Several tidbits in this ESPiN article:

Quote:Utah State and San Jose State will announce they are joining the Mountain West Conference for the 2013-14 season on Friday, multiple sources told ESPN.com on Wednesday.

Quote:Boise State is set to join the WAC in all other sports, but multiple sources said the Broncos are trying to get in the Big West, as well, now that the WAC is falling apart.

Quote:Sources told ESPN.com the Mountain West wanted to preserve its Football Bowl Subdivision membership at 10 in football, and stay at nine in men's and women's basketball for scheduling purposes.

Quote:Sources said the Mountain West has no interest in adding NMSU or Idaho.

It better happen soon, because I've been celebrating for an entire week now. Go Spartans!

I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible institutions to sign on if necessary.

(05-03-2012 06:45 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible initiations to sign on if necessary.

I don't think it was a shell game and I think it was a concept worth investigating. However, they found that the pitfalls outweighed the benefits, so they scrapped it - at least for now. Both conferences needed to expand and they knew they had at least 6 months to get that done and they knew that the SBC and WAC weren't going anywhere. If the Alliance were to have worked out, the new conference could have taken shape without expansion. They took 4 months to figure out the Alliance wouldn't work, so now they're restructuring to rebuild and grow.

(05-03-2012 06:45 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible initiations to sign on if necessary.

All of the schools added would have jumped at the opportunity whether the Alliance had been a possibility or not.

(05-03-2012 06:45 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible institutions to sign on if necessary.

More likely a bluff to try to gain some leverage in negotiations with their TV partners.

(05-03-2012 08:05 AM)wvucrazed Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 06:45 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible initiations to sign on if necessary.

All of the schools added would have jumped at the opportunity whether the Alliance had been a possibility or not.

Probably but I'm sure that both felt it was in their best interest, at least for the short term, to create the impression that something bigger and better could come out of the carnage.

What is obvious now is that both suffered major damage with no hope of recovering fully and with more carnage likely in the near future, both are in survival mode, as is the BE, and SBC.

Only the MAC looks stable going forward.

(05-03-2012 07:57 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 06:45 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible initiations to sign on if necessary.

I don't think it was a shell game and I think it was a concept worth investigating. However, they found that the pitfalls outweighed the benefits, so they scrapped it - at least for now. Both conferences needed to expand and they knew they had at least 6 months to get that done and they knew that the SBC and WAC weren't going anywhere. If the Alliance were to have worked out, the new conference could have taken shape without expansion. They took 4 months to figure out the Alliance wouldn't work, so now they're restructuring to rebuild and grow.

I think your thoughts on the tining of it happening now are right, but the part about scrapping it or finding that it wouldn't work are a bit pre-mature. TV contracts have to finish out first. Let's see what happens when they both have to renegotiate. Doesn't mean they will actually merge but the Alliance is far from dead.

(05-03-2012 06:45 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible institutions to sign on if necessary.

It looks like the alliance plan is in limbo, at best. I never liked the idea, but they should try to schedule each other out of conference more often.

Even if the Alliance does not come about they will have done a big favor for those above, as well as for the rest of us in my opinion. They will have pushed the rhetoric of increasing the conference postseason by another week.

Some of us here have been talking about conference playoffs for awhile now but the Alliance really brought it to the mainstream forefront. Now with the idea out there anyone could take the bull by the horns and run with it.

The MAC and SBC do not have the NCAA tournament points to hold them back from such a merger. Neither of them have any real substantial tv agreements. With the MAC moving over into New York and Massachusetts they are already showing the desrie to move out of their base region.

MAC and SBC games are about as local as it comes but having watched a few MAC games myself they actually play some pretty interesting ball. I am sure you guys down in the SBC have some pretty exciting teams as well. By the MAC and SBC forming up an alliance of their own some of those teams would get better coverage.

So even if the Alliance between the MWC and CUSA does not happen. They have succeeded in pushing forward the rhetoric in this country when it comes to college football.

(05-03-2012 08:38 AM)Mothership Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 07:57 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 06:45 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible initiations to sign on if necessary.

I don't think it was a shell game and I think it was a concept worth investigating. However, they found that the pitfalls outweighed the benefits, so they scrapped it - at least for now. Both conferences needed to expand and they knew they had at least 6 months to get that done and they knew that the SBC and WAC weren't going anywhere. If the Alliance were to have worked out, the new conference could have taken shape without expansion. They took 4 months to figure out the Alliance wouldn't work, so now they're restructuring to rebuild and grow.

