NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:41 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:37 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2003 11:18 pm
Posts: 758
What is this divide Montana in 2?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:38 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:39 pm
Posts: 1215
Realistically, Montana and Montana State have to hope for some near-great fall out from all of the realignment issues and changes to the A/AA classifications, and then they may have a chance to join the WAC or some other reconfigured western conference. The MWC, however, appears to be the port for mid-major powers that can't find their way into the Pac 10. If Boise St can't make it there, Montana won't be able to. And if Boise St can make it, there probably won't be any room left for Montana!

Several folks on some SDSU boards have suggested the MWC become exactly that, by having the Rocky Mt. 5 team up with Boise and Montana while SDSU joins more flatlanders within the WAC. While I know the MWC will become the new poster-child for Disconnected Memberships, methinks the market powers will overcome geography here. At least until the west (besides LA and The Bay Area) becomes populated enough to consider more regionalism and/or warrant more auto trips between universities.

JMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 3:36 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:57 pm
Posts: 1287
Location: Portland! (and about time!)
After all this time generally buying in, I have an issue with Metro on the market size issue.

Every Oregon fan I know is intimately aware of the Oregon State broadcasts, and almost instantaneously will let the barkrats know when they've screwed up.

In other words, while measuring alumni size generally means dividing by 2, in terms of a television market, the division is unwise. You know, something along the lines of "hate is the closest thing to love." (Dying for a better quote than that one)

Of course, if you put Montana in that spin cycle, you can certainly apply it to most other states. So, for the most part, it doesn't help Montana.

However, Wyoming, is a more interestiing comparison in this light.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 11, 2005 2:04 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 11:15 pm
Posts: 261
Location: Louisville, KY
Ok, this is coming from a former UM student, so take it with a grain of salt, though I'll be as unbiased as possible. :)

I think if you asked in confidential of administrators, athletic department personnel, etc., where Montana would like to move if out of the Big Sky, it would be to the Mountain West. Would it be the most feasible solution in terms of UM's demographics or logicality for the MWC, I'd say a resounding no. The only geographical rivalries that it would spark up would be Wyoming, and as a stretch possibly Utah and BYU. I can't say for sure right now, but I'm not sure if Wyoming and Montana were in a conference together, especially after UM's post-(now)Pac-10 days. And this doesn't even bring to question the Montana State U System's Board of Regents wanting MSU to be part of the package.

Right now I think if UM were to move up to I-A the best bet would be the WAC. Having a rivalry with Idaho that comes close to UM-MSU and a historical affiliation not only from UI's Big Sky days but also in the old Pac-10, as well as former Big Sky members Nevada and (maybe not for much longer) Boise State would provide some extra incentive to the WAC to accept them in. The more-oft trips to California , not to mention the perk of going to Hawaii would also help exposure and recruiting not only with football, but with other sports as well. UM would need to add 3 sports, with men's golf and softball being 2 possibilities (possible with converting a section of the soccer field, though weather could be a big problem).

Also, there is a possibility of the WAC dropping to 7 members with SJSU's lack of football attendance and LaTech bolting as soon as they find a reasonable (read: closer) conference.

I doubt we'll see Montana in the MWC anytime soon, but I bet within 5 years we may see them get an invite to the WAC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 11, 2005 7:53 pm 
I agree that when and if Montana moves up it will be with an invite from the WAC not the MWC. If the MWC
expands to ten it will take a team from the WAC, probably Fresno St. or Boise. I also see La. Tech leaving the WAC when CUSA has another opening. If expansion occurs again the WAC will be picked clean by the MWC if they loose members or if ihey expand to 12. The WAC will survive if 1A teams keep moving up though.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:50 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2003 11:18 pm
Posts: 758
What state is the most important to MWC recruiting? Texas or California? That might make the difference in expansion for MWC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:54 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2003 11:18 pm
Posts: 758

Quote:

Quote:
What state is the most important to MWC recruiting? Texas or California? That might make the difference in expansion for MWC.


The MWC may hesitate taking any more teams from Texas, as that might take on the look of the old WAC-16, and what led them to break away to form the MWC. UTEP, Houston, SMU and Rice, all individually are still possible candidates, but I doubt they will ever become something that they were trying to move away from. Its not so much Texas per se, as it is any alignment that would hinder current core conference rivalries, such as CSU vs. AFA, Wyoming vs. CSU, Wyoming vs. AFA, Utah vs. BYU, BYU vs. anybody in the Mountain 6 core of the conference. No new alignment can disrupt the historical core of the conference, that is BYU, Utah, CSU, AFA, Wyoming, and UNM, perhaps SDSU. If any alignment tilts in a certain way that affects scheduling of core conference rivals, through divisional alignment or weird geography, the MWC will not go in that direction. That is what they are not the WAC anymore and why the MWC exists in the first place.

Fresno State may have all the elements for conference expansion (competitiveness, market, recruiting base of California, etc), but Boise State has had the best record and ranking and is the team of the moment.


A conference like this might have been good for the MWC.

West
Air Force
BYU
Colorado St
New Mexico
Utah
Wyoming

East
Houston
Rice
SMU
TCU
Tulsa
UTEP

Never will happen, but it would have been a fairly good conference.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group