What about them putting their non-FB sports in the MWC ? That + Hawaii FB = one all-sports member.

Why would the MWC want to take all their crappy sports, and not have the only valuable thing Boise has?


Why should the MWC bail them out?

It still comes down to money. I would love to see SDSU and BSU back in the MWC. But even without the BE AQ, there is still a lot of money to be made. The Big East essentially went out and took the top market schools (and some of the better performers) from CUSA. Just in time for their TV negotiations. They now get to show the networks that they have the Big East brand in NY/NJ, Philly, DC, Orlando, Tampa, Memphis, Houston, Dallas, Cincinnati, Louisville, Hartford. Throw in state penetration like UConn does (beyond Hartford). A national brand like Boise St. is a huge help and SDSU will give the conference a west coast presence they have never had.

The Big East TV contract is expected to be anywhere between 5 and 10 times the MWC, with or without the CUSA alliance. So even without the AQ, it still might be a ton of money that SDSU and BSU would have to leave behind.



FSA, with your Duke comparison. Yes, it would under a balanced comparison. If Duke was available for FB only, the Sun Belt, another FBs conference would likely take them for FB only for the brand alone. As for the Summit, if they need members...their numbers are a bit low, and if Denver made the move, wouldn't you think adding a known D1 school like Boise St. would be more valuable than a D2 upgrade? If you get to chose from a known D1 school with lots of national attention for it's FBS football program, or a D2 upgrade, I think you go for the brand you know. We have precedent: Notre Dame joined the Big East, a conference that's footprint extended only from Boston to Washington DC. It's not like South Bend was a close bus trip away, something the Big East was at the time (a bus league). But the Notre Dame brand, without football, was welcomed. Boise St. might not offer as much as Notre Dame...but Notre Dame was joining the best basketball league. The Summit is a lower level D1 basketball conference...lower than the WAC that Boise St. represented in the NCAA tourney just a couple years ago. My point is just that Boise St. will have options. They can try the Big Sky, willing to accept lower revenue for basketball if the BS changes their membership rules to permit them. They can try th Big West again with the same offer. And then there is the Summit...where even if they aren't welcomed as equal members, they can still offer a lower revenue split in return for a conference home.

There were no negotiations between the Big West and Boise St. BSU asked to join, Big West said no and joined what appeared to be a stable enough WAC. Now if Boise St. negotiates with the Big West, the Big West could change their stance. If Boise St. asks for BW membership and is willing to accept only 90% of a full revenue share, who is to say the Big West would reject them. what about 80%? What about 70%. Point is, there have been no negotiations at that level because BSU had a backup plan, the WAC, and it wasn't a bad one at the time. Now that BSU has no leverage, they'd have to give more in order to get what they want.

Then they should hit up the BW again and not the Summit. We both know it's not a given that the BW will take their "name brand" they asked once. If they were such a name brand once should have been enough to get in. BW saying no the 1st time shows BSU isn't such a big deal outside of football that the BW needs to worship at their feet.

I think the bigger issue for the Big West is that adding Boise State creates an expense and provides no additional revenue.

Due to Hawaii's unique ability to offer ESPN a time slot no one else can, there will be some increase in exposure with Hawaii. Not to mention the recruiting perks, and donor implications ("Donate this large amount to the program and come with us to the MBB game at Hawaii")

Boise? Not so much. The Big West is comprised of a ton of schools with massive budget issues. They went down the road of a western, multi-state, large conference with football schools that had higher aspirations. Look what happened. They all left the Big West high and dry.

Quinn, I am confused with your comments. Are you stating that Boise State will make the same revenue as football only member in the Big East as all sports members Houston, SMU, UCF, etc?

I realize that neither of us know for sure what the Big East will be able to negotiate until the process is complete and the new contract is available.

If your statement is anywhere close to 10 times more revenue, that would indicate Boise State will get 10 million dollars as a football only school in the Big East. I am guessing MWC schools currently share 2 million per school.

That would indicate each Big East football schools would share 10 million dollars just for football alone without basketball revenue included.

I could see all sports Big East schools getting 10 to 11 million each which included basketball and football participation per Memphis AD quotes as a possible estimate of what the new contract will be.

If that is correct, then basketball only schools would be only getting 1 to 2 million dollars if they continue to get the same amount for basketball as football schools do for basketball participation.

I am thinking football would only be half at best based on past Big East previous contact negotiations.

If the Memphis AD is close on 10 to 11 million dollar estimate per school, Boise State and SDSU will only get about half of that at best for football which would be 5 to 6 million dollars per school.

If yes, then Boise State and SDSU would only be able to make at best 2 to 3 times amount of what money could be obtained by remaining the MWC with current MWC revenue sharing.

This comparison would be before MWC is able to factor in a football championship game into its football contract if Boise State and SDSU remained in the MWC.

I am just not seeing how there will be that substantial of an increase in revenue unless the Big East adds both Boise State and SDSU as all sports members.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7883895/utah-state-san-jose-state-joining-mountain-west-conference-2013-2014-according-sources

"ESPN college sports writer Andy Katz is reporting that multiple sources have confirmed that as suspected, both Utah State and San Jose State will join the MWC beginning in 2013. An official announcement is expected Friday. Katz also states that sources said the conference plans to stay at 10 members in football, and nine in basketball for 2013-14, but later added, "There's also the possibility of UTEP switching to the Mountain West.". Not quite sure what to make of that, but apparently in some way UTEP is still in play.." -http://www.minerrush.com/

Also saw this in the Katz's story... "Sources said the Mountain West has no interest in adding NMSU or Idaho. "

The Katz story says there's no merger per se... but likely a scheduling agreement.

I could guess there's more than that, your guess is as good as mine.

Note that the Katz story also says Boise may be enticing another school to the Big East... and I suspect this school helps them into the Big West for other sports. Fresno and UNLV are at tops of tongues.