NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:09 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 171 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2002 12:40 pm 
Offline
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811
Here's the starting point for Mountain West expansion/realignment issues:

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Last edited by Quinn on Wed Oct 08, 2003 8:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2002 12:16 am 
At this point, assuming that the moratorium in the MWC is lifted, Boise State should have a legit shot at joining the MWC, due to region within the MWC area. They should get it, due to their winning record and impressive tradition, though recent.

As for Nevada, they could get the nod, too, however, the Wolf Pack are not on the same keel as Boise recordwise, so they may have to wait.

Off the subject for a bit, one team that I am proud of that is thinking a bit about joining I-A, but isn't, is Montana. They have a good winning streak, and they are a unique team all their own, but if they were to join I-A, it would be a big mistake, because they would be scratching and clawing for wins in the WAC or the MWC.

But, all in all, Boise has the best shot of joining the MWC. I predict that they should be in in 2 or 3 years...? 8-)


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 31, 2002 12:19 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:56 pm
Posts: 290
If Boise and Fresno State joined the MWC, that would be one solid conference. I'd take it over C-USA any day.

Once the BCS dies out (IF it does), I'd like to see the MWC included in a playoff system, getting an automatic berth for its champ (with champs seeded based on a modified BCS-type formula and other slots going to at large teams). At least then they'd be in the mix. If Colorado State and Boise State each had great years, (or insert BYU or Air Force here) the MWC could probably put an at-large team into the mix of a 16 team playoff, along with the MWC conference champ. I'd love to see Tennessee or Nebraska on a down year traveling to the blue field in Boise for an opening round game in December. That'd be quality tv. Plus


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 6:19 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:56 pm
Posts: 290
Does anyone think the WAC's success, and the MWC's lack of success, in the recent bowl games will push the MWC to expand? It might be in there best interest. I think it would be dangerous to risk another poor showing while the WAC wins its bowl games and Boise has yet another banner year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 10:07 pm
Posts: 41
The MWC could expand and take one to four teams and kill off the WAC. Whoever didn't make it would be doomed to 1-AA because I don't believe that an independent (with the exceptions of Notre Dame and Navy) can make it.

In oreder to keep the western Division 1-A teams alive, I propose that the MWC stand pat at eight teams. They would then form a coalition with the WAC to keep all of them afloat.

I have extremely serious doubts that San Jose State can reach or maintain attendance requirements to remain in the top classification. Several of the eastern WAC teams are unhappy with travel costs and some of the teams don't draw well, especially where they have few alumni in the area.

Here's what I think that is best for college football in the Pacific and mountain states. Tulsa, SMU, Rice and Louisiana Tech be allowed to merge into some form of the SBC. In return, the SBC allows Idaho, Utah State and New Mexico State to join the WAC. The WAC would then consist of:

Hawaii
Fresno State
Nevada
Idaho
Boise State
Utah State
New Mexico State
UTEP

Then if you wanted to reduce some travel costs by having conference schools a little closer, I would move San Diego State and UNLV to the WAC and NMSU and UTEP to the Mountain West, creating the following alignments:

WESTERN ATHLETIC
Hawaii
San Diego State
Fresno State
Nevada
UNLV
Idaho
Boise State
Utah State

MOUNTAIN WEST
Utah
Brigham Young
Wyoming
Colorado State
Air Force
New Mexico
New Mexico State
Texas-El Paso

Further, I would put the two conferences under one commissioner and have them play two games per year with members of the other conference. The commissioner's office would negotiate bowl games, TV contracts and provide officials for the two conferences.

I'd like to see them operate as separate conferences rather than divisions of the same conference. It might be advantageous if, and when, there is a playoff system.

There should also be a proviso that if any team can no longer qualify as Division 1-A, and a suitable replacement cannot be found, then the two conferences have the right to collapse into one conference. If the number of teams, the surviving members have a choice to eliminate the weaker members until a number satisfactory to all can be reached, but not to be less than 12.

Personally, I don't like to see universities that can't get along with their neighbors but this would reduce to one the number of schools that continue to blackball their nearby competitors. By placing Utah State in a separate conference with Utah and Brigham Young, friction is avoided there. That leaves only New Mexico State and UTEP who seem at odds. I think that all of these so-called obstacles can be overcome in time and we have intrastate rivalries in all states except Utah.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 31, 2003 11:20 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:56 pm
Posts: 290
JFin,

Love that idea. Awesome. I had a similar idea for the BE/ACC, but it makes much more sense here. There's anxiety and mistrust between the two conferences, but I think they need each other. By cooperating they could pave the way for participating in a playoff system while remaining autonomous. With your system they could encourgage regional rivalries and especially intraconference rivalries while cutting costs. Perhaps they could generate an additional bowl game (or maybe qualify for the BCS or playoff system) by having a title game between conference champs?

