NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:26 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:24 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
Since the MWC is meeting this month to discussion membership, I was thinking, should they kill off the WAC? It occurred to me, why not let the WAC rebuild so that they can remain a stepping stone conference? The MWC can let the WAC rebuild and when they stabilize, grab two schools (either WAC or C-USA schools which will likely trickle down to the WAC in some way.

Then the MWC can have a wait and see approach. If Nova upgrades, things will likely be pretty stable for the time being. Then they can add a basketball school (I still hope BYU will go back for Olympic sports) for 10 all sport members and 10 football members.

On the flip side, if Nova does not upgrade and the Big East takes UCF, the MWC can still see what happens. If another WAC school leaves then they may as well go to 12 and finish off the WAC. If C-USA grabs a Sun Belt school and everything goes back to calm, then they can continue to wait.

The upside to keeping the WAC around is to make sure there are schools in waiting should any more schools ever leave. Big 12 or Pac 12 expansion could lead to schools leaving the MWC and with the WAC dead, it will be a lot harder to find replacements. And while they may be bitter, I'm sure there are some OOC games that can be scheduled between the two conferences and a rivalry to be rebuilt.

The downside is accepting the loss of Texas markets. SMU, Houston, UTEP all put the MWC back in Texas which helps recruiting and their TV deal. Also, with the Big 10 and Pac 10 adding a conference championship game, they're one of the few conferences without a championship game in 2012. That's not too big of a deal now as they aren't an AQ conference yet, but it still costs them money and some relevance late in the season. Obviously I don't have any numbers, but would adding 2 schools make up for the extra mouths to feed? If they are Houston and SMU maybe, I doubt it if it's UTEP and USU.

Thoughts? Predictions?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:59 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:06 am
Posts: 154
If C-USA loses a school i have to think Louisiana Tech gets the Invite. I personally don't see how getting the rest of the WAC schools help the MWC. If anything other conferences will gain. I could see the Sunbelt Dumping UALR and picking up the 2 WAC Texas schools. I see San Jose state dropping to the big west in Olympic sports and trying to join the BIG SKY in football. Idaho will most likely try and get a full member of the big sky. The same with Utah state. In all i think the MWC gains nothing from the other WAC schools unless their is pressure from Boise on wanting a rival in conference so they get Idaho.

_________________
Fan of:
Sun Belt Conference
Summit League
Us National Soccer Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:49 pm 
Offline
Sophomore
Sophomore

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:22 pm
Posts: 58
I just don't think dropping to FCS is a realistic option for Utah State, Idaho or San Jose State. In order for that to happen there have to be some serious budget woes, and once the move down is made it's effectively over for the program vis a vis fan/alumni/student/community interest, etc. If absolutely necessary (i.e., the dissolution of the WAC), the drop down is a wise or realistic move in terms of budgets and operating expenses; however, it would be a psychological blow to not only the entire athletic department, but possibly to the university's overall stature as well. It's an absolute last resort path for any existing FBS school.

As far as best interests for the MWC to kill the WAC, who knows? Too much speculation at this point.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 9:27 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
86mets wrote:
I just don't think dropping to FCS is a realistic option for Utah State, Idaho or San Jose State. In order for that to happen there have to be some serious budget woes, and once the move down is made it's effectively over for the program vis a vis fan/alumni/student/community interest, etc. If absolutely necessary (i.e., the dissolution of the WAC), the drop down is a wise or realistic move in terms of budgets and operating expenses; however, it would be a psychological blow to not only the entire athletic department, but possibly to the university's overall stature as well. It's an absolute last resort path for any existing FBS school.

As far as best interests for the MWC to kill the WAC, who knows? Too much speculation at this point.



I agree, none of the schools will drop their football programs to FCS. If they can't be in an actual conference, they will just have scheduling agreements. Might make bowl games more difficult, but something they'll have to live with until they can form a new conference or join another.


