NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:01 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1038 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 70  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2003 11:53 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:39 pm
Posts: 1215

Quote:
This isn't about the quality of the conference schools, it's about putting schools out before the public that get good TV ratings. The MWC, minus BYU (and maybe Colorado State if they maintain a good stretch) does not have that with 8, nor 9, nor 12. Fresno is an ESPN draw (not as good of one as you might think, BTW), NOT a network draw.

The MWC has also talked to ESPN in all likelihood, asking what 9, or 10, or 12 schools might reduce the cut in the next TV contract. I've also already demonstrated that going to 12, even with $1 million extra per year for a conference championship game (per the Salt Lake Trib, that's all the MWC would get), the current schools would receive less TV contract funds than they get now.

$1 million for a championship game? Can you help me find that story, as I'm curious to why the amount would be so low. Obviousy if the MWC held a championship game they be a larger conference with more impressive markets, and face less competition with the demise of the WAC and, depending on the lineups, CUSA. The MWC would essentially be the 6 or 7th best conference in the country, and feature one of only 6 championship games, 2 of which seem unlikely to draw near as well.

I agree with you that overall the money may not work out, this figure just seems iffy to me. However, with the end of the WAC as a marketabe conference, that may free up more ESPN time and/or money for west coast games. Plus there has been speculation of an additional network trying to join the college football fray; The ACC will undoubtedly inquire about a stand alone contract like the SEC enjoys with CBS, and many columnists have suggested that one or more networks may try to partner conferences for their broadcasts. Something along the lines of an ACC game at noon est, followed by, say, a MWC game at 3:30.

The other side to this discussion that I don't think has been hit on enough is the concept of like-minded schools. TCU would seem out of place in the MWC, IMO. A private school so distant from the Rockies and left coast. Surely part of the appeal of Boise is that the school mimics the MWC standard in size, mission and social atmosphere. These are also the lynchpins of where SDSU and UNLV have their disagreements with the "Gang of 5," as they're called, but I feel that can be assuaged as the conference enjoys overll prosperity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2003 12:56 pm 
Right now MWC isn't saying they are going to 12.

What I meant was that a 12 team C USA is as strong as a 8 or 9 team MWC. The team that wins the C USA championship game would be as good or better anyway.

Where do I get this from?

How many Liberty Bowls has the MWC won? 1 out of 4. How many teams does the MWC have ranked? One, is Utah still ranked? Depending on Thursday night, C USA could have 2.

As far as the list you put up goes, Memphis is on a rise. They have a good coach and 2 years of good recruiting. They spanked Louisville who the Big East believes is as good as Miami. (Howard Schnellenberger must do some consulting for them)


Quote:


What! C-USA has Marshall, Southern Miss and TCU thats it football wise. MWC would have BYU, Colorado State, Boise State, Air Force, Utah, Fresno State, Hawaii if they went to 12. Thats a lot stronger football conference.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2003 10:55 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2003 12:34 pm
Posts: 151
Location: Lafayette, LA
Why not go to a 10-team league with two WAC schools? Seems to me like Hawaii and Fresno State would be natural fits. Both have the potential to become BCS caliber. Certainly more than TCU in the long run. Dividing the pie 10 ways would be offset by what Hawaii and Fresno would bring to the table.

I can understand why the MWC wouldn't want to expand to 12, because that would divide the pie too much.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 12:36 pm 
In all seriousness now that the delirium is over and the cherry has been popped,
Is the MWC serious about TCU (enrollment 7,500, private institution that only brought 700 to Hattiesburg for a conference championship game, undefeated season, etc) and thinking that will give them instant credibility?

Take away 2 major special teams errors and it wasn't close.


Quote:
Why not go to a 10-team league with two WAC schools? Seems to me like Hawaii and Fresno State would be natural fits. Both have the potential to become BCS caliber. Certainly more than TCU in the long run. Dividing the pie 10 ways would be offset by what Hawaii and Fresno would bring to the table.