I think your thoughts on the tining of it happening now are right, but the part about scrapping it or finding that it wouldn't work are a bit pre-mature. TV contracts have to finish out first. Let's see what happens when they both have to renegotiate. Doesn't mean they will actually merge but the Alliance is far from dead.

Which is why I added the "for now." I think when the TV contracts expire after the 2015 season, we'll see this talk ramped up again. I suspect the TV partners basically told them that they wouldn't rework the existing contracts now and the NCAA told them they would lose out long term if they merged now (loss of a tourney spot, loss of exit fees, loss of tourney revenue, etc.). In 2014 or 2015, I suspect we'll see the Alliance come to fruition.

(05-03-2012 09:12 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 08:38 AM)Mothership Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 07:57 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 06:45 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible initiations to sign on if necessary.

I don't think it was a shell game and I think it was a concept worth investigating. However, they found that the pitfalls outweighed the benefits, so they scrapped it - at least for now. Both conferences needed to expand and they knew they had at least 6 months to get that done and they knew that the SBC and WAC weren't going anywhere. If the Alliance were to have worked out, the new conference could have taken shape without expansion. They took 4 months to figure out the Alliance wouldn't work, so now they're restructuring to rebuild and grow.

I think your thoughts on the tining of it happening now are right, but the part about scrapping it or finding that it wouldn't work are a bit pre-mature. TV contracts have to finish out first. Let's see what happens when they both have to renegotiate. Doesn't mean they will actually merge but the Alliance is far from dead.

Which is why I added the "for now." I think when the TV contracts expire after the 2015 season, we'll see this talk ramped up again. I suspect the TV partners basically told them that they wouldn't rework the existing contracts now and the NCAA told them they would lose out long term if they merged now (loss of a tourney spot, loss of exit fees, loss of tourney revenue, etc.). In 2014 or 2015, I suspect we'll see the Alliance come to fruition.

The Mountain network is shutting down. The TV contracts are being re-worked with CBS Sports. The alliance is on. A full merger is the only thing that is out right now. Nothing has really changed but the form of their alliance. And a full merger may still be in the works a few years down the road.

(05-03-2012 09:32 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 09:12 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 08:38 AM)Mothership Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 07:57 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 06:45 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  I wonder when the MWC and CUSA will just straight up say that that alliance/merger or whatever was just a shell game to buy some time, and help attract some gullible initiations to sign on if necessary.

I don't think it was a shell game and I think it was a concept worth investigating. However, they found that the pitfalls outweighed the benefits, so they scrapped it - at least for now. Both conferences needed to expand and they knew they had at least 6 months to get that done and they knew that the SBC and WAC weren't going anywhere. If the Alliance were to have worked out, the new conference could have taken shape without expansion. They took 4 months to figure out the Alliance wouldn't work, so now they're restructuring to rebuild and grow.

I think your thoughts on the tining of it happening now are right, but the part about scrapping it or finding that it wouldn't work are a bit pre-mature. TV contracts have to finish out first. Let's see what happens when they both have to renegotiate. Doesn't mean they will actually merge but the Alliance is far from dead.

Which is why I added the "for now." I think when the TV contracts expire after the 2015 season, we'll see this talk ramped up again. I suspect the TV partners basically told them that they wouldn't rework the existing contracts now and the NCAA told them they would lose out long term if they merged now (loss of a tourney spot, loss of exit fees, loss of tourney revenue, etc.). In 2014 or 2015, I suspect we'll see the Alliance come to fruition.

The Mountain network is shutting down. The TV contracts are being re-worked with CBS Sports. The alliance is on. A full merger is the only thing that is out right now. Nothing has really changed but the form of their alliance. And a full merger may still be in the works a few years down the road.

It's a lot less likely with the expansion in both leagues. CUSA alone is going to have 14 schools now; they started talking with the MWC about a merger that would have had 16.

(05-03-2012 07:57 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  They took 4 months to figure out the Alliance wouldn't work, so now they're restructuring to rebuild and grow.

Amazing.

many of us immediately recognized the issues about the lost BB credit $$, the autobid that would be lost, the lost exit fees from departing BigEast-bound schools, and the lack of significant per-school TV money/interest when they first announced they were looking into this "idea".

Not only that, most posters also recognized the astronomical odds against a C-USA/MWC champion being granted an auto-bid to a BCS bowl or the NCAA likely approved extra a pre-bowl game

Why did it take them 4 months to figure that out?