46566 wrote:
If C-USA loses a school i have to think Louisiana Tech gets the Invite. I personally don't see how getting the rest of the WAC schools help the MWC. If anything other conferences will gain. I could see the Sunbelt Dumping UALR and picking up the 2 WAC Texas schools. I see San Jose state dropping to the big west in Olympic sports and trying to join the BIG SKY in football. Idaho will most likely try and get a full member of the big sky. The same with Utah state. In all i think the MWC gains nothing from the other WAC schools unless their is pressure from Boise on wanting a rival in conference so they get Idaho.


I agree that that is certainly a realistic possibility, but at the same time, why should the MWC pull the trigger (though they sure stabbed the WAC a few times). Of the MWC's candidates, only Houston is really being considered elsewhere (Big East). The MWC will have their pick now and 5 years from now should they wait that long. On top of that, should the Cotton Bowl ever become a BCS game, the Big 12 can switch their tie in to that game and the MWC would get the Fiesta Bowl tie in. So down the road they will likely be an AQ conference, again their choice of the litter. And like I said, if another conference makes the first move, then they can make their move and still get anyone they want.

The MWC is always slow to move anyway. The Fresno/Nevada move was a counter attack that they had to make to save their conference. It took them years to finally invite Boise even though they were a dominant program trying to get in for awhile. My reasoning for keeping the WAC around is to make sure there are schools to pick from in the future. If they grab the rest and a scenario such as this one plays out, where do they go in the future if there is Big 12/Pac12 expansion? I'm sure they would manage with more C-USA west schools but that's not really the intent of the conference.

I suppose on the flip side is what if they lose a school or two before expanding to 12, then they may not be as attractive to say Houston and SMU. But I don't envision any Pac 12 or Big 12 expansion for awhile, not unless it's forced upon them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:13 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811
And it's worth noting that leverage is the ultimate weapon. The MWC could throw a bone to Idaho, NMSU and even SJSU and invite them for football only. But since they have the power, they could make it so that these schools make no money from the MWC, maybe even having to pay to be in. What the 3 schools get is a conference schedule...something they won't have if more schools leave.

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 2:35 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:41 am
Posts: 118
Location: Chicago, IL
Quinn wrote:
And it's worth noting that leverage is the ultimate weapon. The MWC could throw a bone to Idaho, NMSU and even SJSU and invite them for football only. But since they have the power, they could make it so that these schools make no money from the MWC, maybe even having to pay to be in. What the 3 schools get is a conference schedule...something they won't have if more schools leave.


I don't see the MWC agrreing to it. Wouldn't adding SJSU, Idaho and NMSU cripple the MWC's chances of qualifying as a BCS conference?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 5:29 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
hickory_cornhusker wrote:
Quinn wrote:
And it's worth noting that leverage is the ultimate weapon. The MWC could throw a bone to Idaho, NMSU and even SJSU and invite them for football only. But since they have the power, they could make it so that these schools make no money from the MWC, maybe even having to pay to be in. What the 3 schools get is a conference schedule...something they won't have if more schools leave.


I don't see the MWC agrreing to it. Wouldn't adding SJSU, Idaho and NMSU cripple the MWC's chances of qualifying as a BCS conference?



That's sort of where I was going with this. If the MWC does become an AQ conference, who will they look to if they ever lost a couple teams? We all look down on the Big East since they had to get C-USA teams to fill their void, how would it look if the MWC is begging Big Sky or Southland schools to come up (which they may not do)? Again, they could continue to move into Texas and grab C-USA West teams again, but I don't think they'd want too many Texas schools (as this is the Mountain West). If you allow the WAC to live and rebuild, perhaps a new powerhouse could arise (as opposed to bringing in a school that will not be able to compete).