I can understand why the MWC wouldn't want to expand to 12, because that would divide the pie too much.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 2:05 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 5:31 pm
Posts: 281
The TCU thing seems to be about the trend toward "expanding" the footprint, ala BC to the ACC and So.Fla to the BigEast.
New markets, wider recruiting, blah, blah, blah...

The ACC can do this.
The new BigEast maybe.
MWC, nope!
MWC would be better and more powerful, and more economical, and just as competitive in their regional footprint.

TCU now looks no better than Boise State after last nights game with USM. Boise St. beats TCU straight up on the field. Boise St. is a better choice for all for the MWC.

You want 9 take Boise. You want ten...Fresno is the most economical choice. Hawaii has a lot of value, but they would have to agree to add something, probably a stipend to travel as was done before. Either way, MWC should stay Mountain-West.
8-)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 2:07 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 8:45 pm
Posts: 315
Location: Great Northwest
Just for fun...make the MWC take the winner of tonight's Boise/Fresno game. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 4:50 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 7:21 am
Posts: 748
Location: Midwest
After all these weeks, the TCU thing still seems strange to me, despite all the reports this is where it may be headed. I agree with many of you that Boise and Fresno make more logical choices--good quality, stays within regional footprint, California partner for SDSU and good tv market, you stay within two time zones.

Hawaii should become an independent for 6 years until Pac10 is ready to become PacTeleven. There may be some future in this if NotreDame goes to BigTeleven.

:D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 9:51 pm 
Javaman, I agree.
If the Mountain West wants BCS access, it should take Fresno St. and Boise St.. They have more football potential than anyone else who may join. TCU and Hawaii may help a lot with recruiting though. I think that maybe the Mountain West should take Fresno St. and Hawaii for more national recognition or maybe take all 4 of them.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 22, 2003 12:16 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
I think it makes little sense for TCU to go to the MWC. I think they should learn from the UH experience.

I also think it doesn't make sense for the MWC. Again they may not be thinking divisions through very well. Ultimately that triggered the split of the WAC 16. As someone else pointed out, the gang of 5 want to stay together (at least the eastern 3 really do). Absolutely no divisions make sense that keep them together unless the MWC only adds western schools.

The MWC is probably not looking at 12 now, but they should be thinking about the possibility in the future. Since these Presidents seriously thought they might replace the BE or get a guaranteed spot in addition, clear thinking does not seem to be their strong suit.

They should add 1 or 2 out of Hawaii, Fresno and Boise St.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 22, 2003 8:06 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 7:21 am
Posts: 748
Location: Midwest
I also think a name change might be in order. Too bad BigWest is already taken. MountainWest seems too limited, and WAC, the original MWC, is used by the current WAC. Sort of the same problems the BE schools face in retaining name rights.

GreatWest?

:D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:53 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 8:45 pm
Posts: 315
Location: Great Northwest
I have contended, and still contend that it makes the most sense that the MWC NOT expand. I believe TCU will not join unless MWC goes to 12 w/ divisions. Travel costs are the big question here, MWC does not want to divide the revenue that much... much less power ( gang of five for lack of a better term)... So if they don't join, what are the options?

1)Take Boise. They bring football respect, and a bowl game worth $750,000 and no bb revenue.

2)Take Fresno. They don't have a bowl game associated with them, but may make a lesser bowl every other year, and may make it to the bb tournament every few years. Maybe $500,000/year tops.

3)Take TCU (even if they do go for it) they bring nothing but a bowl every now and then. Recruiting?, forget about it, Whatever Texas, A&M, N.Texas, and the lesser Big 12 have not taken isn't worth it. $250,000 tops.

4)Take nevada. No immediate revenue, project at best.

5)Take Hawai'i. Travel costs eat up anything they bring.

At best you increase revenue by $750,000. What does the bb bring in annually? I'm not good enough to find out, but I guess its more than that. So why bring in another cut of the action? I really don't see why it isn't 12 (assuming a BSC bid comes with that) or nothing.

In short, I think TCU has a good argument. Thoughts?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2003 2:39 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 7:21 am
Posts: 748
Location: Midwest
Good interview with Craig Thompson, the commish.