If push comes to shove and money and football become a huge factor (and only if absolutely necessary), they could form two divisions, the Western and Mountain divisions, based along those lines, and the transition wouldn't be too tough. By then, they'd know who the problem schools were.

As far as the teams like La Tech in the WAC, there seems to be a lot of agreement that the southern C-USA, and major southern WAC and Sunbelt teams ought to form their own conference for football. I agree there as well.

Excellent post.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:37 am 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 136
i would stop one step short of swapping teams between the wac and mwc. there's a tendency on our parts to try to force realignment along geographic lines, when the existing set-up already works.

i'd like to see two 9-team conferences (which i prefer to 8-teamers):

MWC
byu
air force
colorado state
utah
new mexico
wyoming
san diego state
unlv
hawaii

WAC
fresno state
boise state
idaho
utah state
new mexico state
utep
nevada
smu
rice

the real killer for the wac has been having hawaii in the same conference as tulsa, smu and rice. way too much ground. on that i will agree. the flight from houston to fresno is only half the distance as it would be to hawaii, making this a lot more workable.

or, you could just make hawaii an independent. has there ever been a better candidate (other than notre dame)? they could schedule 9 home games if they wanted to, bring in the revenues, and only travel stateside to play san diego state, ucla, fresno, etc. keep their bowl affiliation, match up with an at-large.

just throwing ideas out there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:31 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 1:17 pm
Posts: 822
Location: Dothan, AL for the time being.

Quote:
i would stop one step short of swapping teams between the wac and mwc. there's a tendency on our parts to try to force realignment along geographic lines, when the existing set-up already works.

i'd like to see two 9-team conferences (which i prefer to 8-teamers):

MWC
byu
air force
colorado state
utah
new mexico
wyoming
san diego state
unlv
hawaii

WAC
fresno state
boise state
idaho
utah state
new mexico state
utep
nevada
smu
rice

the real killer for the wac has been having hawaii in the same conference as tulsa, smu and rice. way too much ground. on that i will agree. the flight from houston to fresno is only half the distance as it would be to hawaii, making this a lot more workable.

or, you could just make hawaii an independent. has there ever been a better candidate (other than notre dame)? they could schedule 9 home games if they wanted to, bring in the revenues, and only travel stateside to play san diego state, ucla, fresno, etc. keep their bowl affiliation, match up with an at-large.

just throwing ideas out there.

Not too bad of an idea sbro. The main problem w/ hawaii is not so much the football team, but rather bball and other low revenue sports.
Think back to the disintegration of the 16 team WAC. Both Fresno and Hawaii were not invited. According to one MWC poster on another board (Wild West Wars, I think), Fresno takes waaay too many Prop 48s to be considered for MWC consideratiobn. Hawaii doesn't have the academics problem, but you still have the distance problem, even with the MWC. I believe that every MWC member, with the exception of BYU and Air Force, did not want Hawaii in the conference because of travel distance, and that's why Hawaii wasn't invited to the MWC. The problem with Hawaii being independent is again, the non-revenue sports like volleyball, baseball, and golf. Even ND found the going tough in that department, and that's why they accepted BE membership in all sports but football. The best conference for Hawaii to be in is the Pac 10. The distance isn't too bad from the Pac 10 schools to Hawaii, which makes it a real plus. And I'm not just saying this just because I'm a big Hawaii to the Pac 10 advocate. I'm saying this because it's the truth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2003 6:46 am 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 7:53 am
Posts: 9
Why does the MWC hate Utah State so much? Every time you hear about MWC expansion, the blocking by BYU and Utah comes up? It is not as if USU beats up on the other two Utah schools? Why the hatred?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2003 1:20 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 136
if the mwc hates utah state, unfortunately nobody told utah state. prior to the invite from sbc, utah state was apparently holding out for an invite from mwc:

"Following the eradication of football in the Big West, USU was offered an invitation to join the Sun Belt, but former President George Emert declined, looking for a better offer, such as the Western Athletic Conference or the Mountain West Conference."