But dang Quinn, I see if you're the MWC Commish you'd have pulled the trigger already.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 3:27 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
hickory_cornhusker wrote:
Quinn wrote:
And it's worth noting that leverage is the ultimate weapon. The MWC could throw a bone to Idaho, NMSU and even SJSU and invite them for football only. But since they have the power, they could make it so that these schools make no money from the MWC, maybe even having to pay to be in. What the 3 schools get is a conference schedule...something they won't have if more schools leave.


I don't see the MWC agrreing to it. Wouldn't adding SJSU, Idaho and NMSU cripple the MWC's chances of qualifying as a BCS conference?



That's sort of where I was going with this. If the MWC does become an AQ conference, who will they look to if they ever lost a couple teams? We all look down on the Big East since they had to get C-USA teams to fill their void, how would it look if the MWC is begging Big Sky or Southland schools to come up (which they may not do)? Again, they could continue to move into Texas and grab C-USA West teams again, but I don't think they'd want too many Texas schools (as this is the Mountain West). If you allow the WAC to live and rebuild, perhaps a new powerhouse could arise (as opposed to bringing in a school that will not be able to compete).

But dang Quinn, I see if you're the MWC Commish you'd have pulled the trigger already.



If I were commish, I'd have had the foresight to know what I woudl be willing to do with hawaii. The MWC could have done the same blow to the WAC had they had that vision. They raided Nevada and fresno with hopes that BYU would opt to stay. But BYU called their bluff. Had the MWC invited Nevada and Hawaii (Hawaii for FB only) and told BYU they could stay for non-football, the MWC would be stronger. BYU, even without football, helps the MWC.

So the MWC would have been at 10 for all sports (9 and the Hawaii/BYU combo for 10): Boise St., Nevada, UNLV, SDSU, New Mexico, Colorado St., Air Force, Wyoming, TCU, Hawaii/BYU.

They could have right then and there invited Houston to be #11 and have 2 Texas schools. Then when TCU opted to leave, you're back at 10. But you have options. You can stay at 10 and still have the Houston market in Texas. You can expand to 12 with 1-2 other Texas schools like SMU and/or UTEP. Or you can bring in a 2nd Texas school for #11 and a 12th school from the west from the pool of Fresno St., Utah St., and UTEP.

Regardless, you'd have BYU and Hawaii instead of just Hawaii for football.

Instead, the MWC will likely try to get Houston and maybe even SMU now while UTEP and Utah St. will be left out. The kicker? The MWC would still have access to the SLC/utah market...they're strongest. Now, they have no presence unless they bring in Utah St....which means they can only have 1 Texas school....and who is to say Houston would join if they were the only Texas school now that the gap between the MWC and CUSA is smaller.

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 5:13 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
Quinn wrote:
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
hickory_cornhusker wrote:
Quinn wrote:
And it's worth noting that leverage is the ultimate weapon. The MWC could throw a bone to Idaho, NMSU and even SJSU and invite them for football only. But since they have the power, they could make it so that these schools make no money from the MWC, maybe even having to pay to be in. What the 3 schools get is a conference schedule...something they won't have if more schools leave.


I don't see the MWC agrreing to it. Wouldn't adding SJSU, Idaho and NMSU cripple the MWC's chances of qualifying as a BCS conference?



That's sort of where I was going with this. If the MWC does become an AQ conference, who will they look to if they ever lost a couple teams? We all look down on the Big East since they had to get C-USA teams to fill their void, how would it look if the MWC is begging Big Sky or Southland schools to come up (which they may not do)? Again, they could continue to move into Texas and grab C-USA West teams again, but I don't think they'd want too many Texas schools (as this is the Mountain West). If you allow the WAC to live and rebuild, perhaps a new powerhouse could arise (as opposed to bringing in a school that will not be able to compete).

But dang Quinn, I see if you're the MWC Commish you'd have pulled the trigger already.



If I were commish, I'd have had the foresight to know what I woudl be willing to do with hawaii. The MWC could have done the same blow to the WAC had they had that vision. They raided Nevada and fresno with hopes that BYU would opt to stay. But BYU called their bluff. Had the MWC invited Nevada and Hawaii (Hawaii for FB only) and told BYU they could stay for non-football, the MWC would be stronger. BYU, even without football, helps the MWC.