(05-03-2012 01:49 PM)nert Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 07:57 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  They took 4 months to figure out the Alliance wouldn't work, so now they're restructuring to rebuild and grow.

Amazing.

many of us immediately recognized the issues about the lost BB credit $$, the autobid that would be lost, the lost exit fees from departing BigEast-bound schools, and the lack of significant per-school TV money/interest when they first announced they were looking into this "idea".

Not only that, most posters also recognized the astronomical odds against a C-USA/MWC champion being granted an auto-bid to a BCS bowl or the NCAA likely approved extra a pre-bowl game

Why did it take them 4 months to figure that out?

I think they knew the issues, but thought they could get the TV deal to cover those losses. I suspect that the TV partners said no and the NCAA said no to the extra game they wanted to go to a 2-round playoff within the Alliance. Basically, I think the NCAA is going to grant a 15th game for the NCG, but they didn't want a school to possibly play a 16th game. There were ways around that, but I don't think they were appealing to the TV partners. So the idea isn't dead, but it's postponed.

(05-03-2012 01:57 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 01:49 PM)nert Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 07:57 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  They took 4 months to figure out the Alliance wouldn't work, so now they're restructuring to rebuild and grow.

Amazing.

many of us immediately recognized the issues about the lost BB credit $$, the autobid that would be lost, the lost exit fees from departing BigEast-bound schools, and the lack of significant per-school TV money/interest when they first announced they were looking into this "idea".

Not only that, most posters also recognized the astronomical odds against a C-USA/MWC champion being granted an auto-bid to a BCS bowl or the NCAA likely approved extra a pre-bowl game

Why did it take them 4 months to figure that out?

I think they knew the issues, but thought they could get the TV deal to cover those losses. I suspect that the TV partners said no and the NCAA said no to the extra game they wanted to go to a 2-round playoff within the Alliance. Basically, I think the NCAA is going to grant a 15th game for the NCG, but they didn't want a school to possibly play a 16th game. There were ways around that, but I don't think they were appealing to the TV partners. So the idea isn't dead, but it's postponed.

I think this is closest---but I dont see the merger coming. The original Alliance announcement was basically a hurried written-on-the-back-of-a-napkin-idea announced as a hail mary to try to convince Boise, SDSU, Houston, and SMU to stay. It was later enlarged to include the Big East in yet another Hail Mary. Over the last 4 or 5 months the plan was fleshed out and more completely investgated. That was when they discovered that the hoped for TV dollars were not going to be there---at least not to the extent that it was worth giving up the income from NCAA credits and exit fees.

If you look at CUSA's 6 new additions and its current layout--its clear they are not going to be merging. The CUSA school map has nice georaphically stable divisions and some good schools with alot of upside. Essentially, CUSA now looks far more like a finished product than a work in progress. I dont see any future merger in the picture--maybe at most just a loose working partnership.

One thing that will be interesting to see with CUSA is what happens with the TV deal. If there's no slippage in terms of money, the leaving schools are set.

From the bylaws:
If the member affords the Conference at least one calendar year prior notice of withdrawal but less than two calendar years
prior notice of withdrawal, the member shall pay the Conference a withdrawal fee of (i) $500,000 plus (ii) the aggregate
amount, if any, by which the television rights fees received by the remaining members of the Conference pursuant to any and
all Conference-level television broadcast and licensing agreements are reduced, as a result of the member's withdrawal, during
the five year period immediately subsequent to the effective date of the member's withdrawal.
also:
The withdrawal fee shall be reduced by the value of any NCAA basketball fund units earned by the withdrawing member that will be
paid to the Conference and not distributed to the withdrawing member after the effective date of the withdrawal. The withdrawal fee
shall be increased by the amount of any and all assessments or debts that the member owes to the Conference as of the effective date of
the withdrawal.

So- it would appear as if the tv deal doesn't go down- the exit fee for all schools leaving would be $500k. Memphis and Houston would be free- as they have NCAA units left. UCF and SMU would be having to pay the $500k.

(05-03-2012 02:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  One thing that will be interesting to see with CUSA is what happens with the TV deal. If there's no slippage in terms of money, the leaving schools are set.