From what I read between the lines here the number is going to be ten. Which schools? If TCU sends a signal, it would probably be TCU/Boise. If TCU does not send a signal, would think Boise/Fresno.

http://www.cougarblue2.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3267&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

We should know within the next two weeks, before the schools start institutional Christmas meltdowns...

;D



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 12:36 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2002 2:41 am
Posts: 167
If they are really serious about being a player they should expand to take out another player . My feeling is if they want to create a strong conference they must destabilize their main competition, the WAC. I would take Fresno St., Nevada, Boise St., and a pick from New Mexico St or UTEP. It would be best for them to destabilize the WAC to be more high profile and more attractive for tv. Expanding into Central Texas for just 1 school just does not make sense geographically. It is just what the ACC did to the Big East.


Last edited by arpmany on Tue Dec 02, 2003 12:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 8:51 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 8:45 pm
Posts: 315
Location: Great Northwest
Agreed arpmany, although the West has always seemed to have three conferences, be it Pac-10/WAC/pcaa, Pac-10/WAC/Big West, Pac-10/MWC/WAC, there has always been quite a separation talent (and attention) wise between them. With the emergence of Boise, Fresno, and Hawai'i as perinial "powers" the line between the MWC and WAC has gotten blury.

The old pcaa/Big West had no TV deal and rarely competed for the same athletes as the old WAC. Now, you can see the new WAC every Friday night (which I hate...Fridays are for high school ball) and the top WAC teams have recently finished the season, and/or been ranked throughout the season higher than than the top MWC team.

If the MWC doesn't raid the WAC subtantially, I think they will be making a mistake. They shouldn't miss this opportunity to put the new WAC/pcaa/Big West back in its traditional place. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 6:07 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:01 pm
Posts: 129
Location: Moscow, Idaho

Quote:
If they are really serious about being a player they should expand to take out another player . My feeling is if they want to create a strong conference they must destabilize their main competition, the WAC. I would take Fresno St., Nevada, Boise St., and a pick from New Mexico St or UTEP. It would be best for them to destabilize the WAC to be more high profile and more attractive for tv. Expanding into Central Texas for just 1 school just does not make sense geographically. It is just what the ACC did to the Big East.


Well, I think that the ACC didn't kill the Big East. They will survive and are actually a better b-ball conference. I think what they conceded with inviting those five schools was that they should return to what they do best, and that's Men's Basketball. The ACC will actually weaken in BBall. Miami, VaTech and BC weren't the best bball schools. However, the ACC solidified it's place at the BCS table. I think the Big East basically said, "Oh well, we will get back to Basketball."

The same could be said for the MWC weighing its options. They are looking for the upgrade in Football and stay within the region. That's why Boise State, TCU and Fresno State rise to the top. I think the other schools mentioned (Nevada-Reno and Hawaii) were merely afterthoughts. I don't think they will look at those two seriously. Hawaii has serious travel concerns and that's why the MWC formed in the first place, to reduce travel and become more regional. Nevada-Reno is not an upgrade in football. It would be just adding another bottom-feeder. They aren't good. Now, Boise State (51 wins over last 5 years), TCU (recent success) and Fresno State (recent success and better facilities) make much more sense to the football upgrade mentality.

I think the MWC will find out privately if TCU will accept. If they say no, then Boise State and Fresno State will get invited. Both programs have the known answers of "HELL YES!" where TCU is teetering. If the goal is to reduce travel and keep regional, then TCU would stay in CUSA. If the goal is to look for BCS status, then they would go. MWC will not entirely Kill the WAC, but they will significantly weaken it by selectively taking the best football performers.

The WAC won't go away. There are several schools in the WAC that play the MWC every year (NM-NM State, Utah-Utah State, UNR-UNLV, SD State-Fresno State). I don't think the MWC would be so foolish to raid the WAC to the point of reducing it to nothing. The issues would be for strength of schedule. The MWC would then be a stronger conference than the WAC (they all ready are, but by taking Fresno and Boise, they would expand the gap). But, the WAC would still be around to be good regional partners for the member schools and for the most part, easy wins.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1038 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 70  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