So the MWC would have been at 10 for all sports (9 and the Hawaii/BYU combo for 10): Boise St., Nevada, UNLV, SDSU, New Mexico, Colorado St., Air Force, Wyoming, TCU, Hawaii/BYU.

They could have right then and there invited Houston to be #11 and have 2 Texas schools. Then when TCU opted to leave, you're back at 10. But you have options. You can stay at 10 and still have the Houston market in Texas. You can expand to 12 with 1-2 other Texas schools like SMU and/or UTEP. Or you can bring in a 2nd Texas school for #11 and a 12th school from the west from the pool of Fresno St., Utah St., and UTEP.

Regardless, you'd have BYU and Hawaii instead of just Hawaii for football.

Instead, the MWC will likely try to get Houston and maybe even SMU now while UTEP and Utah St. will be left out. The kicker? The MWC would still have access to the SLC/utah market...they're strongest. Now, they have no presence unless they bring in Utah St....which means they can only have 1 Texas school....and who is to say Houston would join if they were the only Texas school now that the gap between the MWC and CUSA is smaller.


Very good post. I still hold out hope that BYU will join non football and have that Hawaii/BYU combo you're talking about. It just works for everyone involved and certainly beats adding Denver or Seattle.

I agree SMU and Houston are the best additions in terms of prestige and markets. I wonder though if location will factor in more though. This conference was created because the WAC was too large, but then, principles tend to be compromised when money is involved. Personally, I want it to be SMU and Houston (partly so the WAC may live and partly cause that would be a darn good conference).

If C-USA lost Houston and SMU to the MWC and UCF to the Big East, my hope is C-USA responds by grabbing N. Texas (for SMU) and at least one of the Florida schools. Then there is room in both the WAC and Sun Belt for several upgrades.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 7:04 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:06 am
Posts: 154
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
hickory_cornhusker wrote:
Quinn wrote:
And it's worth noting that leverage is the ultimate weapon. The MWC could throw a bone to Idaho, NMSU and even SJSU and invite them for football only. But since they have the power, they could make it so that these schools make no money from the MWC, maybe even having to pay to be in. What the 3 schools get is a conference schedule...something they won't have if more schools leave.


I don't see the MWC agrreing to it. Wouldn't adding SJSU, Idaho and NMSU cripple the MWC's chances of qualifying as a BCS conference?



That's sort of where I was going with this. If the MWC does become an AQ conference, who will they look to if they ever lost a couple teams? We all look down on the Big East since they had to get C-USA teams to fill their void, how would it look if the MWC is begging Big Sky or Southland schools to come up (which they may not do)? Again, they could continue to move into Texas and grab C-USA West teams again, but I don't think they'd want too many Texas schools (as this is the Mountain West). If you allow the WAC to live and rebuild, perhaps a new powerhouse could arise (as opposed to bringing in a school that will not be able to compete).

But dang Quinn, I see if you're the MWC Commish you'd have pulled the trigger already.


Why not keep the WAC as a feeder conference? Allow them to make the first investment in the schools and the pick them up in a later date. Maybe push some southland or big sky schools to join the WAC with a promise of a potential MWC invite. The could look into the big West to get a BB only school to feel the Hawaii other sports slot. I know both Portland State and Eastern Washington are not that strong in most sports but why not try to get these schools to expand their television market into Oregon and Washington.

_________________
Fan of:
Sun Belt Conference
Summit League
Us National Soccer Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:44 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 701
Location: Louisville, KY
Possible subplot: since the WAC needs the current "continuity of membership" clause removed by the Division I board to keep its automatic bid in basketball, the Mountain West would be wise to help them out-because the Mountain West is one defection away from being in the same boat.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] 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:  
 

 

cron




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