across that highly populated state could increase marketly. Thats what I mean by upside. The UNLV upside is extremely limited beyond its core market.

1) Last year, Fresno State average "announced" attendance was 29,298 per game.

2) Even if Fresno drew 40,000 or 50,000 per game...that's obviously not the most important factor to the Big East...because if it was...ECU would have been invited over teams such as Boise, SDSU, SMU, UH, UCF, Memphis and Temple.

Attendance doesn't mean much...especially compared to TV market and other factors....because if it did, schools like SMU, Memphis and Temple never would have been invited.

3) Last I recall, there are ZERO bowl games played in Fresno...and with Big East expanding to the West Coast...any and all new bowl games in that area might become future partners for the conf.

From all of your previous posts...seems like you have some personal hatred about UNLV...especially trying to even suggest that Fresno or New Mexico have more "upside" than UNLV with a new $2 Billion stadium project would be able to bring in.

Actually I have no dislike for UNLV. I go Vegas pretty regularly and have a great time. I just think as a "football only" invite they are a poor choice for multiple reasons. Ive NEVER suggested New Mexico as a good choice. In fact, if you read the previous posts, I lump them in with UNLV as poor choice. UNLV's value lies in its basketball program. As a football program, thier value is considerably less. Honestly, of the available choice out west beyond BYU and Air Force, only Fresno makes much sense---and they are probably borderline. Basically, it will come down to what the media people say. If they say UNLV adds the most money to the TV contract---then thats who we need to add. I just dont believe that will be thier final recommendation.

UNM and UNLV will never care about football, being football onlys, they don't offer anything even if they'd offer SDSU quite a bit in a regional other sports conference.

(03-19-2012 03:12 PM)SleepingGiantsFan Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 02:16 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 11:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

Sounds like YOU are the one that doesn't understand TV markets.

Las Vegas is a Top 50 TV Market (#42), while Fresno is not (#55).

Las Vegas is almost the #1 or #2 tourist destination in the USA, with approx 40 Million visitors per year.

Next time...why not do your own research into the matter vs throwing out dumb and non-factual statements like "zero upside to (UNLV's) TV market".

I don't mean to get into a urinating contest here but how familiar are you with California and southern Nevada? As I've said, I would love to see UNLV added to the BE PROVIDED the western division was expanded to include all sports. Because UNLV hoops is great but their football is awful.

And here's the deal with Fresno from somebody who has lived in the Bay Area, in Fresno and in Southern California and who travels throughout the state on business. The Fresno area only has about half a million people but the San Joaquin Valley extends from Redding in the north to Bakersfield in the south and has a population of probably four million or so.

Fresno State has the only FBS football program in the SJ Valley. Therefore, nearly every little hamlet south of Fresno roots for the Bulldogs first and USC, which is on the other side of the Tahachapis, to a much lesser extent. (Almost nobody in the central valley cares about either UCLA or SDSU.) North of Fresno, including Merced, Modesto and Sacramento, Fresno State football is almost as popular as Cal, Stanford, UC Davis and Sac State combined. UCD and Sac State play FCS football so almost don't matter at all and Cal and Stanford are perceived by many as being part of the uppity Bay Area rather than the agricultural central valley. Pat Hill emphasized that by placing a large green "V" on the back of Fresno State's helmets.

The bottom line is that looking at Fresno State's "market" as strictly the Fresno metro area is highly misleading.

Excellent Post, Couldn't have said it any better myself..

(03-19-2012 01:52 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  Not to mention that this entire argument ignores the obvious. Why give teams who are terrible at football, and pretty much always have been, a football only invite? With the exception of the last couple of years, Fresno St has consistantly played football at a high level. That cant be said of UNLV or New Mexico.

Well you gave one to SDSU :-) Other than the 60's and two recent years that pretty much describes them.

(sorry Aztec's, you have been very supportive but I just couldn't resist)

(03-19-2012 02:16 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(03-19-2012 11:59 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Yeah, the entire state of New Mexico has 2.1 million people. The entire state of Nevda has 2.7 million people. The people that keep mentioning New Mexico and UNLV dont understand that there is ZERO upside to those markets. A California school like Fresno St has 2.6 million people living in the surrounding valley area (more than the entire state of New Mexico and nearly equal to the entire state of Nevada) PLUS they have a secondary market of 37 million million Californians that might have a more casual interest in watching Fresno games on TV. Thats a huge potential upside that Nevada and New Mexico cant provide. There is just no reason to take UNLV and New Mexico. Both have bad football and limited markets.

Sounds like YOU are the one that doesn't understand TV markets.

Las Vegas is a Top 50 TV Market (#42), while Fresno is not (#55).

Las Vegas is almost the #1 or #2 tourist destination in the USA, with approx 40 Million visitors per year.

Next time...why not do your own research into the matter vs throwing out dumb and non-factual statements like "zero upside to (UNLV's) TV market".

So just to provide you some numbers.

The UNLV Market is is 4oth at 737,300

As you point at the Fresno/Visalia Market is 55th at 574,800

But what you are missing is you are trying to sell your cable package. So if you really want to understand the potential of Fresno you have to realize the geographically it is one of the smallest DMA's in the country. Those of us who live in the valley recognize to properly value Fresno you have to look beyond the DMA.

So Fresno really is (all within 90 minutes of the stadium):
Fresno/Visalia 547,800
Bakersfield 221,920
and a portion of the
Sacramento/Stockton/Modesto 1,388,570 *.2 = 277,714

So really Fresno is about 1,047,434 which puts them just below San Diego on the DMA list. In addition, I have another 1M plus in Stockton/Sacramento that has no BCS or Pro football team and isn't really owned by any team.

As to no bowl game, have you ever been to Fresno in late December/January?