No, and no plans to thus far. 10 is easier for basketball, but 9 works fine with home and homes. Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that the MWC has made a push for BYU to stay. Which is sad. Because at the beginning of the MWC changes this past summer, the MWC felt it was in a better position that they actually were. They just didn’t have the foresight to see all the changes. On day one when BYu said they were going indy in football and joining the WAC for other sports, the MWC should have been calmer, cooler. Because they could have just said, “look, it you are going to leave for indy football, we can’t stop you. But we will be inviting 2 WAC schools (UNR, CSUF) for all-sports. So why not stay with us for non-football sports”. Instead, the MWC played tough guy and forced BYUs hands. The MWC did raid the WAC, but that just sent BYU into the arms of the WCC. Again, if the MWC had the foresight, they could still have a BYU/Hawaii 10th member situation. Now, they don’t have any presence in Utah, which was their biggest base. Sad.

As for UTEP. A loud No. Utep was not entirely interested in the MWC, which is why the MWC had to look at Utah St. and SJSU…which they passes on. Texas schools just arent’ sold on the MWC versus CUSA right now with BYU, Utah and TCU all gone. So UTEP as a non-football member is even less attractive than being invited for all-sports for them.

The MWC is a step down for Gonzaga right now, especially with BYu joining. The WCC, with 9 members, will likely be a 3 bid conference most years and only 9 mouths to feed. And when schools like GU, StM and BYU advance, that’s another revenue share for the WCC. With BYU joining, the WCC overall revenue for basketball will likely be higher than the MWC, again, with 9 mouths to feed. Once BYu is gone, think the MWC is a 3 bid conference? SDSU and UNLV could sustain but no lock on a 3rd team.

Nathan, Denver is already out, leaving only UALR. UALR met the minimum sports sponsorship number, so they can’t exactly be kicked out. They can volunteer to leave though. They spoke with the Summit already. but you gotta figure the southland would make more sense. Regardless, UALR is in the Sunbelt as long as they want to be, it would appear.

Could be, Nathan.

Seattle
* Idaho
Denver
CSUB
* NMSU
* UTSA
* Texas St.
* LA Tech
UTPA
HBU

But really, looking at that group, it leads one to think:

1) If you’re LA Tech, there’s no reason to wait around for CUSA to call. There’s no more BCS/Boise St. money coming in. Might as well pack your bags and leave for the Sunbelt, where you are wanted.

2) If you’re the Sunbelt, and you do bring in LA Tech, do you bring in a 12th football school (13th total)? Perhaps. And if so, do you go with the devil you know (NMSU) or take a chance with newbie UTSA and expand into Texas?

3) Denver. Ouch, tough way things played out. I see no reason for Denver to remain in this group which is primarily the Great West and indys. It’s time to finally accept those feelers made by the Summit League, where you at least have some nearby schools like NDSU, SDSU, and USD.

4) if this all happens, loss of USU and SJSU, loss of LA Tech & another football school, loss of Denver…what next?

You’d have:
Seattle
* Idaho
CSUB
* NMSU
* Texas St.
UTPA
HBU

So you can bet that NMSU and TSU hope the SB would goto 14 to save them.

Idaho is left out. To remain in FBS, they can be another western indy like BYU. But they’ll have a lot more road games.

I’d sure like to see that as well, Trey. I’m not sure if it makes sense for the Sunbelt though. They are in a position of power over the WAC right now. So if the SB lost school(s) to CUSA or another conference, they’d have their feeder ground in the WAC.

But in expanding with the 2 Texas schools, it would give them a bigger share in the state to compete with CUSA.