(http://www.collegesports.com/sports/m-footbl/uwire/102102aap.html)

that the invitation never came from mwc could mean they weren't interested, or it could mean nothing. but at least in 2001 usu thought it had a shot, or else it would not have rebuffed the sbc in the first place. i've looked up several web sites, and so far haven't found any evidence -- doesn't mean it's not there, and i would welcome any entry that supports the notion that utah and byu blocked usu's membership efforts in mwc. but on the surface, this looks like one of those things you hear about and never find out where it comes from.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2003 3:55 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 1:17 pm
Posts: 822
Location: Dothan, AL for the time being.

Quote:
Why does the MWC hate Utah State so much? Every time you hear about MWC expansion, the blocking by BYU and Utah comes up? It is not as if USU beats up on the other two Utah schools? Why the hatred?

I don't know much about the BYU-USU hatred, but I do know a little about the Utah-USU hatred. Back in the days of the old Skyline Conference, Utah and USU were the dominant schools of the state. BYU was an afterthought. However, as time went on, BYU began emerging as a national power, and USU started to sink. Utah has to be forced to play USU in football every year by the state government. The Utes are very wary of USU in recruiting and that has continued to this very day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 04, 2003 9:16 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:56 pm
Posts: 290
I've been curious about the alleged USU hatred too. Like DawgNDuck pointed out, the only obvious reason to oppose USU moving up in the world is recruiting. There's no way BYU and the Utes can afford serious competition for recruits in-state. If USU didn't pose a recruiting threat, then maybe the opposition (if it's there) wouldn't be so great. There's no way either the Utes or the Cougars are willing to take a hit, especially if that means one school will dip below the other. I think that was the main reason Bama didn't support UAB's football program (since it was far more likely to draw away Bama recruits than Auburn recruits).

DawgNDuck,

Hawaii, at least in terms of symmetry, seems like a perfect fit for the Pac-10. I don't think it would take much for them to be a tad more competitive in football, and if they moved to the Pac and paid June Jones well, I think they'd really move up in the world. The Warriors definitely have a home field advantage working in their favor. But I get the impression that the willingness to upgrade other athletic programs (and I'm guessing the academics as well) just isn't there. I'm sure June is doing his part. It'd be nice if the school really made a push for the Pac 10. It'd take a major investment, but once in the conference, I think the addition fan interest, tv exposure, and decreased travel expenses would pay off. I guess the Pac-10's unambiguous opposition to expansion doesn't leave them much to hope for though.

Btw, assuming Hawaii was brought in as the 11th member, who would come in as #12?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 1:10 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2676
Location: Phoenix Arizona
If the BE/Conf USA expands to 12, the MWC should expand with Fresno State, Nevada, Boise State, and Hawaii

East: Colorado St, Air Force, Wyoming, New Mexico, Utah, BYU

West: Fresno St, San Diego St, UNLV, Nevada, Boise St, Hawaii


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 2:15 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:56 pm
Posts: 290
I like that alignment Lash, especially if Hawaii really comits to football. If not, gotta replace them with another 12th. If they could break it up so that TCU didn't have to travel so much, that'd be better. That'd give them 5 top 20-25 teams, not counting BYU and Utah who can get there with an extra recruit or two. Utah gave Michigan hell last year, and even though they were a fraud then, BYU's not far removed from that 12-0 run. I'd love to see a meaningful late season game on the blue turf in Boise. Now THAT'S football weather. Plus what apears to be a very painful field. Ouch.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 2:51 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:56 pm
Posts: 290
Does anyone know which teams wold be the most desirable acquisitions if the MWC raided the WAC right now (Hawaii could have potential if they invest in football, but right now they're a risk)?

Seems like there's the potential to make an east/west conference, with one division centered on Texas, Oklahoma, and Colorado. That would mean losing a little dead weight in the MWC (which I am...possibly incorrectly..assuming Wyoming is). What about this:

Mountain

Boise St.
BYU
Fresno St.
San Diego State
Utah
UNLV

West

Air Force
Colorado St.
New Mexico
TCU
Tulsa
SMU

I only put SMU in here because two Texas teams and two Cali teams might help the conference in recruiting. Also, SMU alums have tons of dough, and they could bring alot more to the conference than some of the other schools.

This alignment, it seems, would cut down on travel costs. It'd also put Tulsa and Colorado State in one division in bball and Utah, BYU, and Fresno St. in the other. Makes for a pretty interesting conference, and ought to be good for at least one extra bid per year.

In football, BYU would have a tough road with Fresno, Boise and Utah in conference, but that's still better than having to beat TCU, Colorado State, and Air Force. If UNLV could resurrect its bball program, this could be one heck of a conference.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 171 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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