From the bylaws:
If the member affords the Conference at least one calendar year prior notice of withdrawal but less than two calendar years
prior notice of withdrawal, the member shall pay the Conference a withdrawal fee of (i) $500,000 plus (ii) the aggregate
amount, if any, by which the television rights fees received by the remaining members of the Conference pursuant to any and
all Conference-level television broadcast and licensing agreements are reduced, as a result of the member's withdrawal, during
the five year period immediately subsequent to the effective date of the member's withdrawal.
also:
The withdrawal fee shall be reduced by the value of any NCAA basketball fund units earned by the withdrawing member that will be
paid to the Conference and not distributed to the withdrawing member after the effective date of the withdrawal. The withdrawal fee
shall be increased by the amount of any and all assessments or debts that the member owes to the Conference as of the effective date of
the withdrawal.

So- it would appear as if the tv deal doesn't go down- the exit fee for all schools leaving would be $500k. Memphis and Houston would be free- as they have NCAA units left. UCF and SMU would be having to pay the $500k.

Interesting take. I wonder how they compute the loss in contract value when the number of schools increases/decreases. They now have 14 members vs 12 when the defecting schools left. If the contract goes up and everyone makes more---thats obvious. If the contract goes down and everyone makes less---thats obvious too. But there is a middle ground where the contract value could go up, but due to the larger number of schools--the per-school pay out would be a bit less. Wonder what happens then?

(05-03-2012 02:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  One thing that will be interesting to see with CUSA is what happens with the TV deal. If there's no slippage in terms of money, the leaving schools are set.

From the bylaws:
If the member affords the Conference at least one calendar year prior notice of withdrawal but less than two calendar years
prior notice of withdrawal, the member shall pay the Conference a withdrawal fee of (i) $500,000 plus (ii) the aggregate
amount, if any, by which the television rights fees received by the remaining members of the Conference pursuant to any and
all Conference-level television broadcast and licensing agreements are reduced, as a result of the member's withdrawal, during
the five year period immediately subsequent to the effective date of the member's withdrawal.
also:
The withdrawal fee shall be reduced by the value of any NCAA basketball fund units earned by the withdrawing member that will be
paid to the Conference and not distributed to the withdrawing member after the effective date of the withdrawal. The withdrawal fee
shall be increased by the amount of any and all assessments or debts that the member owes to the Conference as of the effective date of
the withdrawal.

So- it would appear as if the tv deal doesn't go down- the exit fee for all schools leaving would be $500k. Memphis and Houston would be free- as they have NCAA units left. UCF and SMU would be having to pay the $500k.

Yup.

(05-03-2012 02:19 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 01:57 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 01:49 PM)nert Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 07:57 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  They took 4 months to figure out the Alliance wouldn't work, so now they're restructuring to rebuild and grow.

Amazing.

many of us immediately recognized the issues about the lost BB credit $$, the autobid that would be lost, the lost exit fees from departing BigEast-bound schools, and the lack of significant per-school TV money/interest when they first announced they were looking into this "idea".

Not only that, most posters also recognized the astronomical odds against a C-USA/MWC champion being granted an auto-bid to a BCS bowl or the NCAA likely approved extra a pre-bowl game

Why did it take them 4 months to figure that out?

I think they knew the issues, but thought they could get the TV deal to cover those losses. I suspect that the TV partners said no and the NCAA said no to the extra game they wanted to go to a 2-round playoff within the Alliance. Basically, I think the NCAA is going to grant a 15th game for the NCG, but they didn't want a school to possibly play a 16th game. There were ways around that, but I don't think they were appealing to the TV partners. So the idea isn't dead, but it's postponed.

I think this is closest---but I dont see the merger coming. The original Alliance announcement was basically a hurried written-on-the-back-of-a-napkin-idea announced as a hail mary to try to convince Boise, SDSU, Houston, and SMU to stay. It was later enlarged to include the Big East in yet another Hail Mary. Over the last 4 or 5 months the plan was fleshed out and more completely investgated. That was when they discovered that the hoped for TV dollars were not going to be there---at least not to the extent that it was worth giving up the income from NCAA credits and exit fees.

If you look at CUSA's 6 new additions and its current layout--its clear they are not going to be merging. The CUSA school map has nice georaphically stable divisions and some good schools with alot of upside. Essentially, CUSA now looks far more like a finished product than a work in progress. I dont see any future merger in the picture--maybe at most just a loose working partnership.

The quotes indicated they were hoping for $2-$3 million a school, maybe more, when they 1st started this. Last I saw they were talking maybe $2 million.

Its a big increase over the $1-$1.5 they are getting now, but not enough to offset what they would lose. I've seen as high as $7.5 million apiece for the exit fees. That would be $30 million + Memphis taking its NCAA credits with them.